eyeball Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: @eyeball Read this. This is a house of cards, healed by cheap lending and easy games.. the only people who suffer are the poor right? https://betterdwelling.com/canadian-cities-have-seen-up-to-90-of-new-real-estate-supply-scooped-by-investors/ I'll bet much of it can be laid at the feet of the oligarchs we're laundering money for. Perhaps what we need is a law that restricts owners of property to only one residential property. I can already hear the battle cry against that echoing in the streets.... FRRREEEEEDOMMMMM! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) Sell your house privately where the buyer pays you the full amount of capital gains in cash. Then put the rest on paper. Sign the invoice with "fuck Trudeau" Edited April 5, 2022 by cougar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 42 minutes ago, eyeball said: I'll bet much of it can be laid at the feet of the oligarchs we're laundering money for. Perhaps what we need is a law that restricts owners of property to only one residential property. We had this under a socialist regime - one is entitled to one primary residence and a secondary, recreational property. I find it totally fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: ............... people work hard for their money, they sacrificed to get to where they are today ...everybody in Canada has access to the same opportunities as most others in this country... Do you really believe the above two?? There are passive forms of income - interest, rent, investments, real estate buy and sell. If you work at whatever hourly wage or salary, you will not be able to catch up with those who make money by just doing a single transaction on paper ! You can believe in the equal opportunities, but those opportunities were not equal even under socialism where people had limited private property and nearly identical monthly incomes. You DO NOT have equal opportunities to one born with a silver spoon in his mouth; one who has millions or billions. You will not catch up (unless a miracle happens) and generally the difference between you and teh other guy will be getting bigger to your disadvantage. Have you not already experienced that over the past 30 years where your buying powers diminished and you were pushed further down into the hole? You can hope you are born with some huge talent and connections - a hockey star or a top singer, or some other prodigy, or at least win the lottery to pull you out of there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 16 minutes ago, cougar said: We had this under a socialist regime - one is entitled to one primary residence and a secondary, recreational property. I find it totally fair. There'd probably need to be a fair bit of grandfathering in existing cases where people own a 2nd property due to inheritance. There can be no getting around the fact that rental income can be an important factor in a person's income and taking away their opportunity to make that could leave them in the street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: There'd probably need to be a fair bit of grandfathering in existing cases where people own a 2nd property due to inheritance. There can be no getting around the fact that rental income can be an important factor in a person's income and taking away their opportunity to make that could leave them in the street. Renting was never a significant form of income under socialism. There were instances where a room was rented or most often given to a student free of charge by the owner who was a friend of the student's parents. In resort towns rooms were also rented in airbnb style to tourists; often the owners were there in the house on the next floor. A typical house often had 2 or 3 floors. And that was about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 12 minutes ago, cougar said: Renting was never a significant form of income under socialism. For many the income or cash flow from any source is significant under capitalism. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 20 hours ago, West said: Depopulation by design. Make the burden so high on families that they have no choice but to not have kids. Mike thinks this is funny. My own daughter is putting off having kids for this exact reason. Libbie shills will wallow in mud endlessly in order to protect their precious "New World Order". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 10 hours ago, cougar said: Do you really believe the above two?? There are passive forms of income - interest, rent, investments, real estate buy and sell. If you work at whatever hourly wage or salary, you will not be able to catch up with those who make money by just doing a single transaction on paper ! You can believe in the equal opportunities, but those opportunities were not equal even under socialism where people had limited private property and nearly identical monthly incomes. You DO NOT have equal opportunities to one born with a silver spoon in his mouth; one who has millions or billions. You will not catch up (unless a miracle happens) and generally the difference between you and teh other guy will be getting bigger to your disadvantage. Have you not already experienced that over the past 30 years where your buying powers diminished and you were pushed further down into the hole? You can hope you are born with some huge talent and connections - a hockey star or a top singer, or some other prodigy, or at least win the lottery to pull you out of there. Yes i do, tell me what opportunities that you are shut out of right now...And i did not say you were going to catch up to the ultra rich, i implied that you could live very comfortable in retirement, and that i was not willing to share that with someone that did not make the same decisions. . And you'd be a moron if you think this is going to happen over night, most adults have gathered wealth over a life time, that takes dedication, to keep at it regardless of what life throws at you...it takes sacrifice, Tell me what opportunities are you excluded from... name one... Look you can get pissed off all you want, but my standard of living is very comfortable, and i got there becasue of my decisions i have made over the course of my life... You sir had access to all the opportunities as i did, and now i seems like your whining because you do not have the same life style...or your mad that i implied i was not willing to share.... WOW, no where in that statement is working hard, and investing your money wisely...and over time building wealth...even you could have done it... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 11 hours ago, eyeball said: I'll bet much of it can be laid at the feet of the oligarchs we're laundering money for. Perhaps what we need is a law that restricts owners of property to only one residential property. I can already hear the battle cry against that echoing in the streets.... FRRREEEEEDOMMMMM! So now we are going to restrict what we can invest in, and here i thought we were in a free market society....we are under the assumption that every investor is some criminal washing money, well you might be able to put banks, pension funds, other investors into the same category, but one would have to be crazy to think they would not be getting in on these fire house sales....that are safer than gold right now...and no sign of collapsing in the near future This entire thing has been going on for years in the big cities and big and small government have either refused to solve the issue or can't figure it out....Oh they will acknowledge it, even pass some unless legislation on it. But fix it come on.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Army Guy said: now it seems like you're whining because you do not have the same life style...or you're mad that i implied i was not willing to share.... WOW, no where in that statement is working hard, and investing your money wisely...and over time building wealth...even you could have done it... I did not say nothing about my lifestyle. I was only mentioning the obvious to you, which over the course of your lifetime you must have observed too. Had you been unable to buy a house and were renting 10 or so years ago, the chances of you buying a house now, with the same effort and dedication and sacrifice would have diminished significantly over this time. As I said, you do not have the same opportunities as everyone - starting from education - paid and terribly expensive for the masses to afford and then going forward in life. The rich get a huge boost , you will be constantly pushed back. Edited April 5, 2022 by cougar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Army Guy said: So now we are going to restrict what we can invest in, and here i thought we were in a free market society.... We are and will be for some time. Perhaps it would be better to restrict who can invest in housing. In any case we see restrictions on how many things people can buy all the time, I'm sure everyone has seen a sign above some product that says "limited to one or two per customer". Its not like limits are some new horrible form of dictatorship or totalitarianism. Quote ...we are under the assumption that every investor is some criminal washing money, well you might be able to put banks, pension funds, other investors into the same category, but one would have to be crazy to think they would not be getting in on these fire house sales....that are safer than gold right now...and no sign of collapsing in the near future We really don't know how many criminals there are. Either by design or incompetence and likely a combination of both the worst aspects about money laundering is just how incredibly lame Canada's capacity for investigating never mind tracking it is. I'm reminded of Michael's ideas on using digital currency so money can be followed. DING DING DING Warning warning warning dictator alert!!!! As for legitimate investors into housing it appears there's already a primary residence principle being established around what people can or can't do with their property when one looks at the measures many communities around the country are adopting to stop the proliferation of short term rentals. That principle should be more deeply entrenched and applied to ownership and taxation. Perhaps it could be two primary properties to allow for the circumstances where people own two places thru inheritance etc. Quote This entire thing has been going on for years in the big cities and big and small government have either refused to solve the issue or can't figure it out....Oh they will acknowledge it, even pass some unless legislation on it. But fix it come on.... It's not just governments refusing to do what needs doing. Nimbyism towards greater density and subsidized housing in particular have also been going on for years. Almost all of the regulatory things affecting housing are governed at the local level from rural, villages, small towns on up to big cities. Provinces have legislative control of Municipal Acts that empower these and the federal government has little to do with anything. The feds could bring in legislation that cuts thru the local nimbyism and mandate greater density, which is the hardest hurdle at the local levels. But of course the feds risk being labelled/cancelled as totalitarians so... That said, I've been on a local area planning commission in my regional district for nearly 35 years and recently participated in a broader housing study in my area and I've seen a definite shift in people's attitudes around allowing greater density. Edited April 5, 2022 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: @eyeball Read this. This is a house of cards, healed by cheap lending and easy games.. the only people who suffer are the poor right? https://betterdwelling.com/canadian-cities-have-seen-up-to-90-of-new-real-estate-supply-scooped-by-investors/ It's not that different than what happened in 2008 in the US. It's not subprime lending, but overspeculation is indeed a house of cards and always has been. Homes are for people. Let's get some populism on this. But no, the rich elites always seem to get their way. Canadian banks and developers always seem to do so well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 24 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said: But no, the rich elites always seem to get their way. Canadian banks and developers always seem to do so well. It's not even the "rich elites". Boomers who are living in houses they couldn't afford - which is a lot of them - are counting on selling out and using it to retire. I personally know 2 ahead of the curve who sold out at near $2M and moved into a tiny apartment.... You want to buy a house in Toronto ? The mortgage would be around $4000/month with a minimal downpayment. which means 2 earners each making 6 figures each. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 Capital gains taxes aren't the solution here. The solution is to encourage housing affordable housing development and discourage real-estate speculation. As a matter of public policy the priority should be on promoting housing for younger working people and families, and less on maintaining absurd price values for real-estate speculators. The problem is that as a voting issue, there are too many people sitting on fat nest-eggs and their votes will discourage any serious policy against it. That's why municipalities continue to block large real-estate development with red-tape and why mortgage rules and tax adjustments are never seriously considered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Moonbox said: Capital gains taxes aren't the solution here. The solution is to encourage housing affordable housing development and discourage real-estate speculation. As a matter of public policy the priority should be on promoting housing for younger working people and families, and less on maintaining absurd price values for real-estate speculators. The problem is that as a voting issue, there are too many people sitting on fat nest-eggs and their votes will discourage any serious policy against it. That's why municipalities continue to block large real-estate development with red-tape and why mortgage rules and tax adjustments are never seriously considered. So you put said policies in place. Housing market takes a dive. People are stuck with over inflated mortgages and young people are unable to upgrade as a result. What's the solution? Edited April 5, 2022 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 On 4/4/2022 at 11:48 AM, dialamah said: This makes no sense; It's not like only 10 Canadians are working, and the other 37+ million are getting handouts. Most Canadians work and pay taxes, so it's not like they're getting "free stuff", even if they get a tax break or something subsidized. The only people who are given "free stuff" (ie they don't pay taxes) are people who are unable to work, either permanently or temporarily. If the government really wanted to fill their coffers, they'd focus on corporations, not workers. But those corporations will just pass on the cost to Canadians. There's no escaping all of the record inflation and hefty tax hikes coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted April 5, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, eyeball said: We are and will be for some time. ...... ........ ....... It's not just governments refusing to do what needs doing. Nimbyism towards greater density and subsidized housing in particular have also been going on for years. Almost all of the regulatory things affecting housing are governed at the local level from rural, villages, small towns on up to big cities. Provinces have legislative control of Municipal Acts that empower these and the federal government has little to do with anything. The feds could bring in legislation that cuts thru the local nimbyism and mandate greater density, which is the hardest hurdle at the local levels. But of course the feds risk being labelled/cancelled as totalitarians so... That said, I've been on a local area planning commission in my regional district for nearly 35 years and recently participated in a broader housing study in my area and I've seen a definite shift in people's attitudes around allowing greater density. Nimbyism is rampant and it can get far more contentions than some debates on this forum. And what is real funny, it is often little old ladies and men that are the worst NIMBY offenders. The Feds do not have any say in local planning or say in local housing density. Edited April 5, 2022 by ExFlyer spell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted April 5, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Moonbox said: Capital gains taxes aren't the solution here. The solution is to encourage housing affordable housing development and discourage real-estate speculation. As a matter of public policy the priority should be on promoting housing for younger working people and families, and less on maintaining absurd price values for real-estate speculators. The problem is that as a voting issue, there are too many people sitting on fat nest-eggs and their votes will discourage any serious policy against it. That's why municipalities continue to block large real-estate development with red-tape and why mortgage rules and tax adjustments are never seriously considered. Solution to what? The feds are thinking about capital gains on primary residences only as a new source of revenue. This has nothign to do with affordability, density, housing starts etc, it is just a plain old money grab. If this goes through, it will not matter who is the next government, the tax will remain. I cannot think of any tax that has been repealed by a new government. Edited April 5, 2022 by ExFlyer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted April 5, 2022 Report Share Posted April 5, 2022 2 hours ago, Moonbox said: Capital gains taxes aren't the solution here. I see only one solution which is pretty obvious but not the one you talk about. Given the climate crisis, the overpopulation, overdevelopment and over exploitation of resources, throw in there the effects of the pandemic, the wars, the effects of the "natural" disasters like forest fires, floods, slides, hurricanes and tornados and I can bet