New posts

The Decline of Vancouver.

Oct. 19, 2021, 12:07 p.m.
Posts: 1757
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Stuminator

Holy smokes, this guy tells it like it is! Gotta hand it to him for being honest & speaking his mind. He tried to run a legit business & got shit on (literally).

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-349038-3-.htm#349038

Yeah, he tells a fair job of what's happening and it sucks. Although, he has no idea why. When he makes a comment like; "The homeless need to leave. Period." he doesn't realize that he is part of the problem. Comments like that may come from frustration and anger, but they also come from privilege and entitlement. What's happening in the DTES is not a "them" problem, it's a medical problem, it's a social problem and it's a societal problem. We are all responsible.

Oct. 19, 2021, 12:12 p.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Posted by: syncro

From the Globe and Mail

Wealth a bigger factor than income in Vancouver home sales, new study suggests
Rachelle Younglai
Published 1 day ago
Updated October 10, 2021

Definitely some super weird stats in that article. How the heck is someone who makes $29,800 buying a $499,000 condo? $29.8k is less than minimum wage and is just over $2k a month after-tax. $2k a month is barely enough to pay for groceries and the most basic living expenses (phone, internet, transportation, etc.) before even considering any housing costs.

Vancouver is a very weird place in terms of wealth/income vs. other places from my experience. I grew up in Eastern Canada (both large and small cities) and there you would primarily see people in high income jobs living in the expensive neighborhood's (as you would expect). However, Vancouver is a completely different story in that regard. Here there seems to be barely any connection between income (aka. having a good job) and wealth. I've come across tons of people with very mediocre average Joe jobs that happen to live in $1.5-4M houses and I also see a lot of people on the other end of the spectrum - people with high earning jobs that either rent or own a small condo. So much seems to depend on whether you come from a rich family or not. Salary alone won't get you too far here unless you are on the very extreme high end of the spectrum - and if you are fortunate enough to have a very high paying job, do you really want to spend your hard earned money on a $2M old/small/crappy house? Much easier to justify purchasing something like that when you get the $$ for free from family and didn't have to earn it yourself.

Vancouver seems to be a city full of rich kids. And I think the reason for that is because you pretty much need to be a rich kid to live comfortably here from a financial perspective.


 Last edited by: Bull_Dozer on Oct. 19, 2021, 12:18 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Oct. 19, 2021, 12:30 p.m.
Posts: 1757
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

Posted by: syncro

From the Globe and Mail

Wealth a bigger factor than income in Vancouver home sales, new study suggests
Rachelle Younglai
Published 1 day ago
Updated October 10, 2021

Definitely some super weird stats in that article. How the heck is someone who makes $29,800 buying a $499,000 condo? $29.8k is less than minimum wage and is just over $2k a month after-tax. $2k a month is barely enough to pay for groceries and the most basic living expenses (phone, internet, transportation, etc.) before even considering any housing costs.

Vancouver is a very weird place in terms of wealth/income vs. other places from my experience. I grew up in Eastern Canada (both large and small cities) and there you would primarily see people in high income jobs living in the expensive neighborhood's (as you would expect). However, Vancouver is a completely different story in that regard. Here there seems to be barely any connection between income (aka. having a good job) and wealth. I've come across tons of people with very mediocre average Joe jobs that happen to live in $1.5-4M houses and I also see a lot of people on the other end of the spectrum - people with high earning jobs that either rent or own a small condo. So much seems to depend on whether you come from a rich family or not. Salary alone won't get you too far here unless you are on the very extreme high end of the spectrum - and if you are fortunate enough to have a very high paying job, do you really want to spend your hard earned money on a $2M old/small/crappy house? Much easier to justify purchasing something like that when you get the $$ for free from family and didn't have to earn it yourself.

Vancouver seems to be a city full of rich kids. And I think the reason for that is because you pretty much need to be a rich kid to live comfortably here from a financial perspective.

This has been going on in Vancouver for Decades - easily back to mid 90's - and comes down to Satellite Families. People/families live here while dad runs the family business off shore and pays the bills. It's how someone lists their occupation as sutdent or homemaker and has a house in a wealthy neighbourhood like Shaughnessy, Oakridge, Granville, etc. Other anecdotal evidence is people taking advantage of the CoV's leisure access pass which is meant for low income persons/families and requires proof (NOA) of income status yet they're address is listed in an expensive neighbourhood and they drive expensive cars. There are simply too many loopholes for people to hide their incomes or sources of income. The problem is that the statistics that are kept do not allow us to fully understand the scale of the problem or figure out ways to deal with it. Unfortunately at this point it's been happening for so long that I don't know if there's any way of making enough changes to fix the income/housing price inequity that exists here.

