|
Cultural Imperial posted:If you want to develop your skills and move up in your career, the clear choice to me is to leave and then come back. Don't fool yourself into thinking your 'support' network is going to help you get ahead if everyone is bush league. This is a profoundly sick way to understand the value of community.
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Oh please, spare me your sanctimonious bullshit about 'community'. Vancouverites are humungous assholes who don't give a poo poo about anything other than themselves. Project much?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2013 10:18
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Eh, Someone paid money for all that poo poo to be built, so where did that money go? Unless all the construction workers and interior designers and condo developers move to China Vancouver is still ahead. Uh, bulldozing viable low-rise neighbourhoods and replacing them with empty glass and concrete towers that destroy economic activity is a demonstrable economic disbenefit right now. I don't see how a bunch of contractors making bank mitigates that. I'm not sure what racism has to do with it. Is anyone aware of a comparable study for Toronto? I wonder if high crime rates on the Bay corridor aren't partially related to the density of new condo buildings there. Wouldn't surprise me if a bunch of those units were empty. Paper Mac fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 08:51
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The low-rise owners weren't evicted at gunpoint, they got paid more than what they figure the property was worth to them. That money didn't just dissapear into a hole in the ground, the total amount of "stuff" (apartments and cash) in the economy has increased. If lovely 1970s low-rise apartment buildings were such a lucrative proposition they can build another one somewhere else. Ah yes, because what matters in an economy is how much "stuff" is in it, and concepts like capacity utilisation and density distortions don't actually matter.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 10:27
|
|
|
Isentropy posted:If that is Vancouver I am legitimately honestly very, very, very scared about Halifax. Qualified tradesmen and builders do not suddenly exist out of thin air. Whereabouts are these new subdivisions? I was back recently and heard the guy who owns the Inn on the Lake is building a huge condo building out there. Funny thing is, it'll draw water from the lake. I had no idea what to make of condo/apt type buildings going up where there isnt even city water.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:You mean like, your standard suburban 1-family home? I think one of the issues in Halifax is just that getting on the peninsula has always been a huge pain in the rear end and a lot of employment left for the industrial parks, which has had a really weird effect on the downtown and peninsula itself when combined with the surburban development. Halifax has some pretty unique geography that requires more careful and imaginative urban planning than I think we've seen from an HRM council ever, unfortunately.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
BoC tried to raise interest rates but then they got the "YOU CAN'T RAISE INTEREST RATES!! YOU WILL REGRET THIS!!" guy and backed off.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Well there's another problem. My parents got tons of help from their parents, as did most of their generations friends, but my parents generation seemed consumed by debt and financial mismanagement and only a couple "rich kids" I knew had ANY help with money for school. A lot of my friends, with boomer parents with big houses, actually worry about inheriting debt rather than assets. You can't inherit debt from your parents.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
Persona non grata posted:The Japanese offered multi-generational mortgages during their real estate boom. What better gift for your children than a sure-fire investment in real estate? Your children are richer than you think. Jesus Christ that's a terrible idea.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
I think the global context any putative housing bubble pop happens in matters as much as the structure of the debt here in Canada, doesn't it? If it happens in the midst of (or as a result of) a global slowdown that involves a Chinese debt crisis and a decrease in demand for oil, the consequences are likely to be more dire than if it somehow happens as a result of endogenous factors in the context of strong demand for Canadian goods.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Is it possible to get a mortgage from a Canadian bank as a non-citizen, and if so does the CMHC insure it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
The RECAPITATOR posted:Just so I can follow what's going on. When 'inventory' is thrown around, in this thread, does this mean the number of houses on the market that have not yet been sold? Yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
We already do that routinely with environmentally protected areas. If GTA developers had their way, the Oak Ridges moraine would have been destroyed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
Coylter posted:The most amazing thing is i have a few people around me who JUST bought houses. Like the bubble doesn't even exist. They aren't making land anymore!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:What happens in this scenario, which is going to be increasingly common, is that when Coylter's mom goes into the bank to renew her term, the bank will run the numbers on comparable properties in her neighborhood, tell her the house is worth $40,000 less than the mortgage outstanding, and demand the cash balance before they'll renew. If she tries to go to another bank (and this stands for the people with the rate-shock problem I mentioned above, too), the bank will impose a penalty on her, the new bank will demand a fee for porting the mortgage, and she'll still be out tens of thousands of dollars. Not to mention, the new interest rate will be prohibitively high, since she has zero leverage and is a comparatively large balance-sheet risk due to her nonexistent equity. She should just rent out her basement!!  If the mom BKs on a CMHC backed mortgage, what happens, the CMHC pays the bank out to the full term of the mortgage? Or the CMHC pays the bank the outsanding balance and takes possession? Something else?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:In that case CMHC may deny insurance coverage, which is something they've been warning banks lately is a real possibility. How exposed is this decision making process to direct political influence?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:Well, ask yourself which of these scenarios is more likely: the Federal government happily accepts tens of billions of dollars in Crown agency debt due to CMHC being a bunch of profligate morons, or Harper playing the populist anti-banker card and sticking as much of the losses on the Big 5's shareholders as possible without blowing up the banking sector entirely? LOL That sounds like a sight. Any idea whether or not the deposit insurance is likely to get messed with? If they decide to go Cyprus bail-in style, it would be better to be in cash, methinks. E: please rate in terms of 1 to "tempurpedic already stuffed" Paper Mac fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Ah, the president of the Toronto Realtor's Group says "markets surging" and "buy, you buy now"? Well, that sounds good to me!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
Why THIS Time is Way Different Than All The Other Times Canada's housing market is immune to mean reversion because of our powerful leader Stephen HArper. He is holding the economy like a wolf he is riding into battle. Also because we are immune to foreigners economic diseases. Look how white Stephen is. This represents his powerful anglo-saxon hairitage and his noble Ontarian upbringing. "Haha, you should totally buy my book," someone employed in the housing industry said to me, confirming this analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
How do I figure out how big margin calls are on bank short positions
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:This is related to the thread I think, and pretty interesting if we're actually starting to reclaim farmland (which we should be doing): How much of this price increase is related to development demand, do you think? I'm wondering what effect a residential bubble pop would have on farmland prices. I vaguely remember you were interested in farmland protection in Ontario- how do you think this affects that concern? Generally I'm leery of the notion that increased farmland prices in the vicinity of major urban areas is good for anyone other than the farm owners. In particular, it seems to deny access to growing land to those other than the wealthy or those willing to sell themselves to a bank. This is problematic for those of us interested in moving away from industrial agriculture, ensuring eg recent immigrant communities have physical access to growing land, etc. Matthew_O posted:I personally have settled on one of two results if the macro-environment remains as even keel as it has over the last few years Do you have (institutional or personal) contingencies for the failure of the "if" doing so much work here? Paper Mac fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Sep 19, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to when condo owners start getting the bills to replace the skins on their buildings in fifteen years and you have to dodge falling glass and suicidal owners to get to work.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
e: ignore
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Helsing posted:It left me wondering whether Manhattan is a friendlier town than some people think, or whether Toronto is just so cold and unfeeling that my standard expectation about the kindness of strangers is overly cynical. I dropped my wallet at Bay and College and within an hour someone had called me to return it. If we're judging solely by anecdotes here, Manhattan and Toronto are neck and neck..