the government will never find the money it needs while people soon will discover that the planet is no longer able to feed them, even if they decided to walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 6, 2022 Report Share Posted April 6, 2022 5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: It's not even the "rich elites". Boomers who are living in houses they couldn't afford - which is a lot of them - are counting on selling out and using it to retire. I personally know 2 ahead of the curve who sold out at near $2M and moved into a tiny apartment.... You want to buy a house in Toronto ? The mortgage would be around $4000/month with a minimal down payment. which means 2 earners each making 6 figures each. This type of market can not sustain itself.. sooner or later most housing in Toronto will be unaffordable...those that can not afford it will move else where and Toronto's housing market will crash or become vacant...i bet on crash... Here is another point, there is no guarantee that anyone is going to find housing in their preferred city, town, province which seems to be another layer in this crises some think it is a right .... boomers are cashing in now and moving to cheaper cities, and upgrading homes and life styles... and the younger generations have limited options wait and grin and bear it or move to greener pastures...just not NB please, we already got way to many Ontarians... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 6, 2022 Report Share Posted April 6, 2022 4 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Nimbyism is rampant and it can get far more contentions than some debates on this forum. And what is real funny, it is often little old ladies and men that are the worst NIMBY offenders. The Feds do not have any say in local planning or say in local housing density. hear is what i don't understand, we have the second largest country in the world, one of the lowest population densities...Why do we need to live on top of each other... a few years back i went to wainwright , Alberta, drove for maybe 60 mins out of Edmonton and never seen anything except open fields.. got to Wainwright population i think is less than 5000 and everyone lives on building lots, maybe 20 to 30 feet between homes... WTF, then leave wainwright and again nothing but empty land...NB it is the same except those that do not have city water and sewage require 1 acre minimum,for well and sceptic you can drive for hours and only see trees, then poof clusters of homes, all jammed together then nothing but trees. Land is not the issue... we got lots of it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 6, 2022 Report Share Posted April 6, 2022 4 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Nimbyism is rampant and it can get far more contentions than some debates on this forum. And what is real funny, it is often little old ladies and men that are the worst NIMBY offenders. The Feds do not have any say in local planning or say in local housing density. The federal government in New Zealand is probably turning a few heads. Quote New Zealand plans new housing density laws to tame red-hot property market The new rules will enable more medium density housing by allowing up to three homes of up to three stories to be built on most sites without the need for resource consent. Currently district plans only allow for one home of up to two stories per site. https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/new-zealand-plans-new-housing-density-laws-to-tame-red-hot-property-market Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 6, 2022 Report Share Posted April 6, 2022 19 minutes ago, Army Guy said: hear is what i don't understand, we have the second largest country in the world, one of the lowest population densities...Why do we need to live on top of each other... a few years back i went to wainwright , Alberta, drove for maybe 60 mins out of Edmonton and never seen anything except open fields.. got to Wainwright population i think is less than 5000 and everyone lives on building lots, maybe 20 to 30 feet between homes... WTF, then leave wainwright and again nothing but empty land...NB it is the same except those that do not have city water and sewage require 1 acre minimum,for well and sceptic you can drive for hours and only see trees, then poof clusters of homes, all jammed together then nothing but trees. Land is not the issue... we got lots of it... You can probably thank planners in England for this weird density/distribution of small pockets of land available for property development spread out across vast landscapes. We have a little town-site in our regional district that was laid out in the middle of the wilderness and I've seen plans for a city the size of Victoria that was planned nearby. The town-site was purchased with all the streets and 130'x60' lots laid out shoulder to shoulder in neat rows. They even named the streets 1st 2nd 3rd Ave. Its what passes for cottage hereabouts. A nightmare of septic/well conflicts. No end to zoning issues and restrictions. There are little pockets of these properties scattered around the area. Usually out in the middle of nowhere with no road access or services. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted April 6, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2022 8 hours ago, eyeball said: The federal government in New Zealand is probably turning a few heads. I cannot imagine a national zoning policy for this country. Provinces and especially municipalities would go berserk if Ottawa was to decide what they could build when and where in their province of communities. What Ottawa can do to make housing affordable is change the archaic mortgage processes and rules. Ottawa g=has often tinkered with stress tests to try and make sure people could afford what they want to buy but that has been a failure because people find ways around it. Make mortgage interests tax deductible like in the US, considering the huge majority of your mortgage is interest, that would allow more people to afford homes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.