Burnaby Updates

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

If market based capitalist housing policies were really successful we would not have had (socialist) rent/price controls being implemented. Remember that socialism is a response to the historical failures of capitalism and NOT the reverse.

And please don't try dismissing this reality by talking about crony capitalism being the causative factor because no other type of capitalism has ever or will ever exist.

You need to realize that capitalism is a Ponzi Casino that generates illusionary debt based wealth within the context of GROWING INCOME INEQUALITY AND ATTENDANT DEBT (hence a need for social housing and rent controls).

You sound like some kind of walking, talking, parroting caricature.

But it's never too late to start thinking and learning for yourself.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by sburnaby33

It is indeed terrible that the service workers that we rely upon may not be able to live close to the city they work and will certainly cause the local economy to stagnate if not remedied. I think the affordability issue would be addressed by greater supply, speeding up developments in areas earmarked for major urban growth, and lowering the quality of finishes in some new developments to lower purchasing costs. In essence, the market needs to be flooded. The demand for condos is barely being met by the supply offered as most people who are looking for SFH are shifting their focus to condos. In the development I purchased in there were literally 50 to 60% more buyers then places offered.

The developers are never, ever going to flood the market. Why would they? Some of them sit on land for decades and build slowly to extract the best returns (see Concord Pacific lands by the false creek). Show me one place in the western world where density has led to affordable prices? The density occurs where prices are already astronomical. You don't build density in the middle of nowhere. You build it where the land is already expensive.

[sburnaby33]

Originally Posted by WBC

The developers are never, ever going to flood the market. Why would they? Some of them sit on land for decades and build slowly to extract the best returns (see Concord Pacific lands by the false creek). Show me one place in the western world where density has led to affordable prices? The density occurs where prices are already astronomical. You don't build density in the middle of nowhere. You build it where the land is already expansive.

I am indeed aware that developers will not do anything to compromise their bottom line. What should happen and what will happen are two different stories. The only way to increase supply would be for the government to step in in some way. Of course, market forces would not allow for an asset to be willingly depreciated.

As for density I understand that density follows density and places with many developments prices will inevitably increase. However, mechanisms can put put in place to ensure that prices do not skyrocket.

[jlousa]

Originally Posted by WBC

The developers are never, ever going to flood the market. Why would they? Some of them sit on land for decades and build slowly to extract the best returns (see Concord Pacific lands by the false creek). Show me one place in the western world where density has led to affordable prices? The density occurs where prices are already astronomical. You don't build density in the middle of nowhere. You build it where the land is already expansive.

Thank you, very well spoken and someone that understands economics in the real world not just the academic one. For the most part the most expensive cities for the densest and the cheapest are the least dense, not the other way around.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by WBC

The developers are never, ever going to flood the market. Why would they? Some of them sit on land for decades and build slowly to extract the best returns (see Concord Pacific lands by the false creek). Show me one place in the western world where density has led to affordable prices? The density occurs where prices are already astronomical. You don't build density in the middle of nowhere. You build it where the land is already expansive.

How about if municipalities flooded the market with density?

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

You sound like some kind of walking, talking, parroting caricature.

But it's never too late to start thinking and learning for yourself.

...and you sound like an anti intellectual right wing zombie who parrots that government (regulation) is always the problem. If you really had a background in economic history we could both learn alot.....but I figure you don't have that insight!

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Thank you, very well spoken and someone that understands economics in the real world not just the academic one.

Actually true/effective academic insight respects the findings of the "real world"!

[WBC]

Originally Posted by logan5

How about if municipalities flooded the market with density?

They could if they built co-op housing and kept ownership of the building and land. Instead of CHMC underwriting individual mortgages they could underwrite municipal co-op housing.

Sweeden has municial owned housing -
http://www.sabo.se/om_sabo/english/S...ichousing.aspx

Actually there are other solutions out there but they would mean complete reversal of our housing policies. For example, see Singapore in particular (I was not aware of this until very recently) or Northern Europe in general.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public...g_in_Singapore

I also recommend watching Waterfront Cities of The World (Singapore episode). They talk a lot about public housing in Singapore. It would be interesting to hear from somebody who lived there about personal angle on this (I am sure it is not all roses)

Canada has made certain choice over time that are very socialist (healthcare) and very capitalist (housing). It's an odd combination. But in general as capitalist societies age they turn more and more socialist...so in 100 years...

