Good advice. Were going on vacation for a couple weeks end of February. Not sure if i'll be able to do that but thats one reason i'm looking for a highly recommended contractor.

Area is called Riverwood. I hope it's alright, it was reasonably priced and that was the main reason I went for it. Someone will always be able to afford it when it comes to sell.

Our search was super broad. Only needs were a double garage and something that would be a good investment (and maybe something where I won't be burned too hard (i'm still negative)).... We were also looking at some detached. One particularly in Pitt Meadows. Triple garage. A shower right outside the garage door so I can wash my dirty ass down. haha. But it was basically twice the price and 4 times as scary for me. haha. This will be a good start.

Feb 20. NDP Budget release that they say will "fix" some of the issues with the local housing market.

https://www.gensqueeze.ca/bcbudget2018

If NDP really wants to address the housing problem, just have the guts and kill any speculation.

Tax heavily for any financial gains when selling residential properties (think 70% tax on gains) and even heavier if it's not primary residence (90% wouldn't hurt), and no matter the status of the owner. All you need is adding a clause a-la US 1031, which if you are either upsizing/downsizing, the taxes can be discounted/eliminated.

This allows true residents who aren't speculating to move freely up and down in size without serious tax obligation while kill the entire speculation market.

Seriously... kill this craze already. Shelter is a basic human necessity... speculating on basic necessities, often at the expense of those who are the most vulnerable should be a fucking crime.

Then BC, or lower mainland can really go and start developing an economy based on actual values and not speculations beyond market fundamentals.

Hehe,

I'd have to say I am not a fan of your definition on "speculation".

To me at least, "speculation" is more of a short term thing. In that sense, short term buying and its subsequent selling (ie. flipping) is definitely something I agree should be frowned upon. But longer term buying of investment properties is a perfectly legitimate vehicle many middle class families rely on to help build their assets. Furthermore, many of these properties end up becoming rental units. If you heavily tax all non-primary residences, you are going to kill not just the housing sales market -- you are also going to kill a good chunk of the rental market. People are not going to want to become landlords, and that is just adding more bad news into the mix.

A far more appropriate approach is to only discourage short term RE speculation.

I'm assuming he's talking about 90% of the gains when sold, will apply under your current tax rate. Not 90% straight tax on gains lol

Currently it's just capital gains tax, right? So he's basically saying that non-primary residences should be taxed closer to income tax rate as opposed to capital gains

It looks like there's finally going to be some public activism about housing in Metro Vancouver.

https://www.facebook.com/events/1619...tive_tab=about

My reasoning is simple, a shelter is a basic human necessity. There is no need for speculation in this kind of market. If one were to buy for rental income, as long as one can accept the whole rule set from RTB, no one is stopping you to collect whatever rent you can charge.

People who buy RE for investments and not speculations look at long (VERY) terms and cashflow. I know because that's what I/my family does for a living.

A US 1031 exchange scheme fixes the whole problem you described. We are not discouraging people to buy RE or invest, but rather killing the speculation on basic necessity.

An economy built on speculation would never last if history has taught us any lesson. Why did we allow this whole game of pure speculation on basic necessity to go so long is beyond me. It benefits very few while having a lasting impact on a whole bunch of people... all those who actually live in the area.

Think it this way... if in a perfect world there were no speculation and RE are only built by demand (population growth), houses cost basically the value of land, material, and labor... there is no reason why people would simply stop buying house as investment (rental), because after all, it's a simple supply-demand.
The only thing is that in this perfect world, landlord would only pay whatever reasonable price given the rent, while the rent is dictated by wage.

Who loses in this scenario? No one. All that "hot money" currently invested in RE would be invested elsewhere.

In short, investing in residential RE is fine... but speculating is not. Residential are designed for people to live... plain and simple.

So basically you are saying you want to stop a ton of middle class workers from trying to get ahead in live by investing in real estate and renting it out or maybe selling it later when the price is up? I guess you don't realize how many middle class try this and provide a better living for their family. I guess you want to make it harder to people try to earn their way up to.

^
1 single generation is able to do this under a speculation scenario... just 1... ie: my parents and your parents or anyone who had a family in the 1980's here... they have a nest egg.

The rest of us just have MASSIVE mortgages and debt. A future one will have some kind of a crash and bankruptcy.

Then another generation after that the cycle will start over again... it's all timing... investing in real estate is not a way to provide a better life for your family UNLESS you are in the right timed generation.

Also, in a non-speculation market, there is still the ability to better your family life... if you have extra income money and buy another property and rent it out and the rent is paying that asset off for you for the entirety of your life, you have a, say, $500k property that someone has paid off for you to sell and retire on. It still works, it's just not to the crazy % that exists here now. Ie: the house my parents bought in 1985 for $140,000 and is now worth $2.5 million... that's ridiculous... good for them I guess? Shitty for everyone else. If it was just worth what they originally paid for it + inflation, but they had put their money into other investments or other houses, they'd still be way ahead and NOT at the expense of every other generation or their own children.

FUCK speculating on housing to "get ahead". Tragedy of the muthafuckin' Commons here...Yeah, you get ahead while screwing over the rest of your community. What ever happened to working hard, saving your money and reinvesting it in said community? You know maybe taking that extra cash and starting a business or heck, invest in equities in the stock market. That sure as hell is more productive for society than housing speculation. Lazy ass mother fuckers.

