BC Political Discussion - BC Election 2017 May 9th

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Shortage of SFH/townhouses forces people to buy into condos, driving prices up because it's the only type of housing really being built.

It doesn't help that a large fraction of said condos get presold overseas at ridiculous prices and end up inflating the market. There needs to be increased supply AND reduced demand.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Shortage of SFH/townhouses forces people to buy into condos, driving prices up because it's the only type of housing really being built.

The numbers being built have been shown to be well in excess of demographic requirements. You're just building more units for specuvestors, which only adds to the bubble.

[a very long weekend]

^ you're building for speculators, but you're also building them for people moving to vancouver, moving out onto their own, etc. you have to remember that canada has only a few cities, demand will always be high.

on the plus side, though, the longtime zero growth policy across 85% of the city has pushed prices so high that high-rise towers pencil, and towers do look cool on the skyline. if you'd had a permissive citywide growth policy all this time, housing would be a lot cheaper, but there would be 4-5 story buildings all over and the skyline wouldn't look as good. so high levels of indebtedness and all the other harms caused by high housing costs do payoff in the public good of a more impressive skyline for postcards and views from across the water.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The numbers being built have been shown to be well in excess of demographic requirements. You're just building more units for specuvestors, which only adds to the bubble.

If you're building more than demand then prices would come down.

One big problem is we're not building enough family-sized units outside the DT core. If most of Vancouver, especially on arterials like Cambie/Granville/Oak/41st/King Edward were adding 3 and 4 bedroom units in significant numbers, we'd see a gradual decrease in the cost of housing in the CoV.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by a very long weekend

if you'd had a permissive citywide growth policy all this time, housing would be a lot cheaper, but there would be 4-5 story buildings all over and the skyline wouldn't look as good. so high levels of indebtedness and all the other harms caused by high housing costs do payoff in the public good of a more impressive skyline for postcards and views from across the water.

Shockingly tone deaf and stupid statement.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Jebby

If you're building more than demand then prices would come down.

As has been discussed many many times, we don't have a local housing economy. Demand is much higher than building could ever satiate.

Originally Posted by Jebby

Shortage of SFH/townhouses forces people to buy into condos, driving prices up because it's the only type of housing really being built.

Or <600 sq feet is all the vast majority of Vancouverites can afford now, even while leveraged to the hilt.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Soooooo.... incumbent BC gov't obviously will fall on non-confidence motion on Throne Speech on Thursday.

S. 43 of the BC Constitution Act clearly confirms that GreeNDP combo will be unable to pass budgets/bills at 3rd reading - by statute. IOW, if the GreeNDP are unable to pass budgets/bills, then they technically can't "govern".

This is precisely why the LG will probably call an election and will take some of the heat off the Liberals for actually triggering a snap election.

To me, the blame is on all 3 parties.

The Liberals have basically stalled and resorted to dirty tactics to try and sway public opinion. Their intention was to make the GreenDP look like utter hypocrites by adopting their platforms, however this may have turned off traditional Conservative supporters. The wisest move would have been for CC to immediately resign and THEN (and only then) pull out all stops to try and trigger an election.

That said, the Greens squandered an opportunity to establish themselves as a viable party by immediately siding with the NDP. I reckon Andrew Weaver could have tapped into the right/centrist base by siding with the Liberals and could have received major concessions from CC. Now? He's basically an NDP supporter- and will likely get smoked the next election as the Liberals see a more consolidated base.

[a very long weekend]

Originally Posted by Pinion

As has been discussed many many times, we don't have a local housing economy. Demand is much higher than building could ever satiate.

Or <600 sq feet is all the vast majority of Vancouverites can afford now, even while leveraged to the hilt.

Exactly. Canadians' mortgage debt passed $2 trillion last year. But 300,000 people immigrate to Canada every year. And real estate/property services account for 40% of BC's GDP. Instead of trying (probably fruitlessly) to stanch demand, why not level out or decrease prices by increasing supply?

Think about how weird it is to have a city like Vancouver enforcing zero growth across a supermajority of its territory. No matter how global the demand for Vancouver real estate, the idea that Vancouver is "full" isn't very convincing when, again, almost all of the city is single family home neighborhoods.