[jlousa]

I agree it should, but my own experience is it does not. Most professors unfortunately do not come from the private sector and thus have limited experiences to pass along to their students. The good ones recognize that and will be blunt and tell you reality is very different then theory. Best one I had convinced me to drop out after a great lesson in opportunity cost and I'm glad I did. Back onto the subject, prices in bby have not come down nor have then risen less then they did before the density floodgates opened. If we look at other local cities that haven't increased density as much I wager we won't see prices their increased more due to the lack of supply.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

If you really had a background in economic history we could both learn alot.....but I figure you don't have that insight!

If you were to conduct an examination of economic history with a modicum of intellectual rigour and independence, you would definitely learn a lot, namely that it contradicts many of your current beliefs. But that outcome is nothing to be feared, if knowledge is your goal.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Actually true/effective academic insight respects the findings of the "real world"!

And the findings of the "real world" are that rent control (any price control, really) negatively affects supply and the quality of that supply. Rent control hurts the poor it's meant to help more than anyone by reducing the incentive to create affordable housing and reduces the incentive to modernise existing rental stocks.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

If you were to conduct an examination of economic history with a modicum of intellectual rigour and independence, you would definitely learn a lot, namely that it contradicts many of your current beliefs. But that outcome is nothing to be feared, if knowledge is your goal.

The real question here is ...are you trained in economic history??? Trust me,...you really don't want to go there with me if you're not. You have no clue as to my academic background.......just reflect on the role of growing income inequality and attendant debt within capitalist markets as the impetus for rent control (see the recent Burnaby squat-ins as an example of the frustrations of the working poor with market priced housing).

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Jebby

And the findings of the "real world" are that rent control (any price control, really) negatively affects supply and the quality of that supply. Rent control hurts the poor it's meant to help more than anyone by reducing the incentive to create affordable housing and reduces the incentive to modernise existing rental stocks.

Jebby, there is such a thing as a combination of "carrot and stick" approach to economic problem solving: one that can be varied over time to suit dynamic housing conditions.

Thus, no one is advocating a singular/"one size fits all" strategy of government rent control ONLY, but to simply leave markets unregulated to their own self correcting devises is to promote a "religious approach",..one based on "blind faith" and not a scientific one based on rational human administrative reasoning/problem solving skills.

If we relied on market conditions only (and not deliberate government intervention) mankind wouldn't have been on the moon already because of weak market demand conditions for such EXPENSIVE explorations! Now thanks to the initial investments of the U.S. government's NASA,....private sector companies like Space X can now stand a chance of using decades of public sector subsidized (space) technologies to make market based profits.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

The real question here is ...are you trained in economic history??? Trust me,...you really don't want to go there with me if you're not.

Wow, that sounds so intimidating. If you tried utilizing more independent thought and less threats, you could start acquiring some knowledge for yourself and stop regurgitating the dogmas of others.

[the_prof]

Caliplanner, did you learn your Econ history at UMass-Amherst?

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by the_prof

Caliplanner, did you learn your Econ history at UMass-Amherst?

At a college of the University of London. I'm a retired urban planning professor of development studies.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Wow, that sounds so intimidating. If you tried utilizing more independent thought and less threats, you could start acquiring some knowledge for yourself and stop regurgitating the dogmas of others.

Silly fellow...I'm a development planning researcher/professor not a regurgitator (in California). Now let me encourage you to put forth your best conservative argument in economics theory and watch me systematically dismantle it........here is a possible prompt....."high taxes kills private sector economic growth"....jump on it friend so that I can enlighten you on the counter intuitive realities of economic history.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Silly fellow...I'm a development planning researcher/professor not a regurgitator (in California).

Regarding your stale, old, clichéd (and false) narratives on the history and nature of capitalism and socialism, you are a regurgitator through and through. But it does not have to be that way, if you value reason and the independence of your own mind (although the saying about "old dogs and new tricks" can sometime apply).

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Regarding your stale, old, clichéd (and false) narratives on the history and nature of capitalism and socialism, you are a regurgitator through and through. But it does not have to be that way, if you value reason and the independence of your own mind (although the saying about "old dogs and new tricks" can sometime apply).

You may say disrespectfully that you can't teach "old dogs new tricks".....but I'd caution you to respect the adage that "new brooms may sweep quickly, but old ones know the established corners."

There is nothing new under the sun that you know that I don't,....especially given that I'm not an ideologue but rather a pragmatic academic. However I do have a wealth of information that precocious youngsters like yourself can benefit from so respect age based wisdom here (unless your arguments can debunk with data)!

[Pinion]

~*fartz*~