Current Events > Investors OWNS nearly a THIRD of HOMES in major Canadian markets

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://financialpost.com/real-estate/investors-own-nearly-a-third-of-homes-in-major-canadian-markets-2/wcm/45dc7b1a-a141-4436-807d-c5f98bdda0fb/amp/

People who own more than one home account for about a third of the housing stock in some of Canadas biggest markets, new government data show, highlighting how the nations real estate boom may also be heightening inequality.

Multiple-property owners accounted for 31 per cent of all homes in Ontario as of early 2020 and almost the same share in British Columbia, a report from Statistics Canada said Tuesday. In the smaller East Coast provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the share was about 40 per cent, the data show.

A 50 per cent rise in home prices over the last two years has made the cost of housing a political issue in Canada, prompting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to make home affordability a centrepiece of his governments 2022 budget.

But with the supply of houses for sale still near record lows, prices at record highs, and interest rates set to rise, the barriers for new buyers appear to be getting more entrenched. In British Columbia, the top 10 per cent of owners control 29 per cent of the total value of residential properties in the province.

While Trudeaus budget focused on curbing the role of professional investors and foreign owners in the housing market, the new government data suggest the majority of multiple-property owners are just individuals or families already living in Canada. Most own just two properties usually single-family detached houses and are usually located in the same area, suggesting most are buying the second property for rental income not recreation.

Because the figures are from the period prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, they may underestimate multiple homeowners current role in the market. More recent data from the Bank of Canada showed multiple-property owners have increased their share of home purchases in that time, while first-time buyers represented a smaller share of the market.

the top 10 per cent of owners control 29 per cent of the total value of residential properties in the province.

But they told me laissez faire capitalism was good and market forces would balance things out, or something

This is why homes should be limited to 1x Residential Property per Adult Citizen & Resident of said area.
That will rebalance the value of homes and prevent it from being abused as "Investment Property".

WingsOfGood posted...

the new government data suggest the majority of multiple-property owners are just individuals or families already living in Canada. Most own just two properties usually single-family detached houses and are usually located in the same area, suggesting most are buying the second property for rental income not recreation.

Rental properties are a great investment vehicle for extra income

Nothing will ever change until the guillotines start coming out.

The actual problem:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/7/0/AAEhCpAAEEvC.jpg
Damn near the entire country lives in Montreal and Toronto.

Questionmarktarius posted...

The actual problem:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/7/0/AAEhCpAAEEvC.jpg
Damn near the entire country lives in Montreal and Toronto.

Nobody wants to live far away from the city or in the boonies.

I wonder what the folks who live way up that at the nose area are like

Owning property as an investment is a massive problem in every market in Canada.

The area I'm in a shitty house is still $300,000. Un fucking believable.

tremain07 posted...

I wonder what the folks who live way up that at the nose area are like

I assume they're cold

Should be forced the sell tbh

WingsOfGood posted...

the new government data suggest the majority of multiple-property owners are just individuals or families already living in Canada. Most own just two properties usually single-family detached houses and are usually located in the same area, suggesting most are buying the second property for rental income not recreation.

This is actually what I was thinking was going on. I finally funny that the headlines has investors ,because when most people visualize investors they think like big corporate banks. Instead of you know the family down the street that owns one home and owns a second home for for rental income. So I'm not a fan of word games here.

My own unpopular opinion is that real estate should not be a good investments. There should be such an abundance of homes, that it's just not worth it dabble into it. Because you can't have real estate be both a good investment and have it be affordable. But I think most people disagree with me. So when you try and make laws restricting the amount of homes that people can own, I think you're going to get a lot of pushback

Questionmarktarius posted...

The actual problem:
[picture of population distribution of Canada]
Damn near the entire country lives in Montreal and Toronto.

That's not the problem at all. The entire population of Canada is less than that of just California. The houses exist, the real problem is that they're being held by speculators. Fuck that.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

Nobody wants to live far away from the city or in the boonies.

I think its more its fucking damn cold in the North.

I heard a house was a good investment

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

Rental properties are a great investment vehicle for extra income

You shouldn't be allowed to profit off of people's need forhousing.

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

Rental properties are a great investment vehicle for extra income

You mean being a leech and getting money for doing nothing?

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

Rental properties are a great investment vehicle for extra income

Or the last good one ?

emblem-man posted...

Because you can't have real estate be both a good investment and have it be affordable.

You absolutely can, in the US that state existed for well over 200 years. 20 years of price insanity doesn't mean it is impossible to return to a healthy situation.

It ain't right

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

You mean being a leech and getting money for doing nothing?

That's the goal of investing yeah

Norman_Smiley posted...

You absolutely can, in the US that state existed for well over 200 years. 20 years of price insanity doesn't mean it is impossible to return to a healthy situation.

Well, I guess it depends on how you're defining "good" investment. But yeah, it'd need to not appreciate more than inflation I guess. Don't know if others consider that a good investment or not

Prepare the guillotine

Buying property just to rent it out should be illegal

So, if these people are buying hundreds of thousands of homes and they are almost certainly unoccupied for the most part, isn't the logical counterplay for people to just start squatting again?

Then, once forcing the rental moguls to pay for constant enforcement, it becomes slightly less palatable of a misery based enrichment scheme.