|
Baronjutter posted:I was apparently loving wrong on the tax having any effect. The tax just moves where the buyers will go. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-real-estate-1.3750933 quote:The Toronto Real Estate Board said its members had 9,813 sales in August, a 23.5 per cent increase from the same month last year, though there were two more working days this year. So yeah. They won't pay the tax and as a result Toronto looks like a better market. That said, I am waiting until spring to pass complete judgement on this.
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Do people just not want to pay the tax, purely financial, or has the fact that the government started to do things to target foreign speculators spooked the market? Some of both I'd imagine. If I was trying to get my money out of China I'd be pretty wary that this is just the start of regulations getting tightened up. As long as you can just go elsewhere, why take the unnecessary risk?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
I think it's less about the dollar amount of the tax itself and more about breaking the seal on potentially further taxes/penalties/investigation down the road. Vancouver just looks like a less safe target as soon as any motions are made. The tax is the canary-- even thought it's doubtful the government would ever actually do more than the absolute minimum to keep voters believing they're acting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
But elsewhere isn't the best place on earth, what's the point of buying a condo or house in some 4th tier city when you could be buying in world class Vancouver? Other cities might just be bubbles because they don't have the intrinsic real value of Vancouver. You see Vancouver is limited by mountains and water, they aren't making more Vancouver.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
ephori posted:I think it's less about the dollar amount of the tax itself and more about breaking the seal on potentially further taxes/penalties/investigation down the road. Vancouver just looks like a less safe target as soon as any motions are made. The tax is the canary-- even thought it's doubtful the government would ever actually do more than the absolute minimum to keep voters believing they're acting. This is spot on. Exactly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/locals-first-west-vancouver-1.3773516 this is pretty awesome considering west van (british properties) has had a long history of banning ~*the wrong sort of people*~ from their neighbourhood
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/locals-first-west-vancouver-1.3773516 quote:District of West Vancouver councillor Craig Cameron says even though the agreement is written and signed, there are no penalties for breaking the terms of the contract.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/locals-first-west-vancouver-1.3773516 I think I know why they have no intention of policing the policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I was apparently loving wrong on the tax having any effect. It's one month of numbers dude. Numbers that have aberration written all over them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:I was so loving wrong about foreign buyers. These numbers are just staggering. I figured the 5% number from the realtors was bullshit, but I didn't expect to see a number closer to 30% by the time we finally got data. This also doesn't take into account the impact of foreign capital from the Quebec Investor Immigrant Program. The real impact is much greater than these foreign tax numbers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
I guess the highest numbers are pushed higher by everyone cramming to get deals done before the deadline but still
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
30% (which is probably the real number at least when you factor in the people who bought in the name of permanent resident kids/wives/etc) is so absolutely staggering. No wonder there's a bubble when a full quarter, and almost a full third of properties are being bought by people who don't live here. gently caress it, ban buying from foreigners completely and force existing homes owned by non-PRs to sell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Don't forget the number of people who are residents and are also buying because they hope they can eventually flip the house at a profit after holding on to it for a matter of months. Without a bunch of crooked money changing hands this whole bubble may very well have never happened.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Without a bunch of crooked money changing hands this whole bubble may very well have never happened. Not picking on you in particular, but there is no way in hell money smurfed out of China has more influence than the Bank of Canada and the Fed (as well as the ECB to a lesser extent) putting the pedal to the metal for nearly a decade, even if 100% of that money were to make its way into Canadian real estate (and we know it hasn't). Of course it's people borrowing cheaply to buy as much as possible of one of the few remaining things that appear to yield meaningful returns. tagesschau fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:I guess the highest numbers are pushed higher by everyone cramming to get deals done before the deadline but still With the suddenness of the tax announcement, it is unlikely that many people were able to push it forward. That the number is that high even in a period that should have had at least a partial decrease (recall the sob tales about poor Master degree students being unable to continue their $500K purchase), points to a number from March-May that even the most vocal foreigner blamers were probably underestimating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thisisthat/...lding-1.3773054quote:Mississauga condo developer forgets to put 120 bathrooms in brand new building 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Wat the f
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
hahaha
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
This is That is barely exaggerating, didn't some condo sold as 2br end up being built all as 1br units with the owners being told to get hosed
