jm20 posted:

On one side hes fueling the fire, on the other he's readying the fire hose.

ocrumsprug posted:

True.

It is somewhere between 5 and 100% depending on whom you ask. I suspect in Vancouver is is close to 5% of the total market, but could be a very sizable chunk of the detached segment (because seriously how many locals are buying $2.2M houses .)

rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:

I don't think 5%-11% at the low end can even really be considered all that insignificant.

Mr Luxury Yacht posted:

I know of a lot of people going on about foreign ownership just on the assumption of there's not that many jobs in Vancouver can support the insane prices for homes so the sales have to come from somewhere.

I mean the average sale price of a single family home in the greater Vancouver area is what, 1.5 million? A quick calc online assuming a lovely down payment of 10% leaves $1,350,000 and over 25 years at 3% interest that's like almost $6,500/month in mortgage alone.

I mean with property tax and random house poo poo you could be pushing 100k a year in housing costs alone. How many jobs in Vancouver support that kind of living and yet sales keep increasing?

Antifreeze Head posted:

In some old future predictions thing I just watched, there was speculation that condos could be built on a suspension bridge. Someone better start locking that down in Vancouver.

About 3:00 into this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czr-98yo6RU

triplexpac posted:

It makes perfect sense. They're not making any more land, so future houses will have to be built on levels ABOVE the ground. Basically we're looking at a Final Fantasy 7 scenario here.

rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:

I don't think 5%-11% at the low end can even really be considered all that insignificant.

quote:

Canada's housing market is in no danger of a correction nationally, but that's not the case in Toronto, Regina and Winnipeg where the CMHC says there's a "high risk" of a slowdown.

In its quarterly house price analysis released Thursday, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation says Toronto, Regina and Winnipeg are at "high risk" of a housing correction for a variety of factors.

The housing agency looks at market conditions in 15 major housing markets across the country. While most markets get a low or moderate risk in the CMHC's eyes, the agency singled out Regina, Winnipeg and Toronto for being in a possible danger zone.
Overbuilding

The reasons for concern are not the same in each city. In Toronto, the main concern is that "the rise in house prices has not been matched by growth in personal disposable incomes" the CMHC said, adding there is evidence of overbuilding in the market, with a historically high level of unsold units.

Toronto's conditions have gotten worse since April, when the city was deemed to be at "moderate risk" of a slowdown. Regina and Winnipeg, meanwhile, were singled out in the CMHC's last quarterly report in April, too.

"The high level of risk in Winnipeg reflects risks of overvaluation and overbuilding, while in Regina it reflects price acceleration, overvaluation and overbuilding, particularly of condominium apartments," the agency said.

The rest of the country is deemed to be in pretty good shape from a risk perspective.

Montreal and Quebec City's housing markets were deemed of moderate risk despite the presence of some overvaluation. And the CMHC says Vancouver's housing market is a "low risk" one despite sky-high prices, because demand is backed "by a growing population and growth in personal disposable income."

The last time the CMHC put out its quarterly report, there were only 12 cities in it. This one expanded the scope to 15 and of the three new ones added — Victoria, Hamilton and Moncton — each of which were assessed as "low overall risk" in terms of their housing markets.

The Butcher posted:

It's certainly not insignificant, but it's not the root of the problem.

Because the actual problem is more complicated, the vast majority of people have just latched onto "it's the fault of rich Chinese!"

It's a compelling, simple narrative. You can't afford a house because those strange, rich and corrupt others have taken them all away from you. It's been pushed hard by realtors and the local media, day in and day out.

I'd imagine you go around asking people, 90%+ in YVR would tell you that rich Chinese are the biggest driver of prices.

Singling out a group of racially different others as the source of your societies problems is obviously problematic as gently caress to begin with, but it gets worse because it gives legit racists a way to come into the mainstream and spout off hate (where normally they keep to dark corners), which just feeds back into the cycle of ugliness.

rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:

Hmm. Hmmmmmmmm.

I love the continued narrative that "It's just a few markets that are at risk!" Just ah, Toronto and Vancouver. And Regina and Winnipeg. And now all of Alberta. And Montreal and Quebec City. You know, just a few places. The places where people actually live

rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

It seems really simple, rich foreigners are a factor unique to Vancouver and maybe Toronto, but the whole of Canada has the same housing bubble so obviously they can't be the root of the problem. No coal baron wants to move to Winnipeg, or buy a 2 million dollar home in Prince George.

Mr. Wynand posted:

Has there actually been growth in average household income in Vancouver ? I'm not asking rhetorically. I could believe either answer - some industries seem to be doing OK, others seem to be worse then ever.

quote:

While the Vancouver census metropolitan area continues to experience population growth, Statistics Canada numbers show that the Lower Mainland is actually losing residents aged 20 to 30 to other provinces.

The region saw a net loss of 1,571 residents in that age group in 2013, adding to the 770 that left Vancouver the year before.

In fact, Vancouver has been losing traction in that age group (those graduating from post-secondary institutions, launching careers, looking to put down roots and start families) since net influx peaked in 2009.

None of that comes as a surprise to Penny Gurstein, of the University of British Columbia’s school of community and regional planning. “It’s a larger reflection of the socioeconomic community we’re creating here,” said Gurstein. “You have a number of well off people buying properties and a large service sector, where the 20- to 30-year-olds are primarily employed, that doesn’t have enough income to afford anything. Of course they would want to leave.”

And although 34 per cent of people in Metro Vancouver sport a bachelor’s degree or higher (above the national average of 26 per cent), Vancouverites aged 22 to 55 with degrees have the lowest median income ($41,981) among Canada’s 10 largest cities, according to research by prominent urban planner Andy Yan, of Bing Thom Architects.

quote:

B.C. experienced the worst income growth — in fact, incomes declined — of any province in Canada during the 2006-12 period, according to an analysis of Statistics Canada data by an Ottawa think-tank.

B.C.’s inflation-adjusted median income fell 2.4 per cent, from $29,917 per tax filer to $29,200, during a period when Canada’s overall employment income grew by 3.5 per cent. Median income is the midway point between the lowest and highest incomes.

Ontario, with a manufacturing sector devastated by the 2008 recession, suffered a 1.7-per-cent decline and was the only other province to suffer negative growth.

The bleak performance was particularly striking in B.C. cities, with Metro Vancouver employment incomes falling three per cent, Victoria’s 4.8 per cent, and Abbotsford’s 5.1 per cent.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/income+growth+worst+Canada+analysis/10749375/story.html#ixzz3ijvV03ZA

quote:

"I think a lot of the reason for concern with respect to Vancouver is the tendency to equate high price levels with overvaluation," said Bob Dugan, CMHC's chief economist.

"High prices are only part of the story."

Dugan said overvaluation measures take into account whether prices are supported by underlying factors such as incomes, population growth and, in the case of Vancouver, land constraints.

"You have the mountains on one side, the ocean on the other and you have the Agricultural Land Reserve," Dugan said, referring to a parcel of land set aside for farming where housing development is prohibited.

"There isn't a lot of land. There's a lot of constraints there that put upward pressure on prices."

Baronjutter posted:

The foreign buyer has priced honest debt-seeking Canadians out of markets like Vancouver and forced them to buy up rural properies and poo poo shacks in Prince George.

triplexpac posted:

I feel like, if the CMHC is saying there is a major issue in certain cities, it must be even worse than that right? Doesn't the CMHC generally fall on the "everything's fine, soft landing ahoy!" side?

jm20 posted:

A government agency making those statements would legitimize the housing market fears, which would lower consumer confidence and spending in kind.

triplexpac posted:

I feel like, if the CMHC is saying there is a major issue in certain cities, it must be even worse than that right? Doesn't the CMHC generally fall on the "everything's fine, soft landing ahoy!" side?

rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:

At this point I'm more inclined to believe that the CMHC is a total clown show.

quote:

WTI oil’s worst summer in trading history signals the price rout is nowhere near done

If crude’s slump back to a six-year low looks bad, it’s even worse when you reflect that summer is supposed to be peak season for oil.

U.S. crude futures have lost 30 per cent since the start of June, set for the biggest drop since the West Texas Intermediate crude contract started trading in 1983. That beats the summer plunges during the global financial crisis of 2008, the Asian economic slump in 1998 and the global supply glut of 1986.

It even surpasses the decline of 2011, when prices fell as much as 21 per cent over the summer as the U.S. and other large oil-importing nations released 60 million barrels of oil from emergency stockpiles to make up for the disruption of Libyan exports during the uprising against Muammar Qaddafi.

WTI, the U.S. benchmark, fell to a six-year low of US$41.35 a barrel Friday. It may slide further, according to Citigroup Inc.

Oil had already tumbled more than 3 per cent on Thursday, driven by a report that stocks at Cushing, Oklahoma, the delivery point for U.S. crude futures, rose more than 1.3 million barrels in the week to Aug. 11.Brent crude traded at US$49.12, down 10 cents and some way off its 2015 low of US$45.19 reached in January. The front-month September Brent contract expires on Friday.

Robin Bieber, director and technical analyst at London brokerage PVM Oil Associates, said the U.S. crude oil contract had become somewhat dislocated from Brent.

“The contracts are not all on the same technical page and this causes a lack of clarity,” Bieber said. “WTI could plunge but the rest hold steady.”

Commerzbank analyst Carsten Fritsch said he didn’t expect an accelerated drop in prices, but rather “a slow grind lower”:
“As long as (Whiting) refinery is out of service this will add to stocks in the U.S. which is WTI’s main driver now.”

Goldman Sachs said a weaker Chinese yuan was putting downward pressure on all commodity markets, signalling a change in global macroeconomic conditions.

“We believe the net commodity market effects are bearish,” it said in a note to clients.
Analysts said prices could drop further still unless oil production started to fall, particularly in North America.

“The lowest crude prices in six years might not be enough to put the brakes on the U.S. supply growth. U.S. shale players are actively cutting costs and some players are profitable at less than US$30 per barrel,” ANZ Bank said.

“Summer is when refineries are all running hard, so actual demand for crude is as good as it gets,” Seth Kleinman, London-based head of energy strategy at Citigroup Inc., said by e-mail.

OPEC’s biggest members are pumping near record levels to defend their market share and U.S. production is withstanding the collapse in prices and drilling. The oil market is still clearly oversupplied and “it will get more so as refiners go into maintenance,” Kleinman said.

Oil demand usually climbs in the summer as U.S. vacation driving boosts purchases of gasoline and Middle Eastern nations turn up air-conditioning.

Crude has sunk this year even U.S. gasoline demand expanded, stimulated by a growing economy and low prices. Total gasoline supplied to the U.S. market rose to an eight-year high of 9.7 million barrels a day last month, according to U.S. Department of Energy data.

Crude could fall to $10 a barrel as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries engages in a “price war” with rival producers, testing who will cut output first, Gary Shilling, president of A. Gary Shilling Co., said in an interview on Bloomberg Television on Friday.

“OPEC is basically saying we’re not going to cut production, we’re going to see who can stand lower prices longest,” Shilling said. “Oil is headed for $10 to $20 a barrel.”

quote:

Weaker loonie gives rise to falling corporate investment

A research report from National Bank Financial economist Krishen Rangasamy highlights the dark side of the weak loonie.

The cratering domestic currency is likely to help export growth, but it makes corporate investment expensive – particularly in imported machinery – and the expected gains in manufacturing employment may not be in the cards.

In a perfect world, the Bank of Canada’s efforts to weaken the domestic currency would create a virtuous economic cycle.

Rising non-energy exports would result in profits for companies, hiring and eventually corporate investment in new machinery to increase production levels to meet demand.

The newly employed would spend their wages, creating more wealth throughout the economy.

Mr. Rangasamy throws a wrench into this rosy scenario in the report released Thursday, suggesting that corporate investment will stay weak for a long time.

“The investment decline won’t be isolated to the energy sector. Thanks to the sinking Canadian dollar, it’s now more expensive for everybody to import capital goods. … There’s plenty of downside for investment spending from here. If we’re correct about the extent of the investment slump, that would equate not only to weak growth this year, but also to lower potential GDP growth for 2016 and beyond.”

The chart below is a re-creation of one presented by Mr. Rangasamy to support his pessimistic view on Canadian capital investment.

It suggests that the loonie is a leading indicator for corporate investment – when the loonie falls, investment is likely to follow.

In the current environment, the sharp drop in the Canadian dollar paints a bleak picture of the future.

Importantly, there is a regional economic tug-of-war that is hidden by the chart – spending in the oil patch is falling rapidly while initial signs of manufacturing investment become evident.

The energy sector has accounted for about 40 per cent of the total capital investment for S&P/TSX Composite companies in recent years.

Budgets have now been slashed and investment in the industry has come to an abrupt halt.

At the same time, June economic data featured a surprisingly strong showing from exports as Canadian Manufacturing reports: “With the lower loonie, exports to the United States led the way, rising 7.1 per cent to $34.2-billion in June. … Exports grew in 9 of 11 [industry groups] measured by Statistics Canada, led by consumer goods.”

The export strength in non-energy sectors suggests that while the scale of cuts in energy-sector investment currently dwarfs the gains in manufacturing and consumer-goods investment, the tide in overall corporate investment may be turning.

However, Mr. Rangasamy’s analysis implies that the upside in corporate spending will be very limited in the short term. The domestic economic recovery will be delayed and Canadians may well be stuck with sluggish growth for at least the next 18 months.

Follow Scott Barlow on Twitter @SBarlow_ROB.

quote:

Cheap Rentals Near Transit Hubs Face Wave of Demolition

Dennis McDonald rented in Coquitlam for less than a year, but his area meant a lot to him. It was close to amenities and the Lougheed SkyTrain Station. Neighbours were welcoming and colourful: large families, new immigrants, seniors with pets.

That's why he represented them at city hall when they learned all tenants had to leave.

With Metro Vancouver municipalities looking to house growing populations near transit hubs, Burquitlam and other up-and-coming areas are due for development. The problem is, older buildings with affordable housing like McDonald's have been targeted for demolition.

McDonald started a tenants' committee to show city hall and developer BlueSky Properties the "human cord."

"I wanted to show them just who this is affecting, real time," said McDonald. "These are people that have been living their lives in the same place for years."

But the efforts have been too big a burden for McDonald, who felt the stress caused "an erosion of the community."

McDonald moved out last fall. His two-bedroom Burquitlam unit cost $950 a month to rent. Now he's renting a house on an acre-large property for $1,400. But the Maple Ridge location is nowhere near the walkable Burquitlam transit hub he knew.

The rezoning of McDonald's former Burquitlam home has passed its third reading at Coquitlam City Hall and is on its way to a final one. A station along the new Evergreen Line is making the area even hotter.

Craig Jones is a PhD geography student at UBC who recently completed a report on transit-oriented development endangering cheap rentals. Jones is for density near transit, but stresses we shouldn't forget who's living there.

"It's a really problematic thing, to demolish [rental housing] without having something take its place," said Jones.

Other affordable rental housing near transit hubs in Vancouver and Burnaby are also beginning to vanish. Renter makeup is similar between them: low-income folks, families, new immigrants, seniors. Most are highly dependent on public transit and walking-distance to amenities.

Some new developments do have rental units, but it's a far cry from what many low-income renters can afford.

Bye-bye Burnaby?

In Burnaby, 12 rental low-rises with 275 units were demolished since 2010 and replaced with six condo towers -- a few still under construction.

Even at low estimate, Burnaby's planning and development committee chair Colleen Jordan said she expects a net gain of over 130 rental units.

But families like Sherry Chen's can't afford to rent the new units. The renters of their low-rise near Metrotown are expected to vacate by the end of February 2016.

Chen and her husband, an electrician, immigrated from the U.K. At one point, they considered moving back.

"We never knew the house prices [here] were so expensive!" said Chen.

They pay $800 a month for a single-bedroom unit, which they share with two toddler children. Chen scouted out possible new homes, but found nothing as convenient or affordable.

Chen is a member of the Metrotown Residents' Association, headed by Rick McGowan, who lives in the area and is concerned about the amount of development. The association and groups Social Housing Alliance and ACORN want city hall to place a moratorium on demolishing rental low-rises until a solution can be found for low-income renters.

McGowan doesn't want to see renters in his neighbourhood displaced. Metrotown is changing, but he hopes it can be more inclusive.

"I think Metrotown could develop into a very interesting, walkable, cycleable, sustainable place to live," said McGowan.

Cambie in the wind

It's a similar story in Vancouver as developments crowd the hot thoroughfare at Cambie and Marine Drive.

Jillian Skeet lives in Marine Gardens, a townhouse community built for the 1976 UN Habitat Forum and lauded as an exemplary model of affordable family housing.

"The world was here," said Skeet, who recalls the diversity of neighbours: aboriginals, South Americans, Chinese, Filipinos, Russians.

A rezoning application by owner-developer Concord Pacific was approved by city council in February. Residents like Skeet were told then that demolition would happen between 18 to 24 months.

Skeet has been a major voice for residents for about seven years at city meetings, but sees a neighbourhood built for families like hers changing fast. She estimates three-quarters of Marine Gardens' 70 units are now empty. Two condo towers will replace them.

"I don't feel like Vancouver is my city anymore," said Skeet. "I've been made to feel very unwelcome here." [Tyee]

Cultural Imperial posted:

http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/08/12/Rental-Demolition-Near-Transit-Hubs/


Everyone is thinking it but no one is saying it: Vancouver just isn't for you if you're not a hotshot monied mover and shaker with a great job at hootsuite. It's not our fault you went and wasted 10 years getting a phd. Maybe next time you'll have the gumption to get a 2 year programming certificate at BCIT to finally join the ranks of Vancouver's ~technorati

the talent deficit posted:

Hootsuite employee compensation is notoriously lovely. There are no great jobs there.

quote:

Weaker loonie gives rise to falling corporate investment

Cultural Imperial posted:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...815012355&ord=1


gently caress this country and gently caress you.

quote:

The energy sector has accounted for about 40 per cent of the total capital investment for S&P/TSX Composite companies in recent years.