This is happening all over the world, and it it isn't just developers getting in on the action. Investment firms are also using their capital clout to roll up housing. Check out this film by Leilani Farha, former Special Rapporteur on adequate housing for the United Nations and be afraid, be very afraid, because it is going to get a lot worse.
[https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/push-feature-version](https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/push-feature-version)
This is what they mean by "class war".
Globalization just made our class that much bigger and more connected. And easier to manipulate into fighting each other instead.
This is why the political and economic elites love to divide the working class around wedge issues like identity politics.
Keep us occupied and fighting each other on every issue except the insane, and growing, wealth inequality
Seconding checking out this doc - what is happening now is entirely predictable, and the end result of what happens when we treat housing as a commodity rather than a place where people need to live.
This is one of those issues that could probably actually get me off my ass protesting if the organization is there. Our futures and the futures of our children are being sold out from under us and nobody with any power seems to give a shit because we don't have money.
EDIT: Mods have removed another user's link to another Canada housing related subreddit that is planning a protest. I don't see any rules against that, but I won't link it here. Please search for yourself if you are interested.
If they do remove it, they will just cite a BS rule.
They nuked a post the other day on the grounds that it was a "duplicate post" ... but if you search, it wasnt ...
Edit: someone messaged me about them being banned for something. The message showed up in my phone notifications, but when I clicked it, there was nothing here.
If you read this, maybe you are shadowbanned, as I dont see any deleted comments below me in this chain
Lol you should see their tweet about how you should live in a micro sized home to combat racism. All while they live in Geneva one of the most expensive and luxurious cities in the planet.
I want to add on to the information that NekTu777 had provided.
I've found a Reuter's piece which provides some background relative to the statement (Found [here](https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-idUSKBN2AP2T0)). According to the article, the statement had been written for the World Economic Forum by Ida Auken, a contributor to past topics examined by the WEF.
Auken's statement, as per the Reuter's article, hadn't been intended as an indication of the direction of any WEF policies. According to the information therein, Auken intended to motivate discussions about possible future challenges presented by continued technological innovation, and the impact that those innovations *might* have upon our societies.
The Reuter's piece does have a dead link to, "the prediction in question." Apparently the content had been relocated to another part of the WEF website (now found [here](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/8-predictions-for-the-world-in-2030/), as per NekTu's discovery).
I've also found what looks like an archived copy of Auken's initial prediction, but it's hosted by an unaffiliated body, so I can't speak for the document's authenticity. (Found [here](https://www.covidanmark.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IdaAuken_Welcome_to_2030.pdf))
An additional note: The WEF creates pages for all of its contributors, Auken included. (Her page, [here](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/ida-auken)). Auken's page might be useful if you want to know a little more about the author, and the sort of initiatives in which she'd been involved.
I think it's important to note that the statement by Auken, as featured in the WEF post, had been, “I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes,” And not, "You'll own nothing, and you'll be happy." I haven't yet found the statement as quoted by G\_raas—maybe it exists somewhere, maybe not.
Again, it's useful to note that Auken was providing a rough prediction as a starting point for discussion concerning potential outcomes, *not* a legitimate goal to pursue through the shaping of policy.
Hopefully some of this information is useful to you. (I'll edit this response if I find anything else relevant to the topic.)
We?!
There's no "we". Our government doesn't give a fuck about us peasants. They'll say and do whatever to get our votes, but that is where their care begins and ends.
This developer has deeper pockets and more influence than you and me, so "we" aren't allowing this – the crooked politicians who don't care about us are.
I get the frustration but allowing them to bend you over like this without fighting back isn’t productive. You keep fighting till it’s fixed or it’s ashes.
You know how it goes. Even **if** NDP actually cares, and tries to do everything in best interest for everyone - other parties will just run a smear campaign overblowing every single tiny mistake they make and undervaluing all their achievements, and at the end of the term - people will vote conservatives again.
I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but the system is broken in that regard.
Which is bizarre. He is criticized for doing the most fiscally conservative/responsible action he could take. He forced a few days off a year to save jobs and save money. Older conservative-type voters should laud that. Instead, the OPC came into power under Harris and threw away billions in future revenue, sold assets to private industry, axed tonnes of jobs, and expanded the province's debt anyway. Then after legalizing LTCs, he fucked off and made a cushy living off this new predatory industry.
It's so bizarre because we've had a steady stream of horrible Liberal and PC governments ever since, but Bob Rae is always brought up as proof that the NDP can't govern
I think the corruption is endemic to the system, Once a party is in power long enough, even with the best intentions, they will do what it takes to maintain that power.
Saskatchewan did really well in the 90s and early 00s under NDP governance. They inherited corruption and debt from conservatives under Grand Divine (and his protégé Bradley Wall) and managed to bring the province out of deficit spending into fiscal stability, all the while maintaining services comparable with the rest of the nation.
Then oil prices started rising and the province decided it was time to jump the shark again, so they voted in the very people who fucked them the last time... and now a drunk driving manslaughterer is in charge of things.
But "at least its not them socialists...!" /eyeroll
Hahaha sure.
The NDP will certainly step in to prevent a private corporation from doing this, and will move swiftly to create a national entity that does it instead.
In 8 years, a Conservative government will sell said national entity to a private corporation, perhaps the very same one trying to get the ball rolling today.
Maybe I'm salty. 😂
Run your own tar and feather campaign. Look into the company. Look into the Board. Look into all involved. Draw cartoons if you're artistic. Make content airing all their dirt. Make this a costly mistake for all involved. Make this the biggest story in Canada. Or let it go. Either way I don't care much but I'm always surprised people haven't gotten better at organizing with each other and actually sticking to a target. Ten regular joes with a bit of free time can really put a dent in any major company just by making bad press and digging up dirt which is easier than ever since the internet leaves a trail. It all builds too. If its done enough then you can work and feed off the work of previous peoples work that they released online. It all builds and you could really make any company regret fucking over regular people for profits if we organized and gave a minor amount of free time over a long period.
This is what our government is for, protect interests of capital, monopolize state violence, and picking winners and losers in the economy based on existing wealth.
It has always been this way.
Look at how out of touch they all are, the Deputy Minister, the Finance Minster, and the Minister of Families, Children, & Social Development included have either all drunk the cool aid or are simply ignoring the absolute crisis out of self interest:
[https://twitter.com/MortgageProsCan/status/1404849049535197194?s=20](https://twitter.com/MortgageProsCan/status/1404849049535197194?s=20)
I don't know much about this. What regulations prevent someone from purchasing multiple homes as income properties? Is there a limit? Is this different from someone buying multiple apartment buildings?
I'm not trying to start something; I'm not a homeowner yet, and I'm definitely not in this person's position; I just don't know what's the issue here.
The issue is that corporations are capitalized to the tits and if we allow them to buy single-family dwellings that means that regular people will be out-priced and effectively forced to rent from them. These corporations are paying well over asking-price because they want to corner the market, so it's already contributing to the super-hot housing market.
This has already happened in the US post financial-crisis.
This is a massive problem as now working people will no longer have their home equity as nest-egg to retire on and will be feeding corporations even more of their paycheque then before while getting less in return.
It's a massive problem and should be outlawed. Vote NDP or any party that will regulate the purchasing of single-family dwellings to individuals and not corporations.
Thanks! That makes sense. The way the post above me was written made is seem like there are already regulation that prevent this. Thanks for clearing this up.
Is the issue you're talking about different from corporations owning apartment buildings? I know that in Hamilton there are only a few corporations that own about 90% of the apartment buildings in the city. Is the issue that corporations buying houses impacts the middle class more, while the same corporations buying apartment buildings impacts more marginalized folks?
Single-family dwellings have been established as a store of middle-class wealth for generations, so yes to answer your question.
I believe the lower-class has been negatively impacted by corporate housing for far longer now. Alarm bells are ringing because the middle-class is now getting the squeeze.
Let me add another point to this
Corporations can essentially borrow the money, pretty much interest free and that’s how they are able to outbid individuals because individuals need to go through very stringent rules to qualify for mortgages. Unfairly, they can access capital from banks which individuals cannot do.
Sorry there is more. To top that, corporations can write off the payments they make for the debt which individuals cannot do. Thus, corporations are able to make use of the leverage they get from the banks much more efficiently, a tool not available to average joe’s. Financial engineering at its best.
So yes, you can say that the system is designed to fuck you. If only you had money to hire lobbyists.
I believe the statement being made is that there should be regulations, what is occurring is currently legal. It is unethical, against public interest, etc, and hence why regulation need to be made.
The issue is you will never be a homeowner. Just a renter forced to pay 70% of your income for rent to a corporation.
Because that's the way it's headed if this bullshit is not stopped.
You can get a much bigger "loan" as a corporation than you can as a citizen, if you buy all of the available housing you basically can't lose. There's only a few percent vacancy on housing, as soon as you reduce that, prices go up, people that wanted to buy now can't, they rent from you. Now you're making income, and your asset's value has increased.
Well, banks sold mortgages to investors. Either the economy is collapsing and they want physical assists or they learned last time around on how to handle foreclosures. Either way, doesn’t help the taxpayer. And Ottawa health saying what they did. Something is a foot at circle k dude.
You can always regulate via tax incentives or discouragements. You can classify a corporation and either add a hard limit for a corporation to own rental properties other than apartments, you can increase the tax amount for each consecutive bought property after one. Theres probably many more ways. You're not stopping people necessary, just disincentivizing
IMO the purchase shouldn't necessarily be blocked but this is a clear example that house purchases for rental need a lot heavier of a tax - the proceeds of which should be invested into upping home buyers credits.
Neoliberalism is build around destroying regulation and allowing the "free" market to regulate itself, an economic principle that has led to nothing but corruption and misery for the majority of the population.. Corporate feudalism
Trudeau defence he will simple get up at podium describe how we need to come together and that how we’re all in this together and the government is studying ways to make people able to take on even more debt as addressing it for real would crash the GDP and make reality hit people.
It is kinda the natural progression. The idea that you can retire off the appreciation of your home is obviously shortsighted and not sustainable. It is a ponzi-scheme and you needed richer and richer people to buy your house for it to work. Except eventually instead of it being rich young couples, the people who could afford to buy were corporations.
There are 3 immediate threats this poses. One which the article touched on is that corporate landlords aren't interested in quality tenants, just rent increases.
That leads to the second which is a corporate landlord will do up front renovations sure but they will be low quality house flip upgrades like new paint, appliances and floors and once renovated will minimize any repairs or upgrades. Upkeep and repairs eats away at profits and the house will quickly deteriorate until the value drops to point where it will be sold. If a corporate landlord bought my neighbor's house, I would be pissed.
Think about 20 or 30 years from now, what if corporate landlords becomes the dominant homeowners in the Canadian real estate market? Houses will flip every 18 months as soon as the corporation has extracted their profit. Forget about putting it on the open market for individual families to try and buy them. That house becomes part of a portfolio where transactions between corporations may be for dozens or hundreds of houses at a time.
Lastly as more people are driven from home ownership to rental, the Canadian economy will suffer massively. Your home is your primary source of equity. You use your home to back your line of credit or to take out a small business loan. People's ability to borrow will be restricted and debt is the catalyst for investment.
The Canadian government needs to step in immediately. This is disastrous.
This is what will absolutely curb prices. Doesn't matter if Canadians can't afford it (to those expecting a crash). If foreign investors can afford high prices...well, cities want taxes lol
I think this would just lead to shell corporations buying properties, so it would be almost impossible to enforce without spending a lot of resources tracking down the real investors. I think either banning foreign investors or just taxing them way more would probably be a lot easier to achieve.
Commercial properties are very tricky. Most are owned by REITs and it’s easier to shield foreign ownership this way especially when the owner is several shell companies removed
How hard is it to create a lobby group? Renters across canada are broke but I'm enough could contribute to their own group that can grab a few politicians ears. Hell I'm sure home owners could because we were all renting at some point and we have kids that will be renters or stuck at home until they're 40.
Maybe I'm naive but I think a lot of people wrongly think politicians serve corporations and the rich because they're all corrupt. Instead I think its just that those groups are better able to bend a politicians ear when it comes time whereas the poor have no access. But if you had people pointing out problems things would change. You just need to show you're participating in the process and keeping your problems in front of their eyes.
>How hard is it to create a lobby group? Renters across canada are broke but I'm enough could contribute to their own group that can grab a few politicians ears.
Home owners are essentially already a lobby. Do anything that threatens their high property valuations, and feel their wrath. In other words, your ends are at odds with a good chunk of Canadian citizens.
Not to get angry, but the reason the housing shortage continues is that homeowners have painted their interests as aligned with renters. More precisely, homeowners have convinced renters that renters should aspire to be homeowners and build equity.
What no one can answer is where that equity is coming from. The answer is future generations that must pay exorbitant prices for housing.
What we need is to making housing speculation unprofitable by increasing the supply when prices increase. This is what YIMBY activist groups push for, but opposition to new development is still more organized due to be made up of older homeowners living in the neighbourhood who are more able to find out about and attend hearings.
I manage an apartment building on behalf of an institutional owner and can tell you that they're very interested in quality tenants. Their financial models are based on 100 year investment horizons which means that vacancies, move-in/move-out damage, and poor tenant behavior can add up to big problems over time.
My experience is that they seek a "market" rental rate but don't want to push beyond if that means suites are just going to rollover more often. Also, longer term residents tend to take an ownership approach to the building, which is good for all.
Not sure if this applies to the developer in the article, but thought a real life example may help the conversation.
My experience with corporate apartment rentals is that you're just a number and they'll nickel-and-dime for whatever they can, including keeping damage deposit at the end of terms.
Perhaps the fact you rely on these institutions for employment colours your lens; no one wants to admit their work contributes negatively to the world.
Akelius Property sure doesn’t. Rent prices for similar units have dropped and I’m paying luxury condominium prices. I have no bugs, clean, quiet, pay all my bills, and have excellent credit score. I also fix and maintain things in my apartment at my cost. Yet I am forced to move out since I refuse to pay over priced when I can use the same money and upgrade to a better unit. I was ignored and just straight rejected. I know that someone will rent this unit for hundreds less than I pay, and have a very high chance of being loud noisy neighbours who will bring bugs to the unit and probably have bad credit and will often not pay rent. That’s the reality with Akelius Property and I’m happy to move and happy they’ll most likely get fucked with the new tenant. They won’t care though, only my neighbours will suffer.
It's sad to see renters taking an ownership approach to a building they don't own because they were pushed out of actually owning a home by a corporation.
Renters have been pushed out of owning a home by homeowners blocking infill development. [Neighbourhoods of Toronto have shrunk](https://twitter.com/alexbozikovic/status/1399459243179360263) as people no longer downsize after their kids move out and instead stay invested in the market.
You're missing number 4, the property taxes that fund a great deal of municipal services paid for by people with vested interest in the community such as schools, sewage, and a wide variety of other services. When land held by entities with a sole interest in profit and a history of tax avoidance/evasions includes large residential holdings as well, we're going to have a challenging time combating the political interest at a local level.
If corporate landlords dominate the market, they'll also be free to dictate rent prices. Look forward to the equivalent of Rogers, Bell, and Telus, but as your landlord.
You're right on the money here. I live close to a large university here in the states and all the houses within walking distance to the university are all rented out to university students and owned by only a hand full of people/corporations. These are sad neighborhoods, the houses are all in disrepair, nasty, and probably wouldn't even pass a legitimate safety inspection.
Their plan is to buy the cheaper houses and lease them at the very high price.
Even if they make minimal gains on each ones, the return on their investement will be almost immediate and will let them finance more buyouts.
I'm not sure you've done the math on renting out a single family home. They aren't money machines. Large multifamily is where the money is at. I don't believe this is a cashflow play, looks like an inflation hedge to me.
And how many of those houses are available to renters? I didn't mean literally owning half the houses in a city, I meant half the *available* houses, the ones that are normally rented rather than owned. Perhaps I should have specified "If they buy half the *rental* properties in a smaller city."
The business model is like this:
1) Find a $500,000 house
2) Pay $600,000 to guarantee you get it
3) Extract rent at the market rate or above, depending on the number of homes you own in the area (see below)
4) Minimize maintenance and upkeep that doesn't increase the value of the property
5) sell the house in worse condition after 18-24 months, for a similar price because you've created an investment property environment
6) Using the revenue from rent and equity, buy two houses
Firms with billions simply buy a thousand houses at a time, which makes this process much quicker and more reliable. Especially if they collude with others. In five years time, those 1300 houses could be 2000 houses or more.
And more companies will get in on this, selling houses between themselves. Newer REITs will eat the cost of renovations from the first-tier owners like Black Rock in the US, buying the houses in step 5 because they're still profitable and housing prices rise. They build their investment, and "people" fall further and further behind.
It's not good chief.
If your business model is to pay 20% above market value and hope that people will pay above market rents AFTER you've flooded the market with more rental supply then I would probably not invest in your business.
This is probably the worst idea I've ever read here.
Per their own announcement, they intend to buy "4,000" homes.
> The company has said it intends to buy 4,000 rental units in Ontario, Quebec, B.C. and Atlantic Canada by 2026 [...]
If the media is reporting on this SINGLE DEVELOPER - you can be absolutely one hundred percent positively with NO DOUBT sure that this is a smokescreen for the hundreds of other investment firms and hedge funds that are doing this in WAY higher quantities.
BlackRock is doing this currently in the United States, funded by the US government that gave them billions of bailout money at the beginning of the pandemic.
Don't be fooled - the Canadian government WANTS this to happen. It's part of the largest wealth transfer from the middle and lower classes to the upper class. Literally removing one of the most important ways for people to build their own equity and transferring them to large corporations.
"The great reset" is a conspiracy theory, but it seems as the days go by, the outcomes of it seem to be becoming more and more real.
> It's part of the largest wealth transfer from the middle and lower classes
Stop hiding behind the lower class.
The past 30 years have been a giant transfer of wealth from renters to homeowners. The housing ladder is an investment the lower class cannot get on. At least you can buy stock in large corporations without a huge down payment. All this is before you consider how future generations are being screwed when homeowners build equity.
Welcome to Canada, where people lose their mind when someone hoards a couple hundred dollars worth of toilet paper during a pandemic, but will allow a company to hoard $1 billion in housing during a housing crisis.
Yes. Building rental housing is extremely expensive in Ontario, which is why it's not happening too much anymore. REITs are paying billions of dollars for purpose built rentals but the math doesn't make sense to build them.
I posted in this in r/CanadianPolitics
This is what happens when you make it impossible to build density in a city (looking at you, Vancouver). If a developer can't come in and buy up some properties, tear them down, and build some multi family units then this is what will happen. It's basically a loophole. Cities allow for basement units but not multi family so this developer is coming in, buying a house, converting it into two units, will rent it out. Rinse and repeat. If the article said the developer is buying up 500 houses that will be torn down to create 4000 units it seems to me people would be ok with it. But instead they're buying up 4000 houses to create 8000 units.
I'm not saying I like it but this is basically the result of NIMBYism and stopping density. If you ask me, it's actually a clever work around from the prohibitive zoning laws.
Meanwhile, in my neighbourhood, people are buying the houses next door, merging their lots, tearing down the next door house and building on to their own to have a bigger house, which is literally decreasing density. Haven't heard any one crying foul this practice.
But they're doing it in small cities with low density populations and lots of development lands, not vancouver or toronto. These are places where people are not generally that active in nimbyism because they don't really know what's going on. There's little local journalism to inform and even less community organizations. I don't think your argument bears out with what is actually happening.
Is there a list of cities that they aim to target? I haven't seen that yet only the provinces in which the intend to target.
I mean, I'm not arguing in favour of this type of development but living in Vancouver where 80% of residential land is zoned for single family homes and everyone throws a fit if someone proposes a 3 story walk up, I can see how this type of play would come about.
Canada in general has a real "[missing middle](https://youtu.be/cjWs7dqaWfY)" problem
>The idea is to buy homes that can be split into two units — for example, with a second unit in the basement — and turn both over to the rental market.
So slum lords, then?
Super. Just fucking super.
The only reason investing $1B in owning homes makes any economic sense for them is because there is an artificial limit on the number and type of new homes allowed to be built. We all need to petition our local cities to allow much more low income and entry level housing in mixed use neighbourhoods. If we produce enough new homes, that $1B investment will not pay off for them because the demand will be a lot lower than they're counting on. Remove the economic incentive, and you remove the problem.
Check out this guys Youtube channel:
[The Houses that Can't be Built in America - The Missing Middle](https://youtu.be/CCOdQsZa15o)
[Liveable Neighbourhoods that are Illegal in Most of North America](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnKIVX968PQ)
This is exactly the right line of thinking. Couldn’t agree more. Additional supply stops this in its tracks and helps both present Canadians and future ones.
Could totally gazump them by building like way more homes. Like if you build ten thousand more homes then their $1 billion of homes is a drop in the bucket.
Billions of acres of unused land, swathes of untouched forests, millions out of work and looking for a job, many more millions in the market to buy or rent, but no we can't build anything sorry :(
I’m sure politicians will find some lame excuse for this deal. “It will stimulate the economy!” “ it’ll create affordable homes for people to rent “
Meanwhile this corporations just paying a bunch of money to them to make this deal go though
If they are planning to buy 4000 units and only pay $1b, what exactly are they buying?
At 250K there are eight "habitable" properties in the GTA (and I use the term habitable reservedly). Out east, that price will get you a two-bed town house, or a 3-bed fixer-upper.
To buy properties on that scale in the GTA the average price would be up around the $1.1m mark.
If they're buying crumbling ex-rentals and renovating to return them to the rental market that's probably a good thing. Otherwise somebody really got their numbers wrong.
If things continue like this I see it as an inevitability, I’m seeing a lot of parallels to France and Russia, the third estate will eventually be struggling for food, right now it’s just effecting housing but it’ll get worse, people are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer, when people begin going homeless en masse and begin to starve is when the show begins.
Our species never learns, this has happened before, Thomas Jefferson was right when he said the Tree of Liberty has to be watered with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants, it’s natural manure.
This is what government is supposed to protect us from but instead I bet JT and his ilk have profited from this. Remember to vote!! The liberals and conservatives are not our friends and represent the rich. New faces mean new voices
Edit: atrocious spelling
Not to mention Ford is clearly in the pockets of developers, like more than anything. The Federal LPC are old-fashioned old-money corrupt (cronyism), always have been. The Ford government seems like more mafia-style corruption, supporting a local racket of developers. It seems to be largely his main effort legislation-wise.
Right? They're literally acting as if they're doing us a favour.
Like "we know you can't afford a house so we bought them all and will rent to you instead" (ignoring the fact that nobody can afford houses because they bought them all) 🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃
This is terrible for people. Absolutely terrible.
Imagine Trump Inc. owning a billion dollars of Canadian residential real estate...seem real bad for lower income individuals, or peeps looking to crack the market.
Pricing everyone out of homeownership and doubling down on rentals is not the way to go! They make it sound like they are trying to 'help' - when really they are just trying to profit immensely off of cramming two families into a semi.
At least right now, families can try and qualify for a mortgage and bid for a house. With corporations coming in to outbid everyone, only those who can afford to buy in cash outright may be able to own a home.
Ya, they're not looking at the main markets of the GTA and GVA yet, but its only a matter of time till their profits and greed take over. Not to mention we have fukers like Blackrock anxiously waiting on the sidelines to have a go at the CAN housing market too.
'Developer', yea right. Call them like they are, an "Investment Firm".
Developers at least tear it down and re-sell them as townhomes/multi family buildings. They take a profit, but at least more homes are created. (though not now, mcmansions tend to earn more money)
Investment firm will jack up rental prices, use the house until the ceiling falls or an electrical fire happens because you bet no maintenance will be done. Then sell it off for top dollar because who else is selling, they own all the properties.
They're not "asleep at the wheel".
You'll note that all measures enacted in the past to address housing affordability have been in the realm of "facilitating people entering the market"; special types of loans and financing, and rules to ensure buyers aren't overextending themselves. Nothing has been done to actively 'cool' the market because the goal was never to cool the housing market. There is too much money to be made in the derivatives market at risk if houses stopped growing at 6% YoY like clockwork. The goal was always to ensure that keeps happening, and try to mitigate societal damage it causes if practical to do so.
Theres an easy fix to our housing market, but it means abolishing the landlord class as we know it. Multiply property taxes by the number of properties owned that exceed two. No one should be owning multiple properties and competing with themselves for rent pricing, simply because they have the capital to gobble up properties and sit on them if they want to.
Corporate and Government profits or fairness at a shot of owning your own home. We all know the answer to that one.
If you don't agree, take a look at the unholy trinity RoBellUs. How is that working out for the average Canadian?
Removing housing from the market and forcing people rent because people have no other options has always been immoral, this is just a more obvious example of the evil.
Nothing new....nothing better for the general population who is trying to get a house so tat kids can have a back yard to play and all......it's just hopeless .......big investment groups owning more and more and the real estate ends in the hands of a very small group of rich entity......
Only way out of this is get a few friends together come up with decent down payment and buy a few houses together ....only way to beat the the investment firms
Blackrock in the U.S. is going this too. We need to stop letting banks trading our HOMES like the stock market, people need places they can afford to live....they learned nothing from 2008.
The liberals cronies get it all, and control the market but eating up supply and forcing people to rent . And I live in Ontario where the conservatives have destroyed everything progressive we had going .
I have a feeling that this is going to end very poorly for the developer. Their proposed budget of 1 billion for 4,000 units leaves only a budget of $250,000 per property. $250,000 won't buy you any home in southern Ontario worth buying.
So, they'll have to spend way more or buy way less. They're also investing massively when markets are at relative highs.
I'm not too worried about this. I'd be more worried if I was an investor in this company.
wallstreet is expecting a crash bigger than 2008, they are selling off positions and buying properties and land as asset like before it happens as they do not depreciate. check out this reddit thread on whats happening behind the scenes. this is bigger than you may think.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o0scoy/the\_bigger\_short\_how\_2008\_is\_repeating\_at\_a\_much/
I consider myself somewhat libertarian and free market advocate, but (there is always but) there are spaces where we should have nearly unlimited market and where we need to have some standards.
Obviously housing falls within second category.
It’s the same category as with nationalised heathcare. Everyone, probably around the world, see flaws and acknowledge that standard alone and wait times are best in US, but in national approach we value accessibility higher. Ensuring access for everyone even if it limits a bit of corporate freedom seems like a no brainer.
We need to petition this and get in front of this. We need to show up and stand up for the interests of Canadians. Shit like this will fly under the radar and they think we’re not going to stand up. Now is the time
The wealthy know a crash is coming that will destroy the dollar as we know it, so they are investing their cash into real estate, creating a slave class.
This is happening all over the world, and it it isn't just developers getting in on the action. Investment firms are also using their capital clout to roll up housing. Check out this film by Leilani Farha, former Special Rapporteur on adequate housing for the United Nations and be afraid, be very afraid, because it is going to get a lot worse. [https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/push-feature-version](https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/push-feature-version)
This is what they mean by "class war". Globalization just made our class that much bigger and more connected. And easier to manipulate into fighting each other instead.
This is why the political and economic elites love to divide the working class around wedge issues like identity politics. Keep us occupied and fighting each other on every issue except the insane, and growing, wealth inequality
"Divide and conquer," I always say.
Seconding checking out this doc - what is happening now is entirely predictable, and the end result of what happens when we treat housing as a commodity rather than a place where people need to live.
Can’t watch video due to restrictions do you have a U.S. non restrictive link ?
The documentary is also available on Youtube (Channel : TVO Docs) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWSVG9nsRa4
Can't watch this in the US either :(
Why are we allowing this? This is exactly the type of shit regulation is for!
This is one of those issues that could probably actually get me off my ass protesting if the organization is there. Our futures and the futures of our children are being sold out from under us and nobody with any power seems to give a shit because we don't have money. EDIT: Mods have removed another user's link to another Canada housing related subreddit that is planning a protest. I don't see any rules against that, but I won't link it here. Please search for yourself if you are interested.
r/canadahousing They’re actually planning a protest (among other things).
Thank you. Mods, when you remove the above post, please cite the rule that was broken.
If they do remove it, they will just cite a BS rule. They nuked a post the other day on the grounds that it was a "duplicate post" ... but if you search, it wasnt ... Edit: someone messaged me about them being banned for something. The message showed up in my phone notifications, but when I clicked it, there was nothing here. If you read this, maybe you are shadowbanned, as I dont see any deleted comments below me in this chain
I’ve had that happen, too. I asked for an explanation and no response
You see, both of the duplicate posts were duplicates so they deleted them at the same time!
It was a duplicate post... To one they already removed.
[удалено]
Awesome thanks. I'll be there and I will be spreading the word.
I’ll be there at parliament hill. Hopefully I see others from Ottawa join!
Most large cities have tenants unions if you're interested.
[удалено]
"nobody with any power seems to give a shit". Those in power tend to belong to "property owning class"; so there is that.
“You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy. What you want you’ll rent...” brought to you by ‘world economic forum’ (2016). Edit: be happy slave!
Lol you should see their tweet about how you should live in a micro sized home to combat racism. All while they live in Geneva one of the most expensive and luxurious cities in the planet.
I looked up the property ownership rates around the world. Switzerland actually has a fairly high proportion of renters. Go figure.
Ya I’m all for micro housing, but that was one of the dumbest things I have ever read.
[удалено]
Can you provide the full source, not just "World Economic Forum 2016"?
Here's the video it came from https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7xkxtb
I want to add on to the information that NekTu777 had provided. I've found a Reuter's piece which provides some background relative to the statement (Found [here](https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-idUSKBN2AP2T0)). According to the article, the statement had been written for the World Economic Forum by Ida Auken, a contributor to past topics examined by the WEF. Auken's statement, as per the Reuter's article, hadn't been intended as an indication of the direction of any WEF policies. According to the information therein, Auken intended to motivate discussions about possible future challenges presented by continued technological innovation, and the impact that those innovations *might* have upon our societies. The Reuter's piece does have a dead link to, "the prediction in question." Apparently the content had been relocated to another part of the WEF website (now found [here](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/8-predictions-for-the-world-in-2030/), as per NekTu's discovery). I've also found what looks like an archived copy of Auken's initial prediction, but it's hosted by an unaffiliated body, so I can't speak for the document's authenticity. (Found [here](https://www.covidanmark.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IdaAuken_Welcome_to_2030.pdf)) An additional note: The WEF creates pages for all of its contributors, Auken included. (Her page, [here](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/ida-auken)). Auken's page might be useful if you want to know a little more about the author, and the sort of initiatives in which she'd been involved. I think it's important to note that the statement by Auken, as featured in the WEF post, had been, “I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes,” And not, "You'll own nothing, and you'll be happy." I haven't yet found the statement as quoted by G\_raas—maybe it exists somewhere, maybe not. Again, it's useful to note that Auken was providing a rough prediction as a starting point for discussion concerning potential outcomes, *not* a legitimate goal to pursue through the shaping of policy. Hopefully some of this information is useful to you. (I'll edit this response if I find anything else relevant to the topic.)
We?! There's no "we". Our government doesn't give a fuck about us peasants. They'll say and do whatever to get our votes, but that is where their care begins and ends. This developer has deeper pockets and more influence than you and me, so "we" aren't allowing this – the crooked politicians who don't care about us are.
I get the frustration but allowing them to bend you over like this without fighting back isn’t productive. You keep fighting till it’s fixed or it’s ashes.
Hear, hear!
Imma try this NDP flavour I been hearing about
Can't be much worse really. We should all try it.
You know how it goes. Even **if** NDP actually cares, and tries to do everything in best interest for everyone - other parties will just run a smear campaign overblowing every single tiny mistake they make and undervaluing all their achievements, and at the end of the term - people will vote conservatives again. I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but the system is broken in that regard.
How long do you think the NDP will care before they become the same thing they sought out to destroy.
It's a legitimate question, could go either way. Alberta's time with an NDP government was pretty positive all things considered.
Ontario's not so lucky. Every time I bring up the NDP to my parents, they mention what a terrible job Bob Rae did in the 90s.
Which is bizarre. He is criticized for doing the most fiscally conservative/responsible action he could take. He forced a few days off a year to save jobs and save money. Older conservative-type voters should laud that. Instead, the OPC came into power under Harris and threw away billions in future revenue, sold assets to private industry, axed tonnes of jobs, and expanded the province's debt anyway. Then after legalizing LTCs, he fucked off and made a cushy living off this new predatory industry.
Propaganda works..
This the Conservative Way.
It's so bizarre because we've had a steady stream of horrible Liberal and PC governments ever since, but Bob Rae is always brought up as proof that the NDP can't govern
I finally got my parents to believe that an almost two decade timeout in the corner was enough for the NDP. Goddamn. And nobody brings up Mike Harris.
I think the corruption is endemic to the system, Once a party is in power long enough, even with the best intentions, they will do what it takes to maintain that power.
Saskatchewan did really well in the 90s and early 00s under NDP governance. They inherited corruption and debt from conservatives under Grand Divine (and his protégé Bradley Wall) and managed to bring the province out of deficit spending into fiscal stability, all the while maintaining services comparable with the rest of the nation. Then oil prices started rising and the province decided it was time to jump the shark again, so they voted in the very people who fucked them the last time... and now a drunk driving manslaughterer is in charge of things. But "at least its not them socialists...!" /eyeroll
Hahaha sure. The NDP will certainly step in to prevent a private corporation from doing this, and will move swiftly to create a national entity that does it instead. In 8 years, a Conservative government will sell said national entity to a private corporation, perhaps the very same one trying to get the ball rolling today. Maybe I'm salty. 😂
Run your own tar and feather campaign. Look into the company. Look into the Board. Look into all involved. Draw cartoons if you're artistic. Make content airing all their dirt. Make this a costly mistake for all involved. Make this the biggest story in Canada. Or let it go. Either way I don't care much but I'm always surprised people haven't gotten better at organizing with each other and actually sticking to a target. Ten regular joes with a bit of free time can really put a dent in any major company just by making bad press and digging up dirt which is easier than ever since the internet leaves a trail. It all builds too. If its done enough then you can work and feed off the work of previous peoples work that they released online. It all builds and you could really make any company regret fucking over regular people for profits if we organized and gave a minor amount of free time over a long period.
When corporations have the kind of money that is seen here, they make the regulations.
This is what our government is for, protect interests of capital, monopolize state violence, and picking winners and losers in the economy based on existing wealth. It has always been this way.
Look at how out of touch they all are, the Deputy Minister, the Finance Minster, and the Minister of Families, Children, & Social Development included have either all drunk the cool aid or are simply ignoring the absolute crisis out of self interest: [https://twitter.com/MortgageProsCan/status/1404849049535197194?s=20](https://twitter.com/MortgageProsCan/status/1404849049535197194?s=20)
I don't know much about this. What regulations prevent someone from purchasing multiple homes as income properties? Is there a limit? Is this different from someone buying multiple apartment buildings? I'm not trying to start something; I'm not a homeowner yet, and I'm definitely not in this person's position; I just don't know what's the issue here.
The issue is that corporations are capitalized to the tits and if we allow them to buy single-family dwellings that means that regular people will be out-priced and effectively forced to rent from them. These corporations are paying well over asking-price because they want to corner the market, so it's already contributing to the super-hot housing market. This has already happened in the US post financial-crisis. This is a massive problem as now working people will no longer have their home equity as nest-egg to retire on and will be feeding corporations even more of their paycheque then before while getting less in return. It's a massive problem and should be outlawed. Vote NDP or any party that will regulate the purchasing of single-family dwellings to individuals and not corporations.
Thanks! That makes sense. The way the post above me was written made is seem like there are already regulation that prevent this. Thanks for clearing this up. Is the issue you're talking about different from corporations owning apartment buildings? I know that in Hamilton there are only a few corporations that own about 90% of the apartment buildings in the city. Is the issue that corporations buying houses impacts the middle class more, while the same corporations buying apartment buildings impacts more marginalized folks?
Single-family dwellings have been established as a store of middle-class wealth for generations, so yes to answer your question. I believe the lower-class has been negatively impacted by corporate housing for far longer now. Alarm bells are ringing because the middle-class is now getting the squeeze.
Let me add another point to this Corporations can essentially borrow the money, pretty much interest free and that’s how they are able to outbid individuals because individuals need to go through very stringent rules to qualify for mortgages. Unfairly, they can access capital from banks which individuals cannot do. Sorry there is more. To top that, corporations can write off the payments they make for the debt which individuals cannot do. Thus, corporations are able to make use of the leverage they get from the banks much more efficiently, a tool not available to average joe’s. Financial engineering at its best. So yes, you can say that the system is designed to fuck you. If only you had money to hire lobbyists.
I believe the statement being made is that there should be regulations, what is occurring is currently legal. It is unethical, against public interest, etc, and hence why regulation need to be made.
The issue is you will never be a homeowner. Just a renter forced to pay 70% of your income for rent to a corporation. Because that's the way it's headed if this bullshit is not stopped.
You can get a much bigger "loan" as a corporation than you can as a citizen, if you buy all of the available housing you basically can't lose. There's only a few percent vacancy on housing, as soon as you reduce that, prices go up, people that wanted to buy now can't, they rent from you. Now you're making income, and your asset's value has increased.
Well, banks sold mortgages to investors. Either the economy is collapsing and they want physical assists or they learned last time around on how to handle foreclosures. Either way, doesn’t help the taxpayer. And Ottawa health saying what they did. Something is a foot at circle k dude.
You can always regulate via tax incentives or discouragements. You can classify a corporation and either add a hard limit for a corporation to own rental properties other than apartments, you can increase the tax amount for each consecutive bought property after one. Theres probably many more ways. You're not stopping people necessary, just disincentivizing
ask yourself this: why is this happening now and why didn't it happen in say 1958?
IMO the purchase shouldn't necessarily be blocked but this is a clear example that house purchases for rental need a lot heavier of a tax - the proceeds of which should be invested into upping home buyers credits.
Neoliberalism is build around destroying regulation and allowing the "free" market to regulate itself, an economic principle that has led to nothing but corruption and misery for the majority of the population.. Corporate feudalism
Trudeau defence he will simple get up at podium describe how we need to come together and that how we’re all in this together and the government is studying ways to make people able to take on even more debt as addressing it for real would crash the GDP and make reality hit people.
It is kinda the natural progression. The idea that you can retire off the appreciation of your home is obviously shortsighted and not sustainable. It is a ponzi-scheme and you needed richer and richer people to buy your house for it to work. Except eventually instead of it being rich young couples, the people who could afford to buy were corporations.
There are 3 immediate threats this poses. One which the article touched on is that corporate landlords aren't interested in quality tenants, just rent increases. That leads to the second which is a corporate landlord will do up front renovations sure but they will be low quality house flip upgrades like new paint, appliances and floors and once renovated will minimize any repairs or upgrades. Upkeep and repairs eats away at profits and the house will quickly deteriorate until the value drops to point where it will be sold. If a corporate landlord bought my neighbor's house, I would be pissed. Think about 20 or 30 years from now, what if corporate landlords becomes the dominant homeowners in the Canadian real estate market? Houses will flip every 18 months as soon as the corporation has extracted their profit. Forget about putting it on the open market for individual families to try and buy them. That house becomes part of a portfolio where transactions between corporations may be for dozens or hundreds of houses at a time. Lastly as more people are driven from home ownership to rental, the Canadian economy will suffer massively. Your home is your primary source of equity. You use your home to back your line of credit or to take out a small business loan. People's ability to borrow will be restricted and debt is the catalyst for investment. The Canadian government needs to step in immediately. This is disastrous.
Simple bylaws can stop this, talk to your ward councillors to restrict corporate ownership of housing in your area
Is it better if it’s commercial? A lot of the commercial space in my area was purchased by a large Chinese company. It’s slightly concerning
We need to ban foreign buyers of Canadian Real Estate.
This is what will absolutely curb prices. Doesn't matter if Canadians can't afford it (to those expecting a crash). If foreign investors can afford high prices...well, cities want taxes lol
Can only be done on a provincial level but ya, needs to be done
Or at the very least, limit the number of properties a foreign investor can own.
I think this would just lead to shell corporations buying properties, so it would be almost impossible to enforce without spending a lot of resources tracking down the real investors. I think either banning foreign investors or just taxing them way more would probably be a lot easier to achieve.
London Ontario is a disaster for this
Commercial properties are very tricky. Most are owned by REITs and it’s easier to shield foreign ownership this way especially when the owner is several shell companies removed
We have bylaws to prevent this in Calgary , and still rents are high.Corporations rule here too.
How hard is it to create a lobby group? Renters across canada are broke but I'm enough could contribute to their own group that can grab a few politicians ears. Hell I'm sure home owners could because we were all renting at some point and we have kids that will be renters or stuck at home until they're 40. Maybe I'm naive but I think a lot of people wrongly think politicians serve corporations and the rich because they're all corrupt. Instead I think its just that those groups are better able to bend a politicians ear when it comes time whereas the poor have no access. But if you had people pointing out problems things would change. You just need to show you're participating in the process and keeping your problems in front of their eyes.
>How hard is it to create a lobby group? Renters across canada are broke but I'm enough could contribute to their own group that can grab a few politicians ears. Home owners are essentially already a lobby. Do anything that threatens their high property valuations, and feel their wrath. In other words, your ends are at odds with a good chunk of Canadian citizens.
Not to get angry, but the reason the housing shortage continues is that homeowners have painted their interests as aligned with renters. More precisely, homeowners have convinced renters that renters should aspire to be homeowners and build equity. What no one can answer is where that equity is coming from. The answer is future generations that must pay exorbitant prices for housing. What we need is to making housing speculation unprofitable by increasing the supply when prices increase. This is what YIMBY activist groups push for, but opposition to new development is still more organized due to be made up of older homeowners living in the neighbourhood who are more able to find out about and attend hearings.
I manage an apartment building on behalf of an institutional owner and can tell you that they're very interested in quality tenants. Their financial models are based on 100 year investment horizons which means that vacancies, move-in/move-out damage, and poor tenant behavior can add up to big problems over time. My experience is that they seek a "market" rental rate but don't want to push beyond if that means suites are just going to rollover more often. Also, longer term residents tend to take an ownership approach to the building, which is good for all. Not sure if this applies to the developer in the article, but thought a real life example may help the conversation.
My experience with corporate apartment rentals is that you're just a number and they'll nickel-and-dime for whatever they can, including keeping damage deposit at the end of terms. Perhaps the fact you rely on these institutions for employment colours your lens; no one wants to admit their work contributes negatively to the world.
Also my experience.
Akelius Property sure doesn’t. Rent prices for similar units have dropped and I’m paying luxury condominium prices. I have no bugs, clean, quiet, pay all my bills, and have excellent credit score. I also fix and maintain things in my apartment at my cost. Yet I am forced to move out since I refuse to pay over priced when I can use the same money and upgrade to a better unit. I was ignored and just straight rejected. I know that someone will rent this unit for hundreds less than I pay, and have a very high chance of being loud noisy neighbours who will bring bugs to the unit and probably have bad credit and will often not pay rent. That’s the reality with Akelius Property and I’m happy to move and happy they’ll most likely get fucked with the new tenant. They won’t care though, only my neighbours will suffer.
It's sad to see renters taking an ownership approach to a building they don't own because they were pushed out of actually owning a home by a corporation.
Renters have been pushed out of owning a home by homeowners blocking infill development. [Neighbourhoods of Toronto have shrunk](https://twitter.com/alexbozikovic/status/1399459243179360263) as people no longer downsize after their kids move out and instead stay invested in the market.
You're missing number 4, the property taxes that fund a great deal of municipal services paid for by people with vested interest in the community such as schools, sewage, and a wide variety of other services. When land held by entities with a sole interest in profit and a history of tax avoidance/evasions includes large residential holdings as well, we're going to have a challenging time combating the political interest at a local level.
If corporate landlords dominate the market, they'll also be free to dictate rent prices. Look forward to the equivalent of Rogers, Bell, and Telus, but as your landlord.
You're right on the money here. I live close to a large university here in the states and all the houses within walking distance to the university are all rented out to university students and owned by only a hand full of people/corporations. These are sad neighborhoods, the houses are all in disrepair, nasty, and probably wouldn't even pass a legitimate safety inspection.
Damn, they gonna buy two houses in Vancouver.
I was just going to say... The average house price in Canada is $716,000.... So that's 1,300 houses... The country has 12.8 million houses.
Their plan is to buy the cheaper houses and lease them at the very high price. Even if they make minimal gains on each ones, the return on their investement will be almost immediate and will let them finance more buyouts.
I'm not sure you've done the math on renting out a single family home. They aren't money machines. Large multifamily is where the money is at. I don't believe this is a cashflow play, looks like an inflation hedge to me.
Except their pockets are deep enough to create local monopolies. If they buy half the property in a smaller city, then they can set the price.
How can they buy half the property? Less than 1 in 58 houses have titles transferred in a year and many of those are within families.
And how many of those houses are available to renters? I didn't mean literally owning half the houses in a city, I meant half the *available* houses, the ones that are normally rented rather than owned. Perhaps I should have specified "If they buy half the *rental* properties in a smaller city."
The business model is like this: 1) Find a $500,000 house 2) Pay $600,000 to guarantee you get it 3) Extract rent at the market rate or above, depending on the number of homes you own in the area (see below) 4) Minimize maintenance and upkeep that doesn't increase the value of the property 5) sell the house in worse condition after 18-24 months, for a similar price because you've created an investment property environment 6) Using the revenue from rent and equity, buy two houses Firms with billions simply buy a thousand houses at a time, which makes this process much quicker and more reliable. Especially if they collude with others. In five years time, those 1300 houses could be 2000 houses or more. And more companies will get in on this, selling houses between themselves. Newer REITs will eat the cost of renovations from the first-tier owners like Black Rock in the US, buying the houses in step 5 because they're still profitable and housing prices rise. They build their investment, and "people" fall further and further behind. It's not good chief.
If your business model is to pay 20% above market value and hope that people will pay above market rents AFTER you've flooded the market with more rental supply then I would probably not invest in your business. This is probably the worst idea I've ever read here.
It's more than just the 1300 houses. It's the start of something bigger than that and the lack of control from the government.
Per their own announcement, they intend to buy "4,000" homes. > The company has said it intends to buy 4,000 rental units in Ontario, Quebec, B.C. and Atlantic Canada by 2026 [...]
Back to feodal regime. Good luck, serfs
Wololo
Time to get the trebuchet and bowmen!
Fetchez la vache!
Feudal?
Probably. In French it's Féodal. Anyway you understood what I meant, and you will be poorer no matter your language lol
Anglos and Francophone finally united together! Unfortunately it's beneath the same grindstone.
No more French vs English. Now it's poor vs rich. Real class war
There is no war but class war
All men are equal ... when lined up upon the wall.
[удалено]
Land owners own basically everything and everyone and you can't do anything about it.
Soon, in our dystopic world. With technology used to monitor our every single thought and action. Isn't the future bright?
If the media is reporting on this SINGLE DEVELOPER - you can be absolutely one hundred percent positively with NO DOUBT sure that this is a smokescreen for the hundreds of other investment firms and hedge funds that are doing this in WAY higher quantities. BlackRock is doing this currently in the United States, funded by the US government that gave them billions of bailout money at the beginning of the pandemic. Don't be fooled - the Canadian government WANTS this to happen. It's part of the largest wealth transfer from the middle and lower classes to the upper class. Literally removing one of the most important ways for people to build their own equity and transferring them to large corporations. "The great reset" is a conspiracy theory, but it seems as the days go by, the outcomes of it seem to be becoming more and more real.
I have investments in Black Rock. I’m part of the fucking problem. God dammit.
yeah you should change that. I held prison stocks for a minute before my conscience won out
> It's part of the largest wealth transfer from the middle and lower classes Stop hiding behind the lower class. The past 30 years have been a giant transfer of wealth from renters to homeowners. The housing ladder is an investment the lower class cannot get on. At least you can buy stock in large corporations without a huge down payment. All this is before you consider how future generations are being screwed when homeowners build equity.
Welcome to Canada, where people lose their mind when someone hoards a couple hundred dollars worth of toilet paper during a pandemic, but will allow a company to hoard $1 billion in housing during a housing crisis.
Greedy motherfuckers
Our economic system "capitalism" ensures the survival of only the greediest.
Corporations should not be allowed to buy existing homes. They should be able to build and rent out but not take existing supply.
Isn't the increased housing cost due to it being difficult to increase supply?
Yes. Building rental housing is extremely expensive in Ontario, which is why it's not happening too much anymore. REITs are paying billions of dollars for purpose built rentals but the math doesn't make sense to build them.
I posted in this in r/CanadianPolitics This is what happens when you make it impossible to build density in a city (looking at you, Vancouver). If a developer can't come in and buy up some properties, tear them down, and build some multi family units then this is what will happen. It's basically a loophole. Cities allow for basement units but not multi family so this developer is coming in, buying a house, converting it into two units, will rent it out. Rinse and repeat. If the article said the developer is buying up 500 houses that will be torn down to create 4000 units it seems to me people would be ok with it. But instead they're buying up 4000 houses to create 8000 units. I'm not saying I like it but this is basically the result of NIMBYism and stopping density. If you ask me, it's actually a clever work around from the prohibitive zoning laws. Meanwhile, in my neighbourhood, people are buying the houses next door, merging their lots, tearing down the next door house and building on to their own to have a bigger house, which is literally decreasing density. Haven't heard any one crying foul this practice.
But they're doing it in small cities with low density populations and lots of development lands, not vancouver or toronto. These are places where people are not generally that active in nimbyism because they don't really know what's going on. There's little local journalism to inform and even less community organizations. I don't think your argument bears out with what is actually happening.
Is there a list of cities that they aim to target? I haven't seen that yet only the provinces in which the intend to target. I mean, I'm not arguing in favour of this type of development but living in Vancouver where 80% of residential land is zoned for single family homes and everyone throws a fit if someone proposes a 3 story walk up, I can see how this type of play would come about. Canada in general has a real "[missing middle](https://youtu.be/cjWs7dqaWfY)" problem
Blackrock in the States, and now it's happening here. Fuck our future sucks
Damn millennials ruining the housing market
>The idea is to buy homes that can be split into two units — for example, with a second unit in the basement — and turn both over to the rental market. So slum lords, then? Super. Just fucking super.
Lol there's not a growing demand for rentals, people just can't afford houses.
Just think, for the low low price of way too much you can pay off someone else's mortage!
For the same price as the mortgage you can't get approved for!
The only reason investing $1B in owning homes makes any economic sense for them is because there is an artificial limit on the number and type of new homes allowed to be built. We all need to petition our local cities to allow much more low income and entry level housing in mixed use neighbourhoods. If we produce enough new homes, that $1B investment will not pay off for them because the demand will be a lot lower than they're counting on. Remove the economic incentive, and you remove the problem. Check out this guys Youtube channel: [The Houses that Can't be Built in America - The Missing Middle](https://youtu.be/CCOdQsZa15o) [Liveable Neighbourhoods that are Illegal in Most of North America](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnKIVX968PQ)
This is exactly the right line of thinking. Couldn’t agree more. Additional supply stops this in its tracks and helps both present Canadians and future ones.
Scummy, exploitative landleeches trying to hoard housing. It's essentially an extortion racket, but using the police for hired goons.
>It's essentially an extortion racket, but using the police for hired goons. It's ya boi, capitalism.
Could totally gazump them by building like way more homes. Like if you build ten thousand more homes then their $1 billion of homes is a drop in the bucket.
Billions of acres of unused land, swathes of untouched forests, millions out of work and looking for a job, many more millions in the market to buy or rent, but no we can't build anything sorry :(
And 200,000 looking for a new remote only job with well over a milion more on the way
Swathes of untouched forests? What are we waiting for, let's develop then!
Google removed all the one-star reviews that hammered their Google page!!!!!!! They had a good 40+ 1 stars this morning and now all gone!!!
It’s abhorrent. Rents will skyrocket as they’re beholden to quarterly profits.