Oct. 19, 2021, 12:40 p.m.
Posts: 6017
Joined: April 10, 2005

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Stuminator

Holy smokes, this guy tells it like it is! Gotta hand it to him for being honest & speaking his mind. He tried to run a legit business & got shit on (literally).

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-349038-3-.htm#349038

Yeah, he tells a fair job of what's happening and it sucks. Although, he has no idea why. When he makes a comment like; "The homeless need to leave. Period." he doesn't realize that he is part of the problem. Comments like that may come from frustration and anger, but they also come from privilege and entitlement. What's happening in the DTES is not a "them" problem, it's a medical problem, it's a social problem and it's a societal problem. We are all responsible.

I don't understand how it's his fault. Dude is trying to run a business legit. He faces obstacles while running that business, so many that he finally has to throw in the towel. I don't see how he is privileged or entitled. We need people like him, small business owners who are willing to take a risk to make a buck. He's a taxpayer, which is more than can be said for the freaks he had to deal with. I don't know the solution for dealing with the homeless & drug freaks but there has to be one. Anyone who has a job, goes to work, pays taxes, obeys the law & stays outta trouble is not part of the problem. They are providing a tax base from which comes money (funding) to deal with issues like the ones he faced.

Oct. 19, 2021, 1:25 p.m.
Posts: 1757
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Stuminator

I don't understand how it's his fault. Dude is trying to run a business legit. He faces obstacles while running that business, so many that he finally has to throw in the towel. I don't see how he is privileged or entitled. We need people like him, small business owners who are willing to take a risk to make a buck. He's a taxpayer, which is more than can be said for the freaks he had to deal with. I don't know the solution for dealing with the homeless & drug freaks but there has to be one. Anyone who has a job, goes to work, pays taxes, obeys the law & stays outta trouble is not part of the problem. They are providing a tax base from which comes money (funding) to deal with issues like the ones he faced.

The attitude of "I don't want those people here" is where part of the problem lies - it's not all of it tho for sure. Even though I agree with some of what you're saying in terms of needing small business owner, I think you're looking at the issue through too narrow a lens.  Consider that in addition to what I said up there, this is also a political issue - wherein politicians are only willing to do so much, because they know that there will be backlash from the people who do vote. "Solving" the DTES is something that will take years of commitment, resources and funding, and not just in the DTES. It means changing social welfare programs, it means changing the school system, it means changing healthcare and it has to happen on a national scale too. If you really want the simple answer it comes down to funding and people willing to do the work. The attitudes expressed by that restaurant owner are one of someone not willing to do what's necessary - it's not his problem to fix it's somebody else's. As long as enough people have the attitude that it's not my problem to deal with the problem won't get dealt with.

Oct. 19, 2021, 3:18 p.m.
Posts: 1302
Joined: March 18, 2017

REsponse to my post and Chups reply 2 pages back - 

Difference is HSBC charges a fee of ~18% to launder moneys of ill-gotten gains. BCLC does the same free of charge.  

It's racist to say that families/groups/companies are using CDN RE as safety deposit boxes.  

Carrying costs of CDN RE is so low it's comical.  Also perfect rinse device for ill-gotten moneys. 

Millionaire Immigrant Investment program messed up CDN RE market all for ~$13 billion interest free loans over its existence.

Happy that my copy of Sam Coppers "Willful Blindness" is arriving soon; before it's banned by LPC and CPC.

Oct. 19, 2021, 3:58 p.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Posted by: Endur-Bro

Carrying costs of CDN RE is so low it's comical.  

That's why it drives me crazy when someone's property taxes goes up like $500/year and they complain about it being so unfair, ignoring the fact that our property taxes (as a % of home value) are extremely low. And also ignoring the fact that their property probably increased in value by more than $100k in the past year.

Oct. 19, 2021, 4:08 p.m.
Posts: 14411
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

Posted by: Endur-Bro

Carrying costs of CDN RE is so low it's comical.

That's why it drives me crazy when someone's property taxes goes up like $500/year and they complain about it being so unfair, ignoring the fact that our property taxes (as a % of home value) are extremely low. And also ignoring the fact that their property probably increased in value by more than $100k in the past year.

For sure. Should be easy for that homeowner to sell off a 500$ piece of the 100K appreciation to cover that bill. Also ignoring that the home owner isn't getting any additional benefit from that tax bill.


 Last edited by: Couch_Surfer on Oct. 19, 2021, 4:46 p.m., edited 2 times in total.
Oct. 20, 2021, 9:23 a.m.
Posts: 76
Joined: May 11, 2017

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

For sure. Should be easy for that homeowner to sell off a 500$ piece of the 100K appreciation to cover that bill. Also ignoring that the home owner isn't getting any additional benefit from that tax bill.

Haha. This. 