Isn’t that investment good for your whole family though? It’s a family asset not just your parents.

People who are left in the dust are the ones who rented their whole lives and didn’t realize any gains from their home.

My wife has long time family friends who turned down buying their house near King ed/princess margret for a few hundred k back in the day, they’ve been renting for 25 years and now that house is worth 2.5 and they are fucked.

That's how you end up with a landed gentry in this country. Property passed down from generation to generation.

^^ Lot's of people get screw over. Big crops such as Telus, Rougers, Bell, Shaw, ICBC, RBC, BMO etc etc they also screw a ton of people just to make money every single day. Maybe they should charge everyone a cheaper more fair rate instead of screwing everyone up? I mean it will be more productive to society right?

You can't judge and penalize the way people make money as long as it is legal. Unless the gov make it illegal to speculate on housing market is fair game. Vancouver is a popular place and people want to move here. Is supply and demand. Currently we have way more people coming to live, work, study in Vancouver than the housing supply. Build more supply, over supply the market and price will drop.

Do you think anyone will contiune to buy and use real estate as a means to make money when there is an over supply? No coz they know is not worth it. Why do you think housing in other places haven't gone up at all(Regina, Winnipeg) coz no one wanted to move there and there is always too much supply.

Button line is people will pay what they feel like is fair for a roof over their head. Don't like it move farther away where housing is cheaper.

I don't get the question.

If a middle class wants to invest in RE (rental) for stability, the scenario I described doesn't stop one from doing it. The only effect it has is that house prices don't go up exponentially. It would only go up as dictated by the wage/inflation.

Even in that case, say inflation at 2% and a middle-classer bought an investment house for 100k, after 25years, the same house would worth roughly 164k, while rent is purely driven by wages (higher wage, higher rent).

At the end of 25yr, if the landlord decides to sell, he gets his 100k back, plus a small profit after tax. Alternatively, with the 1031 scheme I said, the owner can decide to put that whole 164k into some sort of investment vehicle (say another house for his kids), no tax would be deducted on the gain.

I fail to see any problem in this scenario. Sure, they won't be cashing it out like winning a lottery, but they aren't losing anything exactly. He/she got rent for the entire 25years and could continue to do that if he/she doesn't sell.

As 68style said, any increase in price beyond market fundamentals just screw up future generations for the benefit of the current one. And it's scary. My friends live basically paycheck to paycheck. All the disposable income goes into their house. This is fucking scary IMHO. Imagine where the majority can only afford to pay their house and nothing else... the economy would go shit because no one can afford to buy anything.

This is not about entitlement or anything... but rather just what a healthy economy should do. Germany has very strong laws against RE speculation... but without the boom in RE, their economy is nothing short of amazing compared to the rest of G7/G20. That's because they build their economy around things with real value/growth rather than speculating on RE.

I'm not against investing and doing business. I'm against betting on basic necessities.

With so much speculation in the RE, we actually build more than what we need. Hence we create opportunity cost when we could instead diverting that resource into creating businesses with real values.

Please don't tell me that a house that cost 200k at the turn of century suddenly contribute 10x as much to our economy for it to be worth 2M. It still only has 3br in it with enough to house 6people... nothing more, nothing less. So it shouldn't be worth 10x as much unless our wage went up that much in the same time period. I remember flipping a burger at McD would get you maybe 1k in 2000? Last time I checked, it's definitely no where near 10k a month doing the same job.

The problem is that there will never be a surplus of supply. On average how many homes are built a year vs how many people move here per year and are able to overbid on what an average local Joe can afford? Condo's are sold out almost instantly and I'm going to take a guess and say that a majority of them are not first time home buyers. There's no way that we will ever build enough to supply our residents.


Hehe said that his friends live paycheck to paycheck with their disposable income going to their homes. At least they have a home to call their own, for a lot of others their living the same way but to rent and show nothing for it in the future.

Imo basic shelter doesn’t mean owning a home.

If you’re pumping every dollar you have to scrape by in owning a place you may have made a wrong decision along the way

You know what they say... buy today or be priced out forevvaaarrr!!! :fuckthatshit:

Well the bright side is they probably made some equity in their struggles, short term pain for hopefully some reward in the end

What if housing went he other way, they would be way worse. They would be scrapping by and have an underwater mortgage.

https://www.rew.ca/properties/R22381...ad-richmond-bc

3100 SF house in Richmond for the same price as larger townhouses in same area. This has been on sale since Nov with a big price drop now.

This reminds me of pricing 10 years ago when a few of my friends were debating between a newer townhouse or an older home; the pricing was the about the same back then.

Looks like townhouse/condos pricing are starting to approach older houses.

One of my friends bought a place in Richmond 200 grand below asking a few days ago. The place was listed for approx 1.4 and was on the market not moving for 3 months - just sold for 1.2

I'd believe it, I've been watching an older house in Cloverdale sitting for at least 2 months. Started at 888, they dropped to 848 still sitting. The newer inventory in East Clayton is moving quick, the older homes seem to be sitting. I think the market is pretty clear, a lot of inventory out there is over priced.

Are single detached houses starting to sell below asking now? I'd very much like to move into a place bigger than our tiny apartment. If older single detached houses are selling below asking, there might be a chance I can actually do this.

A house near my place (new westminster) sold within a week, but below asking price too (-20k).

That being said, the house is 20+ years old and looks like it could use some renovation inside.