Canada Housing/Debt: Trust me, I'm a landlord.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Canada Housing/Debt: Trust me, I'm a landlord.

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Powershift posted:

If everybody's an rear end in a top hat everywhere you go, maybe you're the rear end in a top hat.

Not everybody is an rear end in a top hat, when I leave my neighbourhood(s) people are much more pleasant to deal with. Now, I'm probably also an rear end in a top hat, to be fair, but I don't think that's responsible for 100% of the situation. Maybe the places I choose to live are just filled with assholes, including myself.

# ? Mar 17, 2017 16:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 06:30

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

Well if it helps you figure it out, i'm sure we could take an informal poll here.

# ? Mar 17, 2017 16:31

yippee cahier: Mar 28, 2005

Ccs posted:

So when the bubbles in Vancouver and Toronto implode, who is left holding the bill? If we're correct in thinking that the government will bail homeowners out, then will it just be provincial taxpayers who are providing that money? Or is it going to require the federal government to put in money in order to prevent a total economic clusterfuck?

The feds will give enough money to the big five to fill in their losses so their executives can still get bonuses. The money will probably come from (or through) CMHC even though a bunch of loans should have never qualified. Homeowners are irrelevant to keeping the wheels of the economy in motion if they're no longer shovelling money onto the bottom lines of the banks.

This is Canada. We're just going to do a crappy imitation of the US, years later.

# ? Mar 17, 2017 19:10

cowofwar: Jul 30, 2002; by Athanatos

Why is there so much regulation on buying and trading options by retail investors but no regulation when it comes to buying and trading options on real estate (pre-build sales)?

cowofwar fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Mar 17, 2017

# ? Mar 17, 2017 19:12

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

Literally the answer is liquidity

# ? Mar 17, 2017 19:56

Baronjutter: Dec 31, 2007; "Tiny Trains"

cowofwar posted:

Why is there so much regulation on buying and trading options by retail investors but no regulation when it comes to buying and trading options on real estate (pre-build sales)?

Stocks and investments and stuff are scary risky financial things and history has shown that fast talking con-men offering promises of massive returns and no risk continually bilk people out of their fortunes which causes problems for society in general.

Real-estate doesn't suffer from any of those problem, it's a safe simple investment so no need.

# ? Mar 17, 2017 22:31

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

https://twitter.com/OnTheMoneyCBC/status/842543716891992064

# ? Mar 17, 2017 23:49

triplexpac: Mar 24, 2007; Suck it
Two tears in a bucket
And then another thing
I'm not the one they'll try their luck with
Hit hard like brass knuckles
See your face through the turnbuckle dude
I got no love for you

My coworker's husband wants to refinance their house so he can help his sister buy a house in Toronto. He figures they'll charge her rent.

What could go wrong?

# ? Mar 17, 2017 23:53

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

I don't think this is really any worse than cohousing or 'mixer' mortgages. At least he doesn't have to live with his profligate sister.

# ? Mar 18, 2017 00:01

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

https://twitter.com/dbcurren/status/842381892473241601

# ? Mar 18, 2017 19:12

leftist heap: Feb 28, 2013; Fun Shoe

mods rename me "ongoing froth"

# ? Mar 18, 2017 20:05

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

Poopsocking shitlord TV shows legion and Lucifer are relocating to California from Vancouver

https://variety.com/2017/tv/news/legion-lucifer-oa-affair-california-tax-credit-1202010890/

# ? Mar 18, 2017 20:18

Mandibular Fiasco: Oct 14, 2012

namaste faggots posted:

https://twitter.com/dbcurren/status/842381892473241601

What planet are these guys living in that makes them think this is normal?

'All is well. Nothing to see here.'

Unbelievable.

# ? Mar 18, 2017 20:18

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

https://mobile.twitter.com/donutshorts/status/843563257914830850
lol

# ? Mar 20, 2017 00:11

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

namaste faggots posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/donutshorts/status/843563257914830850
lol

It's like that scene where he's talking to the stripper with all the mortgages in the Big Short.

