Tuesday, September 17, 2024

Not Impressed

In typical fashion, the federal Liberals, thanks to the absence of an overall vision, have tried to put their finger in the housing dike. As in the tale of the Dutch boy, their 'solution' will fail.

Because Mr. Trudeau and company are innately averse to interfering in the marketplace, they are going to make it easier for people to take on more debt while at the same time greatly exacerbating our housing crisis.

First-time buyers across Canada and any purchasers of newly built homes will soon be able to stretch their mortgages out an extra five years, the federal government announced Monday — along with other changes builders hope will spur more home construction, but that observers fear could push prices up. 

The ability to offer 30-year amortizations for insured mortgages was announced by deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland in Ottawa on Monday, along with a reduction in the down payment required for homes between $1 million and $1.5 million.

“It is going to put the dream of home ownership in reach for more young Canadians,” Freeland said Monday. 

With Monday’s announcement, a first-time buyer of a resale home who takes out an insured mortgage, which happens when a homebuyer provides less than a 20 per cent as a down payment, could also be offered a 30-year loan repayment instead of a 25-year term. The same would apply for any buyer, first time or not, who buys a newly built home.

Except that the dream will quickly transmute into a nightmare, since housing prices will soar beyond their current  record levels.

...the policy changes were also seen by many observers as a spark to demand that could push home prices even higher.

“This is something that’s going to have a direct impact on the buying public as soon as it takes effect,” predicted mortgage broker Mary Sialtsis... 

But any kick to an undersupplied market could come with a cost, she said. “Is that going to end up driving up home prices with multiple offers? Sure, there’s a risk of that, because we’re in a chronic housing shortage in the GTA.”

 David Hulchanski, a housing policy expert with the University of Toronto, sees the goal of increasing housing supply as important. But he, too, has concerns around price inflation if demand is stoked, as well as the impact of allowing people to take on bigger loans. “In Canada, we’re already putting a lot of our financial effort into the housing sector, whereas it could be more productively used elsewhere,” he said. “It’s putting more people in some greater debt.”

This short-term thinking, typical of the increasingly desperate Liberal government, is not the solution for these times. For that, we have to go back a bit in history, when, between 1941 and 1945, government, through a crown corporation called Wartime Housing Limited, built affordable housing you can read about through the above link. 

And this video is instructive:

A direct, interventionist policy that tried to address shortage, the concept of Victory Houses is clearly considered off-limits by today's movers and shakers. They  place all of their faith in marketplace 'solutions', which is why the federal government tosses money at provinces and municipalities to give to private builders in the hope they will come to everyone's rescue.

Newsflash: they will not.

12 comments:

  1. The first person to come forward and solve the housing issues of north America will certainly receive the order of Canada plus a Senate seat and possibly a sainthood from the Vatican.
    Until then we will just have to find a solution to greed!
    TB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, TB, we lack politicians who will stand up to the greed imperative. Window dressing just doesn't do it for people living on the edge, a substantial segment of the population.

      Delete
  2. IIRC, the Gov't started its plans to deal with the looming post-war crisis in 1943, did a lot of careful analysis, and then brought in enabling legislation, probably before the end of the war.

    All one needed was a government with a vision---and an absence of large developers who were close friends with your local provincial premier.

    I used to work for CMHC and have actually read the reports from 1943--1945. They are a bit humbling.

    I doubt that the exact same approaches used in the 1940's and 50's would all work today though some might. However, I suspect a Federal Gov't ruthless enough to stomp on local and provincial (where possible) objections could do a lot fairly quickly.

    The Federal Government, to a very large part, controls the purse strings. I am not sure but they might even be able to take back tax points. (Evil grin)

    Depending on what the remnants of CMHC has in the plans folder and what other departments have stashed away one could probably have a decent program in place in three years.

    This may sound like a long time but building a complex national-level program like a major housing effort is amazingly complex.

    In the mean time one could pump funds into several existing programs that look pretty good. IIRC, there was some co-operative municipal housing initiatives in Québec a couple of years ago that looked good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the information, Anon. I wasn't aware of housing initiatives in Quebec, but I'll look into it.

      The Mound of Sound often used a term, "captured governments," i.e. those who have been co-opted by powerful interests, and I'm afraid that is what we see at both the national and the provincial levels. Is it any wonder why so many have lost faith in the democratic process? I am not hopeful of any remediation in the near future.

      Delete
    2. The Mound of Sound often used a term, "captured governments,

      With good reason. There is good reason to think that South Africa had that a few years ago when a rich Indian industrial family nearly captured the government. I think a SA President may still be in prison over that one. It was close.

      In term of Israeli policy, the US government has been captured for years by AIPAC. I don' think it has been completely captured otherwise though it is hard to disentangle the Military Complex and the Government.

      I think we can say the current UCP Gov't in Alberta has been captured by the oil and gas industry. I'm rather surprised Danielle Smith is not holding live sacrifices outside the Legislature to the Spirit of the God of Fossil Fuels.

      I suspect Dougie, though not the entire Gov't has been captured by developers although, to be fair, his behaviour in many areas may be explained by a lack of intellectual rigour, lack of experience, and an unquestioning neoliberal mindset.

      Delete
    3. All true, Anon. And as you say, with Doug, there is definitely "a lack of intellectual rigour, lack of experience, and an unquestioning neoliberal mindset."

      Delete
  3. I am one of the lucky ones that , in the mid 1970's, was able to purchase a "home" with a loan for the down deposit, then a mortgage!
    It did go sideways when the mortgage rate jumped to 21 1/2 %
    but we survived.
    Back then a "home " modest it was, cost about four or five years of my annual income.
    Nowadays owning a home is an investment for profit , not an investment to a future of contentment.
    Nowadays a home is much more lavish than it needs to be ; it's become an overbuilt status symbol where the garage holds the rewards of over consumption and not a car!!
    The 'homes" around me are around 3000 sq ft and the average occupancy is three persons!
    The average home in the old neighbourhood of town was 1200 to 1400 sq ft and were built when the average family was five or six persons!
    I think we have unrealistic expectations?

    TB




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that our expectations today are unrealistic, TB. No doubt all of the 'reality shows' have played a role in selling the 'good life.' I have owned two homes in my life, both bungalows that would be considered very modest by today's standards, yet we raised two children in our 1200 sq. ft. abode, and it continues to serve us well to this day. No doubt, after we are gone, it will be deemed a teardown.

      Delete
  4. No doubt, after we are gone, it will be deemed a teardown
    Ahh the theme of the day, within the real estate sector at least.
    The real estate sector of our( false) economy has had massive influence here in BC particularly with the sale of the profitable BC Rail with it's extensive land ownership.
    Home ownership has gone from being an acquisition to a comfortable life to a financial investment!
    Many years ago the average home owner purchased a home for his or her long term benefit then made investments typically in the interest a bank offered and also saved a little cash for future use.
    Nowadays we have an unreliable financial gong show which is best typified by crypto currency, pay for view tv and radio , which was once free, pay to hear music that one was a one time purchase, the list is long!
    Our value of 'worth' has been debased?
    TB


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, TB, and things as you describe the real estate industry are exactly the same here. in Ontario. Bigger and better seems always to be the rallying cry.

      Delete
  5. Modest houses give modest returns to a developer. It is better to build a bigger house and make more money. Building modest housing is uneconomical under our current housing model.

    I do not think we are that spoilt, we have no choice. The same thing applies in rental housing. It is not cost effective to build an apartment building with 3 or 4 bedroom units or so developers say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The developers are in the driver's seat here. Of that there can be no doubt. The 'beauty' of unfettered capitalism, eh?

      Delete