In 2015 campaigns Trudeau visited Vancouver and spoke of his concerns about housing affordability. We know what’s happened since.
It’s not all the feds fault of course, but policy decisions such as immigration levels have been a non trivial contributor on the demand side.
What also needs more discussion is why the federal government has done nothing to try and reduce money laundering activities. See Sam Cooper’s reporting in Willful Blindness.
There are links between crime, money laundering, and housing costs the feds seem determined to ignore, which also touches on foreign interference. These issues need more attention.
What are the chances that, over the long term, our housing situation would be improved if the federal capital gains exclusion relative to the matrimonial home were at say the 50% to 75% level rather than 100% ? The 100% exclusion incents people to view their home as an investment first and a home second. Why direct savings into a business opportunity or into the stock market, when there is such an appealing tax free alternative? The capital gains exclusion does not work in favour of building new homes; you can just as easily generate tax free money by selling your 100 year old house. To me, the 100% exclusion tends to say to all of us: renting is for losers. To me, that is distortive and unhealthy. In a really healthy market, it should be possible to find a great place to live whether you choose to buy or to rent. Have any of our think tanks taken the capital gains tax issue on? If not, I hope one of them will do so. I don't know whether the above thinking is sound, but I believe it deserves a careful public airing.
I'd love to hear from an expert about the change in mortgage finance over the last couple decades.
There was a big but subtle change in 2001 when the CMHC started guaranteeing mortgage backed securities. The program has grown from basically zero to an $11 billion per month operation. Those securities are the building blocks of Canada Mortgage Bonds, which the Bank Of Canada has used as a monetary policy and bailout tool since the financial crisis.
There's lots of talk about supply and demand and zoning and NIMBYism, but I feel like the switch from construction subsidies to mortgage subsidies is a big part of our current crisis. The government essentially accepts all the default risk of the mortgage market on behalf of investors, allowing virtually unfettered mortgage lending. But nobody ever talks about it.
As usual the elephant in the room on this issue is the massive departure from the long-term consensus of a 1% rate of newcomers. I’ve heard that the Conservatives are starting to tiptoe towards addressing this and credit to them if that’s the case.
This was excellent. It didn't help my anxiety for my kids (who are *this close* to giving up on the dream of home ownership ever), but it was so useful a summation of the issues, what's needed and the political impediments to actually dealing with the issue.
For a "failed Liberal academic", Dr. Moffatt had some cautious praise re: the proposals made by our likely next Prime Minister. I hope Dr. Moffatt keeps pushing the agenda, and that the Conservatives are willing to listen and act on his recommendations.
Perhaps dumb question: it seems to most that immigration prizes white-collar professionals above all else, on a "mo' money, mo' taxes" philosophy. If the petroleum engineers, and even cardiologists, had to step back in line while carpenters and plumbers went to the front for several years, would that make a difference?
We kind of need a whole dwelling built, per new immigrant, at this point, so if 10% of them were construction trades, it would still take years to "pay off" their own housing needs, as every dwelling has a couple or three human-years of work embedded.
He was very agreeable to Paul. A reflection of Paul’s knowledge perhaps... Left me wanting.. How we arrived here is important and where we are going and how I believe is more important.
Is the GST exemption on rental apts. significant? Even if rent consisted only of amortization of the capital cost (it's not!), are there people out there who will pay $1900/month but won't pay $2,000/month? The cynic in me says those apts. were going to be built anyway, and market rates will be charged (i.e. without 5% discount).
In 2015 campaigns Trudeau visited Vancouver and spoke of his concerns about housing affordability. We know what’s happened since.
It’s not all the feds fault of course, but policy decisions such as immigration levels have been a non trivial contributor on the demand side.
What also needs more discussion is why the federal government has done nothing to try and reduce money laundering activities. See Sam Cooper’s reporting in Willful Blindness.
There are links between crime, money laundering, and housing costs the feds seem determined to ignore, which also touches on foreign interference. These issues need more attention.
What are the chances that, over the long term, our housing situation would be improved if the federal capital gains exclusion relative to the matrimonial home were at say the 50% to 75% level rather than 100% ? The 100% exclusion incents people to view their home as an investment first and a home second. Why direct savings into a business opportunity or into the stock market, when there is such an appealing tax free alternative? The capital gains exclusion does not work in favour of building new homes; you can just as easily generate tax free money by selling your 100 year old house. To me, the 100% exclusion tends to say to all of us: renting is for losers. To me, that is distortive and unhealthy. In a really healthy market, it should be possible to find a great place to live whether you choose to buy or to rent. Have any of our think tanks taken the capital gains tax issue on? If not, I hope one of them will do so. I don't know whether the above thinking is sound, but I believe it deserves a careful public airing.
When one 30 minute interview saves you 12 hours of reading. Very informative.
I'd love to hear from an expert about the change in mortgage finance over the last couple decades.
There was a big but subtle change in 2001 when the CMHC started guaranteeing mortgage backed securities. The program has grown from basically zero to an $11 billion per month operation. Those securities are the building blocks of Canada Mortgage Bonds, which the Bank Of Canada has used as a monetary policy and bailout tool since the financial crisis.
There's lots of talk about supply and demand and zoning and NIMBYism, but I feel like the switch from construction subsidies to mortgage subsidies is a big part of our current crisis. The government essentially accepts all the default risk of the mortgage market on behalf of investors, allowing virtually unfettered mortgage lending. But nobody ever talks about it.
As usual the elephant in the room on this issue is the massive departure from the long-term consensus of a 1% rate of newcomers. I’ve heard that the Conservatives are starting to tiptoe towards addressing this and credit to them if that’s the case.
This was excellent. It didn't help my anxiety for my kids (who are *this close* to giving up on the dream of home ownership ever), but it was so useful a summation of the issues, what's needed and the political impediments to actually dealing with the issue.
For a "failed Liberal academic", Dr. Moffatt had some cautious praise re: the proposals made by our likely next Prime Minister. I hope Dr. Moffatt keeps pushing the agenda, and that the Conservatives are willing to listen and act on his recommendations.
Perhaps dumb question: it seems to most that immigration prizes white-collar professionals above all else, on a "mo' money, mo' taxes" philosophy. If the petroleum engineers, and even cardiologists, had to step back in line while carpenters and plumbers went to the front for several years, would that make a difference?
We kind of need a whole dwelling built, per new immigrant, at this point, so if 10% of them were construction trades, it would still take years to "pay off" their own housing needs, as every dwelling has a couple or three human-years of work embedded.
He was very agreeable to Paul. A reflection of Paul’s knowledge perhaps... Left me wanting.. How we arrived here is important and where we are going and how I believe is more important.
Is the GST exemption on rental apts. significant? Even if rent consisted only of amortization of the capital cost (it's not!), are there people out there who will pay $1900/month but won't pay $2,000/month? The cynic in me says those apts. were going to be built anyway, and market rates will be charged (i.e. without 5% discount).