5 ms·

Nice, this will curb the unacceptably high 4% of home buyers who are foreign who are definitely responsible for driving the market prices up. It certainly coul

Nice, this will curb the unacceptably high 4% of home buyers who are foreign who are definitely responsible for driving the market prices up. It certainly couldn't be driven up by the fact that if you ask virtually any person under 40 if they will purchase a home once they can afford one they will say yes. If only there was a way you could put more than one home on a single lot so you could actually meet demand without building $300m apartment buildings.

baybal2 5y ago
I lived in Vancouver for 6 years. > Nice, this will curb the unacceptably high 4% of home buyers who are foreign who are definitely responsible for driving the market prices up. These 4% are driving up prices of the most elite real estate, and crowding out rich elite upper-middle-class Canadians, who invest in real estate, and live in big cities (read Toronto, and Vancouver.) That's the real problem for them. So, these unacceptably high 4% is mostly visible on West Georgia, and Cambie, and then DT Vancouver, and Toronto. Most people unhappy about it are rich recent immigrants wanting to buy a house themselves. Please make a distinction in between migrants with Canadian passport, or PR, and foreign buyers without any relationship to the country.
- kenned3 5y ago
  they also use this to jump to the head of the line for their PR. https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=653&top=6 https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=653...
- lwansbrough 5y ago
  My whole post was being sarcastic. None of those groups are responsible for the vast majority of demand in this country, it is people who have been living here their whole lives like myself who are priced out simply because there isn't supply for them. The population has grown but the housing has not. And we're doing nothing to meet that demand with additional supply, just slightly cutting down the demand, which doesn't do anything to address the underlying problem.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I'm not saying the ban on foreign ownership will fix the housing problems, nor am I really disagreeing that the primary issue is just a lack of housing, and of course banning foreign ownership is an easy political target because foreigners don't vote. But just because foreign ownership is only 4% doesn't mean it can't have a sizable impact on home prices. Prices are always set at the margins, and since foreign ownership, especially in Vancouver, is really treated as a "safe place for cash" from foreign buyers, it can cause prices that are out of whack with the intended purpose of a home as being place to live. Also, when your primary use of a house is simply a store of value to park your cash, you're likely going to want to put it into areas that are already supply constrained, because that means the risk of prices falling is lower.
- lwansbrough 5y ago
  > is really treated as a "safe place for cash" from foreign buyers, it can cause prices that are out of whack with the intended purpose of a home as being place to live. > you're likely going to want to put it into areas that are already supply constrained These are the primary arguments for building more. Build enough and you will drive prices down, and with it the reputation of Vancouver's housing market as a safe store of value. Housing can be cheap and not seen as a substantially valuable investment if we simply build to meet demand. Densely of course - something other than 20+ floor apartment buildings would be nice.
  - gorgonzolachz 5y ago
    And this is where the NIMBYs come in; people who bought in years or even decades ago, who want to see prices rise to astronomical levels so they can retire off of their home's equity. Any proposal to do this will absolutely be shot down, until the voting public outnumbers the homeowners - which may never happen, given current voting trends.
mixmastamyk 5y ago
Four percent can have a larger effect when combined with scarcity from other factors. This is just one constituency that comes last due to their lack of voice. And probably working as it should.

baybal2 5y ago

I lived in Vancouver for 6 years. > Nice, this will curb the unacceptably high 4% of home buyers who are foreign who are definitely responsible for driving the market prices up. These 4% are driving up prices of the most elite real estate, and crowding out rich elite upper-middle-class Canadians, who invest in real estate, and live in big cities (read Toronto, and Vancouver.) That's the real problem for them. So, these unacceptably high 4% is mostly visible on West Georgia, and Cambie, and then DT Vancouver, and Toronto. Most people unhappy about it are rich recent immigrants wanting to buy a house themselves. Please make a distinction in between migrants with Canadian passport, or PR, and foreign buyers without any relationship to the country.

kenned3 5y ago
they also use this to jump to the head of the line for their PR. https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=653&top=6 https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=653...
lwansbrough 5y ago
My whole post was being sarcastic. None of those groups are responsible for the vast majority of demand in this country, it is people who have been living here their whole lives like myself who are priced out simply because there isn't supply for them. The population has grown but the housing has not. And we're doing nothing to meet that demand with additional supply, just slightly cutting down the demand, which doesn't do anything to address the underlying problem.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I'm not saying the ban on foreign ownership will fix the housing problems, nor am I really disagreeing that the primary issue is just a lack of housing, and of course banning foreign ownership is an easy political target because foreigners don't vote. But just because foreign ownership is only 4% doesn't mean it can't have a sizable impact on home prices. Prices are always set at the margins, and since foreign ownership, especially in Vancouver, is really treated as a "safe place for cash" from foreign buyers, it can cause prices that are out of whack with the intended purpose of a home as being place to live. Also, when your primary use of a house is simply a store of value to park your cash, you're likely going to want to put it into areas that are already supply constrained, because that means the risk of prices falling is lower.

lwansbrough 5y ago
> is really treated as a "safe place for cash" from foreign buyers, it can cause prices that are out of whack with the intended purpose of a home as being place to live. > you're likely going to want to put it into areas that are already supply constrained These are the primary arguments for building more. Build enough and you will drive prices down, and with it the reputation of Vancouver's housing market as a safe store of value. Housing can be cheap and not seen as a substantially valuable investment if we simply build to meet demand. Densely of course - something other than 20+ floor apartment buildings would be nice.
- gorgonzolachz 5y ago
  And this is where the NIMBYs come in; people who bought in years or even decades ago, who want to see prices rise to astronomical levels so they can retire off of their home's equity. Any proposal to do this will absolutely be shot down, until the voting public outnumbers the homeowners - which may never happen, given current voting trends.

mixmastamyk 5y ago

Four percent can have a larger effect when combined with scarcity from other factors. This is just one constituency that comes last due to their lack of voice. And probably working as it should.