1) the immigration rate is so high it isn't enough to keep up
2) the house values in areas that dont build in enough housing have skyrocketed, and smart homeowners in those areas have decided to sell and move to places with lower house prices and purchase more than one, which of course rockets the price even in the places that do build a lot. So even in provinces where lots of housing is built, immigration from other countries and other provinces blows up the housing prices anyways.
3) The government doesn't want to do anything about it because immigration is how they're keeping down wages, and since housing has become so much of the GDP they're terrified of what it would mean for the economy if there was a price crash anyways, so they don't look at policies that would fight the housing price explosion in fear of what the economy will look like if they do.
> 1) the immigration rate is so high it isn't enough to keep up
That could be addressed by making home building a priority and by relaxing regulations like zoning. Allow more infill.
> 3) The government doesn't want to do anything about it because immigration is how they're keeping down wages
That's not the only reason to support immigration. Canada, as is the case with most western nations, is facing a demographic cliff due to lowering birthrates among it's citizens. Countries that allow more immigration can mitigate these demographic problems. Countries that are facing birthrates that are falling to or under the replacement rate should be trying to attract immigrant labor. Countries in that position that don't are going to be facing some serious issues in the not too distant future as their populations age.
There’s another reason that local governments don’t embrace intensification, which is that they will be responsible for building the infrastructure to support it. Take a look at Jakarta where zoning laws focus heavily on intensification. Housing is cheap, but power cuts are normal, most of the city smells like sewage because you have sewage flowing into storm water infrastructure, the city regularly floods, and parts of it are sinking into to ocean because unregulated ground water extraction has caused meters worth of subsistence in some areas (the roads are also terrible, but surprisingly the city has been making very good progress in that area at least). Now you can manage all of those things, but it requires competence and proper management of resources. Something local governments tend to not be good at, and why would any of them want to take the risk? Expensive housing and bad traffic is the status quo, flooding you could probably blame on climate change, but power cuts, lack of running water and a city that smells like shit would cost too many people their jobs.
This is easily solved with impact fees. Builders pay a fee in my town of about $30,000 as part of the permit process for a single family home. That money goes towards the necessary infrastructure improvements.
It’s not easily solved at all, because the hard part is planning and building and maintaining the infrastructure. Something local governments frequently reveal themselves incapable of doing, even when they’re sufficiently financed. That’s before you have to contend with the incentives of governance bodies often being not exactly aligned with that outcome. Responsible management of basic services isn’t usually a platform that drives voter engagement. Local governments are incentivised to minimise how much they spend on basic infrastructure, not intentionally create new demand for it.
Ironically you're complaining about the Canadian government not doing anything on the exact day that the FHSA comes into effect, which is a plan to make it easier to buy a home.
The FHSA allows people who have excess money beyond what they can save in a TFSA to save tax money on income put aside for the specific purpose of saving to buy a first house, but on much worse terms than a TFSA. If you've maxed out your TFSA and have room to save in the HFSA, great, but its got a time limit and most people will have room in their TFSA already.
Sure, if the parent had said that the government was ineffective in its attempts to fix the problem I would have agreed.
But they said they were doing nothing, and it was just so ironic the comment came on the day one of several attempts the government has made to address the problem.
ah I see, completely ineffectual tax breaks for already wealthy is different from nothing, so you're going to nitpick instead of trying to communicate a position.
I think I've seen where you're coming from, and I'm uninterested in any more of your opinion.
I'm an immigrant and got really burned during the Harper admin (Kenny's handling of immigration destroyed my life). That basically meant my options are Liberal or NDP. NDP policies seem to think if I make more than 200K, I am a rich fat cat (ignore that I have a freakin PhD at the cost of a delay in buying a house - effectively making me far poorer in wealth terms than someone with a mediocre undergrad who bought a place anytime before 2015). Last election, I recall thinking, how can I vote NDP if them winning means I'll leave the country. That means, my only choice is Liberal. I am so fed up with their mismanagement, that I think I need to vote conservative just to make my voice heard, and then if (when?) the xenophobes of that party come out, go liberal again. I dunno .. feels like Canada isn't for people like me.
> That basically meant my options are Liberal or NDP. NDP policies seem to think if I make more than 200K, I am a rich fat cat
If you make $200k a year, you've got almost 3x the average household income in canada ($75k). You're way up there in terms of wealth, and don't need any help from the NDP or anyone else.
sure but the house isn't income, while $200k is income and enough to buy a house in some parts of this country every 3-5 years, if spent judiciously.
It's so far out the norm of normal income that anyone earning $200k in canada and complaining about the housing situation isn't in touch with what normal people in canada are experiencing and their complaints are ridiculous.
