Real estate in Calgary - another bubble?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Why wouldn’t they if they spent their life paying for it? They are proud of the home and have space for company and whoever to come over they want. No one’s jealousy of their living arrangement should effect their retirement.

Being forced to live in a condo is worse than death for some.

The primary reason condo prices have remained flat is the sheer number of them and condo fees itself.

affect

[Yoho]

Some sobering stats.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1667868962388885505

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Why wouldn’t they if they spent their life paying for it? They are proud of the home and have space for company and whoever to come over they want. No one’s jealousy of their living arrangement should effect their retirement.

Being forced to live in a condo is worse than death for some.

The primary reason condo prices have remained flat is the sheer number of them and condo fees itself.

I'm all for them keeping the property, assuming they are okay vastly increased taxes to support the infrastructure required to support that property. As we move away from a system where the majority of hard working individuals can afford a detached home, we should be increasing property taxes accordingly. The idea of a working poor supporting the roads, sewer/water systems, power infrastructure, etc.. for detached housing owned by an elite is totally absurd and disgusting.

We should increase property taxes, and if you can't afford those taxes, it's time to sell.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Some sobering stats.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1667868962388885505

Honestly, those stats had the opposite effect for me. The fact that property prices in Canada only need to drop 9% to match the OECD average for Price-to-Income is kind of suprising. I thought we were way further out of whack from comparable countries.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by blankall

I'm all for them keeping the property, assuming they are okay vastly increased taxes to support the infrastructure required to support that property. As we move away from a system where the majority of hard working individuals can afford a detached home, we should be increasing property taxes accordingly. The idea of a working poor supporting the roads, sewer/water systems, power infrastructure, etc.. for detached housing owned by an elite is totally absurd and disgusting.

We should increase property taxes, and if you can't afford those taxes, it's time to sell.

“Elite” who’s crime is paying off their house.

Don’t worry that will never happen.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Honestly, those stats had the opposite effect for me. The fact that property prices in Canada only need to drop 9% to match the OECD average for Price-to-Income is kind of suprising. I thought we were way further out of whack from comparable countries.

Yeah we are in good shape everything he fine.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Honestly, those stats had the opposite effect for me. The fact that property prices in Canada only need to drop 9% to match the OECD average for Price-to-Income is kind of suprising. I thought we were way further out of whack from comparable countries.

Thats a terrible tweet. For one thing, that chart was originally displayed by Rosenberg in a Financial Post article back in 2021, so the data is out of date.

Secondly, the data isn't absolute levels. While it isn't totally clear I think each country is normalized to its own 2015 level for the same factor. So it isn't saying that Canada's price to income is 9% higher than the global average, it's saying that Canada's price to income increased by 9% more than the global average from 2015 to 2021. Not a terribly useful statistic, imo.

Link to original article below.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/financi...d6ac9d2d1/amp/

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Yoho

“Elite” who’s crime is paying off their house.

Don’t worry that will never happen.

Paying off their houses...and then manipulating the economic system for the next 30-40 year to ensure the issue of increased property prices gets kicked down the road until young families can't afford proper housing...and then those young families should also be paying extra taxes for services they no longer benefit from.

When the type of people who can own homes changes, so should the tax scheme.

It's not a crime/punishment thing. It's about having people who actually consume the services pay for them.

And yes, it is happening. Most cities are raising their property taxes substantially. A trend that will continue.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

Paying off their houses...and then manipulating the economic system for the next 30-40 year to ensure the issue of increased property prices gets kicked down the road until young families can't afford proper housing...and then those young families should also be paying extra taxes for services they no longer benefit from.

When the type of people who can own homes changes, so should the tax scheme.

It's not a crime/punishment thing. It's about having people who actually consume the services pay for them.

And yes, it is happening. Most cities are raising their property taxes substantially. A trend that will continue.

But doesn't that just fall into the "I don't have kids so I shouldn't have to pay the education portion of property taxes" type of discussion?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

But doesn't that just fall into the "I don't have kids so I shouldn't have to pay the education portion of property taxes" type of discussion?

Are kids not citizens and people too? These are the people who will grow up and do all the work when you are too old to. The economy needs to educate these people to ensure the economy is strong in the future.

Treating children like they are just property of the parent is ridiculous.

Having older people, who are no longer working, just sit there consuming vast resources is the opposite of educating children. You're talking about investing in people for the future vs. inhibiting investing in people for the future.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by blankall

Paying off their houses...and then manipulating the economic system for the next 30-40 year to ensure the issue of increased property prices gets kicked down the road until young families can't afford proper housing...and then those young families should also be paying extra taxes for services they no longer benefit from.

When the type of people who can own homes changes, so should the tax scheme.

It's not a crime/punishment thing. It's about having people who actually consume the services pay for them.

And yes, it is happening. Most cities are raising their property taxes substantially. A trend that will continue.

What, property taxes go up?

“Manipulating”

The people that own houses outright are not usually hand to mouth, they have no mortgage,they will outlast you, your mortgage, condo fees, and property taxes for a long time.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I mean... I saved money, bought in late 2016, found a good deal, paid my mortgage, made a long-term bet on a renewal, and am finally about to be able to reap the benefits of all the work it's taken to get me to that point... and now Blankall is saying that the moment my head's getting above the water he wants the system to change to step on my head and put me right back under?

Boomers sitting in their yards with their free and clear titles aren't the only ones opposed to that sort of change.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

This doesn't seem to be the reality. More often than not, it seems you get two aging people sitting on a 2000 sq. ft. house with a bunch of unused bedrooms spending their retirement putzing in the yard.

From what I have heard and know, most aging couples who are empty nesters refuse to move because they can afford it, have lots of emotional ties to the house and don't want the headache of packing and moving. Some also want lots of space to host their grand children.

Not all decisions are made from a financial heavy POV.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1668075649981087745

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Yoho

What, property taxes go up?

“Manipulating”

The people that own houses outright are not usually hand to mouth, they have no mortgage,they will outlast you, your mortgage, condo fees, and property taxes for a long time.

Successive governments kicked the housing cost issue down the road. The governments have also set up all sorts of red tape and zoning laws to prohibit new builds, creating artificial scarcity in the country with the most open space.

That's find if some people want to hold onto their property past the point they need it, but they should pay - for the associated costs - to do so. Roads aren't free. Sewer systems aren't free.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by blankall

Successive governments kicked the housing cost issue down the road. The governments have also set up all sorts of red tape and zoning laws to prohibit new builds, creating artificial scarcity in the country with the most open space.

That's find if some people want to hold onto their property past the point they need it, but they should pay - for the associated costs - to do so. Roads aren't free. Sewer systems aren't free.

They are, in property taxes. Are you suggesting that people should pay more just to stay in the house that they paid for? That's ridiculous.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by nik-

They are, in property taxes. Are you suggesting that people should pay more just to stay in the house that they paid for? That's ridiculous.

Sure, once it's "past the point they need it", a decision made by a council of deciders will transition you to a less space-squatting abode.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by nik-

They are, in property taxes. Are you suggesting that people should pay more just to stay in the house that they paid for? That's ridiculous.

I get 50' of sidewalk, road and maintained alley to let people move around my hunk of land, dedicated sewer and water hook-ups, yet the guy down the street in the fancy penthouse condo in the 100 unit building pays more in property tax than me.

Isn't that a bit ridiculous?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by nik-

They are, in property taxes. Are you suggesting that people should pay more just to stay in the house that they paid for? That's ridiculous.

As most working young adults can no longer buy detached homes, the economic scheme in which we support the associated costs with those detached properties needs to change. Property taxes are not high enough.

Sure they paid for the houses....now what about the ongoing costs for maintenance of the infrastructure required to have that house. Made sense when most working people were going to have houses to pay those expenses from income. Now that they are not going to own houses, what exactly are they paying income taxes for?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

As most working young adults can no longer buy detached homes, the economic scheme in which we support the associated costs with those detached properties needs to change. Property taxes are not high enough.

Sure they paid for the houses....now what about the ongoing costs for maintenance of the infrastructure required to have that house. Made sense when most working people were going to have houses to pay those expenses from income. Now that they are not going to own houses, what exactly are they paying income taxes for?

Aren't all city services covered by property taxes(other than provincial gifts to cities?) Aren't we already paying for these services?