183
submitted 1 year ago by Pxtl@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 601error@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 year ago

I’m ready for this bubble to pop.

[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 20 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 22 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 3 points 1 year ago

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

[-] Coreidan@lemmy.world 16 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

[-] 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 3 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.

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

Finance is not the economy. And housing should not be a free market. That's the whole problem with it today. When you make housing a finance product, you get what we have today. It's fucked up and it needs to be collapsed and redone.

[-] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And housing should not be a free market.

Agreed. We should regulate it. First, we should zone areas of land as only being for certain types of homes. This will ensure that the detached mansion you always dreamed of will not be usurped by some developer wanting to build condos. Next, we should regulate the structures so that someone doesn’t try to build a small/tiny home where you want your glorious mansion. Third, we enforce only one structure per property. Your mansion needs a sizeable backyard for your pool! I have more ideas, but think that’s a good start.

Oh wait.

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

I'll be the first to vote in favor of a non profit crown corporation taking control over anything that has more than 6 units and to require being registered as a company to own 4 to 6 units!

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

Regular people already can't afford housing. Almost anyone owning a house is a millionaire, or has borrowed a million from the bank as a mortgage.

The former will survive just fine. The latter took a tremendous risk by borrowing a million dollars to buy properly in an overheated market. If it works out then they can enjoy the fruits of their high risk play. If it doesn't work out, then they should suffer the consequences. That's how all risks work.

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

If the housing bubble bursts regular people won't have a job to buy a house. So much better 👍

I'm very very far from a millionaire and I'm an owner, it's the same thing for the vast majority of home owners in Canada.

Heck, our cottage was for sale for months before we bought it for 50k, I've now sold my condo for a price low enough that with 10k you could have bought it including all the paperwork (and I still had trouble selling it!) and I'm looking to buy a house for about 250k close enough to the city that I can still commute and I still have multiple choices... And I'm not talking about bum fuck nowhere, it's a city of over 200k with two hospitals and two universities!

Maybe people should start moving outside of Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver.. but what do I know? Oh, that's right, that you're quick to point the finger and say home owners should deal with the consequences of their choices, but you are unable to point to others who absolutely want to live in the most expensive parts of the country and complain that they'll never be able to afford anything while housing in more rural location just doesn't sell.

I talk to a lot of people wanting to buy their first house and all of them want at least a bungalow, none of them even wants to consider that buying a condo or even a semi detached to start might be a good option... So what do they do? They continue living at their parents' or in an apartment and complain.

Imma burst your bubble. Home ownership in cities is an anomaly in our history, it became prevalent after WW2 and scarcity of urban land means it's not sustainable to expect to see the population increase and have everyone become an owner.

[-] 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.

[-] 601error@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, I am ready for that. I don’t buy this “but the economy” line. It smacks of “too big to fail”, and I think that occasional failure is necessary and healthy.

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

You haven't lived through enough cycles then.... Even 2008 saw a million people in Canada lose their jobs. The one in the early 90s was probably double that.

Besides, nobody understands what the real numbers would even be. Do you know how much of an implosion is required to return Vancouver or Toronto to "affordable" levels? Prices would need to drop something around 80-85%. That's absolutely massive, and would wipe out the life savings of 10 million Canadians, who are now going to need more government support to make it through retirement.

There are ways to fix this problem, but they need to be gradual to not end up causing more problems than they fix.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 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.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

We really have to be taxing the hell out of the rich like we did in the "make Canada great again" days, if we want a cushion for this crash.

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

Yeah, this.

A crash isn't a bad thing if you can build a firewall against profiteering. Governments could buy property, instead of allowing the wealthy to, and governments could force the rich to take a haircut and/or tax the hell out them and then spend our way out of recession.

It won't happen, but it isn't impossible or even improbable.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 1 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 4 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 3 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)

They remained more affordable, for a time. And then housing prices went right back through the roof.

I bought a foreclosed house in 2012 for ~280k. It had been purchased by the previous owner for about 480k.

I put about 150k into it, 100k the first year to make it a liveable property, and 50k or so over the next ten years.

I sold it last year for about 850k...

I then bought a new house that cost about 450k when it was built 4 years ago, for about 680k, in a less expensive market.

[-] droopy4096@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Sorry, but depending on location prices bounced back and surpassed pre-crisis levels within few years in US. Same issue that many already highlighted - folks lost their houses during crisis to the ones who can afford it but they still need place to live. Population grows and so are the real estate prices. Investment firms are busy buying up properties and oh boy will they go wild this time, now that this turned into a very targeted industry. So those prices going down only means some people will lose their homes, others their jobs and corporate investors will gain big time. Selected few with sufficient financial cushion will weather it out and the cycle will repeat itself... because nobody builds housing to keep up with the pace of population growth. With a caveat: some rural areas are still underappreciated and if housing is what you seek - go rural, mind you job selection might be limites if any... so gotta be financially independent... oh guess what? Another pass for the average folk. So yeah... new construction is the only way out of it. Bursting the bubble will hurt folks below median a lot more than status quo. (mind you escalation of institutional investors activity would be as tragic as bursting the bubble).

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CoffeeBot@lemmy.ca 3 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.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

If you're unable to save money for a downpayment while paying the equivalent of a mortgage then you're not ready to own.

You guys believe you just buy a house and that's it, you know how much you're paying every month and it will be the same for the next 25 years or something? Freaking hell, some of you are in for a big surprise the first time a pipe bursts and you need to pay to redo a bathroom!

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

That’s ridiculous. I do put money away. The problem is that the size of downpayment needed is growing way faster than I could hope to save. How often do these adverse affects actually happen? Once or twice? You can also DIY.

Other things you can reliably budget for, new roof is every 20 years, maybe new appliances every 10 years. General upkeep? Renters do that already but you can DIY and you have a say in what happens.

Your argument is basically if you can’t save for a home while already paying for a home you can’t afford a home.

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

That’s ridiculous. I do put money away. The problem is that the size of downpayment needed is growing way faster than I could hope to save. How often do these adverse affects actually happen? Once or twice? You can also DIY.

Other things you can reliably budget for, new roof is every 20 years, maybe new appliances every 10 years. General upkeep? Renters do that already but you can DIY and you have a say in what happens.

Your argument is basically if you can’t save for a home while already paying for a home you can’t afford a home.

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
183 points (96.0% liked)

Canada

7226 readers
572 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 4 years ago
MODERATORS