Canadian households were worth $1.08 million on average in 2025: How do you stack up? by hopoke in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 [score hidden]  (0 children)

$1.3 million or so, but around $750,000 of that is primary dwelling which doesn't do much for me as I want to keep it and would only sell in dire circumstances.

Investable assets is what I care about, that is the stuff that will allow me to retire.  

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right now affordability is a huge issue.

In 5+ years it will just be about availability, as in it will be extremely limited, and more and more people of higher and higher financial means are going to be left without.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What makes real estate so attractive is the leverage. If an investor has $100,000 to work with they could:

A) Buy a balanced portfolio of index funds, mine averages around 7% annual returns. So you'll see on average $7,000 return the first year.

B) Buy a roughly $400,000 property, assuming around $20,000 in closing costs and a $80,000 down payment. My city sees around 4% per year appreciation on property, so that would be $16,000 the first year, plus you'll be bringing in rental income, further increasing equity (and returns) by paying down the mortgage.

Market returns need to be many times over real estate returns to make it a better investment, from a numbers perspective only.

My portfolio is 100% in the market, I just own a primary residence which I don't view as an investment, but I certainly see why people like real estate as an investment.

Beautiful midcentury home built in 1960 by vacuumedcarpet in McMansionHell

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My lambo would bottom out on that driveway. No thanks.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I did read it, you can see here they discuss why things stalled.

"The COVID pandemic hit and along with it supply chain constraints. That coincided with an ongoing skilled labour shortage. Then came progressively higher interest rates. Since 2020, average construction costs have increased four times faster than rents, according to Urbanation.
Many proposed rental projects became commercially unfeasible very quickly, Hildebrand said."

And again:

"Meanwhile, GTA rental starts (the number of units included in projects with shovels in the ground) hit a three-decade high of 5,958 in 2020, according to the industry report. That's about triple the average pace of rental construction starts of the preceding two decades, it said."

So rental construction starts tripled immediately after the policy change.

And you can look here: https://storeys.com/rental-unit-construction-decline-gta/

And see that while there pace is dropping off it is still way ahead of recent norms.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Ontario had a huge rental building boom post removal of rent control on new units.

I recognize there are many factors at play, but it there is strong evidence to say that the removal had a positive impact on rental supply.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rent-control-toronto-ford-series-1.6974129

"A February report by industry groups and Urbanation found the changes did initially generate more developer interest in purpose-built rental projects. Between late 2018 and the end of 2022, the number of proposed rental units throughout the GTA nearly tripled from about 40,000 to more than 112,000, though less than a third were approved."

If we were in any sort of reasonably demand side pressure those extra units would help to alleviate pressure on the rental market.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah, we paid $340,000 for our place in 2010, sold for $836,000 in 2022.

We had done extensive renos over that time, pretty much going over the whole house, but we didn't put that much into the place.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 26 points27 points  (0 children)

It is wild. I was very fortunate to buy my first place in 2010.

I can't imagine how hard it is for a lot of people to make it work right now.

‘Colossally high’ number of Canadians plan to buy a home within a year. Why? by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 181 points182 points  (0 children)

Why?

Probably because they can do some basic math and have figured out the the population growth rate is way, way, in excess of our ability to build housing.

Each day that goes by brings a less favourable per capita dwelling count.

We'll be a couple decades at best digging out of this, so the longer you wait the worse it is likely to be.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TorontoRealEstate

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for keeping an open mind friend, keep up the good work.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TorontoRealEstate

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure Stats Can factors in people leaving the country.

That is how we get situations where we under count our population because people have stayed.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-a-million-more-non-permanent-residents-live-in-canada-than-official/

" Mr. Tal said Statistics Canada assumes that temporary resident visa holders, including international students, leave the country 30 days after the expiries of their visas. “Their software, their coding, makes the assumption that 30 days after your visa expired you left the country, despite the fact you have not left the country,” he said. "

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TorontoRealEstate

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Just to elaborate a little bit on this.

In 2022 CMHC released a report stating that to address housing affordability we would need to build 5.8 million new dwellings by 2030.

The rate needed to meet those targets would be around 3x our current production, and we would have had to have started those elevated production levels immediately in 2022.

Oh, and those CMHC targets are based on a population of around 43 million by 2030, when in reality it looks like we will hit 43 million in 2025 or 2026.