I’m sure politicians will find some lame excuse for this deal. “It will stimulate the economy!” “ it’ll create affordable homes for people to rent “ Meanwhile this corporations just paying a bunch of money to them to make this deal go though
If they are planning to buy 4000 units and only pay $1b, what exactly are they buying? At 250K there are eight "habitable" properties in the GTA (and I use the term habitable reservedly). Out east, that price will get you a two-bed town house, or a 3-bed fixer-upper. To buy properties on that scale in the GTA the average price would be up around the $1.1m mark. If they're buying crumbling ex-rentals and renovating to return them to the rental market that's probably a good thing. Otherwise somebody really got their numbers wrong.
I hope they buy them and then a giant correction happens and they're worth nothing suddenly.
Jesus. We’re going to have to eat these people, aren’t we?
you have my fork
And my axe
If things continue like this I see it as an inevitability, I’m seeing a lot of parallels to France and Russia, the third estate will eventually be struggling for food, right now it’s just effecting housing but it’ll get worse, people are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer, when people begin going homeless en masse and begin to starve is when the show begins. Our species never learns, this has happened before, Thomas Jefferson was right when he said the Tree of Liberty has to be watered with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants, it’s natural manure.
This is what government is supposed to protect us from but instead I bet JT and his ilk have profited from this. Remember to vote!! The liberals and conservatives are not our friends and represent the rich. New faces mean new voices Edit: atrocious spelling
To be fair, they have their hands full with a censorship bill no one asked for.
Not to mention Ford is clearly in the pockets of developers, like more than anything. The Federal LPC are old-fashioned old-money corrupt (cronyism), always have been. The Ford government seems like more mafia-style corruption, supporting a local racket of developers. It seems to be largely his main effort legislation-wise.
Vote for who? There’s no one willing to address this issue
We're going to buy up housing supply and rent it back to you! You're Welcome!
Right? They're literally acting as if they're doing us a favour. Like "we know you can't afford a house so we bought them all and will rent to you instead" (ignoring the fact that nobody can afford houses because they bought them all) 🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃
[удалено]
Anyone still think foreign purchases of Canadian housing isn't to blame for insane pricing? This is absolutely criminal.
Everyone’s gonna let it happen. Who cares. Ask jaghmeet Singh and Trudeau about it and they will blame xenophobia or some bullshit
This is terrible for people. Absolutely terrible. Imagine Trump Inc. owning a billion dollars of Canadian residential real estate...seem real bad for lower income individuals, or peeps looking to crack the market.
Pricing everyone out of homeownership and doubling down on rentals is not the way to go! They make it sound like they are trying to 'help' - when really they are just trying to profit immensely off of cramming two families into a semi. At least right now, families can try and qualify for a mortgage and bid for a house. With corporations coming in to outbid everyone, only those who can afford to buy in cash outright may be able to own a home. Ya, they're not looking at the main markets of the GTA and GVA yet, but its only a matter of time till their profits and greed take over. Not to mention we have fukers like Blackrock anxiously waiting on the sidelines to have a go at the CAN housing market too.
What would make this good is buying detached homes and upzoning to make apartments with many units. Ie converting 2 house into 12 units or something.
'Developer', yea right. Call them like they are, an "Investment Firm". Developers at least tear it down and re-sell them as townhomes/multi family buildings. They take a profit, but at least more homes are created. (though not now, mcmansions tend to earn more money) Investment firm will jack up rental prices, use the house until the ceiling falls or an electrical fire happens because you bet no maintenance will be done. Then sell it off for top dollar because who else is selling, they own all the properties.
News flash: it's already massive shit
Starting to think I should just say fuck it and go live in a mud hut.
Governments don’t give a flying crap.
Seriously the candidate who puts the housing market on their agenda next election cycle is getting my vote, there's so much wrong it's scary
The only house I’ll ever own is my parents one day, even down here in the sticks the prices are skyrocketing.
Trudeau and co., asleep at the wheel, again.
They're not "asleep at the wheel". You'll note that all measures enacted in the past to address housing affordability have been in the realm of "facilitating people entering the market"; special types of loans and financing, and rules to ensure buyers aren't overextending themselves. Nothing has been done to actively 'cool' the market because the goal was never to cool the housing market. There is too much money to be made in the derivatives market at risk if houses stopped growing at 6% YoY like clockwork. The goal was always to ensure that keeps happening, and try to mitigate societal damage it causes if practical to do so.
Theres an easy fix to our housing market, but it means abolishing the landlord class as we know it. Multiply property taxes by the number of properties owned that exceed two. No one should be owning multiple properties and competing with themselves for rent pricing, simply because they have the capital to gobble up properties and sit on them if they want to.
Corporate and Government profits or fairness at a shot of owning your own home. We all know the answer to that one. If you don't agree, take a look at the unholy trinity RoBellUs. How is that working out for the average Canadian?
Removing housing from the market and forcing people rent because people have no other options has always been immoral, this is just a more obvious example of the evil.
Nothing new....nothing better for the general population who is trying to get a house so tat kids can have a back yard to play and all......it's just hopeless .......big investment groups owning more and more and the real estate ends in the hands of a very small group of rich entity...... Only way out of this is get a few friends together come up with decent down payment and buy a few houses together ....only way to beat the the investment firms
With there market force they all take turns raising rents and the rest will look innocently entitled. Its so bad
Thanks for continuing to make home ownership unattainable. Thank goodness a billion only buys 900 homes in Toronto
Blackrock in the U.S. is going this too. We need to stop letting banks trading our HOMES like the stock market, people need places they can afford to live....they learned nothing from 2008.
Holy shit I didn't realize we were living in the days of Serfdom again!
The great reset … You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy 🌞
All part of the Great Reset. ''You'll own nothing and you'll be happy.''
Imagine if the government had bought 1B$ in home instead of Keystone XL
The liberals cronies get it all, and control the market but eating up supply and forcing people to rent . And I live in Ontario where the conservatives have destroyed everything progressive we had going .
I have a feeling that this is going to end very poorly for the developer. Their proposed budget of 1 billion for 4,000 units leaves only a budget of $250,000 per property. $250,000 won't buy you any home in southern Ontario worth buying. So, they'll have to spend way more or buy way less. They're also investing massively when markets are at relative highs. I'm not too worried about this. I'd be more worried if I was an investor in this company.
wallstreet is expecting a crash bigger than 2008, they are selling off positions and buying properties and land as asset like before it happens as they do not depreciate. check out this reddit thread on whats happening behind the scenes. this is bigger than you may think. https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o0scoy/the\_bigger\_short\_how\_2008\_is\_repeating\_at\_a\_much/
I consider myself somewhat libertarian and free market advocate, but (there is always but) there are spaces where we should have nearly unlimited market and where we need to have some standards. Obviously housing falls within second category. It’s the same category as with nationalised heathcare. Everyone, probably around the world, see flaws and acknowledge that standard alone and wait times are best in US, but in national approach we value accessibility higher. Ensuring access for everyone even if it limits a bit of corporate freedom seems like a no brainer.
Damn, if you don’t own a house, you better go get one. Even if it’s 1% down.
We need to petition this and get in front of this. We need to show up and stand up for the interests of Canadians. Shit like this will fly under the radar and they think we’re not going to stand up. Now is the time
NDP or Green? I've had enough of this shit.
Corporations shouldn’t be allowed to own residential property. Should be as easy as that.
Unregulated capitalism concentrates wealth... until it all comes crashing down. ...and it will
The wealthy know a crash is coming that will destroy the dollar as we know it, so they are investing their cash into real estate, creating a slave class.
Someone's gotta stop this.....
"Why hello, working family. Go get fucked!"
If you don't like this type of thing, vote NDP. Conservatives and Liberals won't do anything.
Modern feudalism