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 05:55
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:This is interesting. Some of these numbers are insane. 6 billion in cash was brought into the US in 2012 by mainlanders to buy real estate. In cash. I was especially surprised by this: "Canada keeps no hard data about foreign investors in real estate, but Chinese buyers in one year outnumbered local buyers in Vancouver by a three to one margin." - I thought the HAM story had been discredited?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Is UBC's commerce dept. exclusively staffed by bros and retards? It's a commerce department, of course it is.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Right, but I thought Japan didn't bottom out sharply. I thought it was just a sluggish drop-off from the peak followed by a 10 year economic quagmire. It was pretty vertiginous in the big cities, where the bubble was most inflated: 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 01:54
|
|
|
Where can I get one of those magic 8 ball jobs?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Go away, Thomas Friedman.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:OK OK I'm sorry, couldn't resist. I'm just a bit worried about my sister who lives in Canada and is waiting for her second child. She and her husband have a plan to buy a house but at this stage it seems there are only bad options for them. I agree with you, I'm just joking about the taxi driver thing. Every other conversation someone strikes up with me these days is about the housing market, it's pretty tedious. I have a couple friends who have been spending all their off hours doing renos on run down 80s condos and flipping them, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I struggle to comprehend how flipping is profitable, especially nowadays (easier in 2000-2007 one presumes). The transaction costs of real estate are bloody enormous. A few thousand here and there for legalities, land transfer tax, incidentals, and realtor bastards - and pretty soon you're talking real money. And that's before the actual 'value add' of the renovation itself. No clue. I really hate these conversations so I didn't ask how much money they made, but I was told by a buddy who has done this twice over the last 12 months that it had been "very profitable" for him, whatever that means. I have the feeling that if he accounted for his time and the friends he dragooned into working for him for beer and pizza, it wouldn't look so hot, but I don't know enough about it to say.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
I just remembered he was talking about having to replace all the plumbing and electrical in the condo.. if it was that run down, he might have got it for not much, fixed it up to some serviceable standard, and got a couple hundred k on the sale. One was down on the lakeshore (TO) and the other was uptown somewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
They ain't makin' any more peninsula!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Rime posted:Isn't construction close to or over 10% of our labor market these days? Granted not all of that is involved with Condomania '14, but still. Out of curiousity I picked up the infosheet from that hedge fund that's got the Canada housing short fund going now and there was this handy chart in their investment thesis presentation: 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
I don't think ZIRP and bail-outs (-ins?) are very good conditions for savers, really.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Savers, no, but competent investors have done very nicely in the past half decade. If by this you mean financial asset prices have increased substantially since 2008, I don't really view that as a positive side effect of ZIRP and bailouts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:It's called a reversion to the mean, and has been going on in the equity and bond markets for well over a century. Oh, is that what it is? I thought it was regulatory capture enabling a tiny clique of wealthy banks and institutional investors to extract enormous rents from the real economy, silly me.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
It was about savers and renters, who haven't really benefited from the policy solutions chosen to deal with the last major housing crisis. You made the remark that investors have made out well, apparently because of the axiomatic attractive power of "the mean". I don't happen to believe that increases in prices in financial markets definitionally represent a reversion to some kind of historical growth path, particularly when there are many, many reasons to believe that comparisons to 20th century growth trajectories aren't particularly useful anymore. I think we agree that the post-2008 policy and regulatory environment was extremely favorable for the investment/capital class, I just don't happen to think that the fact that even grannies with RRSPs made out decently since 2008 makes the policy course chosen a net benefit for society (and, in particular, savers or renters), particularly given the ongoing consolidation of financial and political power, as well as the appearance of various investment bubbles, in the relevant markets. e: I guess I should clarify that I took the collective group of "renters and savers" to mean "Joe Blow living within his means with a couple of TFSAs and a savings account" rather than the minority of people who have substantial investment income Paper Mac fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Mar 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:oh for gently caress's sake Ah yes a soft landing  *exits aircraft at 30k feet*
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I don't know about you guys but the only financial news that I'm completely focused on is the impending collapse of China's shadow banking system. It's been about a week since haixin steel defaulted and no one in western press is covering this except the FT. It's deeply frustrating to me that I'm still relying on Zero Hedge for quick updates on this stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2014 21:44
|
|