185
submitted 1 year ago by Pxtl@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 61 points 1 year ago

For those people who are actually wishing for the bubble to burst, remember that's exactly what happened in 2008, and what happened back then. Literally the only people who won were the rich as they just bought out all the property that got severely discounted while other rich people got a massive payday from the government (aka regular Joe's tax dollars) for fucking up. And the bubble simply got restored because those rich people could afford to sit on unproductive products for a decade at a time because they knew that without a constantly increasing supply of housing, the prices will explode again because housing is a requirement, not a luxury.

And the losers was everybody who doesn't make 7 figures or more. People's retirements were crushed, their savings crushed, their existing lives crushed. And the economy was set back for years and inflation skyrocketed for a little while, which never came back down.

And in places where such housing bubbles really burst, Japan hasn't seen any growth for 30 years. They're still in what they all the Lost Generation, because they realized that calling it the Lost Decade was premature and it didn't end in 10 years. We're watching China's housing implode on itself right now with hundreds of thousands of people losing their entire investments and retirement savings. We're watching 80 year olds going back to work so that they don't starve to death while youth unemployment reaches levels so insane that they'll take a job that only pays under the table because the company can't afford to pay minimum wage!

You want a dystopia, you'll get it if the bubble bursts. You'll also get it if the bubble continues to inflate.

So the only solution is to slowly deflate the bubble by increasing housing construction so that it outpaces demand in a controlled manner until the prices come back down to something reasonable, then to continue keeping pace. And for that, we need the political will for both government subsidized housing and a overhaul of zoning laws to allow for mixed-use residential to replace all residential zoning.

Detached single family housing don't belong in major cities, and suburbs shouldn't be subsidized by the downtown core.

[-] apprehensively_human@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 year ago

Detached single family housing don’t belong in major cities, and suburbs shouldn’t be subsidized by the downtown core.

Truer words were never spoken. If you want to be able to live on your own little plot of land surrounded by other people wanting the same thing - then development, upkeep and maintenance of all infrastructure and services needs to be paid for directly from your property tax. When you drive in to downtown to get to work, you should not expect to find parking. Downtown should belong to the people who actually live there, it's crazy how far we bend over backwards to support a lifestyle that's inherently unsustainable.

[-] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago

Whether you hope for it or not, all bubbles burst eventually, and the government has already proven its unwillingness to do anything about it by allowing the bubble to form in the first place.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

You want a dystopia, you’ll get it if the bubble bursts. You’ll also get it if the bubble continues to inflate.

Yeah, the range of ways out of this that don't suck are small. Even if you get the mildest of fixes: property values stay steady for decades while they're eroded by normal levels of inflation, that's going to be hell for people waiting for the prices to become reasonable, but also hell for people who bought property as an investment and instead see it losing value. Some of those people are rich, but other people were just using it as a retirement plan.

And for that, we need the political will

The problem is that political will always aligns with the self-interest of the parties or their leaders. Since home owners vote and donate, they're the ones who get listened to. Since property developers donate, they get listened to. Homeless people don't vote, and definitely don't donate to political campaigns. People struggling to make ends meet don't take time out of their busy days to get involved in politics, they just hope someone will help them.

Since politicians invariably come from a class that not only owns houses, but often owns multiple houses, the idea that they'll voluntarily take actions that reduce the value of their investments is pretty laughable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago

When I read stuff like this I often wonder why nothing is mentioned about Canada's lax laws on foreign ownership of multiple properties and failure to verify the legality of these owners' funds.

Because that's what started this shit show in the 90's and nothing has been fixed.

[-] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 year ago

There are foreign-ownership and vacant unit laws in all affected places in Canada AFAIK. They're basically self-reporting driven but they exist. The BC ones came first. They put a small dent in housing prices and then prices continued their upward march, and they did nothing at all for rent because the color of your landlord doesn't really change much.

Any solution that doesn't involve constructing abundant housing is at best rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic and at worst scapegoating.

[-] CoffeeBot@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago

Basically anything short of we’re going to expropriate land and build massive amounts of rgi’s and cooperatives will fix it on the supply side of the equation.

We need to tackle the problem at the source and that’s housing being used as an investment vehicle by wealthy people and corporations as a means of wealth extraction from the working class. It’s completely choking the economy.

[-] psvrh@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

The problem is, for a neoliberal government, wealth extraction is the point. They'll look at the system and see it working as intended.

On the flip side, massive build-outs of affordable housing is all downside: it doesn't make rich people the maximum amount of money, it requires wealth distribution downwards and there's little to no incentive to get private sector participation.

I don't think people realize how much government has changed since ~1979 and ~1995, or how we have had two to three whole generations of politicians and civil servants who have gone their whole careers believing that government shovelling money at the private sector is the only way to do things.

Here's a little thought experiment:

  • name me one institution implemented entirely with public funds since 1995. You can even go as far back as 1980, if you want. I'm an Ontarian, so something like GO Transit, the AGO, TVO, the Ontario Science Centre, Ontario Place, etc. The number is probably around zero.
  • Now, list all the entities sold off since then. The list is long, and contains some things you probably didn't realize, like Potash Corp, Air Canada, CN, Petro Canada and more. Think about how much money we'd have, how many services we'd still have, how much we'd be able to do about, eg, climate change if we had even a few of these.

It's a real gut-punch to realize we sold our future to billionaries for pennies on the dollar, and now those same billionaires are squeezing us for more.

[-] Smk@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Look at our suburbs. They are immense. Immensely wasting the land for car parking and large road. We fucked up pretty 50years ago and now these are the consequences. Why the fuck do we need a parking lot for each building ? Before saying the investors are evil and all that shit, look how wasteful we are building our communities. The investors only got in the market because of the way we built our neighborhood. We wasted land, we made the house supply low and we got investors trying to make money with it. Preventing investors from buying houses is probably a good idea but is only a band aid that won't last.

Stop wasting the land and this crisis is over.

[-] 601error@lemmy.ca 40 points 1 year ago

I’m ready for this bubble to pop.

[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The last time a housing bubble popped, so did the entire economy.

You sure you're ready for that?

[-] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 year ago

One hundred percent.

This isn't just some overvalued tulip in need of a correction. People need homes and can't afford to exit the housing market entirely. If people can't afford housing, that means they can't really afford anything. Expect the economy to have collapsed. Wages and employment will be down. Home ownership will decline.

Only those with capital to ride out a bumpy economy will be able to snatch up the cheap housing.

The solution to our housing crisis is not to tank the economy. The solution is to tackle the supply of housing, income inequality, and corporate equity in residential real estate.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

Ok, so you're not ready for the bubble to pop then.

[-] Coreidan@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

No one is ready for a depression. We need it tho. We can’t keep doing this.

It’s either depression or severe dystopia. Pick one.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

The longer we put it off, the worse its going to be

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago
[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

I don't think you realise the consequences on regular people.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

The current economic state isn't exactly great for the average person either. Especially young people trying to start careers and leave their parent's house.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Much better than not having a place to live because businesses are closing and unemployment is through the roof and you don't have a job.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] bouh@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I'm starting to think you have too much to lose to care for people not being able to live because houses are too expensive.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You think people are able to live if they lose their job because the whole economy crashes?

The only housing I own is a 3 season cottage that we paid 50k back in 2020 at the peak of demand for cottages (that gives you an idea how much of a piece of shit we bought), I don't have too much to lose, I just realize the consequences of the bubble bursting and these consequences will most definitely hurt those who are already suffering a lot more than the status quo.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] whats_a_refoogee@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

Not the same at all. The previous housing bubble was a result of widespread fraud by the banks. Now, people know very well to look out for that exact thing happening, and it isn't.

If there is a bubble right now, which there probably is, it is a speculative bubble. People believe that housing will forever quickly grow in price, so they are willing to pay above reasonable price to not miss out on the opportunity. Which in turn increases the prices further. It's a self-sustaining cycle, but at some point there won't be enough capital to sustain it any longer. Can happen in a year, can happen in a decade, can happen tomorrow.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

You're saying this but no you're not.

The riskier mortgages are guaranteed by the government, that means everyone pays if people stop paying their mortgage.

Retirement for most owners without a pension fund depends on being able to sell their property, that's also something the whole country would end up paying for through safety nets.

If prices crash that means even more easy to snatch properties for the richest, so even less supply.

The housing bubble bursting would lead to the same social crisis they had to go through in the USA, wishing for it to burst is wishing for people to die, more than are now because of the bubble.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Except in the US it brought prices back down to "normal" levels. Their were still expensive but they remained more affordable than here.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

The housing situation in the USA and in Canada are different though. You would be shifting the cost from those able to snatch the good deals while the crash happens to the whole population having to pay back banks through increased taxes over decades.