As a mortgage owner I am happy to have seen my exposure drop due to increased equity but it by no means changes disposable income. The debt to house value is just closer to "normal" levels for other parts of the world I have lived….

Oct. 20, 2021, 10:24 a.m.
Posts: 16696
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

Posted by: Endur-Bro

Carrying costs of CDN RE is so low it's comical.

That's why it drives me crazy when someone's property taxes goes up like $500/year and they complain about it being so unfair, ignoring the fact that our property taxes (as a % of home value) are extremely low. And also ignoring the fact that their property probably increased in value by more than $100k in the past year.

For sure. Should be easy for that homeowner to sell off a 500$ piece of the 100K appreciation to cover that bill. Also ignoring that the home owner isn't getting any additional benefit from that tax bill.

We're getting a $500 million wastewater treatment plant that's gonna cost a billion - and construction has stopped and the general contractor is gonna be in court with Metro Van for years and it'll be minimum 3 years late before completion.

So there's that.

Oct. 20, 2021, 10:33 a.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Not sure if I am reading your posts correctly - but I think you guys saying that it is BS when your property taxes go up $500 despite the fact that your house also went up in value $100k on the basis that you have no way of affording the extra tax? If your net worth has gone up $100k and you supposedly can't afford another $500 of property taxes then you aren't very financially sophisticated. And are people that own detached houses really living paycheque to paycheque? Pretty sure they wouldn't qualify for the mortgage if that were the case. And if they are living paycheque to paycheque, they should sell the house, pocket the very significant amount of cash (gain is earned tax free) and then buy a cheaper place.

Property taxes are ridiculously low. You know what gets taxed way more than your house? Employment income. Kind of depressing to think that someone who makes $100k but rents pays $25k in income tax but the "housewife" or "student" homeowner only pays a few thousand bucks of property tax a year despite having a six-figure tax-free (unrealized) gain on the value of their house. And who consumes more social services (and other government related spending) - the guy living in a 1 bedroom apartment or the person living in the detached house...


 Last edited by: Bull_Dozer on Oct. 20, 2021, 10:35 a.m., edited 2 times in total.
Oct. 20, 2021, 10:52 a.m.
Posts: 15170
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

yes ^^^ lots of people live paycheck to paycheck

Oct. 20, 2021, 11:04 a.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Posted by: XXX_er

yes ^^^ lots of people live paycheck to paycheck

The same people who own a detached house in Vancouver...?

Oct. 20, 2021, 11:24 a.m.
Posts: 15170
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

sure, some people are living in a house with almost no furniture inside, its all a show and its always been like that

I've also been in new big houses in west van that didnt have a lot of furniture, they might have been renting who knows ?

a couple of nice cars in the garage, definatley running a business out of it cuz I'm there to fix office equipment, I visited  typwriters living all over WV/ NV back in the day when there were typwriters

Oct. 20, 2021, 12:56 p.m.
Posts: 14411
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

Not sure if I am reading your posts correctly - but I think you guys saying that it is BS when your property taxes go up $500 despite the fact that your house also went up in value $100k on the basis that you have no way of affording the extra tax? If your net worth has gone up $100k and you supposedly can't afford another $500 of property taxes then you aren't very financially sophisticated. And are people that own detached houses really living paycheque to paycheque? Pretty sure they wouldn't qualify for the mortgage if that were the case. And if they are living paycheque to paycheque, they should sell the house, pocket the very significant amount of cash (gain is earned tax free) and then buy a cheaper place.

Property taxes are ridiculously low. You know what gets taxed way more than your house? Employment income. Kind of depressing to think that someone who makes $100k but rents pays $25k in income tax but the "housewife" or "student" homeowner only pays a few thousand bucks of property tax a year despite having a six-figure tax-free (unrealized) gain on the value of their house. And who consumes more social services (and other government related spending) - the guy living in a 1 bedroom apartment or the person living in the detached house...

Why are we conflating property taxes with asset valuation? City does it because it’s an easy way to justify a cash increase, but property taxes are meant to fund local services. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/annual-property-tax There is a property transfer tax that is built around the asset sale. That one stings.

Theoretically, if the city or district’s service level has remained static, then regardless of the home owners net worth, property tax shouldn’t be a punitive form of taxation based on that net worth increase. But KenN is right, homeowners got a fancy new lawsuit for their tax hit this year. That’s neat I guess.

Now, if you’re wanting property tax to act as a form of wealth tax, I’d suggest that’s a different topic and we’d have to look at total net worth (ALL assets and liabilities) and go at it holistically and in progressive structure. That’s still gonna screw over the fixed income pensioner living in a 3M$ tear down in Kits that she bought in 1965, but she can defer that tax payment, so probably all good.


 Last edited by: Couch_Surfer on Oct. 20, 2021, 1:07 p.m., edited 5 times in total.

Forum jump: