|
jfood posted:'N' sticker goes on the car, not the plate. Wow, how soon we all forget that anything can be bought.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2016 21:28 |
|
|
# ? May 24, 2024 07:40 |
|
http://www.wsj.com/articles/as-rates-sink-housing-bubbles-rise-1468758085quote:As Rates Sink, Housing Bubbles Rise or maybe, you know, the government does something
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 03:52 |
|
http://bc.ctvnews.ca/more-than-5-000-airbnb-style-rentals-listed-in-vancouver-study-finds-1.2990548quote:More than 5,000 AirBnb-style rentals listed in Vancouver, study finds The total rental inventory in Vancouver is 136,130 (source, p76), making the immediate impact of this seem small. However: 5224 purpose built rental units were constructed from 2012-2015 (and were widely touted as being a positive for rental affordability). This merely maintained the existing supply of purpose rentals as the total number (56,190) has remained pretty much flat over the last decade. Meanwhile the number of rented condo units is increasing (24,213) and are almost always more expensive than purpose rentals for equivalent sizes/locations. A small (and I imagine, increasing) number of short term rentals can put a lot of pressure on the market, especially if these are condos that are taking up rental slots (lovely as renting condos is).
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 04:40 |
|
namaste faggots posted:http://www.wsj.com/articles/as-rates-sink-housing-bubbles-rise-1468758085 The Liberals are not going to touch the housing market. It would be political suicide and ruin them for decades by putting the largest group of voters, boomers, into a very lovely (though deserved) situation.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 05:23 |
|
so we'll just sacrifice everyone instead
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 05:32 |
|
Everything else in our society is going to be sacrificed first to protect home equity, especially with a government entity holding the bag on a gigantic pile of mortgages. It's not going to work but they'll try.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 05:34 |
|
UnfortunateSexFart posted:People were always saying "are you loving kidding me." It's never been locals buying for $4+ million regardless of what the government/SJWs say. Ah yes, it's those drat SJWs again
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 05:41 |
|
namaste faggots posted:so we'll just sacrifice everyone instead Both federal and provincial governments have already done this. Most people just havnt noticed it yet.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 06:17 |
DariusLikewise posted:Ah yes, it's those drat SJWs again Canadians would rather lose their ability to live in their home city than be accused of racism, so yes, it has been a problem.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 09:28 |
|
I, too, wish racism was more acceptable in our country. This housing bubble would be history!
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 09:57 |
It's not racism, it's the unfair accusation that has caused us to not do anything to prevent disaster. If anything the racism comes from assuming that those nice little orientals couldn't possibly be playing us.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 16:35 |
|
Coolwhoami posted:http://bc.ctvnews.ca/more-than-5-000-airbnb-style-rentals-listed-in-vancouver-study-finds-1.2990548 quote:Fully three-quarters of short-term rentals are entire homes, condos, or apartments that could otherwise provide housing for long-term residents of the city. The article (and from the way they talk about it, many councillors) assumes that 100% of these "entire home" Airbnb rentals are necessarily taking away space from long term rental but I think a pretty big leap. I've rented several "entire home" Airbnbs that wouldn't really be reasonable to rent for as a long term apartment. For example I've stayed in what was essentially a very nice shed that only had a bed and bathroom and no room for anything else. There's probably a lot of "basement suites" that are not fully featured and are only marginally good for actually renting out in the long term. I would assume that almost the entirety of downtown is renting out a whole condo, so that's 31% * 5000 = ~1500 long term rental there. I suspect for other places like Kits and Mount Pleasant, where you'd be factoring in basement suites, you can't as strongly assume the Airbnb units would be rented out in any way otherwise.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 17:24 |
|
UnfortunateSexFart posted:Canadians would rather lose their ability to live in their home city than be accused of racism, so yes, it has been a problem. MAKE VANCOUVER GREAT AGAIN!
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 17:29 |
|
https://betterdwelling.com/city/vancouver/chinese-media-now-warning-canadas-housing-crash-will-worse-us/quote:
loool
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 17:30 |
|
Femtosecond posted:I would assume that almost the entirety of downtown is renting out a whole condo, so that's 31% * 5000 = ~1500 long term rental there. I suspect for other places like Kits and Mount Pleasant, where you'd be factoring in basement suites, you can't as strongly assume the Airbnb units would be rented out in any way otherwise. Sure, but those 1500 units would almost double the number of available rentals in Vancouver presently. Like, even if you have 40% of the 5k number that was instead plain long-term market rental, you'd double the Vancouver rental vacancies.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 17:30 |
|
Majuju posted:Sure, but those 1500 units would almost double the number of available rentals in Vancouver presently. Like, even if you have 40% of the 5k number that was instead plain long-term market rental, you'd double the Vancouver rental vacancies. You're totally right that considering Vancouver's situation of sub 1% vacancy any addition of units is a big victory. I am just a bit irked that every Airbnb estimate I see seems to be one that I would classify as a super optimistic scenario, likely over estimating the impact of Airbnb. Maybe there's no harm in this. After all the city is aggressively trying to build more purpose built rental as well. Tourism is super important to the local economy. I wonder if there is some degree of leakage of rental supply to Airbnb (500 units? 1000? More?) that council would be ok with? Or is council so set on increasing rental supply that they'll take the max possible amount of Airbnb units off the market without doing an economic assessment of this action first.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 18:13 |
|
Femtosecond posted:You're totally right that considering Vancouver's situation of sub 1% vacancy any addition of units is a big victory. I am just a bit irked that every Airbnb estimate I see seems to be one that I would classify as a super optimistic scenario, likely over estimating the impact of Airbnb. Maybe there's no harm in this. After all the city is aggressively trying to build more purpose built rental as well. the lack of Airbnb would stop tourism? Or would even impact someone's decision to come here? That's kind of hard to swallow.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 18:25 |
|
Tourism only started 8 years ago.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 19:13 |
|
JawKnee posted:the lack of Airbnb would stop tourism? Or would even impact someone's decision to come here? That's kind of hard to swallow. Don't put words in my mouth. Airbnb is a cheap way to travel, much cheaper than staying at a downtown hotel. Travelers using Airbnb can probably afford to stay in Vancouver longer and spend more than those that don't. There are real implications to limiting a lower income lodging option that should be studied. There are lots of negatives to Airbnb and it should be regulated but I think there are a few positives that should be considered. The tone coming out of city hall from Vision is that Airbnb are villains so it'll be interesting to see how council approaches regulation.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:19 |
|
Femtosecond posted:The article (and from the way they talk about it, many councillors) assumes that 100% of these "entire home" Airbnb rentals are necessarily taking away space from long term rental but I think a pretty big leap. I've rented several "entire home" Airbnbs that wouldn't really be reasonable to rent for as a long term apartment. For example I've stayed in what was essentially a very nice shed that only had a bed and bathroom and no room for anything else. There's probably a lot of "basement suites" that are not fully featured and are only marginally good for actually renting out in the long term. The part you quoted explicitly clarifies that 3/4 of the units are either a house, condo, or apartment, implying the remainder are suites. While I can acknowledge there are a number of units that are purpose built for short term rental (such as the one you stayed in), this doesn't change that there is a substantial impact on the overall availability of housing as a result, even if only a fraction of the units would be rented long term. This doesnt even touch whatever impact buying property to rent like this has on the real estate market, or what I can imagine is something similar to the impact uber is having on taxis (except in this case it is hotels and other regulated units that are impacted). It's fair to point out that an overly optimistic estimate is not useful here, but even pessimistically we can see how things might change. Femtosecond posted:Tourism is super important to the local economy. I wonder if there is some degree of leakage of rental supply to Airbnb (500 units? 1000? More?) that council would be ok with? Or is council so set on increasing rental supply that they'll take the max possible amount of Airbnb units off the market without doing an economic assessment of this action first. My question would be whether we have lost, or have available, vacancies in other sorts of supply as a consequence of airbnb, rather than assuming that any regulatory action would be a net loss. Naturally any action will result in some period of turmoil, but that should not be cause to avoid touching it (because that's how we got here in the first place).
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:29 |
|
If you can't afford to stay in a hotel then you probably aren't contributing enough to offset the impact on the rental housing market. Airbnb can gently caress right off for all I care.
Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jul 18, 2016 |
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:35 |
|
If only there was some way to collect money from all these private citizens renting out their property as means of starting a small business.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:39 |
|
It'd be cool if some affordable hostels could open up here to undercut the hotel market. Sadly there are no properties available to open one in, and regulations ensure that costs aren't significantly less than a hotel room.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:41 |
|
THC posted:If you can't afford to stay in a hotel then you probably aren't contributing a whole lot, certainly not enough to offset the impact on the rental housing market. Airbnb can gently caress right off for all I care. Yeah, there's no reason someone would prefer to stay in an AirBNB even though they can afford to stay in a hotel. Not to mention, even if someone wants to stay in an AirBNB for economic reasons alone, they'll be able to spend the savings at other businesses.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:42 |
|
namaste faggots posted:If only there was some way to collect money from all these private citizens renting out their property as means of starting a small business.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:46 |
|
You say that like taxes have only one purpose Idiot
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:49 |
|
UnfortunateSexFart posted:It's not racism, it's the unfair accusation that has caused us to not do anything to prevent disaster. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Jul 18, 2016 |
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:49 |
|
THC posted:No dumbass, it's because those in power and their supporters directly benefit from the housing bubble. It has nothing to do with "not wanting to be accused of racism" and everything to do with enriching land owners. And yes, you are racist and comments like "the orientals are playing us" are racist. Why can't it be both?
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 20:55 |
|
Our rulers want capital flowing into the housing market, and they don't care where it comes from whether it's rich foreigners, or rich Canadians, or Canadians loaded up with cheap credit from Canadian banks. Whatever increases the value of their holdings. It also benefits a lot of older middle-class voters who bought their houses in the 80s and 90s. It also means big profits for construction, insurance, finance, etc companies. The solution is to kick out our rulers, or force them to abandon this project - not make it OK to demonize Chinese people. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Jul 18, 2016 |
# ? Jul 18, 2016 21:28 |
|
No, they definitely prefer rich foreigners.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 21:35 |
THC posted:No dumbass, it's because those in power and their supporters directly benefit from the housing bubble. It has nothing to do with "not wanting to be accused of racism" and everything to do with enriching land owners. And yes, you are racist and comments like "the orientals are playing us" are racist. The "playing us" comment was me impersonating people with views like yours, genius. I'll be sure to tell my Indian wife that I'm a white supremacist though, she'll get a kick out of that. Who the gently caress stays in Vancouver if they're racist anyway? I refuse to move to the valley/Alberta because I hate the same racist rednecks that you do. I'm concerned about affordability and the economy. The fault still lies with our government for not fixing the housing crisis and tax laws - the only difference between you and I is I don't let the people taking advantage of our loopholes off the hook.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 22:50 |
|
Well then you're bad at impersonation and you don't understand my views as well as you think you do. Anti-racism is not an obstacle to solving the housing market.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2016 23:01 |
|
THC posted:Well then you're bad at impersonation and you don't understand my views as well as you think you do. Anti-racism is not an obstacle to solving the housing market. If only we were more racist, then Canadians wouldn't have record levels of debt!
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 01:10 |
|
JawKnee posted:the lack of Airbnb would stop tourism? Or would even impact someone's decision to come here? That's kind of hard to swallow. You are literally asking if the cost of having a roof over one's head will impact someone's decision to go to a place. These are the people who live in Vancouver.
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 01:25 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:You are literally asking if the cost of having a roof over one's head will impact someone's decision to go to a place. Are you aware of the difference between a hotel and an AirBnB in Vancouver? From just a quick look $127 or so is the average per night for AirBnB. If you can't find a cheap hotel for that you're possibly an idiot, and if that breaks the bank, you're likely not a typical tourist.
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 01:59 |
|
JawKnee posted:Are you aware of the difference between a hotel and an AirBnB in Vancouver? From just a quick look $127 or so is the average per night for AirBnB. If you can't find a cheap hotel for that you're possibly an idiot, and if that breaks the bank, you're likely not a typical tourist. What's the average hotel rate, if averages are being compared?
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 02:03 |
|
I'm having trouble finding anything for Vancouver specifically; I found something from the Hotel Association of Canada, but it lists averages for the whole country which isn't useful.
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 02:10 |
|
Subjunctive posted:What's the average hotel rate, if averages are being compared? $200-$500/night. Cheapest place downtown is the skeevy Ramada for $238/night on Priceline.
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 02:11 |
|
What the gently caress. Hotels used to be dirt cheap in Vancouver because this loving city doesn't get any business travelers
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 02:14 |
|
|
# ? May 24, 2024 07:40 |
|
Rime posted:$200-$500/night. Cheapest place downtown is the skeevy Ramada for $238/night on Priceline. if we're talking about the downtown core the average AirBnB price goes up to $390
|
# ? Jul 19, 2016 02:16 |