The Decline of Vancouver.

I have a few friends that bike commute with their kids in trailers or cargo bike come across debris in the bike lane when descending now. Pretty terrifying. 

The problem gets compounded because the bike lane literally get road junk funneled into it since there's a curb on both sides, and then add to that you have no way around it. Good times. Well intended project seems like there was no real public consultation or input from people who actually ride bicycles.

It's also going to be hilarious in the snow when that curb becomes the high centering point for Honda civics. I guess it'll become one lane? 

It's also shit when ambulances have to get through (which is common) as there's literally nowhere to go.

Here's the real problem.  We have illegal immigrants eating our dogs and our cats.

This post is intended for multiple threads.

Canada’s “housing crisis” is a permanent state of affairs that harms people in, or in need of, rental housing: roughly one-third of the country’s households. The other two-thirds own homes whose values rise much faster than those of other investment options. A housing system that serves all but one group is not in a state of crisis; it is one based on structural inequality and economic exploitation.

https://thewalrus.ca/there-is-no-housing-crisis/

I think it's been posted before, maybe here or the "indigenous history" thread, but I'm interested to see how this project pans out:

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2024/09/19/first-nations-bc-gov-2600-homes-heatherlands/

I really hope it works out well, it provides a bit of a workaround for the impasse that exists with respect to land values being so high that even with densification, prices can't be low enough to improve things. It also operates a little bit outside the dysfunctional housing industry regime referred to in syncros article bove.

If it works well, hopefully they will spin off additional projects, and the irony that these indigenous groups will be the lower mainland's largely landlord is actually kinda great, assuming they use the revenues to continue to improve the quality of life for their own people's and communities. More power to em!

NDP proposing to expand the program noted above to more developments:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-ndp-pledges-to-help-middle-income-homebuyers-with-40-of-financing-1.7051488

It's... not nothing?

Posted by: Kenny

NDP proposing to expand the program noted above to more developments:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-ndp-pledges-to-help-middle-income-homebuyers-with-40-of-financing-1.7051488

It's... not nothing?

This and the lowering interest rates sure will help the price of houses keep going up...yay?

Posted by: Fast-Orange

Posted by: Kenny

NDP proposing to expand the program noted above to more developments:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-ndp-pledges-to-help-middle-income-homebuyers-with-40-of-financing-1.7051488

It's... not nothing?

This and the lowering interest rates sure will help the price of houses keep going up...yay?

Interest rates and the stupid plan for 30 year mortgages don't help, totally agree there. 

I don't see this as falling into the same category though, because the program only applies to first time buyers and has restrictions as far as household income goes. The repayment structure also discourages purchase-for-investment type of transactions. 

The reason I like this is because it hopefully actually reduces the barrier for entry for people who actually need to buy housing to actually live in. If anything, housing that does not meet the requirements for this program will not be competitive within that demographic and will need to be priced lower. What am I missing?

Posted by: Kenny

Posted by: Fast-Orange

Posted by: Kenny

NDP proposing to expand the program noted above to more developments:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-ndp-pledges-to-help-middle-income-homebuyers-with-40-of-financing-1.7051488

It's... not nothing?

This and the lowering interest rates sure will help the price of houses keep going up...yay?

Interest rates and the stupid plan for 30 year mortgages don't help, totally agree there. 

I don't see this as falling into the same category though, because the program only applies to first time buyers and has restrictions as far as household income goes. The repayment structure also discourages purchase-for-investment type of transactions. 

The reason I like this is because it hopefully actually reduces the barrier for entry for people who actually need to buy housing to actually live in. If anything, housing that does not meet the requirements for this program will not be competitive within that demographic and will need to be priced lower. What am I missing?

You realize the province will own 40% of your property.  Government ownership of some form has a word.....communism came up...  Really?  

If you can't afford to live somewhere:  move.  To somewhere more affordable.  Your need to live in Vancouver for the trails, beauty, whatever.....give it up.  Living ANYWHERE is not a right.  You live where you can afford.  If you can't, move.  I'd loved to live in NV where I was raised but can't afford it.  I settled on Langley and it is not ideal but realistic.  But hey, rent in LV and find out 20 years later you have no savings, equity or options.  Was it worth it?

Posted by: Polymath

You realize the province will own 40% of your property.  Government ownership of some form has a word.....communism came up...  Really?  

If you can't afford to live somewhere:  move.  To somewhere more affordable.  Your need to live in Vancouver for the trails, beauty, whatever.....give it up.  Living ANYWHERE is not a right.  You live where you can afford.  If you can't, move.  I'd loved to live in NV where I was raised but can't afford it.  I settled on Langley and it is not ideal but realistic.  But hey, rent in LV and find out 20 years later you have no savings, equity or options.  Was it worth it?

