this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
82 points (90.2% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
156 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In case anyone still wants to somehow debate whether the Liberals will deliver affordable housing.

“Housing needs to retain its value,” Mr. Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.”

(page 2) 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

I'd say that would be fine in theory, if "retain its value" meant that housing would follow very closely but tailing local inflation. That won't happen though. As long as "housing needs to retain its value" ideology runs the country, housing will be viewed as an investment and scarcity will cause it to push inflation upwards. Even trying really hard to quell these prices it might beat inflation, and even if it were a success it would take decades of nominal-growth with negative-real-returns to bring those prices to parity with incomes.

So no, even if "technically maybe?" the answer is still no.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago

Fuck. The. Investor. Class.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago (4 children)

The fundamental issue with housing as an investment is that it is a monolithic and non-fluid vehicle, which makes it worse when leverage comes into play. Whereas stocks can be purchased/sold at any time in an instant and have fractional costs (sometimes as cheap as 10$ per stock), houses are not, and fast fluctuations in prices could heavily impact your ability to realize your gains. So it is, on that aspect, a terrible investment.

For large companies owning thousands of units, this is not an issue since they are spreading the risks across the units (by buying diversely located units of all types). They can also quickly execute purchases and sales since they are in that exact business.

So the argument that houses are ways to pass down wealth is misguided: they are terrible ways to pass down wealth, and parents should leave a trust fund or safe investments rather than a house if their goal is to build generational wealth - housing should be passed down for personal reasons.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 108 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)

Housing CANNOT be an investment, and I say this as a homeowner whose house value has nearly tripled since I bought it. I bought a house simply because I didn't want to rent for the rest of my life.

It's obviously absurd to claim to want affordable housing and refuse to cause prices to go down. If housing is an "investment" then you are by definition fucking over all subsequent homebuyers. Everybody needs a place to live.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I don't get what the point is except for investors.

People using it as a "retirement holdings" might try to sell and then find they can't afford to live anywhere in retirement.

People saving property to leave an inheritance have kids waiting for their parents to die so they can afford a home to own.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

then find they can’t afford to live anywhere in retirement.

I think the plausible circumstance is them selling and moving out of Canada, really it's the logical thing to do when you destroy the eco system you inhabit for gains. Then the money also gets spent out of Canada, we might spend less on healthcare cost for the elderly but I could see the math working out to be a net loss.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think the plausible circumstance is them selling and moving out of Canada

Or moving to SK

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Or moving to SK

Same thing. (Or was that the joke?)

Lifelong SK resident.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Actually, w.r.t. to retirement savings it can be valuable as a lot of the better assisted living arrangements will require an upfront payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars for unexpected expenses along with a regular rent expenditure.

This is arguably an awful way to finance elder care and doesn't justify making housing unaffordable but that stored value is useful if you think you'll need assisted living.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ah, that's fair. I didn't consider assisted living!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

Hey, no worries... I've been getting deep in the weeds on this one as my mom is in her eighties and trying to decide how to allocate her savings for her EOL.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 5 months ago

Absolutely fucking wrong. The immense value tied up in housing is killing the economy...

So written, a condo owner whose property value went up 50% over the past five years.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›