[blankall]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

I don't think we're going to agree on much, if you don't think increasing density is a solution. We need to look more like London, England, and less like Calgary, in order to get more people into the city. People want to live here, for a multitude of reasons. If you don't increase the density, and give them increased transit to get around town, the price continue to rise. You are right that it's like a first year economics situation, but you want to remove supply from that equation? That, and the terrible Globe article you quoted, assume the rising costs will disappear without increasing supply doesn't make sense. I read it when it came out, and it's been easily debunked.

Too many people are putting the blame on developers, Rennie, and Robertson. Let's suppose the NPA gets in power, and stifles developers from building condos. People still want to move here. How will this lower prices? SFHs continue to decrease, as they are converted to mult-unit dwellings. Since this decreases the amount of supply, the prices will continue to go up for land. That's, once again, first year economics.

I think the bigger problem in Vancouver is the median wage. London, England is expensive to live, but the wages are much higher. The vast majority of people there live in multi-unit housing. There is more density, and places are smaller. This is what Vancouver needs to strive for, both in terms of wages, and accommodations.

I'm not saying there isn't illegal foreign money coming to Vancouver. I am saying that the figures being portrayed in the media are vast hyperbole. There was a new building that was reported to have 85% foreign ownership. As someone who got to see the purchaser list, I can tell you it is false. It was about 7%. Many people are blaming the Chinese for buying up all the properties. It's inherently racist to say that. I could go on about that for pages on end, but the simple fact is just because someone is Chinese, doesn't mean they are bringing in illegal cash. Even the Andy Yan paper was taken by the media to mean all buyers are foreigners, when that wasn't what actually happened, or was said by Yan.

I do enjoy the bubble talk. People act like it's new and it's the first time Vancouver's had one. You can literally find over 30 years of articles on it, but yeah, you're definitely right about it this time, people.

Even if it was 7%, i think you are vastly underestimating the impact of 7% ownership on a real estate market.

Also how did you judge who was and who wasn't a foreign buyer? Did you look for ethnic names? Addresses? Occupation? Where money was being transferred from. None of those stats would tell you anything. A major issue is foreign buyers disguising purchases via planted relatives. You do know that China is a communist country. No one is supposed to be taking the amounts of money these guys are taking out. So they are going to go to great lengths to launder and disguise the money, yet you know something that the Chinese government doesn't?

As for bubble talk, when Vancouver is compared with places like San Francisco and NYC, which have experienced stalls and drops, Vancouver just seems bizarre. Just up and up.

The issue is basically that Canada has almost no restrictions to foreign ownership. This makes Canada a very easy target. Australia has restrictions on foreign ownership of new properties. Most US states force foreign owners to hire a local management company. Canada has nothing, and we're a rarity in the world.