|
PT6A posted:Well, yes and no. I lived in Quebec, and you're correct that tenants theoretically have more recourse against rent increases and such. Still, you have to (if I'm not mistaken) actually go to a hearing, and argue why the given increase is unreasonable given the circumstances, and you aren't guaranteed to win. You probably won't be pushed out with an instant $400/month increase, but over the course of years, if you aren't getting proper raises (or are on a fixed income), you can still be hosed. It was basically horrible idea privatizing a somewhat successful public housing scheme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_Act_1980 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/thatchers-legacy-a-shortage-of-affordable-housing/article11015971/ So despite Thatcher selling it as something that would help solve the problem of housing affordability it had the opposite effect due to price speculation and other dumb things seen in the current Canadian housing bubble. For a comparison in the above articles a council flat that sold for 50,000 pounds in the mid 90s now increased to 250,000 pounds in 2013. Also the other big problem with council housing was despite the speculators making piles of money, the local government could not get loans and build enough new public housing to keep up with the demand.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 00:22 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 05:37 |
|
I wasn't sure where to post this but on the taxonomy of "stupid things canadians do with their money", I thought this thread was most appropriate. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/03/26/rcmp-fraud-ontario-charges/ ps: gently caress you globe and mail. you and your loving paywall can go to hell quote:RCMP charges 6 men accused of massive fraud that cost feds and thousands of investors millions
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 04:03 |
|
^ Man, Canadians love the idea of an easy buck. I mean, all people do, but it seems like quite the Canadian proclivity.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 04:47 |
|
etalian posted:It was basically horrible idea privatizing a somewhat successful public housing scheme: To follow on from this, there's some good information at the below link from a UK charity that helps the homeless. http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/why_we_campaign/the_housing_crisis I won't deny that there were quality problems with some of the stock, but there are also plenty of council flats still around that are quite comfortable. And you hear horror stories about the quality of the newer free-market housing being built in the UK (again because of the housing under-supply caused directly by not building council flats). Lead out in cuffs fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Mar 27, 2014 |
# ? Mar 27, 2014 05:24 |
|
You guys are cracking me up about the glory of english council housing. On the other hand, I found this: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/the-uks-top-10-council-estates/5058819.article I've driven by Churchill gardens several times. It looks pretty awesome. I'd live there. but, COUNTERPOINT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heygate_Estate I've driven and walked by this shithole more times than I care to remember. What a complete and utter shithole. gently caress uk council housing.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 05:51 |
|
I can't wait to see the leaky everything crisis that is going to develop in Vancouver within the next decade or so. I have a couple friends working in the lockup fields of construction and apparently some of the poo poo they've been working in has been just phenomenally bad. One of them wondered if we have building inspectors at all anymore.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 05:53 |
|
This is loving awesome.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 05:57 |
|
Rime posted:I can't wait to see the leaky everything crisis that is going to develop in Vancouver within the next decade or so. I have a couple friends working in the lockup fields of construction and apparently some of the poo poo they've been working in has been just phenomenally bad. One of them wondered if we have building inspectors at all anymore. I know certain condos got sued in Toronto for windows literally falling on the street due to shoddy construction. Not to mention other great gimmicks like fountains and pools on the roof.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:02 |
|
etalian posted:Not to mention other great gimmicks like fountains and pools on the roof. Ahh yes, the seals of which will fail within ten years and cost the condo owners a stunning amount of money to replace, assuming maintenance catches it in time before it floods a half dozen units.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:05 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:This is loving awesome. that looks like SFU Burnaby
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:05 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:This is loving awesome. it's very clockwork orange-esque
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:08 |
|
Rime posted:Ahh yes, the seals of which will fail within ten years and cost the condo owners a stunning amount of money to replace, assuming maintenance catches it in time before it floods a half dozen units. black mold galore too due to all the water damage
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:10 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:This is loving awesome. Honestly structures like those should be convex and not concave. The "stretching into the horizon" effect is very dystopian.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:31 |
|
Brannock posted:Honestly structures like those should be convex and not concave. The "stretching into the horizon" effect is very dystopian. Yeah that's why I love it. You couldn't pay me to live in that poo poo though.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:38 |
|
I've always had a soft spot for Brutalism, and especially the 50s-70s "future architecture" look. It's kind of a shame that it's mostly died out and we're stuck with huge nondescript towers of glass and steel. edit: Tell me you wouldn't want to live here:
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 06:45 |
|
I would not want to live there, it looks like a nightmare to navigate, but maybe the inside is actually simple and straightforward?
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 07:57 |
|
JawKnee posted:I would not want to live there, it looks like a nightmare to navigate, but maybe the inside is actually simple and straightforward? How often do you "navigate" your apartment building besides walking to your unit?
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 08:22 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:You guys are cracking me up about the glory of english council housing. On the other hand, I found this: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/the-uks-top-10-council-estates/5058819.article This discussion would probably be better suited to a new thread on historical and modern social housing around the world, but neither of those buildings/complexes are representative of the UK's (former) council houses in general. Most of the council housing stock just looks like, well, regular houses or apartment blocks. People tend to think of the big concrete projects when you talk about council housing because they're so big and visually imposing, but they were always a small part of the overall picture; most of the stock looked more like this: Unsurprisingly, when it became available for tenants to buy at a huge discount, the stuff like ^^^ that sold with a quickness while the unmortgageable concrete monstrosities generally did not. e: for amusement value, compare the quoted market rent of £3k/mo on that listing to the £159/week that would have been charged by its former owner, the City of London corporation. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 11:58 on Mar 27, 2014 |
# ? Mar 27, 2014 10:35 |
|
Dusseldorf posted:How often do you "navigate" your apartment building besides walking to your unit? Gotta think about the pizza man. I don't know where that is, but that sort of thing would likely be a nightmare to heat in many parts of Canada.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 12:25 |
|
Brannock posted:I've always had a soft spot for Brutalism, and especially the 50s-70s "future architecture" look. It's kind of a shame that it's mostly died out and we're stuck with huge nondescript towers of glass and steel. Did you know that this development was considered anything but a success?
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 12:29 |
|
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/bmo-slashes-key-mortgage-rate/article17688398/quote:
This is so loving awesome. 2.99 mortgages are back!
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 12:32 |
|
gently caress it, I'm buying a house. It's obvious now that our banks and government are going to allow the housing market inflate so bad and everyone who didn't max themselves out already is going to be left holding the bag.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 13:29 |
|
downtown Toronto & Vancouver houses for everyone!!!! Edit: gently caress condos, and specifically gently caress Toronto City Council and planning. There could be good condos built, but that's not the business plan. I can't believe these developers get away with building condos that literally only one person can live in. It would be so much more beneficial to the city to build condos for families, so we can live the way families in Europe and New York City live, in apartments and condos. This city just lets the developers have their way and it makes me crazy. Just rubber stamp everything and don't consider whether or not it's good for the city. The Waterfront will be a ghetto a la St Jamestown in 15 years, I promise. peter banana fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Mar 27, 2014 |
# ? Mar 27, 2014 13:30 |
|
Postwar development has always been prone to short-term thinking. Governments never thought to charge developers enough when they were building suburbs so the costs of maintain those suburbs would be sustainable over 40-50 years, and instead we've had to subsidize more and more development with tax dollars as older infrastructure breaks down.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 13:44 |
|
EvilJoven posted:everyone who didn't max themselves out already is going to be left holding the bag. I think you are likely correct about this.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 13:45 |
|
quote:Tara Perkins https://twitter.com/taraperkins/status/449134681569902593 BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 15:15 |
|
The Fed can and should respond to this with a further reduction in maximum amount CMHC is willing to insure. I think a move to something like 800k would have a profound affect on the market. Easily the best tool in a situation where the meta doesn't allow you to raise interest rates - it has demonstrated success in the million+ segment.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 16:04 |
|
https://businessincanada.com/2014/03/27/bank-of-montreal-five-year-fixed-rate-below-3-percent-canada-housing-bubble/quote:Canadian banks are starved for domestic loan growth, so much so that they’re willing to sacrifice their margins in a big way. When BMO’s 5-year fixed rate was last at 2.99 percent, the 5-year Canadian government bond yield was around 1.3 percent. Since then, the five-year yield has moved up 40 basis points. One analyst, however, did point out that skinny margin specials are not uncommon in the run-up to the spring season. This is pretty stupid and irrational isn't it? Does bmo expect the housing market to keep going up or is some rear end in a top hat trying to make his numbers to collect a fat bonus?
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 16:35 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:https://businessincanada.com/2014/03/27/bank-of-montreal-five-year-fixed-rate-below-3-percent-canada-housing-bubble/ It's all riskless profit to them anyway.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 16:40 |
|
Lexicon posted:I think you are likely correct about this. How well protected are bank deposits in Canada? I have a decent chunk of cash in the bank but it's below the CDIC limit. What are the chances of it literally being seized by the government because 'GOTTA PROTECT BANKS AND HOMEOWNERS'?
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 17:57 |
|
EvilJoven posted:How well protected are bank deposits in Canada? I have a decent chunk of cash in the bank but it's below the CDIC limit. What are the chances of it literally being seized by the government because 'GOTTA PROTECT BANKS AND HOMEOWNERS'? I think the chances of that are pretty low (though any Cypriot pre-2012 would probably have said the same thing). Higher taxes, higher national debt, lower CAD all strike me as relatively high-probabiilty future outcomes though.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 18:06 |
|
Lexicon posted:I think the chances of that are pretty low (though any Cypriot pre-2012 would probably have said the same thing).
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 18:18 |
|
EvilJoven posted:How well protected are bank deposits in Canada? I have a decent chunk of cash in the bank but it's below the CDIC limit. What are the chances of it literally being seized by the government because 'GOTTA PROTECT BANKS AND HOMEOWNERS'? Federally it should be fine, similar provincial guarantees for credit unions are likely solid too but may be more at the whim of provincial finances. I don't really see a situation where the government comes and loots saving accounts. If for no other reason, that people don't have much money in them. We aren't in a Cypress situation where our bank accounts pay 10+% interest so people have money there. The saving rate in BC is actually negative, and isn't much better across the country, so it isn't clear to me that looting them would net anyone enough to justify the political price they would pay.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 18:22 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:We aren't in a Cypress situation where our bank accounts pay 10+% interest so people have money there. The saving rate in BC is actually negative, and isn't much better across the country, so it isn't clear to me that looting them would net anyone enough to justify the political price they would pay. That and Canada doesn't use the euro or any other currency they don't fully control and can devalue instead of looting savings accounts.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 18:40 |
|
Your savings are fine, but the banks also won't get all of their CMHC claims back, because there's no way a stringent review of their books will find all of those loans were properly documented and income-verified. So, I wouldn't own any bank stocks if I were you. In other news, the BC Liberals just tabled a bill that would release a bunch of land in the Agricultural Land Reserve to development. This is less than a week after they tabled a tweak to the condo marketing laws so that if a developer pre-sells a project and it later turns out what they were selling is bullshit, as long as they totally didn't mean to lie, I swear honest!, they can't be sued by buyers. The development industry is going hog wild up in this bitch. I guess that's what happens when 50% of Christy Clark's leadership bid fundraising come from developers.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 18:55 |
|
In the shower this morning I briefly wondered how much private funding we could get for a series of short attack ads about the BC Liberals and all the terrible things they've done. Eg: "In 2003, the RCMP raided the home of Premier Christy Clarke in connection with the sale of BC Rail, a sale later found to have robbed the province of millions. What is Christy hiding today?" followed by "The BC Li(e)berals. Do we really need another 5 years?". You could spin this out to all sorts of high profile issues: Parks defunding, healthcare budget cuts, BC Ferries, Hydro rates being raised because of attempts to privatize it, TFW rates being the highest in the country, etc. Just a super intensely dirty attack campaign dredging up everything the Liberals have done to screw the citizens of BC for the benefit of their friends and multinational corporations.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 19:05 |
|
Rime posted:In the shower this morning I briefly wondered how much private funding we could get for a series of short attack ads about the BC Liberals and all the terrible things they've done. http://www.shd.ca/
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 19:06 |
|
^ I'm talking putting it on Radio, if not television. Hence "I wonder how much funding..."
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 19:10 |
|
EvilJoven posted:gently caress it, I'm buying a house. It is starting to look like this, yes
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 21:26 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 05:37 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:This discussion would probably be better suited to a new thread on historical and modern social housing around the world, but neither of those buildings/complexes are representative of the UK's (former) council houses in general. Most of the council housing stock just looks like, well, regular houses or apartment blocks. People tend to think of the big concrete projects when you talk about council housing because they're so big and visually imposing, but they were always a small part of the overall picture; most of the stock looked more like this: To get back off-topic to the Vienna model, one reason why it works so well is that you have multiple firms bidding on the project since the deal helps both a developer and also the government. So instead of hideous buildings you actually get something much closer to class A quality for public housing.
|
# ? Mar 27, 2014 23:59 |