# ? Mar 20, 2017 00:26

Icemakor: Sep 11, 2000

namaste faggots posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/donutshorts/status/843563257914830850
lol

Sweet mother of god this is going to get nasty.

# ? Mar 20, 2017 00:26

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/more-vancouver-renters-decry-loophole-used-to-sharply-raise-rents-1.4032143?cmp=rss

quote:

More Vancouver renters decry loophole used to sharply raise rents
Tenants say their rents will increase by hundreds of dollars per month if the increase is allowed

Residents of a building in Vancouver's Fairview Slopes neighbourhood are adding their voices to demands that the province close a legal loophole that allows landlords to sharply increase rent.

The renters of the 11 suites at 1016 West 13th Avenue say their landlord is petitioning the province to raise their rents by 35 per cent.

Under the province's Residential Tenancy Act, a landlord is allowed to raise a tenant's rent by no more than the inflation rate plus two per cent. Currently that rate is 3.7 per cent.

But a loophole allows landlords to use a geographic increase clause to increase the rent by much more if they can successfully argue that similar units in the area rent for more.

"When we talk about affordable housing, this is one of the things � it's a problem," said Joanna Reid, a tenant who has lived in the building for six years.

"It's really stressful more so than anything else."

The building was purchased by Nicolaou Properties in 2013 for $3,200,000, according to a local realtor. The owners did not respond to requests for comment.

oh well too bad rental dalits it's your own fault for not buying pride of ownership

# ? Mar 20, 2017 06:27

Professor Shark: May 22, 2012

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

It's like that scene where he's talking to the stripper with all the mortgages in the Big Short.

I didn't think I liked The Big Short all that much until I watched Too Big to Fail yesterday

# ? Mar 20, 2017 10:08

Saltin: Aug 20, 2003; Don't touch

DariusLikewise posted:

TD is supppeerrrrrrr worried about home prices, but we'll give you a 1 million dollar mortgage at 2.4% variable interest with 5% down!

No they won't.

# ? Mar 20, 2017 14:00

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/gl...&service=mobile

lol

# ? Mar 20, 2017 14:15

Femtosecond: Aug 2, 2003

namaste faggots posted:

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/gl...&service=mobile

lol

I was going to post about this last week. It's been BIZARRE how many fearful articles full of hand wringing have been coming out of the Financial Post and Globe Business section about the prospect of the Liberals raising the capital gains tax in their next budget.

All from the last few weeks:
Rumours of tax hike on capital gains stoke investor anxiety
Threat of capital gains hike has investors pondering stock sales
Ottawa may eye tax measures that hit higher earners
Worried about higher capital gains? The TFSA may ease your mind
How to plan for potential changes to capital gains taxes
Joe Oliver: Drunk on spending, the Liberal government�s too addled to see the idiocy of raising capital gains taxes

Back before the first Liberal budget I got an email from a money manager relative from mine with baseless (and wrong) tax increase predictions so I assume this happens a lot. There's probably plenty of conservative money managers making assumptions based on political stereotypes (ie. tax and spend liberals), talking to each other way too much, and just emailing out their baseless 'predictions' to their clients. Eventually this becomes news somehow.

# ? Mar 20, 2017 17:02

James Baud: May 24, 2015; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Tax rates are going up medium-long term, boomer health care costs and demographics plus cowardice on things like stripping OAS from well off seniors (especially sooner than 30 years away) basically demand it.

There is an element of "scaring people into crystalizing capital gains can juice revenue today without being an outright tax hike" too, but that just steals revenue from the future.

James Baud fucked around with this message at 11:07 on Nov 11, 2018

# ? Mar 20, 2017 18:03

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

https://twitter.com/dailydirtnap/status/843609569163206657

https://twitter.com/dailydirtnap/status/843611219722485766

# ? Mar 20, 2017 18:05

triplexpac: Mar 24, 2007; Suck it
Two tears in a bucket
And then another thing
I'm not the one they'll try their luck with
Hit hard like brass knuckles
See your face through the turnbuckle dude
I got no love for you

If we can't trust Mr Worldwide to give us sound financial advice, who can we trust??

