Why is York Region so expensive?

[Tony]

Keep the debate civil. If you can't be civil or are unable to debate, leave without the drama.

[Docere]

Mississauaga is slightly more expensive than Etobicoke overall, but well below York Region and North York.

Basically north is the "favored direction" in Toronto, then west, then east.

[Docere]

Average freehold price for top Mississauga and Etobicoke neighborhoods:

Lorne Park $1,585,334
Mineola $1,459,835
Port Credit $1,164,281

Humber Valley $1,879,905
Kingsway $1,570,221
Islington Village $1,473,964
Princess-Rosethorn $1,361,511

via www.realosophy.com

Richmond Hill and Thornhill's top neighborhoods come out higher.

Bayview Hill $2,549,300
Bayview Glen $2,398,269
South Richvale $2,396,879
Uplands $1,834,314

All figures are over the past 12 months.

[Draghi T]

Very simple folks. "Income" is not wealth. York Region - areas like King City, Richmond Hill, Thornhill, and Unionville - is home to Toronto's global ultra wealthy elite. Oakville is where affluent Canadian WASPs live. There is only so much wealth that has and is being generated in this country and only so much that can be passed onto future generations.

Today the vast majority of wealth (net new multi/centimillionaires) in the planet is being generated in East Asia (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan, South Korea), India, Russia, and the Middle East. When these well heeled folks move to Toronto - they have a STRONG preference for York Region or Central Toronto (the former the extension of the latter). These areas are so much more welcoming and already have large existing populations.

Oakville is a place where homogenous insular residents with no interest or appreciation for other cultures bask in their bubble of "status" and "prestige". Truth is this debt laden municipality is being left in the dust. All of York Region save for maybe Newmarket will trump Oakville's house prices shortly. Most have already..

[syesep]

Originally Posted by Draghi T

Today the vast majority of wealth (net new multi/centimillionaires) in the planet is being generated in East Asia (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan, South Korea), India, Russia, and the Middle East. When these well heeled folks move to Toronto - they have a STRONG preference for York Region or Central Toronto (the former the extension of the latter). These areas are so much more welcoming and already have large existing populations.

I think this exactly right. I've been living in the York region for over 10 years and the immigrant communities are very developed. These communities also have good access to downtown Toronto too, so it's no wonder why they're attracted to these area.

[Docere]

York Region also loves Doug Ford.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by wave46

By "anglo" I think they mean "white Canadian". Going to the cottage (the Northern Ontario boy in me shudders at using the phrase) is most definitely a thing that is culturally ingrained in those who are descended from a European background.

I understand where it comes from though - in past days staying in the city was boring during the summer as there was no where near as much to do today and cities were much smoggier and polluted then. Getting away from it all to a lake was a nice change from the urban grind.

Originally Posted by Docere

I was thinking not Italian, Jewish, Portuguese or other "white ethnics" but those of northwestern European backgrounds who aren't seen as "ethnic."

I don't know if Italian Torontonians have embraced the cottage thing that much, maybe they have. Northern Ontario may be different. Northern Ontario Italians are also more assimilated since more of them are descended from the early 20th century immigration compared to their Toronto counterparts.

Is cottage culture mainly (carried over from the Old World) a British Isles and northern European thing (Swedish, Finnish and other Nordic cultures and countries have it) relative to southern Europe?

Do we expect that other groups in Toronto (including many visible minorities) aren't into that as much because they are, often demographically, more recently derived from places lacking cottage culture, but will take up cottage culture more as they assimilate?

If Jewish Torontonians are more into cottage culture than say Italian Torontonians or other southern European Torontonians, does this reflect more assimilation (or earlier assimilation)?

[Capsicum]

It seems that outdoorsy culture (camping, cottages, hiking etc.) is associated with white/European culture in the US too as well as Canada (lots of minorities, like black and Hispanic Americans seem underrepresented in the kinds of hobbies involving wilderness, nature etc. and many people even joke about how eg. camping is a "white" thing) so it seems like a broader phenomenon that perhaps has some explanation?

Don't know if there's an inter-group difference among white groups across the Anglo countries in preferences (eg. are Anglo-descent people more likely to take up camping, hiking in parks etc. than say Italian Americans, Canadians, Australians etc. or other "white ethnics" more broadly, not just cottage culture?).

How much of that is a wealth or leisure availability thing (minorities aren't as well off and have the time and money to do these hobbies and often see them as "impractical" in their lives), or comfort zone thing (minorities live in cities in both Canada and the US, more than small towns/rural areas), and how much of that is cultural (European culture or settler culture having more of that "seeking the wilderness" thing)?

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

It seems that outdoorsy culture (camping, cottages, hiking etc.) is associated with white/European culture in the US too as well as Canada (lots of minorities, like black and Hispanic Americans seem underrepresented in the kinds of hobbies involving wilderness, nature etc. and many people even joke about how eg. camping is a "white" thing) so it seems like a broader phenomenon that perhaps has some explanation?

Don't know if there's an inter-group difference among white groups across the Anglo countries in preferences (eg. are Anglo-descent people more likely to take up camping, hiking in parks etc. than say Italian Americans, Canadians, Australians etc. or other "white ethnics" more broadly, not just cottage culture?).

How much of that is a wealth or leisure availability thing (minorities aren't as well off and have the time and money to do these hobbies and often see them as "impractical" in their lives), or comfort zone thing (minorities live in cities in both Canada and the US, more than small towns/rural areas), and how much of that is cultural (European culture or settler culture having more of that "seeking the wilderness" thing)?

Camping and camps/cottages are very popular with French-Canadians both in Quebec and where I live in Northern Ontario. I don't think there is really any huge difference than that of anglophones. But I'd guess that more francophones on average have cottages/camps and go camping in the wilderness more frequently. But I have to add that most anglophones in Timmins aren't of mainly British Isles background.

My family has two cottages within an hour's drive of Timmins (many people here call them "camps") and I'm thinking of the backgrounds of the ones on the two lakes. About half are French-Canadian. Those of British/Irish and Finnish backgrounds are over-represented when it comes to cottages. You will also find many of Eastern-European backgrounds (mainly Croatian, Ukrainian, Polish) but also some of German/Austrian descent. We do have many Italian-Canadians here and some do have cottages but they seem to be a fair bit less likely to own a cottage. But I have to stress that many people here are of mixed backgrounds so they may have an Italian name but be half Italian and half French-Canadian or vice-versa.

Indigenous people here tend to have more remote camps that are more rustic but I do know some who have fancier cottages. Many are from remote reserves and will visit them for hunting and fishing, camp in tents or teepees and spend much time outdoors.

[TownGuy]

When we went camping on Bon Echo there was a wealthy Asian couple across from us. They had Land Rover and massive trailer, that not even joking, took them over an hour to back into the camp site, they ran over small trees, hit some larger trees, which brought them to a dead stop but did not phase them. The funny part was I didnt see them once after that, they were in the trailer the whole time, no campfires, nothing. Lots of lovin maybe? Who knows?

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Draghi T

Very simple folks. "Income" is not wealth. York Region - areas like King City, Richmond Hill, Thornhill, and Unionville - is home to Toronto's global ultra wealthy elite. Oakville is where affluent Canadian WASPs live. There is only so much wealth that has and is being generated in this country and only so much that can be passed onto future generations.

Today the vast majority of wealth (net new multi/centimillionaires) in the planet is being generated in East Asia (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan, South Korea), India, Russia, and the Middle East. When these well heeled folks move to Toronto - they have a STRONG preference for York Region or Central Toronto (the former the extension of the latter). These areas are so much more welcoming and already have large existing populations.

Oakville is a place where homogenous insular residents with no interest or appreciation for other cultures bask in their bubble of "status" and "prestige". Truth is this debt laden municipality is being left in the dust. All of York Region save for maybe Newmarket will trump Oakville's house prices shortly. Most have already..

York Region has a lot of "locally made" wealth as well and is home to the Italian Canadian elite. Basically the region is "new money."

[Capsicum]

Are much of York Region's wealthy areas really an extension of Toronto's Yonge-street centered "favoured quarter"? There also appears to be a small gap between the city's "favoured quarter" and wealthy parts of York region crossing the city boundary, since by the time the favoured quarter ends at maybe Willowdale, if not the area around the Sheppard subway line, the areas near northern North York and the city limits (eg. Yonge and Steeles or Thornhill) are not that especially well-off.

Where is the line, geographically between the more southern "old money" areas and northern "new money" areas, going north from downtown all the way up through York Region?

Is the old money-new money boundary around midtown Toronto? Around the North York-old city boundary?

I guess it also depends on the definition of old vs. new money -- once the wealthy immigrants' kids and descendants are assimilated and more than one or two generations removed from the "immigrant" experience, are they still new money, even if they are not WASP? Or I guess, you could also limit the idea of old money to those "Canadian elites" that are more influential in ways beyond money (eg. political, cultural influence).

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by Draghi T

Very simple folks. "Income" is not wealth. York Region - areas like King City, Richmond Hill, Thornhill, and Unionville - is home to Toronto's global ultra wealthy elite. Oakville is where affluent Canadian WASPs live. There is only so much wealth that has and is being generated in this country and only so much that can be passed onto future generations.

Today the vast majority of wealth (net new multi/centimillionaires) in the planet is being generated in East Asia (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan, South Korea), India, Russia, and the Middle East. When these well heeled folks move to Toronto - they have a STRONG preference for York Region or Central Toronto (the former the extension of the latter). These areas are so much more welcoming and already have large existing populations.

Oakville is a place where homogenous insular residents with no interest or appreciation for other cultures bask in their bubble of "status" and "prestige". Truth is this debt laden municipality is being left in the dust. All of York Region save for maybe Newmarket will trump Oakville's house prices shortly. Most have already..

Is it likely that such a high percentage of York Region's immigrants made their wealth overseas and then moved there, as opposed to came there, "strived" as immigrants and then made their wealth locally?

New money has been used to describe both immigrants who bring their (already-made) wealth here, versus those who made it here.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

Are much of York Region's wealthy areas really an extension of Toronto's Yonge-street centered "favoured quarter"? There also appears to be a small gap between the city's "favoured quarter" and wealthy parts of York region crossing the city boundary, since by the time the favoured quarter ends at maybe Willowdale, if not the area around the Sheppard subway line, the areas near northern North York and the city limits (eg. Yonge and Steeles or Thornhill) are not that especially well-off.

Sort of, though there are some gaps. Bayview Avenue is pretty wealthy all the way through. On the other hand, some of York Region's wealthiest areas are in the northwest (Kleinburg, King).

Where is the line, geographically between the more southern "old money" areas and northern "new money" areas, going north from downtown all the way up through York Region?

Is the old money-new money boundary around midtown Toronto? Around the North York-old city boundary?

It's not a hard boundary, as "old" and "new" money is not that clearly defined. But I'd say the old city-North York boundary is probably about right - though it's a spectrum and in some ways is as much as about culture as about lineage.

I guess it also depends on the definition of old vs. new money -- once the wealthy immigrants' kids and descendants are assimilated and more than one or two generations removed from the "immigrant" experience, are they still new money, even if they are not WASP? Or I guess, you could also limit the idea of old money to those "Canadian elites" that are more influential in ways beyond money (eg. political, cultural influence).

Probably worth a new thread.

[Loco101]

I do have to stress that I know many Italian-Canadians in Northern Ontario who hunt, fish, camp and own a cottage. I have Italian-Canadians friends from university who were born and raised in the GTA and still live there and they aren't into those things but the same thing could be said about people of most other origins who live in the GTA.

I thought about the many bigger lakes I go to for visiting friends and family cottages and there are people of Italian origin on most of them in the Timmins area. In Sault Ste Marie, you will find Italian-Canadians in all cottage areas and rural areas within an hour's drive of the city.

[Docere]

FWIW, the riding with the highest HH incomes in York Region is King-Vaughan ($145,923), followed by Aurora-Oak Ridges-Richmond Hill ($137,070).