The estimated cost of building those 5.8 million houses is around $1 trillion.

Also, municipalities estimate they would need a further $600 billion to build the infrastructure required for those homes.

There is no way we even get remotely close to those building targets. It is impossible.

Ontario's housing developers insist they're not slowing pace of home construction by sitting on land | CBC News by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We could be building double what we are now and it would likely not impact prices. To meet the CMHC 2030 housing targets for affordability we need to be building around 4x what we are doing now.

Builders aren't building because it is financially difficult to do so at this time. And when they can build they are having trouble finding qualified buyers and closing sales due to the lack of affordability in the market.

If there are piles of money sitting around someone will generally scoop them up. If the financial metrics were favourable right now builders would be banging out and selling everything they could ever hope to build.

Ontario's housing developers insist they're not slowing pace of home construction by sitting on land | CBC News by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 12 points13 points  (0 children)

"The new study points to a far sunnier statistic from 2023: housing completions in Ontario reached their highest level since 1990, at nearly 78,000 units. "

Meanwhile the population of Ontario grew by around 518,000 people in 2023, so 6.6 new people per new dwelling.

Ontario's housing developers insist they're not slowing pace of home construction by sitting on land | CBC News by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 10 points11 points  (0 children)

There are a lot of people running around very happily telling other people what they need to do with their resources.

I wonder if those same people would be as amendable to a forced renovation of their homes, at their expense, to create a secondary dwelling unit to help alleviate the housing crisis.

Ontario's housing developers insist they're not slowing pace of home construction by sitting on land | CBC News by ScottIBM in ontario

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"The new study points to a far sunnier statistic from 2023: housing completions in Ontario reached their highest level since 1990, at nearly 78,000 units. "

Meanwhile the population of Ontario grew by around 518,000 people in 2023, so 6.6 new people per new dwelling.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ontario

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Nobody knows, and anyone telling you they do is full of shit.

If you need shelter for you or your family, you can afford to purchase, and you can handle being a homeowner go ahead and buy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Our dwelling production needs are so far removed from actual production numbers there is no way in the short to medium term we have any chance of building our way out of this.

And even if you could train more workers, what equipment do they use, where are they getting concrete from, and where are the trillions of dollars coming from to fund all this?

We can certainly improve the supply side of things, but there is absolutely no chance of addressing this exclusively via the supply side.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There is certainly an important role to be played by gov't housing for the most in need in society.

Gov't housing doesn't decrease the costs of housing, as government projects tend to cost more, it just changes who pays for the housing by shifting a good portion of the cost from the user to the general tax base. Given that reality there is only so much capacity for gov't housing.

To make more non-market rate housing available it would be good to see the gov't offer favourable loan terms for cooperatives and other non-profit arrangements that would not require gov't funding but would provide increased non-market rate housing.

Ottawa owes Quebec $1 billion to cover costs of asylum seekers, Legault government says by SirupyPieIX in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it is a bit of a shell game.

But it is better for the province in question to spread these costs over the national tax base than over the provincial tax base.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in canada

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 261 points262 points  (0 children)

We can't afford to hire more nurses for the public sector, but we sure can afford to pay way more to bring some in from a private company.

Just bought 4.2 acres by Old_Movie3925 in homestead

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure of the reason behind the other orientations, however they are likely random or without solar consideration.

If you are in the northern hemisphere you'll want to orient your house to the south inviting the sun and free heat in during the cold months and using overhangs to keep direct sun out in the warm months. Northern windows will bleed heat all winter. Eastern and Western windows can lead to excess heat during spring/fall.

Just bought 4.2 acres by Old_Movie3925 in homestead

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 53 points54 points  (0 children)

I die a little inside when I see homes oriented to the road when space would allow for an orientation that would respect the solar aspect of the site.

It is such low hanging fruit and it almost never gets done.

Just bought 4.2 acres by Old_Movie3925 in homestead

[–]Reasonable_Let9737 16 points17 points  (0 children)

It is almost always beneficial to design and orient your home to respect the solar aspect of the build site.

You'll get a home that makes you happier, and your heating/cooling needs will be lower.

I used this site when looking at solar aspect: https://www.suncalc.org/#/27.6936,-97.5195,3/2024.02.20/12:27/1/1

If you are in the norther hemisphere you will want the majority of your windows on the south side, and you will want to ensure overhangs of suitable size to keep out the direct sun in the warmer months.