Change will only happen at the provincial level, as city politicians, despite what people might say about them being beholden to developers, are laser-focused on protecting the voting public's property values.

[Pinion]

Not "exactly," I literally just argued that more supply won't change how much Chinese multi-millionaires buy property here. Barring the inevitable economic disaster on either side of the Pacific, they will buy it all until we're building 60 storey condos on the foothills of Hope. The solution is to stop foreign ownership, which the province can do, not increase supply - although densifying Vancouver proper and fixing the road infrastructure would be nice too.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Not "exactly," I literally just argued that more supply won't change how much Chinese multi-millionaires buy property here. Barring the inevitable economic disaster on either side of the Pacific, they will buy it all until we're building 60 storey condos on the foothills of Hope. The solution is to stop foreign ownership, which the province can do, not increase supply - although densifying Vancouver proper and fixing the road infrastructure would be nice too.

Do not be surprised that A Very Long Weekend isn't paying attention (possibly cognitive dissonance)

In the footer of their profile it says: "从不服用弱剂量" which is basically Chinese for "Never take a weak dose"... a bit of insight to their state of mind.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The numbers being built have been shown to be well in excess of demographic requirements. You're just building more units for specuvestors, which only adds to the bubble.

Were overbuilding yet the rental vacancy rate is less than 1% in Vancouver. Building less is the answer?

I posted some stats from a Frances Bula article that contradict your claim. Then you responded by saying that those were bad examples (of course), so let's see your stats that support your claims.

Empty homes, which is often cited as strong evidence of a large influx of foreign buyers, is far from just a Vancouver phenomenon. There's is far more evidence to suggest that high housing costs are caused by bad planning policy.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Pinion

I'm more interested in bringing cost of life in line with the local economy than expecting the NDP to do anything amazing to create new industry. As you say, it's a global problem and the damage has been done by the failure of trickle down economics and globalism already. If the economy continues to be poor, so be it, but local prices should reflect that so people don't have to leave the metro to survive like they currently do. Bribing industries with huge subsidies and allowing money launderers to run roughshod over the country is not my idea of good governance.

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing here, but your comment was that the economy has been shit for years. I don't disagree that bringing the cost of living down should be a key pillar of the provincial government, that doesn't negate the fact that the Libs has presided over some very strong economic growth of late.

As for

Originally Posted by Pinion

I'm pretty sure city councils control zoning?

They do, and despite that the provincial government gives the city it's rights through a charter taking those rights away would be an unprecedented step and likely cause far more issues than it would resolve.

Originally Posted by whatnext

How do you explain the explosion in condo prices then? No shortage of those.

Locals have become somewhat priced out of the SFH market and have turned to condos. With the recent boom in employment numbers demand for condos have surged. And there IS a shortage of condos, perhaps not in 5 years but people buy for today and today there are not a ton of condos available.

Originally Posted by logan5

Were overbuilding yet the rental vacancy rate is less than 1% in Vancouver. Building less is the answer?

Bingo. Local demand for housing is very strong right now which can be seen in the demand for condos in the $500K to $1M range and the sheer amount of people renting. Building more may not cause prices to drop, but building less certainly wont help anyone.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

..Locals have become somewhat priced out of the SFH market and have turned to condos. With the recent boom in employment numbers demand for condos have surged. And there IS a shortage of condos, perhaps not in 5 years but people buy for today and today there are not a ton of condos available.

Cool, you're actually admitting foreign buyers have priced locals out of the SFH market.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Bingo. Local demand for housing is very strong right now which can be seen in the demand for condos in the $500K to $1M range and the sheer amount of people renting. Building more may not cause prices to drop, but building less certainly wont help anyone.

Vancouver's vacancy rate has been low for decades. As said before, building more condos just adds fodder to the speculative fire. Given that rental is the only option for those without capital or access to credit, it would be better that council only approve multi-family rental buildings, both to dampen the bubble and ensure vulnerable residents are housed.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Cool, you're actually admitting foreign buyers have priced locals out of the SFH market.

I certainly haven't said at any time since prices shot up 30% in a year that the pricing of single family homes in Vancouver was a normal market...

Though like most things in life it's not as simple as one issue.