It's like a CEO yelling that you don't know how much they're paying in capital gains tax. It really isn't relevant.
While that income sounds like a lot it doesn't stretch to buying a home every 3-5 years. Are you taking about getting a mortgage? I make more than that but it's unrealistic I'll be owning a fully paid off house in 3-5 years. I could get a mortgage and purchase a house in that timeframe.
After taxes, high COL, sky-high rent, and retirement savings there's maybe a deposit in there.
the average household income in canada is ~$75k. $200k is a lot more "then maybe there's a deposit there". That's paying off a mortgage in record time if thats the priority money. Everyone in canada who is struggling is paying taxes, col, rent, and retirement savings, or they don't even get retirement savings.
Ah yes, the economic trick of buying the "average" house thousands of kilometers away from where I live. The average house where I live starts at four hundred thousand. Much more if you want detached.
Thanks the advice. I'll start purchasing property impractically far from my work. Good idea
I like that you entirely ignored their parenthesized statement immediately following what you just quoted. If you're going to respond to a point, at least respond to the entire point the other person makes.
It's not really relevant - he can save for downpayment on a house in most places in the country in a single year while also paying down his loans for a phd. He's so far out of the norm at his income that houses that are unattainable to most people are within reach. Sorry he chose to take out loans to get a phd and has to pay it back - I didn't make that decision. But he can definitely afford a home.
I only see one solution to right the wrongs of the past (with respect to the housing bubble). Tax wealth annually. Tax home sales the way the US does it.
As a society, we need to acknowledge how zero interest rates were directly responsible for the housing bubble. The people that caused that should be shamed publicly.
Interest rates and tax policy have massive impacts on behavior and the overall economy. It's kind of nuts that we do live in a system where these rules change all the time based on the whims of a bunch of politicians, half of whom are apparently members of an apocalyptic death cult. Or in this case, kinda racist?
"The bridge from Rinkeby makes it easier for criminals to recruit your children into crime," the party told local voters during last year’s campaign.
Speaking of taxing home sales, before 1997 any profit was considered capital gains. After the "taxpayer relief act" in 1997, the first $250k was exempted ($500k if married). So that was like a big flag saying "go forth and make money flipping houses". Side effect in our timeline is the creation of infinite home flipper content for YouTube. Similar signals with zero interest rates. "Buy a house now, no matter what it costs, for tomorrow it will cost more. Oh, maybe buy some guns too while you're at it, the end times are near".
With that kind of income, I suggest you talk to a wealth manager. There options for low effective interest rate loans. The effective rate on our mortgage is about 1% fixed.
All 3 of the major parties are pro huge immigration. Any discussion to the contrary is labelled racist regardless of a housing and healthcare crisis.
Businesses underpay and when they can't find people willing to impoverish themselves to work for them, they apply to the government to bring in "temporary foreign workers" - for things like fast food restaurant workers not essential business, keeping the wages down.
Temporary foreign workers and international students in canada are allowed to buy housing, so aside from renting the rich ones who make it here actually buy up properties for their family offshore.
Even if Canadians vote out Trudeau, Poilievre of the conservatives has no interest in slowing down immigration or affecting policies to improve access to housing. The leader of the NDP, Singh, is useless and his party is also very pro immigration and has no housing policies that would affect the market.
What we're seeing is a death spiral of some kind but I'm not sure where the ultimate end goes - no doctors, no housing, low wages compared to housing and food costs, etc. This is textbook conditions for serious blowback and social instability.
When asked why there wasn't anything in this years announced budget to deal with the housing crisis Christina Freedland says that they're still spending money from last year's budget on it. Well how about you see the fruits of your labours and realize it isn't working out well for Canadians, and do something else/more?
If we don't manage to vote trudeau out this time around I'm going to look into immigrating to texas. People joke about that but texas recognizes my professional licensing and all I'd need is a job offer.
> Businesses underpay and when they can't find people willing to impoverish themselves to work for them, they apply to the government to bring in "temporary foreign workers" - for things like fast food restaurant workers not essential business, keeping the wages down.
> Temporary foreign workers and international students in canada are allowed to buy housing, so aside from renting the rich ones who make it here actually buy up properties for their family offshore.
If they're being paid so little, I don't see how they could possibly afford to buy any properties. I've only known a few, but they all send the majority of the money back home instead.
This feels very fear mongering on TFWs and not grounded in facts.
Some TFWs and international students some come from wealthy families in their home country and use whatever program they can to get into canada to get a foot in the door, and be allowed to buy a house here. I live in an east indian heavy neighborhood and I know a dozen people who were extremely rich before every coming to canada, far far more than the average canadian.
Make sense, rich people would have an easier time to immigrate.
But how many of this dozen are here on TFW like you're suggesting?
I'm doubtful that it's TFW that are buying the properties you're concerned with, especially since they're still at the mercy of PR/work authorization laws that could make them leave the country at any time.
It _could_ happen, but that would be pretty exceptional.
You want to complain about foreigners making house prices too high for you, you do you. Just be accurate in your complaints.
international students do purchase houses for their families out of country - it happens more in some areas than others.
And if someone couldn't get in as a student, they might try to get in as a TFW and spend their family money on a home - I don't know how often it happens but its allowed because TFWs DO buy houses.
I wonder how much of this issue is due to our (enormous) amount of immigration, given that fertility rate has been below the replacement rate since 1970 or so
I would have gladly had more kids if I could have afforded a place to put them. Do you know what a 3 bed condo costs in Toronto? It is financial suicide.
In my parents generation in communist Poland, people had 2-3 children families in flats no bigger than 500-750 sqft. When there's a will, there's a way, and people just truy wanted to have children back then. While nowadays, it seems that there's always some excuse in the way.
Countries that have fertility rates below replacement should be encouraging immigration. Otherwise they're going to be facing some serious economic problems as their populations age.
some immigration is different than what canada is doing, which is mass immigration at a rate far outpacing most other countries. nearly 1/4 of canadians are immigrants, and we're allowing so many in per year that our housing and healthcare. Its too expensive to have kids for many young people - I have friends who would like to have them but can't afford it.
Are there any economists that support your theory? Namely that (if I understand your point correctly) immigration is hurting the economy more than it’s helping? Everything I’ve seen claims the opposite - but I’m open to new information.
Also, what support do you have for the claim that the existence of temporary foreign workers suppress wages for working Canadians? My understanding is that they are performing jobs that Canadians just won’t do and thus, their presence shouldn’t affect Canadian working wages (or so the theory goes).
They aren't doing jobs canadians wont do, they're doing jobs canadians wont do for the wages being offered. If they raised the wages, people would want to do them. Instead companies hire at very low wages, and very few people want to work for them, they apply to bring in TFW who are desperate.
Their presence suppresses the wages because there's a basically unlimited pool of people willing to work for suppressed wages. All businesses have to do is not raise wages and the prevailing wage is whatever they offer. Almost every tim hortons, mcdonalds, burger king, etc in canada is staffed with TFW. I'd rather they raise the wages or go out of business. Instead they import workers and keep wages suppressed.
We partially agree here. However the vast majority of TFW’s are farm labourers. This is gruelling, backbreaking work that am not convinced Canadians would do at any (realistic) wage. It’s also highly seasonal so not really a big help if people just go on EI afterwards. Furthermore, with grocery inflation what it is, what do you think would happen if the wages of the pickers doubled or tripled because they were done by Canadians?
I’ll tell you what would happen - People would lose their minds.
So… it’s complicated (at least in that industry). I’m not as convinced about the need for them in tech and restaurants because, as you say, they should probably just pay more and Canadians would do those jobs. But the numbers I saw don’t seem that significant so I’m not so sure.
Unemployment is also at the lowest it’s been in ~50 years so.. where would those new Canadian workers come from anyways?
There are no simple answers. That’s why I’d like to see what economists are saying. I know that with regular immigration, there’s a consensus among many economists that we need them so our economy doesn’t actually shrink due to low birth rates.
Here is an Australian site expressing a similar view about the Australian economy. One prominent poster is ex Australian treasury and has been featured on news programs on TV.
> Temporary foreign workers and international students in canada are allowed to buy housing
What?
Drug lords and warlords are allowed to buy real estate in the west through shell companies registered in tax heavens. It's the same companies that do 'tax optimisation' for our billionaires.
The head of Wagner Prigozhin has passed money laundering check in London while he was under sanctions and wanted by the FBI, he submitted his mother's gas bill.
1) the immigration rate is so high it isn't enough to keep up
2) the house values in areas that dont build in enough housing have skyrocketed, and smart homeowners in those areas have decided to sell and move to places with lower house prices and purchase more than one, which of course rockets the price even in the places that do build a lot. So even in provinces where lots of housing is built, immigration from other countries and other provinces blows up the housing prices anyways.
3) The government doesn't want to do anything about it because immigration is how they're keeping down wages, and since housing has become so much of the GDP they're terrified of what it would mean for the economy if there was a price crash anyways, so they don't look at policies that would fight the housing price explosion in fear of what the economy will look like if they do.