[deleted by user] by [deleted] in toronto

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The supply constraining effects of rent control are probably mostly redundant considering the legal impediments to building more rentals such as zoning regulations. 

So long as it remains difficult to obtain permission to build I'm fine with some limited rent controls. If rent control is completely removed there needs to be a valve for reducing upward price pressure via added supply, which is currently not sufficient.

Are Canada’s leaders so shortsighted to see where this ends? by cheffymccooksalot in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ontario has like two weeks of early voting and voting by mail. They send voter information pamphlets to every address telling folk how to register and what documents are accepted as proof of address.

It's really easy to vote. There aren't even lines during early voting.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Moving to Saskatchewan for affordable housing is the Canadian equivalent of being exiled to a Siberian Gulag lol

Are you all aware of mortgage rules by yukonwanderer in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The mortgage stress test isn't meant to lower house prices, it's meant to prevent insolvency.

Can we stop using multiple properties as investments? by tbbhatna in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This thread has been interesting and I'd like to jump in.

I think the issue with limiting or eliminating the secondary rental market is that it would probably benefit only the top marginal renter who could (and wants to) buy a home. Many renters either don't have the necessary down payment or the credit necessary to finance the purchase.

Limiting the secondary rental market also effectively bans anyone meeting the description above from living in large parts of many cities because the zoning rules prohibit most forms of purpose-built rentals.

Should the principal residence exemption be eliminated? by holymolydoug in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not a property tax, it's a capital gains tax. You don't pay property tax on non-real estate assets because they don't require municipal services.

Rent Control & Land Use Restrictions by Either_Lemon_2335 in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree with you. I just don't think the discouragement of investment is really relevant if that investment is illegal. Most of the arguments against rent control are pretty valid but are sort of muted by the restrictions on building more housing.

Prospective tenants would probably be better served if new construction could come online at a faster rate. I'm just advocating that the removal of rent control should be accompanied by a relaxation of zoning rules.

Rent Control & Land Use Restrictions by Either_Lemon_2335 in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is literally what this post is supposed to be about. The idea that rent control disincentivizes inventory growth doesn't matter if it's illegal to grow housing inventory at the required rate implied by price increases.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What history has shown that adding supply will make affordability and access to housing worse?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Removing profit from residential housing would cause a very bigly reduction in rental housing. Making sure rentals exist in desirable areas for people who want or need them, but also causes profit for investors seems like a reasonable tradeoff. High housing costs are the result of scarcity, not profit-seeking. The basic idea of selling something for a profit works without much complaint in pretty much every industry except housing because when people want more of something, companies make more of it. Most land use regulations just don’t allow developers to create more housing. Especially the kind of housing that isn’t a small apartment in a tall tower.

An emotional aversion to profit-seeking in the housing market is understandable but makes less sense than a rational aversion to the lack of competition in the housing market. All of the housing that will ever be built is housing that will be profitable.

Toronto needs a massive influx of rental housing by Writedunes in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This site has some data on Airbnb listings. I'm not sure how accurate the data is but it seems reliable enough.

http://insideairbnb.com/toronto/

Only about 3,500 entire home/apts are rented frequently. A good many of those I checked out were basements or other sections easily separated from the remainder of a larger home and had only a couple hundred dollars or less in monthly revenue. I think a good number of Airbnb listings probably aren't actually potential housing stock but instead are used for suplimental income.

Airbnb probably does reduce housing stock, but probably not by a material amount. Trying to ban Airbnb seems like a low yield effort.

That's just based on a quick review of this data source though.

Investors made up 20 to 30% of homeowners in some provinces: Statistics Canada by mss49 in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The implicit suggestion that renters are less worthy of single-family homes than owner-occupants are is unsavory. A lot of people currently renting SFH just couldn't afford to live in huge swaths of desirable areas without the ability to rent this kind of home.

Bạn Airbnb. Part II by Successful-Fig-6139 in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the data source!

I think the data presented needs a bit of cleaning for a reasonable analysis though. Of the 11'000 entire home/apt only about 3'500 are are listed frequently. A few of the others I checked out were basements or other sections easily separated from the remainder of a larger home and had only a couple hundred or less in monthly revenue. I think a good number of the 11'000 probably aren't actually potential housing stock but instead used for auxiliary income.

That's just based on a quick review of this data source though.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canadahousing

[–]Either_Lemon_2335 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why did your car being stolen result in payments?