|
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/tbs/F&Ereview13.pdf (page 12) That puts FIRE and construction at 31.2% of BC's economy.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 05:31 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 07:10 |
|
HookShot posted:I think there are approximately 50k registered realtors in Canada, but I honestly can't remember where I read that number so it might be way off. The Toronto real estate board alone has over 40,000 members.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 05:42 |
Franks Happy Place posted:The Toronto real estate board alone has over 40,000 members. Well there we go, that's what I get for having a poo poo memory.
|
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 05:51 |
|
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Study+puts+grim+numbers+rental+crisis/10387971/story.htmlquote:A growing number of B.C. renters are facing a crisis of affordability and paying too much of their income on scarce, expensive rental accommodation, according to new statistics to be released today by the B.C. Non-Profit Housing Association. look at all these adorable motherfuckers talking like housing affordability has nothing to do with ease of credit in the housing market
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 06:05 |
|
it's too bad all that financial energy was not put into building more rentals instead of the condo bubble.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 06:16 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 06:40 |
|
Based upon sum total effort exerted by everyone in this loving province to ruin the environment for the same of resource striking, why has it not occurred to anyone that it would be far more profitable and less of an impact on co2 emissions and pollution of the countryside to just turn Vancouver into a north american Luxembourg servicing the public making GBS threads mainlanders? gently caress high tech, gently caress LNG and gently caress oil. Let's just lets just give up this pantomime of building an economy based on anything and just resort to shady banking.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 06:43 |
|
melon cat posted:Even though we're sitting at the edge of a bubble market, I really don't think that this is a taste of things to come. All of the towns listed in that snippet are all smaller cities/towns that people really aren't drawn to, in the first place. They're all just bedroom communities. Agree. I'm less and less convinced the cities are going to see any meaningful change outside of a major macro event.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 07:13 |
|
winnipeg ottawa e: actually, what the gently caress am i thinking, those are worthless cities by any global measure. yes, SJWs, loving beta cities
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 07:28 |
|
You can tell that vancouver is the best city. Why else would houses be so expensive?
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 07:32 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:winnipeg Ottawa! Come for the cultural and historic features worse in every way than Montreal's, stay for the crippling depression.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 07:35 |
|
Whiskey Sours posted:
Wow, that is brutal. I would have thought finance would be a bigger chunk of FIRE than that. Isn't it ironic that construction, real estate and rentals make up 25% of the economy and there's still a dire housing shortage. GO FIGURE.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 07:38 |
|
Just curious, are there any easily accessible charts like this for other countries? For comparison.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 15:41 |
|
My job is tied up in home construction in the GTA so please, for my sake, keep buy buy buying.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 15:47 |
|
triplexpac posted:Just curious, are there any easily accessible charts like this for other countries? For comparison. Without wanting to be a total jerk, it really isn't that hard to google something like '[country] gdp by sector'
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 15:50 |
|
melon cat posted:Even though we're sitting at the edge of a bubble market, I really don't think that this is a taste of things to come. All of the towns listed in that snippet are all smaller cities/towns that people really aren't drawn to, in the first place. They're all just bedroom communities. For the record, that's how the bubble popped down here - prices started dropping in outlying areas and then as the economy slowed it started accelerating as the game of musical chairs finally stopped, rolling inwards. The people with no savings and no way of leveraging further credit dropped first, but eventually, like a massive sinking ship, the ship sucked in everything else, dropping prices by like 50+%. It took a year or two for the wave to hit some of the more rich areas, but it still did (because even those were only up there because of speculation and easy credit, and the real easy credit died). Worse though, was that rent did not go down (and in fact got harder in some areas) during all of this, as lots of houses sat empty, both because banks didn't want to saturate the market, and because the legal process takes time, so when you have a suddenly large influx of people who can no longer own a home in the current situation, they have to rent (or move, or whatever), but the rental supply didn't increase by much by comparison. At least your mortgages aren't denominated in a foreign currency, so maybe you can inflate your way over the next 5-10 years back to this point. Although oil is kinda a foreign currency I guess..
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 15:52 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Without wanting to be a total jerk, it really isn't that hard to google something like '[country] gdp by sector' True enough! Here's another question: why were mortgage rates so high in the 80s? Ratehub has the rates being as high as 20% back then, seems crazy.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 16:07 |
|
triplexpac posted:True enough! Because the general level of inflation was high back then.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 16:33 |
|
Lexicon posted:Because the general level of inflation was high back then. but then monetarism won the day and we all lived happily ever after with stable prices, independent central banks, and sensible inflation targets three cheers for monetarism!
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 16:43 |
|
You know what's really unfair? Property owners only getting 1 vote in elections. Shouldn't they have more votes based on their properties? What if you live in Saanich but own a rental condo in Victoria, shouldn't you be entitled to a vote because money? What if you live in Langford but own a chain of stores in Victoria, Saanich, Langford, and Oak bay? You should obviously get 4 votes since you have a connection to each city. This is currently a serious discussion going on on the right/libertarian Victoria BC forums I read. It's absolutely appalling that a bunch of left wing renters and retired people can keep voting in left wing candidates when most of the city's business owners would vote right wing but can't just because they don't live in the city. What hosed up world do we live in where some "student" who only RENTS in Victoria gets to vote but a rich person who lives in Uplands but owns an office in Victoria is limited to just 1 vote. This is why things are bad!
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 17:15 |
|
^ Holy gently caress are you serious? Can you link us. This country...
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 17:16 |
|
Baronjutter posted:You know what's really unfair? Property owners only getting 1 vote in elections. Shouldn't they have more votes based on their properties? What if you live in Saanich but own a rental condo in Victoria, shouldn't you be entitled to a vote because money? What if you live in Langford but own a chain of stores in Victoria, Saanich, Langford, and Oak bay? You should obviously get 4 votes since you have a connection to each city. Please share the source.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 17:25 |
|
http://vibrantvictoria.ca/forum/index.php?/topic/5128-election-results/page-15 This site is actually pretty good for staying up to date on victoria development and politics but it slants hard to the right and libertarian. Unregulated development for all, social services for none. Also if you even hint at not thinking real estate prices are going to double every year forever you'll be laughed out as a jealous leftist angry at other people's wise investments. They even have a special forum where official partnered REALTORS(r) can give sound trusted financial advice to people with questions about real estate. The owners of the site regularly "partner" with developers and local businesses to basically shill for them. They started off as a fairly honest and non-partisan group of people who were sick of NIMBY's that didn't even live or work downtown showing up to shout down every single downtown project proposed, but "lets get some density downtown" became "Lets unquestionably worship developers and job creators and do paid work supporting their projects". Basically a great place to find out about local construction and politics and what bitter libertarian "businessmen" think about every subject. Victoria is of course a pretty left wing city, so its small community of randian supermen is extremely bitter about having to live in such an "anti-business" city and clearly they'd all be rich by now if it wasn't for that NANNY STATE. (They have a specific nanny-state thread on top of every thread derailing to something about THE LEFT or SOCIALISTS) Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Nov 18, 2014 |
# ? Nov 18, 2014 17:44 |
|
A few seconds of browsing lead me to this glorious piece of hilarityquote:Emanuel Arruda, who in November was ordered by the court to be removed from League’s senior management along with chief executive and co-founder Adam Gant, has penned a letter to some of the 4,200 investors who could lose as much as $370 million when League completes restructuring under the Companies Creditors Arrangement Act. quote:PricewaterhouseCoopers, the monitor overseeing League’s restructuring, said the investor group is expected to lose most if not all of the $370 million they invested. The monitor said League owes $186 million in mortgages to 26 secured lenders and has 460 trade creditors, considered unsecured lenders, owed $19.5 million. Hahahaha, holy gently caress. These guys were OD'ing on the Kool-Aid. quote:“I handed the keys to my apartment over to a tenant who will pay my mortgage for at least the next year. Rendered effectively homeless, I am now staying in a friend’s spare room,” he said. quote:The company is trying to sell 11 of its 22 properties by June 28 to satisfy secured lenders who are owed $186 million. Total sales are not expected to fetch that price.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 17:59 |
|
Love the comment on the first page: In Victoria on a good day you might get 40% willing to vote anything other than hard left.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 18:01 |
|
That project was amazing. Some non-coolaid-drinking people on that forum were calling it the gently caress out from the beginning but you don't call out developers or real estate financing on Vibrant Victoria so some people got banned and they had to implement a strict policy of not talking about League’s finances or if their suburban condo tower and shopping centre was a good investment or not. A lot of that was driven by League threatening to sue Vibrant Victoria or something for spreading rumours that could hurt its business. That project had such weird loving finances and so many red-flags. They proposed to build this huge complex of 20ish story skyscrapers in the middle of nowhere of suburban/rural Victoria (Colwood actually, not even Victoria) yet all the branding was about how URBAN the project is, they even had the gaul to name it "Capital City Centre" despite it not being in the capital and about as far as the centre as you could get. I don't know if they website is still up but it was all about urban living and had pictures of downtown Victoria and would refer to downtown as "minutes away". They had this system where they'd take pre-sales without any down payment but you signed away a certain percentage of your future gains. So they'd supply your downpayment or secure your mortgage but in exchange you'd have to give them like 25% of the increase in value of the condo over the next X years, or something crazy like that. I remember a lot of poeple thinking it was a horrible idea, not because it was a huge red flag, but because they wanted to keep all the value their condo was obviously going to generate. I mean when they sell their condo at the rear end edge of the city for double what they paid for it in 5 years why the hell should League get 10% ??? My company did a bunch of work for the project but we were smart enough to get paid up front. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Nov 18, 2014 |
# ? Nov 18, 2014 18:12 |
|
Speaking of development in Victoria - is there any chance that eyesore of a hole in the ground beside Uptown (already an eyesore in and of itself) will ever get developed? I assume that's the plan, but it's been sitting empty for quite a long time at this point...