Don't forget all the job losses that come with that, can't buy a cheap house if you don't even have a job!

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Government decides who pay taxes. Shitty governments decide everyone pays the same. Good government redistribute.

In the early 20th century people responsible for crisis, bubbles and stuff were severly punished. It can be done.

Also, you should get familiar with the story of the boiling frog. Wishing things won't get worse will only get you dead eventually.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] CoffeeBot@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

Same. Burn it all down. I’m tired of paying my landlord the equivalent of a mortgage for fuck all security because I don’t have enough for a downpayment.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 21 points 1 year ago

Even though I had to pay though the nose to buy a house years ago, I hope for a crash so that people are not screwed forever more.

What I find really odd is the commercial market in smaller towns, its cheap as shit.

[-] Che_Donkey@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 year ago

Crashes only hurt regular people. People who have money/capital can wait it out and then buy even more housing to make the bubble bigger next cycle.

source: lived through 2008 and that fucking sucked

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

Yeah well high prices only hurt regular people, too!! It's almost like we're getting fucking squeezed by our economic masters, eh?

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

Same and I don't think a housing crash would hurt just the poor like say a 2008 style crash (it would still hurt the poor because everything does). I also don't think there is any other option other then a crash, things are too out of hand bubble wise. It would be cool if someone in power could get crazy serious about the issue but there is no will and it is likely to late.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think a housing crash would hurt just the poor like say a 2008 style crash

How about you expand on your ideas a bit, because I could say I don't believe in a lot of things without explaining why and that wouldn't make me right.

No politicians want to tackle the issue because we're the ones who guarantee risky mortgages through the CMHC.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

I mean partly due to real estate now the largest contributor to the gdp (https://www.statista.com/statistics/594293/gross-domestic-product-of-canada-by-industry-monthly/ ) and partly due to the abundance of non home real estate supply, Canada is in a situation of not so much being in a bubble but being the bubble. In a 2008 type crash you have a large group of people with enough capital that could by out the foreclosed houses, the upper middle class (but not all of them https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode-407-the-waffle-house-index-trump-book-quiz-the-big-trip-photographing-spain-s-ghost-towns-and-more-1.4821840/photographing-spain-s-ghost-towns-10-years-after-the-financial-crisis-1.4821871 ).

But I think Canada's next crash will not be part of a world wide event and will be a value crash more then a mortgage crash at a time when that upper middle class is narrowing. When a value crash happens the people who would buy the majority would see their own equity take a hit, limiting how much appetite most would have for buying more. the ultra rich put their money in real estate for investment or laundering, they would be effected but not as much long term (nice to be rich).

Then you have the companies, most are leveraged to the teeth and are not even concerned with the rental income in a lot of cases (they still get all the rent they can, they just see it as a side effect). In the case of a value crash they would be underwater and go overnight, this does not mean other larger entities would not jump in to buy them for pennies on the dollar, but it would remove a lot of the intensive that exists right now. This might mean rents go up when these companies get desperate but the renting class can not bare much more and would likely result in another crisis.

In short term this next crash (unless something really drastic or shady is done) will be incredibly bad for everybody, but in the medium term the poor have little to no capital to lose compared to everyone else and should see prices collapse and due to that being Canada's largest business now would have to cater to the new market. In the long term many here in power would be back trying to pump up the housing bubble and most ultra rich would be hesitant to invest in a market that has shown it is a bubble (think Japan, Grease, Ireland, China, etc.).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

What is bnnbloomberg, anyway? I see them in my feed sometimes and they have highly-produced news, but they don't seem to have a lot of it, which makes me feel like it is carefully targeted (ie propaganda)

[-] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

They've been around forever and it's for financial wonks so their intended audience in this case is people involved in everything financial as it pertains to houses from C level to keener analysts.

It's legit.

[-] villasv@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

Bloomberg a legit news source. Two things though:

  1. This BNN Bloomberg, which is Business News Network after getting acquired by Bloomberg. It's still a pretty factual news source (sometimes even more so than Bloomberg itself)
  2. This isn't news. It's a person (Phillip Colmar, partner at Global Strategist at MRB Partners) saying what they think. It's more like an opinion piece, improvised on live television, and most of those are indeed garbage even in otherwise respectable outlets.
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
185 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7187 readers
343 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS