COVID and the housing market

[Mad Mike]

I get that they are in a tough situation but at some point they need to pull their heads out of their *****. One income (odsp), two adults, three kids (two teenagers and a five year old with severe brain damage) and two pets. Can't possibly live in one room, need elevator, bungalow, won't give up pets, won't consider moving further away from city to get cheaper rent, won't leave 14 year old to take care of family while one works, etc I'm surprised they aren't starving to be honest. Odsp normally pays crap.

'This is not a money issue. This is a housing issue'

Since May 1, 2021 the Wrights have been one of many homeless families in Kingston.

www.thewhig.com

I’ve seen countless situations like this.

ODSP would be somewhere around $28000 ($1200/mo for housing support and $990 for basic needs), $15000 for Child benefit. Approx $43k in tax free govt assistance cash plus a dental and prescription drug plan.

There isnt much incentive for the husband to work as many of those benefits are tied to income. Most mechanics can pick up a lot of cash doing driveway jobs.

 

[Mad Mike]

One just went near me in one day. Similar house, no pool, probably slightly worse lot for >500 more than us 2.5 years ago. Craziness. In the last six years, the neighbourhood is about 200-300% up. If you could sell and move far away (join @Mad Mike in Porcupine?) it is getting close to retirement amounts of money. If you want to stay in the area, it is just a shell game and you need to keep working forever to pay down a mortgage.

Mad Mike isn’t in Porcupine full time yet. Not done watching the local prices in Markham run up.

60x100 building lots just climbed over $1m in Markham. In Porc you can still get a city lot for $50k, however they too are seeing a spike — I bought 3 adjacent lots in Jul 2020 for $45k ($15k/lot) - prices tripled in 1 year.

 

[jc100]

I get that they are in a tough situation but at some point they need to pull their heads out of their *****. One income (odsp), two adults, three kids (two teenagers and a five year old with severe brain damage) and two pets. Can't possibly live in one room, need elevator, bungalow, won't give up pets, won't consider moving further away from city to get cheaper rent, won't leave 14 year old to take care of family while one works, etc I'm surprised they aren't starving to be honest. Odsp normally pays crap.

'This is not a money issue. This is a housing issue'

Since May 1, 2021 the Wrights have been one of many homeless families in Kingston.

www.thewhig.com

Don’t have to go too far outside town for reasonable but it depends on what facilities you want nearby. Want to walk to the store…maybe. Want to walk to downtown..,possibly not. That family has been pigeonholed in a city with one of the lowest vacancy rates around. There’s hardly any affordable housing let alone any that are handicap accessible. This city caves to the developers every time. What they should do is say “OK, you can build your waterfront condo right downtown but in exchange you have to build affordable housing at a rate of 1:10 for each swanky unit“ or something. Right now in downtown Kingston they are advertising condos in the heart of the “vibrant downtown”. What they don’t tell you is that they are built in what used to be the cinema, a large bookstore with a great cafe, a bar, things that did actually make the downtown vibrant. Basically, if they carry on like that the only other thing you’ll have around you are more condos built by greedy mofos.

 

[nobbie48]

Don’t have to go too far outside town for reasonable but it depends on what facilities you want nearby. Want to walk to the store…maybe. Want to walk to downtown..,possibly not. That family has been pigeonholed in a city with one of the lowest vacancy rates around. There’s hardly any affordable housing let alone any that are handicap accessible. This city caves to the developers every time. What they should do is say “OK, you can build your waterfront condo right downtown but in exchange you have to build affordable housing at a rate of 1:10 for each swanky unit“ or something. Right now in downtown Kingston they are advertising condos in the heart of the “vibrant downtown”. What they don’t tell you is that they are built in what used to be the cinema, a large bookstore with a great cafe, a bar, things that did actually make the downtown vibrant. Basically, if they carry on like that the only other thing you’ll have around you are more condos built by greedy mofos.

New developments are named after what was destroyed to build them.

Re subsidizing housing, how about just raising wages so people could afford market value. Instead the public technically subsidizes the businesses paying peanuts.

 

[GreyGhost]

Re subsidizing housing, how about just raising wages so people could afford market value. Instead the public technically subsidizes the businesses paying peanuts.

Doesn't work imo. Even people making decent money are having trouble affording housing. You've got lots of people like George who seem to be working hard and hustling to try to get ahead and it is a struggle. It seems like there needs to be a huge increase in supply to keep prices affordable If you raise the minimum wage to say 60K so people can afford housing, guess what happens to rents when the entire pool is working with 60K income? Landlords get richer, people on the lower rungs of the income ladder still struggle. Flood the market with excess supply and rents stay affordable. If rents are excessively low compared to price to buy, many dwellings currently in the rental pool get relisted and become part of the ownership pool helping to keep lower end ownership in the realm of possibility

Now, what is the best way to increase the availability of rental units by a huge amount? I don't want public housing with specific buildings with cheap rent and sadly a high percentage of bad tenants. I want so much supply that anyone looking for an apartment can find one affordably as landlords are fighting to maintain high percentage of occupancy. Maybe half-price (or less) DC's for dwellings that are permanent rentals (bad idea for the investors so it probably wouldn't work)?. Gov't provides free land for permanent rentals (might work, people would cry foul that gov't was gifting expensive land to people that were already rich enough to pay to build housing)? Gov't builds owns and rents out dwellings at market minus 10% to help pull the average down (bonfire of money as gov't would spend far more than they would ever get back in rent)? Make developers build rentals and dwellings at a 1:1 ratio until the desired supply balance is achieved? I don't know how to get to my potential end point.

 

[backmarkerducati]

A lot of the pro-tenant balance of the "laws" discouraged the for-profit building of large scale for rent MDUs. There was and still is a very long time where lots of condos are getting built but not many if any 100% rental buildings of the same scale. It is a case of unforeseen outcome of policy, lets make things better for renters means that there is less available to renters and it is for some worse.

Now lots of the above condo stock is going on the market but it is at higher prices than purpose built rental properties.... In the US they are doing buildings (forced on developer) were part are condo and part rental (lower floors), with separate entrances so the condo owners don't have to mix with the "riffraff" (developers' solution to the problem), not sure that is a good solution either.

The same for areas that cracked down on basement apartments etc. It is great to protect the renters from dangerous building code situations but it also reduces the number of apartments. Not endorsing a free for all, just acknowledging the impact it has had.

 

[GreyGhost]

Now lots of the above condo stock is going on the market but it is at higher prices than purpose built rental properties.... In the US they are doing buildings (forced on developer) were part are condo and part rental (lower floors), with seperate entrances so the condo owners don't have to mix with the "riffraff", not sure that is a good solution either.

Toronto is enforcing similar rules with affordable rental units in towers. Working on buildings with that design. Being that Toronto can't get their own head out their ass, some of the affordable units are required to be three bedroom. wtf. There should be no three-bedroom rentals for less than the market rate of a bachelor. Build three bachelors in the same space. If someone wants a three bedroom, they can pay market rate for it. Affordable units are required to be rented for xx years and can then be sold off as condos. They have a separate entrance and elevator.

 

[Baggsy]

Toronto is enforcing similar rules with affordable rental units in towers. Working on buildings with that design. Being that Toronto can't get their own head out their ass, some of the affordable units are required to be three bedroom. wtf. There should be no three-bedroom rentals for less than the market rate of a bachelor. Build three bachelors in the same space. If someone wants a three bedroom, they can pay market rate for it. Affordable units are required to be rented for xx years and can then be sold off as condos. They have a separate entrance and elevator.

When we were looking years ago, paying over $1100/month for a 1 bedroom, we had a two bedroom lined up on Birchmount that was $275/month. We met the criteria, but unfortunately the super found out that my wife was in school to become the wrong type of doctor. We were told she was renting it to her son or something like that, and we ended up in Etobicoke.

 

[nobbie48]

Doesn't work imo. Even people making decent money are having trouble affording housing. You've got lots of people like George who seem to be working hard and hustling to try to get ahead and it is a struggle. It seems like there needs to be a huge increase in supply to keep prices affordable If you raise the minimum wage to say 60K so people can afford housing, guess what happens to rents when the entire pool is working with 60K income? Landlords get richer, people on the lower rungs of the income ladder still struggle. Flood the market with excess supply and rents stay affordable. If rents are excessively low compared to price to buy, many dwellings currently in the rental pool get relisted and become part of the ownership pool helping to keep lower end ownership in the realm of possibility

Now, what is the best way to increase the availability of rental units by a huge amount? I don't want public housing with specific buildings with cheap rent and sadly a high percentage of bad tenants. I want so much supply that anyone looking for an apartment can find one affordably as landlords are fighting to maintain high percentage of occupancy. Maybe half-price (or less) DC's for dwellings that are permanent rentals (bad idea for the investors so it probably wouldn't work)?. Gov't provides free land for permanent rentals (might work, people would cry foul that gov't was gifting expensive land to people that were already rich enough to pay to build housing)? Gov't builds owns and rents out dwellings at market minus 10% to help pull the average down (bonfire of money as gov't would spend far more than they would ever get back in rent)? Make developers build rentals and dwellings at a 1:1 ratio until the desired supply balance is achieved? I don't know how to get to my potential end point

The problem is a mix of transportation and centralization. There is no more land in Toronto. We have to expand out or up. Up means condos. Out means more and wider highways, more pollution and more driving stress. Up also means more tax revenue for the city. Cities can not survive on the existing tax base.

Growing out means new cities that will have the same tax problem a few decades down the road. Welcome to the GTBA, Greater Toronto Barrie Area

We may be sampling decentralization to a degree from Covid WFH. Is that enough of a sample to make judgements?

If we go the condo route how do we handle the rat cage factor with limited parks and recreation space? Survey Trinity Belwoods.

Will attitudes change in a generation?

I asked a friend who grew up in Hong Kong why the Chinese here would go to a park or beach with few people around and not space out. He answer was that in Hong Kong any open place would soon be crowded in an hour or two so it's not an issue. Can we get used to that?

Foreign money exacerbates the problem but the problem was already there.

 

[GreyGhost]

When we were looking years ago, paying over $1100/month for a 1 bedroom, we had a two bedroom lined up on Birchmount that was $275/month. We met the criteria, but unfortunately the super found out that my wife was in school to become the wrong type of doctor. We were told she was renting it to her son or something like that, and we ended up in Etobicoke.

The "friend of the people" jack layton was in a cheap rent apartment for many years. Disgusting. Find a way in and you are up many tens of thousands of dollars over your peers that arent exploiting the system.

 

[GreyGhost]

The problem is a mix of transportation and centralization. There is no more land in Toronto. We have to expand out or up. Up means condos. Out means more and wider highways, more pollution and more driving stress. Up also means more tax revenue for the city. Cities can not survive on the existing tax base.

Growing out means new cities that will have the same tax problem a few decades down the road. Welcome to the GTBA, Greater Toronto Barrie Area

We may be sampling decentralization to a degree from Covid WFH. Is that enough of a sample to make judgements?

If we go the condo route how do we handle the rat cage factor with limited parks and recreation space? Survey Trinity Belwoods.

Will attitudes change in a generation?

I asked a friend who grew up in Hong Kong why the Chinese here would go to a park or beach with few people around and not space out. He answer was that in Hong Kong any open place would soon be crowded in an hour or two so it's not an issue. Can we get used to that?

Foreign money exacerbates the problem but the problem was already there.

There is lots of underutilized land in toronto. Much of it on existing transit corridors. I saw plans for a potential 35 storey mixed use tower that replaces a few dozen surface parking spots.

 

[GreyGhost]

So gov't is trying to do something, but again, I think they are off in the rhubarb. Affordable rental project gets a loan from the feds (15M for 71 units). So far, so good. Then they start talking about the project including geothermal heating. Wtf. If people in multimillion dollar homes can't make the economics work on geothermal, there is no way the economics work out in affordable housing. Something stinks there.

