You know, we typically agree, but you time and again have demonstrated that you don't fundamentally understand the different social, economic and mental impacts on a people who rent vs. people who own. Your defenses of this lack of understanding in the past have been incredibly weak; such as claiming renting is such a relief because the landlord will take care of you and conversely home-ownership is oh-so-expensive because you have to pay for things yourself.
Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.
Just, be kind.
Wealth always flees China, this isn't really news to anyone. China doesn't have the same quality of life you can get in Canada or the US, so wealthy Chinese people ship their kids off to these other two countries to live a better life while causing uncontrollable wealth loss in their own country. It may cause minor inconveniences in Canada and the US, but the country with the most interest in stemming this tide is China.
I don't think anyone would argue that renting is better if cost were not a concern, but just like in any other market, if you want the psychological comfort and security of owning then you must be prepared to pay for that privilege. You can't just cry foul and blame foreigners for not being able to access a highly demanded commodity at a low price. The reality of the situation is that this obsession that people have with home ownership as a sign of status and as a safety blanket is what creates these housing bubbles in the first place. People want housing to be affordably priced when they're looking to buy, but at the same time they expect their homes to also be sound investments that never go down in price, and you just can't have it both ways.
How does a tax help the people living in the affected areas? It doesn't, taxes are a joke of a response. You either have to regulate it, or allow it. If you tax it, then should these people go to rent them out, they'll just up the rent to pay for the tax.
- - - Updated - - -
It's true that it's a net positive for Canada. However, it can/does/will crash local economies if people aren't living there. Think of the stores/shops/services in those areas of million dollar houses with no one in them. That being said, I guess you just scale those stores/shops/services back and move your business elsewhere. In that transition, however, some will be hurt or lost.
There's a reason why the university is now being called Water-Wu, because the whole area is being heavily populated by Chinese students. I live nearby, and am absolutely floored by how absurdly overpriced those mediocre rentals are in the area. I mean, I am looking at places that have closets for bedrooms at half of what I make per month (around $2200 after tax). But the markets will bear the costs so long as people are willing to pay the price.
Rich Russians tend to do that here. Many relatives and family friends have sold property to them, and they don't negotiate much. They'll show up, look at the offer, and pay way over the asking price. Like one was asking 150k (which was somewhat over it's value), next comes up Russian buyer and pays 200k straight up.
Effective method to buy property without dealing with other buyers competing for the same I guess.
This is Vancouvers future. A closet for more than half your wages.
http://globalnews.ca/news/3408585/mi...-1700-a-month/
Then I don't understand your question since, I take it, you already value some regulation to some extent. I didn't answer the question directly because I thought it was a libertarian point or something. Instead, I explained that they don't regulate against a booming business but for the inhabitants (and companies, and corporations) of the cities. Sometimes those regulations aren't fully in the interest of every business. It's a case for balance.
You are indeed exposing another case for balance. You don't want the city to sprawl, so building up must be a positive, but it also puts a strain in development.
In your Waterloo anecdote, I think they could look into developing in smaller cities/towns around the area and prop them up, so they don't serve as only residential hubs, but also offer job opportunities. Maybe you're already on that, I don't know Canada that well, or barely at all.
Fwiw, I don't think ownership is a right. But I do think that the housing market is deeply tied with the renting one. While some people have only one of the two in mind, hikes in one market often translate to hikes in the other, so I used both interchangeably.I think the biggest issue is that some people see home ownership as a "right", and I can't agree with that. It's quite possible that some people just legitimately can't afford to own. If they can afford to rent, then it's not an affordable-housing issue.
And while some cities (Vancouver, particularly) have major issues in this regard, it's an issue that predates any recent shifts; it's been building for decades. The real problems there lie deeper than "Chinese immigrants are buying a lot of properly recently".
I honestly don't know what is causing these troubles, but I'm aware of what Vancouver is going through. If only because it was not long ago considered a gem among American cities (some kind of urban planner Mecca).
The Chinese buyers are not all immigrants, I understand, but also a significant speculative force. Which is alright as a business, but if they don't live there and it empties the urban cores, that presents a challenge. Perhaps not enough to grant regulation by itself, but it's just another issue to consider. And it seems that they're considering regulating foreign investment already anyway.
There's this other urban phenomenon (can't remember the name, it's a weird word) in which the poor people see themselves displaced as a result of richer classes buying property and opening luxurious shops (cereal bars and that stuff). It reminds me of that.
Though I'm not sure how temporary that phenomenon is. Demographic shifts occur within the cities naturally. I understand these things only become an issue if the places they're displaced to lack severely in services, transport and infrastructure.
Anyway, since you are knowledgeable, It'd be great if you explained a bit what's going on, and what options are available. Though they often go into very complicated numbers and considerations, it's usually a treat to have them explain how cities work.
Last edited by mmoc003aca7d8e; 2017-04-28 at 04:00 PM.
If some canadians don't like it they can always go and live in the woods or emigrate to China or a poorer country themselves instead of being racist.
Uh, why not? When that is literally what's happening? Foreigners who don't even live or work in the neighborhood are buying up homes, driving up prices and then often leaving the unoccupied home to become a neighborhood blight. Why can't I blame people for that? None of those things have a positive impact on the community.
Actually, you really can. You just have to not have an artificial housing bubble driven by wealthy people purchasing homes in neighborhoods they don't live in or contribute to economically.
Homes are sound investments and they only go down in value when you purchase during a bubble. There is no reason for a home to go down in value short of massive economic crashes.
Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.
Just, be kind.
I am not sure what the government can do about situations like this. My wife represented three foreign buyers last year which were looking for residences for their children which were going to attend University of California, San Diego. All three wanted houses which are close to the school and in safe area. Basically we are talking about La Jolla, the most expensive area in San Diego. All three paid cash and well above asking. I think the transactions range between 1.5 to 3.9 millions. What sellers in their right mind would turn down offers like these?
A country like China can artificially limit credit, outright make speculative real estate investment illegal, and close real estate offices when they don’t want any real estate transactions to be performed in certain regions. Those are measures which are not feasible in most western countries. The reality is that even those extreme measures that the Chinese government are taking to control their run away real estate market barely slowed down the speculative real estate investment in China. So I doubt that increasing property tax for foreign buyers will do anything.