How The Experts Got Canada’s Housing Crisis Wrong

[@richarsontorres]

Thank you for this. I watched your video with a teary eye. Before the pandemic I looked for 3 bedroom housing in my area for my growing family with no luck for a couple of years. Then the lockdowns happened and 3 bedoom rental listings surged. I soon went to check out about a dozen houses and noticed that they had been occupied by students and temp workers, but had to leave due to the circumstances. Kitchens were split with hanging blankets into "rooms", 4 people would share a master bedroom, and matresses would be laid out in the living room. I saw it, we all saw it. But they didn't?

[@john_pasalis]

Sorry to hear about your experience! It's a tough time for many Canadian households looking for housing. Many economists saw this, but rather than seeing the explosion in international student numbers and saying - maybe this is too rapid, perhaps our government should slow down our growth. Their reaction was that we need investors to convert houses to illegal rooming houses to house international students. This was a backwards take as far as I'm concerned

[@katethegardener]

This was happening in the 90"s. Families living together in one room of 4-5 bedroom homes to help one family pay off their mortgage and then the moved on to another home until each one got a home....like a giant pyramid scheme.

[@lak1294]

John, your analysis is spot on. So many things have gone wrong with government and academic policies on housing and immigration at all levels. Governments both took policies too far and at the same time didn't have checks and balances in place, or real-time collection and monitoring of data, or plain old common sense, to adjust and course correct in real time when they should have. This is rightly an election issue, and we'll see what happens in the next federal election. Reactionary, laissez-faire politics, ever increasing regulation making it impossible to get things done, and tax gouging of citizens need to change.

[@ColleenCBooks]

@@katethegardenerthat’s actually…pretty moving in terms of how much they were willing to sacrifice for each other. But still inhumane. But still I kind of admire their determination.

[@fraz2983]

You can thank Dominic Barton & Mark Wiseman for our immigration mess - "The Century Initiative". They are heavily involved in Trudeau's Liberal party (Dominic Barton was Trudeau's appointee in 2017 as Canadian Ambassador to China). I know John, you're coming at this from a real estate perspective but if you're going to talk about housing & immigration in Canada - what I just mentioned has to be included in the discussion.

[@kevinn1158]

We didn’t have a population growth issue back in early 2000s and we were seeing 10-12% price growth back then. The boom in price was because of regulations that allowed domestic investment to triple demand by leveraging. People were hoarding properties and leveraging themselves to the hilt. Once that ball starts rolling, it creates a price momentum that accelerates and the developers and endusers just follow the insanity. And what did the govt do during this time? Nothing except jump in and tax the hell out of land transactions and development. They were adding to the costs massively. Ridiculous approval times, GST taxes etc etc didn’t help either. If the an industry becomes bloated and it relies on much higher prices to cover bloated costs, no matter how much they ramp up production it will never bring prices down. NYC went through this conundrum decades ago. Increasing production demand now just supports irrational prices from the suppliers and developers. Short term, the ugly reality is, govts need to stop sucking at the t-t of development if they want short term price reductions. And developers need to unfortunately be forced to tighten their belts and that means killing demand. But the latter is a mid term cycle issue. The developers are more than happy ramping up production but only if they can make a set profit on their bloated building costs in the short term. If you want prices to drop short term, govt needs to drop 80% of their taxes and force the developers to pass that savings onto the consumers. And then drop immigration massively, then let the industry go through a very lean decade of low demand to force their costs down. The govt also needs to slam flipper and investor activity. Price action has its own life. The old demand supply BS is really a different dynamic that doesn’t come into play with new builds. Demand and supply is a much more longer term dynamic. The developers won’t build at a loss short term. End of story.

[@john_pasalis]

Yes, we had a short term dip in population growth due to covid, right when interest rates went to zero. Then population growth boomed again

[@kevinn1158]

@@john_pasalis what people don’t understand is housing is a commodity. And It trades like a commodity. And there’s 2 elements to price. There’s the price the provider ie the producer/developer relies on to make a profit and then there’s the trading price momentum. Yes trading price takes a life of its own just like in the stock market. This is how companies like Tesla get a PE in the 60s in an industry where OEMs have single digit PEs. That’s all trading price momentum. And Just like the stock market, you have all sorts of people with different objectives playing this game driving up home prices. And that price action can last for a very long time in the real estate sector since the cycles are very slow and very long. There’s endusers, flippers and investors both foreign and domestic and, all of these players have different criteria they are evaluating. Just as long term stock investors differ from day traders or swing traders. The vast majority of these people only see the price momentum and they don’t ask is it worth it. They don’t ask, what profit is the developer making. They just see 5-12% annual gains and say, ok I’ll jump on that band wagon. Same as trading a stock or commodity, but in the stock world the cycles are in months not decades. We’ve seen 20 years of very high inflation in this sector. The main problem now is the price action has run so high and for so long, people have given up on understanding what is value or a reasonable level of leveraging or whether or not the run is done up until now. The whole demand supply thing is irrelevant and has always pretty much been so. Demand supply comes into play years later. Until developers, suppliers, the govt tax office are confronted with years of lean times will costs and prices of building new homes drop. As for existing homes, I’d say that Investors and flippers need to be forced out to create more supply at lower prices for endusers. Drop the land transfer taxes and hike residential property taxes to commercial levels on the hoarding individual and corporate investors to start.

[@jay1645]

So gov jumped in on the band wagon instead of doing it's job of regulating the industry ? Not surprising as the banker lobby is powerful. The gov could cave in to the corp. landlord lobby Blackrock etc this time to put a floor and replace the money launderers (chinese) who have vanished atm

[@pedroual]

@kevinn1158 you got it. But it's not only inconvenient to talk about it but also for decades people never thought like this.

[@kevinn1158]

@@pedroual I've always thought this. We bought in 2003 and back then houses were going up 10% per year. I kept thinking, when are they going to slow this down?? I've also thought a long time ago that the city was massively mismanaged the planning on multiple levels. There's been the complete lack of focus on family dwellings. And that they are still all in on building public housing ghettos ie Regent Park and Atkinson coop. (They actively are burying the violent crime data) In fact, the only new family dwellings in the core of the city are public housing townhouses. They are pretending that it's completely rational to build townhouses right in the centre of Toronto for public housing residents like it's still 1960. 2 million dollar townhouses for people who couldn't afford to pay basic rent. This is how upside down the city councillors are. 350 of them just west of Spadina. .

[@SteveBerube]

not to forget - shortage of tradesmen (plumber/electrician/carpenters) - so to get anywhere you have to educate/promote these fields...then up the chain painters/pavers/surveyors/inspectors to make sure the quality of those house is up to par and futureproof and sustainable

[@mtrest4]

There is no such shortage

[@SteveBerube]

@@mtrest4 ok deny is easy - now prove it, where are you located in Canada, maybe it's a regional thing, what are your sources that backs your reply on

[@icelerate8141]

Problem with academics is that they are afraid suggesting less immigration is xenophobic/racist.

[@jay1645]

HK immigrants with cash put a floor on the last downturn then came the chinese money launderers who have vanished atm

[@C2C19]

Discussion about immigration is not the same as discussing immigrants

[@central3425]

The housing crisis will balance itself

[@latananderson3289]

😂 good one. I wonder how many people missed this reference

[@anthonyhepworth8251]

Good presentation but no reference to unaffordable construction costs. Land costs can adjust to some extent but construction costs aren't. Lots of government infrastructure work keeps the numbers high.

[@GreenBeanGreenBean]

hilarious because conservatives have only balanced the budget one time ever (when oil was very high for a very long time)

[@baseline6786]

It will double almost in price by 2034. Liberal way

[@latananderson3289]

You're last point about Canada not having leaders is spot on. Even the conservatives are followers

[@jay1645]

They are grifters not leaders from both maj. parties in the hands of lobbyists

[@stefanopaoli717]

This is so well said. I wish more people would start speaking up like this. Actually, screaming. I've been thinking this for years already; some people are now getting it, but not enough. I admit I voted Liberals, but now I am so upset. With that reckless immigration policy they screwed up the country so bad. The housing crises is just one example. But it is the most telling, because as you point out it was so obvious that a crisis would occur. Why they did not care? The only reason I can see it that they were so much biased by some business lobby, and had some personal benefit from it; maybe they just got brainwashed by them, and lost any connection to reality. As for the economists, after witnessing how wrong they have been in the last two decades, I don't trust them at all anymore. The frustration comes, as in your conclusion, from seeing that nobody in the political scene is offering a valid alternative. I can't vote for any of the three parties now. Nobody has the courage, or does not want, to say: we stop immigration altogether until we clean up this mess.

[@bman1990]

When you have people who live in Disneyland making decisions for people who live in the real economy, the real world. It's not going to end well for anyone, except for the privileged politicians.

[@gunpreetdhaliwal]

Closing statement was spot on with politics everywhere.👍

[@davidgillies1348]

You've presented a compelling analysis of how we go to where we are. Question: given the 'surge' was mainly a) the belief post-Covid that we desperately needed LOTS of TFR's and b) foreign students are a limitless cash-cow, can we quickly course correct by a) killing the non-agricultural TFR program and b) limit the students to say 2015-ish numbers. How would that affect the housing situation?

[@john_pasalis]

The Liberals and Conservatives appear to be moving in this direction. This will take pressure of rent growth. Maybe rents remain flat or dip a bit.

[@DannyJ-d1z]

Thank you. It is still very lucrative to build while the price moves between $500 to 700k in 5 years, given most of the other parameters re-adjust and move with the price decline. It is possible only if $300k profit in one flipping, loop holes are eliminated. I know a 70 story condo where number of top units were set aside for insiders, family and friends and later flipped. In 2000s I noticed 100% cash transactions and buyers offered extra cash on top of all the buying costs (inflated prices) and many sketchy behaviors caused the today's prices. Stricter monitoring and enforcements would keep the entire sector sane.

[@jay1645]

Take away the artificial props and price will revert to multiples of median wage 3.5x on avg

[@parthppatel28]

They should zone more land for housing and all the problem would be solved but people in the industry and with common interest and lobbyist are PREVENTING THIS.

[@Riderdownn]

There doesn’t seem to be an expert in sight regarding the housing market. If there was, maybe there would be some path to a solution

[@bernie_b12]

Your best video thanks for saying it.

[@littlepinner05]

John - I agree with your assertion that the housing experts got it wrong. However, if you want to focus solely on house prices vs. population growth, the data doesn’t support your narrative either. If you look at the latest census data on occupied dwellings per person (from 2021), you will see that over the previous 25+ years up to that point, the average household size per occupied private dwelling (which excludes things like second homes/cottages, AirBnBs, vacant homes, etc.), decreased, meaning we had more housing supply relative to population growth. This was also confirmed in a note by BMO covered by Better Dwelling in 2022. Specifically, BMO stated that “Canadian Census data on private dwellings occupied by usual residents suggest that household formations have consistently lagged new housing supply for the better part of two decades, even accounting for some likely underestimation of formations,” and “The country doesn’t have a supply problem so much as an affordability problem due to recurring waves of excess demand pressure,” explains Guatieri. As you know, house prices peaked in late 2021/early 2022, before population growth really exploded. Therefore, the notion that house price growth can be explained by population growth is not supported by the data. The data shows that we likely had a supply surplus of housing stock relative to our population growth prior to 2022. This didn’t stop prices from increasing 6-20% per year for nearly two decades. The population growth narrative seems to have been adopted after the fact to justify home prices, with the implication being that population growth will put a floor under house prices going forward. Similarly, the CHMC’s assertion that we need 3.5 million homes by 2030, which you referenced, is often thrown around as a justification for high house prices. What isn’t discussed as frequently is that the 3.5 million number is actually based on affordability rather than population growth, meaning that if housing became more affordable (i.e. house prices dropped), the actual need would decrease. The reality is that demand encompasses much more than population growth, and by focusing solely on population growth, we ignore many of the other demand factors that drove up prices (i.e. interest rates, market sentiment, increasing debt levels, foreign money, speculation, fraud, etc.). The evidence would show that those factors played a much greater role in driving up prices than population growth. Sources: www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=9810003901 www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p3Var.pl?Function=Unit&Id=108091 betterdwelling.com/canadas-housing-supply-has-outpaced-household-formation-for-two-decades-bmo/

[@jay1645]

Bang on we have near recessionary eco. conditions atm and no money laundering as chinese have vanished for now and no other groups have come in with some more rules around ownership and high rates. So price to median wage is correcting , rates will have to drop to 0 as eco conditions worsen or find an equilibrium. Tariffs will hurt our exporters and US elec. result awaited as chinese have signaled retaliation for tariffs put on them by us. US has already put tariffs on our lumber and await what next from there if Trump wins

[@Lifer996]

Thanks for the good info. I think no party leadership knows this information well enough to govern effectively. Do you have real estate contacts in other countries (for retirement)?

[@grab-a-javaroasters7592fresh]

Great show. We can't afford reactionary gov't. It's municipal to federal. Leadership & longer term planning, please.

[@dougpatterson7494]

I would like to point out that the LPC is making changes concerning housing and immigration that the CPC proposed awhile back.

[@jay1645]

Will not work as the eco slips into recession , Carney is here to save the banks atm lol 25 to 30 yr amortz. will do nothing and swapping grifters from Libs to Cons. esp a Cons majority will be a disaster

[@benvicius672]

Maybe not news to viewers of this channel, but Steve Saretsky called the housing construction projects a bold faced lie immediately after they were announced. Now if nobody saw the problems caused by excessive population growth, I wonder how we're going to deal with the problems that surface when it stops. Higher education, and likely other sectors, are going to have budget shortfalls now that the music has stopped. I have to wonder what the second-order effects of that will be.