Vancouver has seen a conflation of issues affecting the market, predominantly prolonged low interest rates, foreign influx of capital and scarcity of land.

Originally Posted by whatnext

Vancouver's vacancy rate has been low for decades. As said before, building more condos just adds fodder to the speculative fire. Given that rental is the only option for those without capital or access to credit, it would be better that council only approve multi-family rental buildings, both to dampen the bubble and ensure vulnerable residents are housed.

Or 30,000 people a year move to metro Vancouver and need to live somewhere.

Honestly where do you expect people to live?

If council only approved rental buildings, ownership opportunities would become that much more scarce and prices would shoot up even higher.

This is like economics 101 man...

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

..Or 30,000 people a year move to metro Vancouver and need to live somewhere.

Honestly where do you expect people to live?

If council only approved rental buildings, ownership opportunities would become that much more scarce and prices would shoot up even higher.

This is like economics 101 man...

Because this is what building more and more condos leads to. Not more affordability but more speculation:

Kensington Gardens Flip Jobs

..Currently there are 65 assignments (some sold, some still active) of the total 404 total units in the development. That equates to 16% of the building being flipped before completion which is still one year away. I would expect the number of assignments to continue growing as the building nears completion, particularly if foreign buyers want to avoid the 15% foreign buyers tax upon closing.

With the developer charging a 1.5% fee on each assignment it’s a lucrative deal for both sides...

http://vancitycondoguide.com/vancouv...d-assignments/

[LeftCoaster]

So your solution is to stop building entirely?

Did you go to the same economics school as Nicolas Maduro?

While flipping in a hot market is something to be wary of and try to combat, especially when it's foreign capital, stopping building is like blowing off your foot with a shotgun to remove a wart, the solution is far worse than the symptom.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Because this is what building more and more condos leads to. Not more affordability but more speculation:

Kensington Gardens Flip Jobs

..Currently there are 65 assignments (some sold, some still active) of the total 404 total units in the development. That equates to 16% of the building being flipped before completion which is still one year away. I would expect the number of assignments to continue growing as the building nears completion, particularly if foreign buyers want to avoid the 15% foreign buyers tax upon closing.

With the developer charging a 1.5% fee on each assignment it’s a lucrative deal for both sides...

http://vancitycondoguide.com/vancouv...d-assignments/

65 units in an incomplete building is going to have no effect on the affordability the 100's of thousands of completed units in the city.

flipping is a symptom and not the cause of in-affordability.

[Spork]

Originally Posted by djmk

65 units in an incomplete building is going to have no effect on the affordability the 100's of thousands of completed units in the city.

flipping is a symptom and not the cause of in-affordability.

Symptoms can be a cause as well.

It is impossible for 16% of units flipped (with more to come, mind you) to have no effect on the market, similar to how it is impossible for 5% of a market fueled by foreign buyers to have no effect on the market either. The market is made on the margins, and flipping is an irregular activity fueled by speculation, which is very likely also happening on the margins due to the expectation of future profit driven by past profits.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Because this is what building more and more condos leads to. Not more affordability but more speculation:

Kensington Gardens Flip Jobs

..Currently there are 65 assignments (some sold, some still active) of the total 404 total units in the development. That equates to 16% of the building being flipped before completion which is still one year away. I would expect the number of assignments to continue growing as the building nears completion, particularly if foreign buyers want to avoid the 15% foreign buyers tax upon closing.

With the developer charging a 1.5% fee on each assignment it’s a lucrative deal for both sides...

http://vancitycondoguide.com/vancouv...d-assignments/

How is it possible to flip a property in a market that is supposedly being overbuilt. Flipping can't work if there are alternatives.

It's like scalping (or flipping) Canuck tickets. But, instead of homes we have seats. Scalpers did well when the Canucks were hot. All games were sold out so your only alternative was to buy from a ticket flipper at a much higher price. Or the Canucks somehow increase seating capacity. Now you can get Canuck tickets at bargain prices (scalpers not making as much money) because there are plenty of seats available as demand for Canuck tickets has dropped.

[Stingray2004]

Ironic... the day the BC Libs fall in legislature... a new Mainstreet Research poll comes out showing BC Libs have jumped to a huge 11% lead: