News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

Preconstruction condo-buying is almost a civic pastime in major urban metros in Canada. I think banning the purchase of units pre-con would be politically unpopular. Similarly clamping down on backdoor immigration through student visas. Many immigrant communities are using that pathway to bring family and friends to Canada. Just slowing the issuance of visas might be possible, but wholesale reform such as you're thinking of would likely be very unpopular in swing ridings.

I could see room for tax subsidies for the development purpose built rentals, but that would likely be open to attack for corporate welfare etc. (handouts to big landlords, etc,).
 
There's a lot that can be done. And the government is aware of all these ideas. They are not motivated to implement them. It's just that simple. The day after the LPC gets voted out, they'll immediately start screaming about housing affordability despite basically paying lip service to the idea their whole time in office.

Added bonus will be screaming about the CPC being racist, making any discussion about changing immigration intake taboo. The real sad part here is what this is doing the country. The Liberals are basically breaking decades of bipartisan consensus on immigration for their own cynical political gains. Reminds me of Belarus weaponizing refugee flows to get concessions from the EU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T3G
afransen said:
Preconstruction condo-buying is almost a civic pastime in major urban metros in Canada. I think banning the purchase of units pre-con would be politically unpopular.
Click to expand...

With developers, undoubtedly, and a comparatively small real estate investor sub-section of society, I'm not convinced that upsetting that constituency would not be advantageous politically. Most people on any given day or in any given year are not purchasing a condo. Of those who are, I would wager most would prefer to buy a known-product, that is move-in ready in 90 days or less, with no bait and switch risk. But perhaps I err in that estimation.

afransen said:
Similarly clamping down on backdoor immigration through student visas. Many immigrant communities are using that pathway to bring family and friends to Canada. Just slowing the issuance of visas might be possible, but wholesale reform such as you're thinking of would likely be very unpopular in swing ridings.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But I know a lot of people who are first-generation immigrants and feel that the door shouldn't be a wide open as it is now.

afransen said:
I could see room for tax subsidies for the development purpose built rentals, but that would likely be open to attack for corporate welfare etc. (handouts to big landlords, etc,).
Click to expand...

With 16B hand-outs to Volkswagen and Stellantis that amount to several million per job..............

16B in housing investment would buy:

~ 48000 units if the gov't paid 100% of the tab (assume government or non-profit is land owner about 1/2 the time, plus cost of construction)

If you assume the private sector should pay 2/3 of the cost, for a private, for-profit unit, then you get 144,000 units out of that. Spread that over 5 years, and for 3.2B per year or just about 0.7% of federal spending you make one hell of a dent in the housing crisis.
 
Northern Light said:
With developers, undoubtedly, and a comparatively small real estate investor sub-section of society, I'm not convinced that upsetting that constituency would not be advantageous politically. Most people on any given day or in any given year are not purchasing a condo. Of those who are, I would wager most would prefer to buy a known-product, that is move-in ready in 90 days or less, with no bait and switch risk. But perhaps I err in that estimation.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. And for a dude who is usually observant this is odd.

And effort on the part of government to ameliorate the housing shortage (through demand reduction or increasing supply) will result in a decline asset prices. That will not be popular. So we see the government just flood in immigrants and make token efforts at building affordable housing. The affordability crisis is the main feature. It's not a bug.

Why would the government go after developers or investors? These are the actual voters. New immigrants stuffed 10 to a house in the GTA aren't voters.

Northern Light said:
16B in housing investment would buy:

~ 48000 units if the gov't paid 100% of the tab (assume government or non-profit is land owner about 1/2 the time, plus cost of construction)
Click to expand...

48 000 units won't solve the housing crisis in a country taking a million per year. But that $16B can make sure manufacturing actually survives in Canada and we don't become even more of a joke economy reliant on real estate and resource extraction.

The million per job is right wing FUD that routinely ignores are the jobs involved in construction of those plants and jobs across the entire supply chain. Also ignores the fact that the $16B spent (and the multiples of that in manufacturing value) wouldn't exist if the plants aren't built.
 
And the $16B likely won't be paid out if the GOP retakes the White House and cancels the IRA. Most of that funding is directly tied to continued US subsidies for EVs and battery production.
 
Northern Light said:
If you legislate an end to pre-construction sales of homes; you must sell a finished product, that will end the issue of bait and switch rendering, but it will also make condos much more difficult to finance, which will have developers turn to purpose-built rental as their model of choice.
Click to expand...
Can city council do this if other levels wont?
 
Many of us here have spoken of the surge in low-skill, low-wage, Temporary Foreign Workers being brought in to the country, which is one factor among many driving housing costs, but also driving down wages and productivity investments.

The Globe is out with a brief piece on this (behind the paywall)

www.theglobeandmail.com

Demand for low-wage foreign labour is surging

Companies are increasingly tapping the Temporary Foreign Worker program to fill jobs
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

From the above:

1689325504671.png


The statistic referenced in the above paragraph is interesting, in that, if one looks at the graph the difference from 5 years ago is even more stark, well over 300%, and if you look at the pace in the last 2 quarters, more like 900%!
 
kEiThZ said:
I wonder what 2014 Justin Trudeau would say about this....

www.thestar.com

Justin Trudeau: How to fix the broken temporary foreign worker program

The Liberal leader says the program must be scaled back and refocused on its original purpose: to fill jobs on a limited basis when no Canadian workers can be found.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com
Click to expand...

Fundamentally what we need is reindustrialization, perhaps along a Swedish corporatism model as part of the ongoing decopuling effort. Certain sectors should have expanded TFW (or perhaps a dedicated immigration route) - construction would be one.

AoD
 
Welcome to Canada, we have no room for you, so you can sleep on the street till we figure out what to do.

Is 24 Sussex still empty? We can put them there. If Trudeau is going to welcome refugees into Canada, he needs to step up and provide the provinces/cities with the resources they need to support them. This is an embarrassment!

'It's an emergency': Officials meet to address refugees stuck sleeping on downtown sidewalk​


toronto.citynews.ca

'It's an emergency': Officials meet to address refugees stuck sleeping on downtown sidewalk

For several days now, a group of asylum seekers have been forced to sleep on a downtown sidewalk outside Toronto's shelter intake office.
toronto.citynews.ca toronto.citynews.ca

https://twitter.com/x/status/1680269069897936897


https://twitter.com/x/status/1680431938652217344
 
Last edited:
So.........

The Canadian gov't telegraphed in June that they would be offering a special immigration window just for U.S. H1B VISA holders. (the U.S's skilled-worker visa program).

This, btw, attracted all sorts of attention from U.S. media with words like 'Canadian talent raid' being used.

At any rate.....the program opened for applications on Sunday and closed Monday, after filling the entire 10,000 spots that were made available, in less than 48 hours.

This move will primarily scoop IT workers who are the largest group of H1B holders.

I'm not convinced this is a good play. At least these are skilled workers; but Canada' s IT industry has been mostly growing as a U.S. branch plant, largely because we pay IT workers up to 1/3 less before factoring for the exchange rate.

We miss out on the start-ups and the grow-ups, due to an insufficiently developed venture capital system, in the same way we get new factories but often fail to lure the R&D side of major industrial businesses.

The Star Article on this is here: (behind the paywall)

www.thestar.com

‘Audacious’: Canada offers work permits to lure tech workers in the U.S., but will they come — and stay?

Ottawa’s latest immigration program to poach foreign tech workers in the U.S. closed Monday night, less than 48 hours after it opened for applications.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

Here's how the story is playing in India:

www.indiatoday.in

Canada's big offer for H-1B visa holders and families, Indians likely to benefit

Canada has launched an open work permit stream to allow 10,000 H1-B visa holders from the US to come and work in the country. The move will benefit Indians, who account for nearly 75% of H1-B visa holders in the US.
www.indiatoday.in www.indiatoday.in

Here's how its playing in the U.S.

 
I fail to see how it would be a bad thing. Tech is an export business, even if it is a branch plant for one of the big US tech companies, it is bringing wealth into the country from these large multinationals that otherwise tend to direct revenues from Canada back to the US. Building a larger tech workforce will only help increase the supply of startups that can become the feedstock for VC. Some of those startups will decamp for the US but some remain in Canada (like Shopify, Open Text, etc.). If the US is not interested in retaining this talent, and Canada can provide a convenient platform for many of them to land, I don't see how this is a bad thing. If the US is unhappy with this, they need to fix their own immigration system. These folks clearly have a first preference to be in the US, but are being turfed due to their dysfunctional immigration system.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top