[@Ricardo-gs2ce]

Why do some people still believe there’s an oversupply in housing? We've been facing a shortage for years, and developers aren’t foolish-they won’t keep building if there aren’t buyers. I'm highly optimistic that housing prices will continue to surge within the next two years. The government doesn’t seem to want Canadians to own property; instead, they appear to aim to become the country's largest landlord. They want people to be content while owning nothing.

[@john_pasalis]

If that's the impression you got, that I think there is an oversupply - you either misheard me or I misspoke I don't think we have an oversupply

[@vancouverlife1040]

Developers do not care about buyers. The only thing drives them is the profit. Now, it's not profitable for them to build anything not because there are no buyers but materials getting expensive and interest rate is too high. They dont have any reason to start building. I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to buy a house if interest rate drops to around 3 to 4 percent mortgage rates and they are waiting. It's sad to see how people don't buy a house when house prices are stagnant but they all try to jump in when house prices are going up like crazy. I have seen that almost every 5 years or so and repeats since 30 years ago...

[@Ricardo-gs2ce]

@@john_pasalis I'm not referring to your video; some comments on other videos strangely suggest that we're in an oversupply situation.

[@Lifeisapartydresslikeit]

You’re absolutely right! If they cared they would make apartment buildings but they know they can’t make money and builders also cannot make money… think about that? It’s all about making money. This is why I keep telling everyone the government isn’t here to save you! Help yourself!!

[@C2C19]

There is an oversupply of 600 sq ft condos that are not suitable for families

[@headab9027]

Without this rate of growth, wouldn't our GDP be much lower? Thanks for bursting the YIMBY bubble. "Builders stop building when prices drop." They are also just listening to the INVESTOR class. The Real Estate sector (investors, REITs, builders, etc) LOBBY hard. Follow the money. Who benefits? The investor class and asset holders. Too many powerful people make money from the housing 'crisis'. It isn't a crisis for them. It's a windfall. Look how many MPs are landlords.

[@Half-Hero]

While you are right in highlighting the fact that demand side has been understated, you are ironically understating the supply side issues. No doubt the population growth (especially in last few years) made it much worse, but it originated as a supply side issue. CMHC used to build housing when markets failed to build enough affordable housing. Much of the blame can be traced to the federal government stopped building in 90s. You also have provincial governments also failing to address it, despite having power over municipalities. In Ontario, the best idea was to build over farmland that is crucial is environmental issues get worse. They could have forced municipalities, which biased towards NIMBY, to actually allow middle housing and better density instead of subsidizing suburbs that are tax revenue negative. When 2 blocks away from a TTC station you can't build anything but a detached home (until recently), you obviously have supply side constraints that are a huge issue. Supply side policies are the reason why Montreal fared better until now in the housing crisis. I don't disagree that you can't ignore crazy population growth and that you can't triple construction labour overnight. But stop saying experts were wrong about supply side issues. Research in Netherlands has shown that government must step in to provide housing that free markets fail to.

[@john_pasalis]

I never suggested the lack of supply is not an issue. And I agree that much of this started in the 90s when governments stopped supporting the construction of PBR and before that, non-market housing. So yes, governments need to do a lot on the supply front. But if you look back and read any report or op-ed from a housing expert, they repeatedly argued our crisis could be solved by supply-side measures alone, and that is the point I think they got wrong. Of course we have a shortage when governments triple our population growth rate and house completions remain relatively unchanged.

[@augustodasilva268]

Great analyses and insight into a problem that was created by inept idealogues in government.

[@theonlyfriedtyguy]

Clearly they’re not “experts”. Let’s stop calling people that and just refer to their names.

[@Matt.k864]

Toronto’s unemployment rates at 8%. How many more people can the economy support

[@shanesteele778]

It was the century initiative

[@rps1689]

As long as current and future homeowners are not just satisfied with paying off their mortgages and to build equity, plus want prices to rise faster than earnings in the local economy at the expense of affordability for those who follow, the crisis of housing affordability will never get resolved no matter how much you reduce immigration, curb foreign buyers or property flippers. The political will does not exist to resolve the crisis nor do most home owners want to see more supply created where needed the most because it threatens their financial asset’s potential; and all political parties know this.

[@aaronbaisarowicz9242]

It's unfortunate that you failed to touch on the impact of short term rental owner/speculators on having a significant impact on the market. It puts your bias in question as one who earns a living off real estate. Certainly much of BC and other areas of Canada has fallen prey to having their inventories depleted by this AND perhaps restrictions on these has also created a little breathing room in the market as owner/speculators of multiple houses are also forced to rent to single families as long term tenants.

[@rps1689]

As long as current and future homeowners are not just satisfied with paying off their mortgages and to build equity, plus want prices to rise faster than earnings in the local economy at the expense of affordability for those who follow, the crisis of housing affordability will never get resolved no matter how much you reduce immigration, curb foreign buyers or property flippers. The political will does not exist to resolve the crisis nor do most home owners want to see more supply created where needed the most because it threatens their financial asset’s potential; and all political parties know this. Real estate developers and the real estate industry are one of the big lobbyists nowadays in Canada and have great influence on government polices regarding regulating the industry to how cities are zoned and how many are actively rigged to prevent new supply where needed the most.

[@raguthanabalasingam2166]

Low density housing is much more elastic and costs much less to build but with the Greenbelt in place, this is not possible. We now have Vancouver prices instead of Calgary prices. Calgary and Edmonton are some of the fastest growing cities. No greenbelt, much lower DC fees, less regulation. Compare Portland to Houston for another example.

[@zomgoose]

Calgary prices are quickly becoming Vancouver prices.

[@raguthanabalasingam2166]

@@zomgoose No, they are not. Single family houses are still afordable for families making the median household income of 108k with house starting at 400k. Townhouses/condos are available for much less. Toronto and Vancouver have restricted land supply and hence have high house (land) prices.

[@zomgoose]

@@raguthanabalasingam2166 Houses are not $400k in Calgary. New builds are $700-800k.

[@raguthanabalasingam2166]

@@zomgoose New build Townhouse in Markham start at $1.5M. They don't have new build houses in GVA. There are resale detached houses in Calgary that start at 400k. Maybe not the best place but it is affordable. The worst neighbourhood in Toronto has house prices that starts at $750K because of the Greenbelt.

[@akshaygulati2707]

​@raguthanabalasingam2166 gta is biggest job market. Calgary don't have enough jobs right now. And those 700k houses are expensive

[@aq7705]

The comments never EVER mention property investors piling in on the housing market.

[@EDA-du5os]

I agree immigration needs to be more balanced, however, please help me understand how house construction numbers should be the same as the number of new immigrants coming into the country. Typically homes have more than one person living there, homes are comprised of more than one person, an average 2-4 per household.

[@timjkinney3472]

John I agree overall with the argument We had lots of building when prices were going up year over year builders were apparently guaranteed to make huge profits If the builders were buying the land 10 years before completion even with increasing construction costs it seems most builders did very well Yes they are profit focused and I suppose the fact that the land cost has been driven up I have no idea about the cost of raw land or that market is it realistic that raw land prices will fall and at some point the builders get back into the game My fear now is that with this natural hesitation of builders coinciding at a time where governments are trying to save their seats my fear is that government will start paying builders or somehow subsidizing which which might actually drive up costs As an individual I think we all need to hold on buying anything for a couple years until prices fall 10 20 30% and obviously individuals will decide when to jump in but this would also help builders The artificially low interest rates used to try to avoid recession have brought us to essentially record housing prices yes they're down a little bit from the absolute stupid record but they're still in stupid record territory It might take a one or 2 or 3 year moratorium on buying to bring prices down If we could get all purchasers together organized and agree that people should offer no more than 80% of current value for anything and if we could apply that for 2 or 3 years we would get down to about $65 or 70% of current valuations This might sound unreasonable but that's probably where valuations are at a affordable or fair level Unfortunately individual buyers seem to have the ability to adjust to stupider and stupider costs As I've said before the current prices in GTA combined with current interest rates put the actual cost in record territory this is not the way to create affordable housing

[@Relaxlifeisshort2]

Hahahha another dreamer waitimg for 60% drop in prices Wow fools

[@dakpod7811]

Dr. George Athanasakos, professor at Ivey Business School (Western), addressed the issue in “The housing crisis isn't just a supply issue. Here's how to fix demand". But who is listening?

[@DarR1299]

Why the population growth, you asked? Three letters: GDP

[@jz12390]

Its not the correct approach.. Its a ponzi.. A shocking statistic is if you removed the insane population growth Canada is in a severe depression for the past couple of years..

[@autonestegg4195]

In the GTA red tape cost an extra 350k for each house and over 1 million in Vancouver if we reduce those costs drastically then there would be room for housing Supply to grow while prices drop to me this seems to be the obvious answer City councilors love to sit around and feel important while also creating extra bureaucratic positions which don't need to exist... this combined with housing Supply exceeding population growth married to each other would be a great dual policy

[@C2C19]

Partly the problem is the experts, others including myself who has 40 years experience, warned government officials 10 years ago and was called a racist. A failure to distinguish immigration from immigrantsWe have seen the enemy it is us!

[@pedroual]

I understand that it is hard to hear this. We have a problem with investors; both domestic and international. We have a problem that investors and the real estate industry and banks and mortgage companies together colude to create what it seems to be a over demand when in fact those who buy one buy plenty. Finally We have a problem and that is as simple as it is both logical and tragic Prices are too too high Fix the prices and orientate the market to first time home buyers nullifying the effect of investors and those with large equity and resolve this problem. The issue is that everyone wants to fix this not to cure but so that the party can go one.

[@ivanandreevich8568]

Hey John the argument about not building if prices are down 25% is flawed. Rezone everything to multifamily and land value craters. Even at 50% values vs today building is more profitable than today etc.

[@john_pasalis]

upzoning land typically increases the value of land (and houses). Land values don't crash when you can build more housing on it

[@mr.d4295]

​@@john_pasalis Land value will plummet over the next few years.. Anyone who owns raw land is going to get devastated

[@evilapple3427]

Municipal development charges for building is done at per unit level not by land. The more units you build the higher the development charges. Building more units also means more material and labor is needed for the construction. Air duct, electrical system, plumbing work doesn't get reduced just because you are building more home - each home still need its own set of systems. This means most of construction cost are variable costs that increases based on how many units are built. The main fixed cost that will be reduced is the cost of land. So if the prices fall too much, it is simply not profitable to convert larger units into multi-family homes.

[@ivanandreevich8568]

@@john_pasalisCurrent multizone family value let's say 10x single family (random number, I don't actually know). Upzone everything, the rezoned lots will be let's say 5x current multifamily value because supply is up 1000%. If supply is up a lot, prices of multizone WILL BE down. It will be up vs single zone.

[@terrylevine]

Very interesting. So, assuming governments have recognized the problem, how do you see this unfolding in terms of rents and how prices for the next 3, 5, 10, 20 years?

[@DavidHughes-f6c]

That question will be answered in 3,5,10,20 years.

[@terrylevine]

@@DavidHughes-f6c Very helpful.

[@DavidHughes-f6c]

@@terrylevine The whole point of the video is that the "experts" got their projections all wrong. Asking what the housing market will look like in 5 years let alone 20 is hopelessly naive.

[@terrylevine]

@@DavidHughes-f6cAsking the expert who just explained why CMHC experts were wrong is actually the ideal person to ask for his opinion. It’s not naive. It means some of us are breathing. It’s not like I’m holding him to his answer. I’m simply curious about his opinion. That’s how people communicate. Or should.

[@Ekowal1965]

I'm 60 years old. 15 years ago I got wiped out financially in a divorce in US. After returning to Canada saving & investing the only solution I see is leaving Canada and enjoying my retirement somewhere else. The housing crisis will not disappear for decades. I just would like to retire in in my own small place. That dream is not going to happen in Canada. Thank you Justin.

[@tylerdurden8378]

New Zealand. But an acre on South Island. Put up a $40K yurt.

[@playbak]

John for prime minister!

[@john_pasalis]

Thank you, but I enjoy what I do way too much

[@JanewDLCYBMGroup]

I totally agee with every word.

[@mr.d4295]

S&D was never the issue. Canadian real estate is in a MASSIVE bubble driven by fomo low rates and ENORMOUS amounts of speculation. The only thing that will restore affordability is when the price of existing homes declines, and the declines are happening from coast to coast as we speak..

[@Stormshfter]

If they were to stagnate the "working population" until 2030 they would only have to build half the housing. Base immigration on the number of people leaving the workforce, and have more stringent rules about the occupations that they must pursue. We're good for low end jobs for a decade. If that happened, municipal govt fees, provincial land transfer tax and GST would all still have to be removed from new builds to make new housing affordable. Problem there is that our govt not only isnt willing to streamline and become more productive, but instead they are growing and becoming more expensive. Tough nut for sure.

[@JamesKjones-n7r]

Hi, I’m retiring in two years and I’m curious how others split their income into savings, spending, and investments. I make around $150,000 a year but haven’t saved much. Can you share some advice?

[@KarenJ.Mancia]

Consider investment planning; learning from an experienced advisor is very valuable.

[@pauline-o2q]

That’s right. I’m a wife, mother of four, and new grandmother. After 28 years in Corporate America, I recently retired at 57. Since the pandemic in early 2020, I’ve been investing and grew my $250,000 savings to nearly $1 million, thanks to my investment advisor.

[@heatherj-o5j]

I’ve been considering getting one, but haven't been proactive about it. Can you recommend your advisor? I could really use some assistance.

[@pauline-o2q]

I'm cautious about giving specific recommendations since this is an online forum and everyone situation is unique, but I've worked with Jessica Lee Horst for years and highly recommend her. Look her up to see if she meets your criteria

[@heatherj-o5j]

Wow!! her track record looks really good from what I found online.i just filled the form and scheduled for a call. Thanks to you.

[@mikehogan1827]

As you say, you can’t triple completions overnight. I don’t think we can get there from here, in large part because we don’t have enough tradespeople. And we don’t have them because we (stupidly) discouraged young people from entering the trades. Crazy.

[@Lifeisapartydresslikeit]

But not only can you not triple housing - please tell me on what land these places will be built? In places people do not want to live? Far from work?? Who is travelling so far to get to work! Let’s get a reality check please

[@daleblock3974]

Very good comments leaders vs followers. Polls should be illegal & computer models., they have disabled the thinking/thought process of humans.

[@puddytat62]

Canadas lack of affordable housing is similar to many other countries around the world so not really unique. The lack of affordable housing stems from the mortgage market being accessible to more people. When interest rates were higher the market sorted itself out since people had to have downpayments and be qualified through legit means. When interest rates were pushed uncharacteristically low for too long it meant anyone could qualify and so while supply increased marginally demand increased exponentially. This easy money is what created the sub prime industry and a world economic crisis where the greed of a few meant any losses would have to be absorbed by taxpayers. In steps the experts ?! Realtors are not experts. They are sales professionals who make commissions on real estate not economics experts. Sales of homes are tied to the cost of borrowing which realtors do not engage in. They are transactional professionals. It’s why it takes very little time or education to become a realtor . And developers are similarly biased since they too have little to do with lending. The more they can sell a property for the more profit they make so they have no incentive to have lower priced homes. They are for profit entities! Sadly the politicians often have limited knowledge on economics and can easily be persuaded to support development thinking that appeasing builders will solve affordability. No chance since they are for profit. Large builders in North America are billion dollar companies which slap up housing at record rates to maximize profit. Bare minimum quality means higher profits. They’re often publicly traded companies so they have allegiance to share holders not to home buyers ! An increase of housing stock at $800,000 or more does not solve affordability. And commissioned sales people make more money from higher prices not lower prices. Not experts… just sales professionals

[@BrendaSargent-t1q]

Simple math I think!! 300 homes/ 10,000 immigrants. Not hard to figure out….. Sorry but we need to close immigration for 5 years.

[@thuydao7052]

Yes, supply problems. Nothing will last profusely, endlessly, water especially. Better, to leave people where they are, where their land can take its fair share with its own resources. Canada presently can carry more, but earth surface conditions get worn off more rapidly with extra load keep adding on. And human reproduction capacity should get some attention when planning for future expansion.

[@elvinilogy]

I am sorry, but your analysis is wrong. Ivy League trained economist here. The housing isn't made of some kind of a rare resource. The land is limited, yes! But not so much in Canada. Don't want to spend time explaining. But my message for the readers, is please, don't ever listen to people who try to discredit science.

[@EagleLeader1]

I my humble opinion, government created this problem and therefore they have to fix it BUT through extraordinary means. Currently they want to use ordinary means, which means traditional for profit builders. That's obviously is not going to happen if it's going to undercut their own industry with falling prices. Now people aren't going to like my suggestions because it's going to sound unrealistic or uncomfortable. Historically however most crises are only handled by extraordinary government measures. It's how we got to the moon, how we defeat Fascists and Communism etc. Almost anything amazing humanity has ever accomplished was through evil big government. My idea, temporarily become like the evil USSR and have the government themselves build cheap ugly shared housing. This will give the average income person housing and let the current home owners fight with each other over their detached Canadian dream homes. Instead of having the poor forced to fight with the rich for their homes. It only benefits the current home owners to have the poor fight for their homes. How? Well create a new government department who hires construction workers directly. This way you won't have to depend on private for profit business. Ensure these cheaper apartment buildings will always remain gov't property so the speculators don't get their grubby hands on them. Put it into law that the government can never privatize this department. Get the Canadian Army involved if recruiting is an issue. I know they didn't join to do that sort of work but if it snows or floods they also have to perform non security missions for the nation. Roman and Napoleonic armies were famous builders and didn't shy away from serving the country through non combatant work. Beats the heck out of trying to teach them DEI and stock tampons in their washrooms. I know I'll get a lot of heat for these commie ideas... And I really am not a communist. But sadly history is on my side. Privatized entities rarely ever saved us from crises. Elon may be the first to break the cycle with Mars. I just don't see any uber rich Canadian willing to mass produce cheap homes for all. Most rich Canadians want the crisis to continue as they are already invested in it continuing. So government is the only solution. We just have to keep a close eye to make sure they don't screw it up like Big government tends to do.