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:This is That is barely exaggerating, didn't some condo sold as 2br end up being built all as 1br units with the owners being told to get hosed It is so believable though. I could see something like that actually happening for reals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:This is That is barely exaggerating, didn't some condo sold as 2br end up being built all as 1br units with the owners being told to get hosed I vaguely recall this too, with the developers justification being "Well at the time that made sense, but we stand to make so much more money this way!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
No offence, but if you're so stupid you don't realize that the washroom is missing from the plans of your new condo, it's quite possible you deserve to get taken for a ride. EDIT: Did no one ever go, "hmm, I wonder if this condo has a bathtub or a shower or both?.... wait a minute..." PT6A fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
PT6A posted:No offence, but if you're so stupid you don't realize that the washroom is missing from the plans of your new condo, it's quite possible you deserve to get taken for a ride. it's very funny, but also completely unbelievable that no one involved with development saw this and commented on it. They simply didn't care enough to do anything about it because why should they? And that's indicative of some real lovely business practices and mentality on the development/sales/whatever side of it - completely aside from anyone who bought such a unit being a moron.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
"This is That is an award winning satirical current affairs show that doesn't just talk about the issues, it fabricates them." reading is hard
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
lets get back to posting onion articles for gullible retards
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
oh hey a new av. bet it's PT6A or ikantski
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:oh hey a new av. bet it's PT6A or ikantski Why does everyone think it was me? I bought one av ever for Helsing because his red text was annoying, it was perfect and one of you idiots overwrote it 10 minutes later
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:Not picking on you in particular, but there is no way in hell money smurfed out of China has more influence than the Bank of Canada and the Fed (as well as the ECB to a lesser extent) putting the pedal to the metal for nearly a decade, even if 100% of that money were to make its way into Canadian real estate (and we know it hasn't). Of course it's people borrowing cheaply to buy as much as possible of one of the few remaining things that appear to yield meaningful returns. The central bank rates might have been holding the accelerator down but 30% of the market foreign speculation is like someone pointing a cylinder of nitrous oxide at the intake and breaking the valve off. Gonna be fun to watch the Real Estate economic engine explosively disassemble.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
leftist heap posted:They forgot to mention that Newfoundland is also the fattest province as well as the poorest and stupidest. The history of it is interesting though. They destroyed their economy by sending all their working men off to fight for the British in WWII, then they were over-fished by the British and Canadians until the basis of their economy was devastated. But why people aren't leaving when given the option doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/is-the-bc-property-levy-on-foreign-buyers-a-new-head-tax/article32013536/quote:Is the B.C. property levy on foreign buyers a new head tax? CAN I WRITE AN ENTIRE COLUMN IN QUESTIONS? AM I BEING OPEN MINDED ENOUGH? AM I REALLY WORTH 170K/YEAR? http://salaries.ubyssey.ca/salaries/employee/henry-yu
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Seriously a loving grown rear end man making 170k/year just wrote in a national newpaper entirely in loving questions
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:Seriously a loving grown rear end man making 170k/year just wrote in a national newpaper entirely in loving questions I expect this will not be the last time I realize I am not paid enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:Seriously a loving grown rear end man making 170k/year just wrote in a national newpaper entirely in loving questions He's a principal, clearly it's pedagogical 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
It's not a head tax because those people can just rent until they become permanent residents or citizens, which is what most permanent residents or citizens should be doing anyway, because owning is expensive and risky.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/is-the-bc-property-levy-on-foreign-buyers-a-new-head-tax/article32013536/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elRxbGJuCw8
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Ccs posted:It's not a head tax because those people can just rent until they become permanent residents or citizens, which is what most permanent residents or citizens should be doing anyway, because owning is expensive and risky. drat i think maybe they should pay you 170k/year to teach history at ubc
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:drat i think maybe they should pay you 170k/year to teach history at ubc There was probably a first draft that was more definitive then the lawyers had a look at it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
It's also not a head tax because it doesn't charge people to come to Canada, and it applies to literally everyone who's not Canadian. What a loving stupid article.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:Ok serious mode: You guys know what this means right? If you think boomers retiring in the near future are in deep poo poo, we're all in even deeper poo poo because our incomes are lower and we didn't have the economic growth of the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's to coast off of. Pension funds and personal equities did quite well and if you could afford a house, you did really well, as a boomer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 13:42 |
|
Baronjutter posted:I was apparently loving wrong on the tax having any effect. I think it's like the Port Mann bridge toll. It's objectively better for most people but most apparently would rather spend the equivalent in gas and time due to the "principle" of it all. I mean these are the same guys who make it impossible to buy anything in Richmond without cash because absolutely no one is declaring things honestly.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 02:42
|
|