# ? Mar 20, 2017 19:31

Subjunctive: Sep 12, 2006; ✨sparkle and shine✨

triplexpac posted:

If we can't trust Mr Worldwide to give us sound financial advice, who can we trust??

# ? Mar 20, 2017 20:09

Fuzzy Mammal: Aug 15, 2001; Lipstick Apathy

That guy likes Patrick Rothfuss so all his opinions are now suspect.

# ? Mar 20, 2017 20:49

Femtosecond: Aug 2, 2003

On the topic of capital gains, the Ontario Finance Minister sent a letter to Morneau urging him to fix the Toronto housing bubble by increasing the capital gains tax on housing above 50%. Of course principal residences would be exempted.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/real...?service=mobile

# ? Mar 20, 2017 21:03

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

http://vancouversun.com/opinion/opinion-smaller-houses-a-solution-for-housing-affordablility

quote:

Opinion: For more affordable housing, start by building smaller

The house in Thunder Bay, Ont. I grew up in was no bigger than 900 square feet, plus a semi-developed basement where my brother and I slept in the same bedroom and yakked, told ridiculous jokes, played chess or table hockey, and made up imaginary stories until we drifted off each night.

There were two bedrooms upstairs � one for my parents, another for my sister � along with one bathroom (a sink, a bathtub and toilet).

In the basement there was an additional toilet and a laundry tub that, as I recall, served as a second sink for us boys.

The main part of the house had a living room and small kitchen with eating area. Outside, our backyard was flooded every winter for a skating rink.

A garage? Nope.

But after my parents had taken us on a three-year journey across Canada in a trailer � an adventure around every corner! � the little house they settled down in seemed like a slice of heaven.

Our neighbours� houses were no larger.

So, why does this matter?

Well, Metro Vancouver is obviously in a housing crisis where young families who overwhelmingly prefer single detached houses are forced into townhomes or � God help them � condominiums. And they still end up paying exorbitant prices.

Call me a silly rear end, but I truly believe condos aren�t the way of the future for young Vancouver families, who � I�ll say it again � prefer their own four walls and a yard for Junior.

But we�ve bought this bill of goods from politicians and their development industry buddies, who say: �Forget detached homes, they�re too expensive! There�s not enough land! Condos or townhomes by SkyTrain stations: THAT�S the future!�

Maybe � maybe � that�s the case in Vancouver�s West End or West Side. But beyond that? I�m not so sure.

The main problem, in my humble opinion and since you asked, is that single detached homes of 900-1,000 sq. ft. no longer seem to cut it.

Instead, as families have grown much smaller over the years, houses have grown much bigger and (surprise!) much pricier, which suits the builders just fine.

In my day, today�s typical detached home � about 2,500 sq. ft. versus about 1,000 sq. ft. half a century ago � would have been called a mansion suitable for (apologies to Willie Nelson) doctors and lawyers and such.

But our dreams have gone way ahead of us; out of hand, even.

A few years ago there were constraints on how large homes could be built. Now there are constraints on how small they can be: a 1,500-sq. ft. house might be deep-sixed because it just doesn�t �fit in� with those adjacent mega-homes.

Take a look at the real estate ads. Port Moody, Coquitlam, Surrey, they�re all the same: Homes often start at 3,000 sq. ft. and easily move up to 5,000 sq. ft. There are five, six bedrooms, many with their own �en suites.�

I live in Squamish and can report that the massive home disease has hit my town too.

Even many of the new townhomes � costing up to $800,000 � are easily twice the size of our little Thunder Bay house.

So, let�s go for a little jaunt through a typical new detached house and see where we�ve gone wrong; where, I submit, developers have missed the affordability boat.

For starters, most rooms are just too drat big � there�s little, dare I say, cosiness � and, of course, they all have two, three or even four full bathrooms.

What a complete waste of money and space. Welcome to exorbitant heating and upkeep costs.

One-and-a-half to two full bathrooms work perfectly well for families with two or three children and you certainly don�t need dual vanities in the en suite.

And do we really need en suites? A bathroom is a private place and I don�t like using our en suite as my wife sleeps on the other side of the door. At night, I tiptoe to the main bathroom down the hall.

And those dual vanities? People typically don�t use the same bathroom at the same time. So what�s the point?

And why does a single washroom need a separate bathtub and separate shower stall to go along with the dual vanities and the bidet and God knows what else? Ever heard of a shower curtain for the tub?

For that matter, why even have two bathtubs or two shower stalls in the same house? Use both showers at the same time and you�ll have lower water pressure and reduced hot water.

Many new homes have two eating places, a smaller one in the kitchen and a separate dining room. Do people start eating in the kitchen and then move to the dining room for dessert? One eating area is fine.

An oversized kitchen and �island� the size of Grand Cayman? Again, nothing cosy about that.

You need enough space to prepare food, yes, but let�s get real about counter space.

Don�t believe me? Check out the tiny spaces professional chefs use to prepare dozens of fabulous meals every night in Vancouver�s top restaurants. You�ll be shocked.

Bedrooms? Three are more than enough for most homes. If you have two boys (or two girls), they can share a bedroom into their teens. Believe me, they�ll love it. And they�ll grow closer.

A huge walk-in closet? Let�s call it what it is: extra storage space.

A separate home office? A little nook area works quite well.

And whatever happened to basements with head room that were typically left undeveloped until a parent, grandparent or other family member (two brothers, perhaps?) needed a spare bedroom?

That garage? This is Vancouver, not Thunder Bay. Vehicles don�t need their own apartment-size room.

Yard space? Here�s what�s required: space for an outdoor table for those sunny days and room for a trampoline. Don�t forget the landscaping and a small garden area.

And you don�t need a separate family room to go along with the living room, although if you do, keep the room smaller.

If you want to spend a little extra, ensure the house is solidly built and consider fine finishings: real wood floors, tile entrances, nice furniture and appliances.

Our detached home in the Garibaldi Highlands is less than 1,800 sq. ft. � far bigger than our Thunder Bay abode, but small by today�s standards. It�s got more than enough room (and rooms).

It has many things we don�t really need, like a garage and separate family room (although we do use it) and a large 8,800 sq. ft. lot that was good for my son�s soccer games � and endless hours of mowing.

Solutions? Here�s one.

In the Garibaldi Highlands there�s a forested area slated for eventual development that the local council, which professes to be �green� and supportive of affordable housing (aren�t they all?), won�t approve until the town reaches a higher population density.

If I owned that property, I�d get the ball rolling by proposing a small lot subdivision with homes no larger than, say, 1,200 sq. ft. to keep prices down.

The main objective is to build a smaller house on a smaller footprint that doesn�t overwhelm the lot.

Individual lots would be sold to individual buyers, with the proviso that they�d have to build within a set period of time. That way, you�d not only ward off speculators, but have a variety of housing styles.

There�d be vigilant construction and landscaping standards and the homes would be much cheaper, but still aesthetically pleasing.

Of course, nearby residents in their 3,000-4,000-sq. ft. homes would scream bloody murder. Well, too bad.

Remember, size really doesn�t matter � so let�s get on with it.

Brian Morton is a reporter at The Vancouver Sun and The Province

hey look guys i'm gonna write like a folksy white trash loving moron so i can spew some poo poo that will resonate with white trash loving morons about how they just need to stop being so entitled and just live in a 900 sqft windowless microshed

# ? Mar 21, 2017 02:43

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

What were the lyrics for Pitbull's songs about Canadian Real Estate?

# ? Mar 21, 2017 02:46

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

https://twitter.com/BenPhillips_ANU/status/843985693567156224

# ? Mar 21, 2017 02:54

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

Just a reminder that Morneau bleats out the new budget on Wednesday.

# ? Mar 21, 2017 03:05

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

https://twitter.com/BenPhillips_ANU/status/843985693567156224

Stealth bragging about having wage growth?

# ? Mar 21, 2017 03:42

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

Powershift posted:

Stealth bragging about having wage growth?

No?

# ? Mar 21, 2017 03:48

Grouchio: Aug 31, 2014

I'm surprised that the bubble hasn't popped yet. It's been 9 months since I did a paper on the housing bubble and back then it seemed imminent too.

# ? Mar 21, 2017 04:29

Baronjutter: Dec 31, 2007; "Tiny Trains"

Grouchio posted:

I'm surprised that the bubble hasn't popped yet. It's been 9 months since I did a paper on the housing bubble and back then it seemed imminent too.

I'm just throwing this out there, but perhaps it's different this time?

# ? Mar 21, 2017 04:42

blah_blah: Apr 15, 2006

Femtosecond posted:

On the topic of capital gains, the Ontario Finance Minister sent a letter to Morneau urging him to fix the Toronto housing bubble by increasing the capital gains tax on housing above 50%. Of course principal residences would be exempted.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/real...?service=mobile

So close to the right solution, yet so far.

# ? Mar 21, 2017 04:43

Subjunctive: Sep 12, 2006; ✨sparkle and shine✨

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

What were the lyrics for Pitbull's songs about Canadian Real Estate?

"It's goin' down /
I'm yellin' timber /
You better move"

# ? Mar 21, 2017 06:00

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

blah_blah posted:

So close to the right solution, yet so far.

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/money-economy/federal-budget-2017-affect-wallet/

quote:

3. Taxing a portion of capital gains on principal residences

A change here could put a cap on the unlimited amount of tax-free capital gains that Canadians have become accustomed to on their principal residence. Tax specialists and policy makers speculate that a possible plan would allow a capped amount to be tax-free on the sale of your principal residence with any proceeds over this amount to be taxed as capital gains in your tax bracket at the time of sale. As an example, a cap of $500,000 in tax-free capital gains on any principal residence means that a home sold for $1 million that was purchased for $100,000 in 1985 say, would have $400,000 taxed at the owner�s tax rate at the time of the sale (about 35% for the average middle class Canadian).

Bell sees a different scenario. �If you claim part of your home as business usage, I can see them perhaps taxing a portion of the principal residence when you sell,� says Bell. �So if you claimed 10% of your home as a business expense, they could tax a 10% portion of your gain when you go sell.�

4. Changes to capital gains inclusion rate
The federal government has never stated it would change the capital gains inclusion rate, currently at 50%. That�s the tax you have to pay when you sell some property, such as stocks, a rental property or a second home, that have increased in value since you bought them. Right now, only 50% of that price difference is subject to tax, with the tax rate depending on your income-tax bracket. But an increase in the rate to 66%, which we had in 1988, or to 75%, which lasted for a decade from 1990 to 2000, is a distinct possibility. �I�ve thought about this change a lot,� says Bell. �And if you increase the capital gain rate to 75%, the taxation level comes closer to that of dividends now. But people are being encouraged to save for retirement and save as well outside of their pensions and RRSPs, so I don�t think it would make sense to change the rates.�

Boosting the inclusion rate to 75% would mean that only 25% of your capital gains from the sale would be tax-free and the remaining percentage would be taxed at your marginal tax rate the year of the sale. The Liberals have long promised to eliminate tax breaks that mostly benefit the wealthy, a change that they promised would boost government revenue by at least $3 billion.

but since it's the liberals they're probably just going to lib because

quote:

�How do we make sure we are helping people (in Vancouver) in exactly the right and targeted way,� Trudeau said. �That is where the kind of collaboration we haven't had for 10 years between the federal government and different orders of government is so important to work on together.�

Most Vancouver homeowners know the inflated housing market must be stabilized, because the current trajectory �doesn't have any good outcomes,� he added.

But any action must not completely devalue those people whose retirements and equity are tied to their homes, the prime minister said.

�We just have to make sure we are keeping people protected in how we stabilize it.�

gently caress you justin you dumb gently caress

# ? Mar 21, 2017 06:27

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

If your retirement is tied to a massive loving bubble maybe it's your own goddamn fault and you can go take a flying gently caress.

Is any part of Canada not filled with retards?

# ? Mar 21, 2017 06:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 06:30

McGavin: Sep 18, 2012

Most of Canada is pretty empty actually.

# ? Mar 21, 2017 06:39

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Canada Housing/Debt: Trust me, I'm a landlord.

«‹›1521 »