[@AUSTRALIANAMADE]

WHAT ALGORITHM IS USED TO PRIORITISE AND DECIPHER NEED IN HOUSING DEPARTMENTS/PUBLIC HOUSING.? IN AUSTRALIA I CAN BECOME A DRUG ADDICT AND GET PRIORITY, IT ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO BE SINGLE, DISABILITY WITH A DODGY DIAGNOSIS. DO YOU KNOW THE CONTRACTOR THAT AUSTRALIA AND CANADA AND NEW ZEALAND USE?

[@robertrankin7805]

@MoveSmartly your top comment is a scam/spam about trading. Please flag and report

[@MoveSmartly]

@robertrankin7805 - yes thank you we do remove and report, we do not want these comments on our channel ` Urmi

[@huskavarnapunkband]

Its a stalemate state,

[@speedyfeint]

F J T

[@luiscardozo0000]

we dont need more houses as a proof you can see houses are not saleing cause ppl dont have the money to buy ...and if the prices goes more down canada became a poor country

[@BogdanRotman]

John John: are you an actiivist for the Liberals? Blamed opp leader, economists but little little for Trudeau!

[@MetaPhysStore0770]

Build your own house😵‍💫, people have done it for thousands of years😂😂😂

[@rzmk8620]

Who’s expert? Backed by Investors, big real estate firm, new paper, media, pension funds. It’s corruption that’s all.

[@Dinoknows007]

1.3 million....more than 50 percent of that are temporary residents. Will house prices drop by 50 percent if we remove 800 million temporary residents? It is not difficult to remove these temporary residents. It is not houses that we need...we need affordable homes which the private sector will not cater to unless they get at least 15 percent profit. Look at the Singapore model for affordable housing.

[@zeusvalentine3638]

Singapore also doesn't have a garbage or recycling problem. They figured out a way to burn everything for energy without pollution. They are leaders in everything.

[@robertrankin7805]

Lol, Singapore also has pretty extreme laws that Liberals/Progressives will never adopt. Singaporean policies would literally be called Fascist by Liberals if an "old stock" politician proposed them. How about some corporeal punishment for littering? How about some race-based forced integration measures to prevent ghettos and prevent cultural enclaves? -- Liberals would never abide any of these

[@camels9654]

Canadian culture has changed due to a number of factors, hard work is no longer respected or rewarded, it is punished with it's communist style progressive tax. Communist/socialist countries will always suffer from poor productivity. Also, the work force is lazy and demoralized because their hard work is never realized because of the excessive taxation. Canada is a failed country and I am divesting myself as quickly as possible from here. Pierre won't change much.

[@martinzarathustra8604]

NO mention of labour supply? Might want to think about that.

[@TheCommonS3Nse]

The answer for why all the politicians refused to acknowledge the population problem is demographics. We’re in a demographic decline, which means we will have less workers supporting more elderly people. There are a whole host of issues that this brings. The only short term solution is immigration, so they all support it (except the PPC). Frankly, we could technically build our way out of this, but it would require the government to build houses themselves, not rely on the private sector. As he said, you can’t incentivize someone to overproduce their product and drive down their profits.

[@sloburnjo]

SORRY NOT, THERE ARE NO EXPERTS.

[@sloburnjo]

Toronto IS NOT Canada

[@Lifeisapartydresslikeit]

But people only want to live in Toronto or the GTA. And Vancouver. No one says yeah I’m moving to PEI or Saskatchewan. Let’s be real here. So in the GTA there will always be a crisis/shortage of housing

[@adrianvisentin534]

Firstly there are no experts. In anything. Secondly everyone is biased, and their official views reflect their bias, not reality

[@ZollMisc-c1w]

Williams Robert Anderson Carol Gonzalez Carol

[@latshmanraghunath2652]

Aren't you one of these "experts"

[@jz12390]

Pre Trudeau population growth was not sustainable either.

[@VitaliyMonastyrev]

I think you are twisting what experts actually saying by taking it too literally, yes everybody talks about building more but it doesn't mean they disregard population growth. When they say "we need more supply" - it implies issues with demand. Another reason to talk primarily about supply: there are at least some benefits to immigration, and our economy relies on immigration a lot, so changing this part is hard and risky, meanwhile amount of red tape and fees around construction are flat out absurd, whereas we need more supply or not.

[@Ricardo-gs2ce]

We need trump here running

[@MikeSmith-vo2yt]

Politian not plural let immigration get out of control