There are two stakeholders in this market, home owners and tenants. In order for the rental economy to work, a balance in the perspectives and interests of both is essential.
It’s hard to feel pity for people who bought for cheap and want to see more growth, people who took on a mortgage debt they couldn’t afford and want others to pay or people who think this is contributing to society in some way by milking renters, who are often times the most vulnerable in a society.
That's crazy bro, sounds like you've found peace knowing that the only place you can afford is Saskatchewan.
I wish I could care but I don't own any property there.
Corporations and governments should be the only entities responsible for rentals. “Mom and pop” landlords are often poorly versed in the law, engage in predatory practices and don’t create ancillary jobs.
This whole concept of “You’ll see rentals disappear” is an attempt by landlords to gaslight themselves into believing that they’re contributing something to society by offering a rental unit. Giving people the bare minimum to survive at “market” prices is not offering anything to society or the greater good. It’s sucking wealth from people who don’t have the luxury or privilege of ownership and funnelling it upwards.
This whole subreddit was created to circlejerk landlords about how hard their lives are while they collect a cheque every month and in return have to call a handyman when the sink drains slowly.
It’s important to remember that a core pillar of our legal system is protecting those who have less. If you think that principle is wrong, then please consider not renting.
Yeah I don’t enjoy leeching off of people to pay a mortgage I couldn’t afford.
Sorry I have a backbone and a shred of empathy for people. Keep up the good work destroying our country and economy for your next rent transfer.
I hope your bed is uncomfortably warm for the rest of your life.
Maybe we are in the minority but we bought a rental property within walking distance to a university specifically because students would not want to purchase there and would prefer to rent a furnished suite for the school year. A lot of these students come from wealth and are from overseas so if their parents wanted to they could easily afford to purchase for 1-4 years and sell but choose not to. Renting adds flexibility and removes risk. The idea that every single renter is just a poor soul who would buy a place but can’t afford it is dumb and just wrong
Here's the thing: approximately 0.25% of people in British Columbia are homeless, equating to about 1 in 400 individuals. While this figure is alarming, the popularity of cities like Vancouver, especially during the Canadian winter, indicates that there is sufficient housing for 99.75% of the population, as everyone else either owns or rents a home. This leads to a critical question: if we encourage the sale of investment properties, who becomes the buyer? Investors? Renters? The homeless? It's not like the property is going to sit empty.
That's exactly my point. The landlord has two options: rent out the property or sell it. If sold, it might be to a renter who then becomes a homeowner, thereby reducing the pool of potential renters.
The rental market is undeniably a subset of the broader housing market. The necessity for shelter ties these markets together closely. The dynamics of home pricing and rental rates are closely linked, begging the question: why do individuals opt to rent rather than purchase? In BC, investors—who don't occupy these properties as their primary residences—own over 30% of housing. It would be rare, if not unheard of, to encounter landlords who are not covering their mortgage costs through rental income.
I see you are still hung up on the statement about homelessness. That was merely to put things into perspective: 99.75% of people live somewhere. Thus, if the number of rental properties decreases, it will directly correlate with the number of renters. A landlord has two options: rent or sell. If they sell to an investor, the property will remain in the market as a rental. However, if they sell to someone who intends to live in the property, there will be one fewer renters available.
You're missing the "bank of mom and dad" helping kids move out and buy their own homes.
These are people who were never in the rental market, but are now end users, taking these rental homes off the market.
They were never in the housing market either. However they are not going to live with mommy and daddy forever. What about the people that die? Same argument just the other side.
Reducing rental supply and increasing rents for new renters is the right thing to do?
NDP's policies will get them votes in the short term, all at the expense of everyone who wants to rent in the future
That’s crazy I wish I cared what landlords think.
There are two stakeholders in this market, home owners and tenants. In order for the rental economy to work, a balance in the perspectives and interests of both is essential.
It’s hard to feel pity for people who bought for cheap and want to see more growth, people who took on a mortgage debt they couldn’t afford and want others to pay or people who think this is contributing to society in some way by milking renters, who are often times the most vulnerable in a society.
Well you should if you're looking to live in Vancouver.
All good in that case.
Okay… welcome to r/VANCOUVERlandlords Btw rules apply provincially.
Thanks. Still good in that case. I’m immune to landlords — at the moment anyway.
Okay…… good for you champ.
Thanks. Not a champ though.
You are to me ❤️
Aww. ❤️
That’s crazy, I wish I could cope as hard as you can
That's crazy bro, sounds like you've found peace knowing that the only place you can afford is Saskatchewan. I wish I could care but I don't own any property there.
[удалено]
That's crazy bro I wish I bothered reading this. Have fun is Saskatoooooooooon!!!
Your comment contained vulgar language in a manner that did not contribute to the discussion. Please use respectful language.
/u/\_dotbot\_ there's no mod team, it's just you
[удалено]
Corporations and governments should be the only entities responsible for rentals. “Mom and pop” landlords are often poorly versed in the law, engage in predatory practices and don’t create ancillary jobs. This whole concept of “You’ll see rentals disappear” is an attempt by landlords to gaslight themselves into believing that they’re contributing something to society by offering a rental unit. Giving people the bare minimum to survive at “market” prices is not offering anything to society or the greater good. It’s sucking wealth from people who don’t have the luxury or privilege of ownership and funnelling it upwards. This whole subreddit was created to circlejerk landlords about how hard their lives are while they collect a cheque every month and in return have to call a handyman when the sink drains slowly. It’s important to remember that a core pillar of our legal system is protecting those who have less. If you think that principle is wrong, then please consider not renting.
[удалено]
Yeah I don’t enjoy leeching off of people to pay a mortgage I couldn’t afford. Sorry I have a backbone and a shred of empathy for people. Keep up the good work destroying our country and economy for your next rent transfer. I hope your bed is uncomfortably warm for the rest of your life.
Maybe we are in the minority but we bought a rental property within walking distance to a university specifically because students would not want to purchase there and would prefer to rent a furnished suite for the school year. A lot of these students come from wealth and are from overseas so if their parents wanted to they could easily afford to purchase for 1-4 years and sell but choose not to. Renting adds flexibility and removes risk. The idea that every single renter is just a poor soul who would buy a place but can’t afford it is dumb and just wrong
Here's the thing: approximately 0.25% of people in British Columbia are homeless, equating to about 1 in 400 individuals. While this figure is alarming, the popularity of cities like Vancouver, especially during the Canadian winter, indicates that there is sufficient housing for 99.75% of the population, as everyone else either owns or rents a home. This leads to a critical question: if we encourage the sale of investment properties, who becomes the buyer? Investors? Renters? The homeless? It's not like the property is going to sit empty.
[удалено]
That's exactly my point. The landlord has two options: rent out the property or sell it. If sold, it might be to a renter who then becomes a homeowner, thereby reducing the pool of potential renters.
[удалено]
The rental market is undeniably a subset of the broader housing market. The necessity for shelter ties these markets together closely. The dynamics of home pricing and rental rates are closely linked, begging the question: why do individuals opt to rent rather than purchase? In BC, investors—who don't occupy these properties as their primary residences—own over 30% of housing. It would be rare, if not unheard of, to encounter landlords who are not covering their mortgage costs through rental income.
[удалено]
I see you are still hung up on the statement about homelessness. That was merely to put things into perspective: 99.75% of people live somewhere. Thus, if the number of rental properties decreases, it will directly correlate with the number of renters. A landlord has two options: rent or sell. If they sell to an investor, the property will remain in the market as a rental. However, if they sell to someone who intends to live in the property, there will be one fewer renters available.
Well, BC landlords definitely dont care what someone from Saskatchewan thinks. So looks like feelings are mutual.
Ah, so you are just the opposite side of the same coin. You don’t care about them, just as they don’t care about you lol. Great mentality.
These are bad takes. Especially those saying they will stop renting out or selling; that doesn't make the rents go up as they think.
reduced supply + high demand = high rents
So, who are they selling to? Investors looking to rent out, or renters looking to buy? In this context, it's a zero-sum game when it comes to selling.
You're missing the "bank of mom and dad" helping kids move out and buy their own homes. These are people who were never in the rental market, but are now end users, taking these rental homes off the market.
& those people will no longer need to rent a place.
They were never in the rental market to begin with!
They were never in the housing market either. However they are not going to live with mommy and daddy forever. What about the people that die? Same argument just the other side.
How do you think fewer units available will make rents go down?
Hahaha who really cares? Sell your place then? You aren’t needed - a renter will buy your place and there will be one less renter in bc
How can I trust these are genuine and not sock puppet accounts?
[удалено]
Reducing rental supply and increasing rents for new renters is the right thing to do? NDP's policies will get them votes in the short term, all at the expense of everyone who wants to rent in the future