Federal government provides $15M loan for rental housing project in Cobourg - Peterborough | Globalnews.ca

The four-storey building on University Avenue West in Cobourg will offer 71 units, at least 13 deemed 'affordable' under CHMC standards.

globalnews.ca

 

[bigpoppa]

govt is great at using band-aids.
fixing systemic root causes?
Not so much.

 

[nobbie48]

So gov't is trying to do something, but again, I think they are off in the rhubarb. Affordable rental project gets a loan from the feds (15M for 71 units). So far, so good. Then they start talking about the project including geothermal heating. Wtf. If people in multimillion dollar homes can't make the economics work on geothermal, there is no way the economics work out in affordable housing. Something stinks there.

Federal government provides $15M loan for rental housing project in Cobourg - Peterborough | Globalnews.ca

The four-storey building on University Avenue West in Cobourg will offer 71 units, at least 13 deemed 'affordable' under CHMC standards.

globalnews.ca

I watch "This Old House" videos on the high tech systems. Great if you are in IT or can afford a high tech firm every time a circuit hiccups. Suddenly a circuit board fails, there's no replacement and it becomes major surgery.

I don't know about this project but a lot of the coops I serviced were always running short of funds and played musical money, shifting it from the intended purpose to a more immediate need. Then a year or two later they reapply for the original purpose.

 

[Mikedezo44]

Today my friend told me his realtor purchased a townhome last year for 500k, rented it out for a year and just sold for 785. I said I'm sure he won't be paying any taxes on that profit, and sure enough, it was purchased in another persons name as a primary residence (who will get a small cut) Don't know how these scammers can hide so much money from the government but where there's a will there's a way.

 

[mimico_polak]

Today my friend told me his realtor purchased a townhome last year for 500k, rented it out for a year and just sold for 785. I said I'm sure he won't be paying any taxes on that profit, and sure enough, it was purchased in another persons name as a primary residence (who will get a small cut) Don't know how these scammers can hide so much money from the government but where there's a will there's a way.

It’s easy. My previous realtor does this normally.

buy house near college…put in niece/nephew/aunt/uncle name or whatever. They live rent free for a year as capital keeps gaining value. Flip after they graduate and then make 3x or more on the free capital gain. Family member gets to live rent free. Realtor gets all their gains tax free.

He sells real estate as a hobby but said he doesn’t bother being a buying agent as it’s too much work.

 

[nobbie48]

Today my friend told me his realtor purchased a townhome last year for 500k, rented it out for a year and just sold for 785. I said I'm sure he won't be paying any taxes on that profit, and sure enough, it was purchased in another persons name as a primary residence (who will get a small cut) Don't know how these scammers can hide so much money from the government but where there's a will there's a way.

It would be interesting if the friend decided to keep the place. In a court wouldn't the details of the procedure have to come out?

 

[mimico_polak]

It would be interesting if the friend decided to keep the place. In a court wouldn't the details of the procedure have to come out?

There’s always a side agreement in place. Plus personally I’m sure I could find some people that want free rent that I could use to gain free capital gains.

It’s a trust business simple as that. But in the end if everyone wins….it’s easy enough to do.

 

[GreyGhost]

There’s always a side agreement in place. Plus personally I’m sure I could find some people that want free rent that I could use to gain free capital gains.

It’s a trust business simple as that. But in the end if everyone wins….it’s easy enough to do.

But for the paper owner, it could be a great way to get ahead. I am assuming this is a cash transaction? Otherwise, how does the student get approved for the mortgage? RE could co-sign but that provides a solid paper trail for this game. So what if there's a side agreement in place? Student says f you, I am keeping the house. RE gets mad and sues them. Goes to court and student submits side agreement that says they are complicit in tax fraud? Seems like something the CRA and crown would be willing to give the student a pass for in exchange for the scum that was doing it repeatedly.

 

[nobbie48]

Go through a will challenge and find out how badly a relative will screw you.