Canada's 'housing bubble' deemed close to bursting

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by casper

Muslim's believe it is wrong to charge or pay interest on loans.

As a side note, if you Christian, there are actually some sections of the bible that says the same thing. But as a society we don't pay attention to those sections.

In some countries you can basically get loans where they factor the financing into the upfront principle of the loan and then the loan is zero interest. So the government changed some of the tax rules to better reflect these types of loans exist.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business...ld-level-the-field-for-first-time-muslim

What is more interesting than the fact this change is happening is the reaction on social media. There is no shortage of right-wing people objecting to why should Canada change because of immigrants or why should one group get "special treatment". Basically a load of non-sense.

We will have to see where the new conservative leader comes in on this.

I have no idea bout Xtianity, but your failing to account the context of the time. In Islam, the Hadiths were written during a time when gold was used as the currency , not fiat currency which loses anywhere between 4-10% of its purchasing power every year (due to loose monetary fiscal policy and a benchmark inflation rate of 2%) So if you look at the context seriously, theres a strong argument that we are not evening using real currency like 1500 years ago.

The Islamic jurisprudence on "interest" referred to the pre-islamic period of Jahilliyyah curbing loan sharking to the truly destitute (poor widows and children) at obscene interest rates of 200-300% per year , or cutting off their hand if they fail to repay. Nowadays the truly destitute or disabled can access social services in Canada. They have no need to borrow money from a loan shark or even from a bank.

It's worth noting that that following the Noahide laws applies to all jews , muslims, and gentiles to ensure a place in the world to come. Negative interest rates like your proposing, and even our current negative real rates breaks the noahide law which prohibits stealing . Nowadays , borrowers (whether they are spoiled university students going to frat parties or hedge funds) are stealing from savers.

I should point out a lot of the points about moneylending in Xtianity, including protestant reformers like the German Theologian Martin Luther were extremely antisemitic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qjZ3rrGGCc

[casper]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

I have no idea bout Xtianity, but your failing to account the context of the time. In Islam, the Hadiths were written during a time when gold was used as the currency , not fiat currency which loses anywhere between 4-10% of its purchasing power every year (due to loose monetary fiscal policy and a benchmark inflation rate of 2%) So if you look at the context seriously, theres a strong argument that we are not evening using real currency like 1500 years ago.

The Islamic jurisprudence on "interest" referred to the pre-islamic period of Jahilliyyah curbing loan sharking to the truly destitute (poor widows and children) at obscene interest rates of 200-300% per year , or cutting off their hand if they fail to repay. Nowadays the truly destitute or disabled can access social services in Canada. They have no need to borrow money from a loan shark or even from a bank.

It's worth noting that that following the Noahide laws applies to all jews , muslims, and gentiles to ensure a place in the world to come. Negative interest rates like your proposing, and even our current negative real rates breaks the noahide law which prohibits stealing . Nowadays , borrowers (whether they are spoiled university students going to frat parties or hedge funds) are stealing from savers.

I should point out a lot of the points about moneylending in Xtianity, including protestant reformers like the German Theologian Martin Luther were extremely antisemitic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qjZ3rrGGCc

Interesting seeing the historical context.

[Coldrsx]

Pulling my condo unit from its listing in Downtown Edmonton as there were only 4 showings in almost 90 days... with a price reduction.

Comps are 25% low and destroying most listing potential.

Ouch.

[lio45]

Just saw data from Quebec in today’s paper: as I suspected, prices have continued to grow and are currently at all-time highs.

Combined with the higher interest rates, affordability is of course the lowest it’s ever been.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Pulling my condo unit from its listing in Downtown Edmonton as there were only 4 showings in almost 90 days... with a price reduction.

Comps are 25% low and destroying most listing potential.

Ouch.

Like it or not, what you are seeing is what is needed in the housing market. The problem is people who used housing as an investment instead of their home are going to lose their shirt, which will be both good and bad. The good thing is, those investment properties (rental, flipping, etc) will drop in price, helping lower the overall housing cost in the area. The bad thing is, those that need that income will find themselves going bankrupt.

[Coldrsx]

Sure... except that the Edmonton market is very reasonably priced as is and quite affordable right now.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Pulling my condo unit from its listing in Downtown Edmonton as there were only 4 showings in almost 90 days... with a price reduction.

Comps are 25% low and destroying most listing potential.

Ouch.

Better to hold off and wait things out. Rent it out if you can.
It's a terrible time to sell in basically all of Canada. Housing prices declining while rentals are still high

[Wigs]

"Apartments" benchmark price for the 3 largest Prairie cities.
The benchmark is $100k higher in Calgary than Edmonton. All (or most) markets of "for purchase" are on the decline, yet rentals are still high.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Sure... except that the Edmonton market is very reasonably priced as is and quite affordable right now.

Edmonton is probably the best value for the money in Canada, considering its a city of 1M in a Metro of 1.4M people.

This may sound strange to some but it's one of my favourite Canadian cities. I've visited 4 times.

[goodgrowth]

Edmonton also seems to be ahead of other cities on thinking about zoning:

• Video Link

• Video Link

[swimmer_spe]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-explainer-1.6589857

Here's why it's difficult to build housing and why it should inform your municipal election vote

"A shortage of skilled workers in the construction industry means there were some 82,000 unfilled positions across the country at the end of June, according to Statistics Canada.

Inflated costs and the labour shortage have forced developers to think twice about whether to move forward with or delay existing projects, or take on new ones, just as securing financing becomes more difficult as the central bank raises interest rates.

Exclusionary zoning rules make it difficult to add housing by restricting what can be built in certain places.

"North York is a great example. You've got the Yonge Street spine with massive density, and then right next door to it, you have houses in very close proximity to two subway lines. That makes absolutely no sense from a planning perspective."


But the same problem exists in other cities.

In Ottawa, about half of all residential land is zoned for single-detached homes, while single-unit zoning is also prevalent in many suburbs surrounding Toronto, despite their proximity to transit and highways, according to the task force's February report.

"The housing system as we have it today in Toronto and in most cities across Ontario was designed to prioritize existing homeowners and also to prioritize those who are wealthier," said Cheryll Case, principal urban planner at CP Planning.

To begin with, it can take eight to 10 years to go from acquiring undeveloped land to building housing, according to Amborski.

Municipal councils can still reject housing projects even after their own planning staff recommend approval.

This often happens due to the opposition of neighbours and residents' associations.

The acronym NIMBY stands for "Not In My Back Yard" and describes a belief among some homeowners in single-family neighbourhoods that building denser communities and more affordable housing is great in theory, but not close to where they live."

[Coldrsx]

Who caused Canada’s housing shortage? We’re looking at you, city hall

THE EDITORIAL BOARD
PUBLISHED OCTOBER 3, 2022

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/...-shortage-were-looking-at-you-city-hall/

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Who caused Canada’s housing shortage? We’re looking at you, city hall

THE EDITORIAL BOARD
PUBLISHED OCTOBER 3, 2022

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/...-shortage-were-looking-at-you-city-hall/

The more we look into the mess the more we will see that our city planners have been the problem.My hope is we are learning and thing will change.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-explainer-1.6589857

Here's why it's difficult to build housing and why it should inform your municipal election vote

"A shortage of skilled workers in the construction industry means there were some 82,000 unfilled positions across the country at the end of June, according to Statistics Canada.

Inflated costs and the labour shortage have forced developers to think twice about whether to move forward with or delay existing projects, or take on new ones, just as securing financing becomes more difficult as the central bank raises interest rates.

Exclusionary zoning rules make it difficult to add housing by restricting what can be built in certain places.

"North York is a great example. You've got the Yonge Street spine with massive density, and then right next door to it, you have houses in very close proximity to two subway lines. That makes absolutely no sense from a planning perspective."...

Oh Gawd, that tired old saw. And yet when you compare the population density Vancouver (5,492) and Toronto (4,334) against Munich (4,736) and Vienna (4,556) they're not far off. Yet the European cities have far better transit systems. There's obviously more to it that development and pop. density, despite what developers would have you believe.


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/170208/t001a-eng.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_cities_proper_by_population_density

[Harrison]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Edmonton is probably the best value for the money in Canada, considering its a city of 1M in a Metro of 1.4M people.

This may sound strange to some but it's one of my favourite Canadian cities. I've visited 4 times.

I'd say it's Canada's most underrated 'big' city for main cities in CMAs over 1 million people (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, Edmonton).

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The more we look into the mess the more we will see that our city planners have been the problem.My hope is we are learning and thing will change.

You’re overestimating the amount of power city planners have. In most municipalities the planners are there to give suggestions. Elected officials at the end of the day make the final decision and a lot of the time they think they know more then city planners which causes them too overrule either a development,
infrastructure project, or adjustment to policy that were usually approved by the city planning department in the first place.

God the amount of times I’ve seen in Winnipeg where the city planning group approves a multi-unit project only to get is shelved because the councillors can’t handle the heat of NIMBYs is ridiculous.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

You’re overestimating the amount of power city planners have. In most municipalities the planners are there to give suggestions. Elected officials at the end of the day make the final decision and a lot of the time they think they know more then city planners which causes them too overrule either a development,
infrastructure project, or adjustment to policy that were usually approved by the city planning department in the first place.

God the amount of times I’ve seen in Winnipeg where the city planning group approves a multi-unit project only to get is shelved because the councillors can’t handle the heat of NIMBYs is ridiculous.

Excellent point

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Oh Gawd, that tired old saw. And yet when you compare the population density Vancouver (5,492) and Toronto (4,334) against Munich (4,736) and Vienna (4,556) they're not far off. Yet the European cities have far better transit systems. There's obviously more to it that development and pop. density, despite what developers would have you believe.

Compare metro area density, not politically defined city limits.

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Excellent point

...or the other way around. "We don't recommend it for these reasons..." "DAMN THE TORPEDOES!"

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Compare metro area density, not politically defined city limits.

In their defined metro areas Vancouver has almost double Munich's pop density (918 per sq/km vs 460, so try again.