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:02 |
|
eXXon posted:Wow, that is brutal. I would have thought finance would be a bigger chunk of FIRE than that. Not even sure you can characterize it as a housing shortage. The housing is obviously there, it is just sitting empty and idle since speculation has removed the need for it. In Vancouver completed units have outpaced population growth by several percent for years now. Seems to be a much smaller version of the empty cities that China is building, it is just that some % of every condo building is just empty.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:24 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:In Vancouver completed units have outpaced population growth by several percent for years now. Seems to be a much smaller version of the empty cities that China is building, it is just that some % of every condo building is just empty.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:26 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:So you're going to get cheap condos for all when the crash hits and/or a plague of badly maintained skyslums. One of the two. Oh, I think we will get both.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:28 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:So you're going to get cheap condos for all when the crash hits and/or a plague of badly maintained skyslums. One of the two. Part of me loves the boom and bubble because it's greedy idiots subsidizing future affordable housing.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:28 |
|
Baronjutter posted:Part of me loves the boom and bubble because it's greedy idiots subsidizing future affordable housing. Given how shoddy the construction is on a lot of those buildings, I'm not so sure that they'll be affordable for the low-income crowd. Is the government going to be on the hook for maintenance?
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:31 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:Not even sure you can characterize it as a housing shortage. The housing is obviously there, it is just sitting empty and idle since speculation has removed the need for it. Do you mean in Vancouver proper or the GVR? I would think that a lot of people living in Richmond/Burnaby/Surrey would move closer to Vancouver if they could.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:35 |
|
eXXon posted:Do you mean in Vancouver proper or the GVR? I would think that a lot of people living in Richmond/Burnaby/Surrey would move closer to Vancouver if they could. I guess that just leads to the question if it's supply or price that's keeping them out of the city. Hanging out downtown at night you need a lot of mostly dark towers. Not a scientific metric but most of the downtown condos feel very empty and desolate. I guess part of that is just their architecture and site planning and strict bylaws against people having any signs of individuality visible from the street.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:42 |
|
eXXon posted:Do you mean in Vancouver proper or the GVR? I would think that a lot of people living in Richmond/Burnaby/Surrey would move closer to Vancouver if they could. I honestly don't recall if it was for Vancouver or the GVRD, but even if we assume Vancouver, it isn't like Burnaby or Richmond aren't building like crazy too. Pencil me in for would rather live in Vancouver, but it is stupid house prices keeping me out not a shortage of housing. (If you're a squatter it is probably a panacea on the West-side at the moment with all the empty homes.) However developers sure are happy with this "shortage" as it gives them leverage when they come to negotiating with the municipality and nets a premium on the sale. And since some percentage of those sales might never see an occupant, the shortage never decreases. I wish I understood how all that property can sit empty without people going bankrupt left and right. Baronjutter posted:I guess that just leads to the question if it's supply or price that's keeping them out of the city. Hanging out downtown at night you need a lot of mostly dark towers as the owners are out enjoying the nightlife they richly deserve for being an astute investor in a downtown condo. fyp
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 19:52 |
|
Brannock posted:Given how shoddy the construction is on a lot of those buildings, I'm not so sure that they'll be affordable for the low-income crowd. Is the government going to be on the hook for maintenance? The government bailed out the leaky condo buildings for something like 3/4's of a Billion, or an actual Billion, so the answer is yes.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 20:10 |
|
triplexpac posted:True enough! Inflation targeting? Inflation was averaging something like 10% per year for most of the 70s.
|
# ? Nov 18, 2014 22:34 |
|
Baronjutter posted:Part of me loves the boom and bubble because it's greedy idiots subsidizing future affordable housing. it seems much more likely it's going to be greedy idiots one step up the ladder fleecing other greedy idiots, ruining the economy, leaving a bunch of shoddy run-down and useless-in-30-years overpriced ugly and rent-unfriendly condos that cost more to tear down and replace than they do to just leave there
|
# ? Nov 19, 2014 02:29 |
|
JawKnee posted:it seems much more likely it's going to be greedy idiots one step up the ladder fleecing other greedy idiots, ruining the economy, leaving a bunch of shoddy run-down and useless-in-30-years overpriced ugly and rent-unfriendly condos that cost more to tear down and replace than they do to just leave there Just look at the 1980s condo bubble in Vancouver, the government ended up forking over millions of dollars to either demo partially finished eye sore condos or gave low interest loans to help repairs condos which had shoddy construction. A sane housing policy would focus on higher direct rental supply, more apartments not more home ownership.
|
# ? Nov 19, 2014 03:31 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 07:10 |
|
I didn't know the government paid to demolish half built condos. That's awesome. I've been telling my friends that the coming crash is going to be glorious because the best place on earth is going to be full of half built husks of buildings blighting its skyline.
|
# ? Nov 19, 2014 04:01 |