Please do a tad bit of research on the definition of Communism, as I did when I thought you have it…incorrectly defined. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

I believe your referring to State Capitalism, where the man owns everything.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

Otherwise, I tend to agree.  

Property ownership is supply and demand in a Capitalist society.  If you can’t afford it, get a higher paying job for longer time trading your life for money to afford your picket fence, or else move to what can be afforded with your human capital. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_capital

Posted by: Polymath

Posted by: Kenny

Posted by: Fast-Orange

Posted by: Kenny

NDP proposing to expand the program noted above to more developments:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-ndp-pledges-to-help-middle-income-homebuyers-with-40-of-financing-1.7051488

It's... not nothing?

This and the lowering interest rates sure will help the price of houses keep going up...yay?

Interest rates and the stupid plan for 30 year mortgages don't help, totally agree there.

I don't see this as falling into the same category though, because the program only applies to first time buyers and has restrictions as far as household income goes. The repayment structure also discourages purchase-for-investment type of transactions.

The reason I like this is because it hopefully actually reduces the barrier for entry for people who actually need to buy housing to actually live in. If anything, housing that does not meet the requirements for this program will not be competitive within that demographic and will need to be priced lower. What am I missing?

You realize the province will own 40% of your property. Government ownership of some form has a word.....communism came up... Really?

If you can't afford to live somewhere: move. To somewhere more affordable. Your need to live in Vancouver for the trails, beauty, whatever.....give it up. Living ANYWHERE is not a right. You live where you can afford. If you can't, move. I'd loved to live in NV where I was raised but can't afford it. I settled on Langley and it is not ideal but realistic. But hey, rent in LV and find out 20 years later you have no savings, equity or options. Was it worth it?

I could see the communism reference, I guess it's sorta communist-adjacent. Haha.

I mean, it's just an option though, specifically for people who can't get into the market.

You can still buy a house the old fashioned way, or move, like you say. Of course. But it's an option.

If a person would rather stay living here and own 60% of a house, rather than own 0% and rent, or move, then why not. If the alternative is moving or owning 100% of nothing.

If I was a first time home buyer I'd be interested I think, if the "if you can't afford it, move" approach was my only other option.

Rent vs own vs investing: 

https://boomerandecho.com/weekend-reading-renting-vs-buying-edition/

Predictably, criticism included someone who bought a house for $40,000 in 1974 and sold it for $2M. But while the dollar amount sounds impressive, it’s an 8% annualized return before factoring in all the phantom costs that went into owning that home for 50 years (namely maintenance and transaction costs). Meanwhile, the TSX returned 9.36% annualized during that time, and the S&P 500 returned 12.09% per year.

Posted by: heckler

Rent vs own vs investing:

https://boomerandecho.com/weekend-reading-renting-vs-buying-edition/

Predictably, criticism included someone who bought a house for $40,000 in 1974 and sold it for $2M. But while the dollar amount sounds impressive, it’s an 8% annualized return before factoring in all the phantom costs that went into owning that home for 50 years (namely maintenance and transaction costs). Meanwhile, the TSX returned 9.36% annualized during that time, and the S&P 500 returned 12.09% per year.

As you know I'm sure, housing is not all about ROI, though. Obviously it's a big expense and worth managing as best you can, but there's more to the decision of rent vs buy than the 50 year end result.

For example, I think the rent and invest approach is much easier without kids. We have so many friends our age with kids our age (elementary school) that have so much stress and so much heartache surrounding the instability of renting and renting long term only for the owners to sell the house and then having no choice but to figure out somewhere else to live with 3 young kids, the older ones of which that house is really their home.

Some people find really long term rentals, and some people aren't bothered by that, but for some people, not having that type of stress has a certain value.

It's housing, not just an investment. That's just one example, but suffice to say there are intangibles whose value varies from person to person and that can't be discounted, that factor into these decisions.

Ah the American dream.  Three kids and a picket fence.  

Procreation is also compounding growth, increasing housing demand, increasing planetary demand.

Posted by: heckler

Ah the American dream.  Three kids and a picket fence.  

Procreation is also compounding growth, increasing housing demand, increasing planetary demand.

Also the absolute worst financial decision you can ever make, believe me. I try not to judge. Myself or others. Everyone's situation is different. 

Just like rent vs buy, there are intangibles whose value varies depending on the individual. 

I think converting the city to a collection of childless renters is an interesting thought exercise but maybe not super practical (I'm being obtuse I know that's not quite what you're saying, probably) haha.