* From 1981 to 2023, 70% of Canada’s population growth concentrated in its six largest metropolitan areas, increasing their share from 34% to 48% ( to the “Canada is big guys we can handle heavy population growth”).
* Shift in housing composition from single-family homes (61% in 2000) to multiple-unit homes (77% in 2023), reflecting a move towards higher density housing.
* Toronto ranks 2nd, Vancouver 4th, and Montreal 7th in population-weighted density among the 30 largest North American metros.
* Compared to European cities, Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal have similar densities to Milan, Stockholm, and Amsterdam respectively.
* Despite densification, housing affordability in major Canadian cities, especially Vancouver, has worsened relative to median household incomes.
* Vancouver tripled its housing units within its pre-WWII footprint, yet remains the least affordable city in North America.
* Improved affordability is possible if population stabilizes, but ongoing population growth, smaller households, and external demand are driving prices higher.
* Long-term solutions require balancing supply expansion with sustained demand to achieve housing affordability.
Golbar-59 on
Canada needs entire new cities and city centers. Nothing short of that will suffice to fulfill demand.
Quirky_Might317 on
Nice to read something from an alternate view point than what we have been absolutely bombarded with by main stream media.
The real problem I see is government policy on immigration, housing, and labour (TFWs) has been largely influenced by the Liberals 100 million single sourced contracts to McKinsey consulting, who have ties with mega realty corp lobby groups like Century Initiative (see their board). Their end goal is to monopolize the purpose built rental market and control pricing like the grocery corps have done…ie not in our favour. What we are being bombarded with in the main stream media is also bought and paid for.
Housing is the embodiment of money supply growth, which needs to grow to increase goods inflation, as the CPI does not track what it deems “investments” like housing; so goods is the main thing it tracks.  Â
Goods inflation is then gamified because we have so much processed food and shrinkflation in services, which is insensitive to increases in money supply. Due to low additional labor input, which is offsetting things with high labor input, like meat and restaurants.
Then theres the fact the CPI is always changing, based on consumer habits and shrinkflation, they will alter the basket to weight towards processed foods if that is what people now buy. It is not a “cost of living index”, and does not purport to maintain a fixed quality of life.
A mortgage is when both parties walk away with the present value of goods they can use in full. The buyer benefits by getting an asset without paying, the seller benefits because it finances more potential buyers who can bid up the price of the home, it is favorable to banks which can create new currency at zero marginal cost every time a buyer wants to buy a house.
So new mortgages create new money supply, which feeds into a CPI that excludes much of the inflation, and therefore you have a housing bubble.
1GutsnGlory1 on
Interesting how the author doesn’t talk about the impacts of rampant money laundering, rock bottom property taxes, abuse of principal residence exemption, NIMBYs blocking new developments outside of the downtown cores, sky rocketing DCC, outdated zoning bylaws, the major shift of Canada’s big 5 banks toward real estate lending, prolonged periods of low interest rates, promotion of foreign ownership, rise of AirBnB and short term rentals and so on.
Canada’s regulatory and tax environment encouraged real estate speculation by making it easy to borrow, buy, sell, and receive preferential tax treatment. The local and provincial governments were happy as they received billions in property transfer taxes for the continued buying and selling of the same properties.
The CRA assessed 1.4 billion in unpaid taxes between 2015-2023 in BC and 1.6 billion in Ontario for the same period. Far more has probably gone unreported if this the amount they agency uncovered.
The author is right in a sense that building homes that only a small group of the population can buy does not improve affordability.
lubeskystalker on
1.3 million ppl in 2023 / 2.5 ppl per roof / 365 days / 4 metros (Van/Calgary/TO/Mtl) = *357 completed units per metro per day.* That’s like two brand new towers per metro per day…
Yes municipal red tape is a dumpster fire and municipal governments can fuck right off. But there is no level of supply/density that can contain this level of demand. Going to the moon in the 60’s was more realistic.
6 Comments
Points from the Article:
* From 1981 to 2023, 70% of Canada’s population growth concentrated in its six largest metropolitan areas, increasing their share from 34% to 48% ( to the “Canada is big guys we can handle heavy population growth”).
* Shift in housing composition from single-family homes (61% in 2000) to multiple-unit homes (77% in 2023), reflecting a move towards higher density housing.
* Toronto ranks 2nd, Vancouver 4th, and Montreal 7th in population-weighted density among the 30 largest North American metros.
* Compared to European cities, Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal have similar densities to Milan, Stockholm, and Amsterdam respectively.
* Despite densification, housing affordability in major Canadian cities, especially Vancouver, has worsened relative to median household incomes.
* Vancouver tripled its housing units within its pre-WWII footprint, yet remains the least affordable city in North America.
* Improved affordability is possible if population stabilizes, but ongoing population growth, smaller households, and external demand are driving prices higher.
* Long-term solutions require balancing supply expansion with sustained demand to achieve housing affordability.
Canada needs entire new cities and city centers. Nothing short of that will suffice to fulfill demand.
Nice to read something from an alternate view point than what we have been absolutely bombarded with by main stream media.
The real problem I see is government policy on immigration, housing, and labour (TFWs) has been largely influenced by the Liberals 100 million single sourced contracts to McKinsey consulting, who have ties with mega realty corp lobby groups like Century Initiative (see their board). Their end goal is to monopolize the purpose built rental market and control pricing like the grocery corps have done…ie not in our favour. What we are being bombarded with in the main stream media is also bought and paid for.
https://dominionreview.ca/century-initiative-the-lobbyists-that-want-to-raise-canadas-population-to-100-million/
Housing is the embodiment of money supply growth, which needs to grow to increase goods inflation, as the CPI does not track what it deems “investments” like housing; so goods is the main thing it tracks.  Â
Goods inflation is then gamified because we have so much processed food and shrinkflation in services, which is insensitive to increases in money supply. Due to low additional labor input, which is offsetting things with high labor input, like meat and restaurants.
Then theres the fact the CPI is always changing, based on consumer habits and shrinkflation, they will alter the basket to weight towards processed foods if that is what people now buy. It is not a “cost of living index”, and does not purport to maintain a fixed quality of life.
A mortgage is when both parties walk away with the present value of goods they can use in full. The buyer benefits by getting an asset without paying, the seller benefits because it finances more potential buyers who can bid up the price of the home, it is favorable to banks which can create new currency at zero marginal cost every time a buyer wants to buy a house.
So new mortgages create new money supply, which feeds into a CPI that excludes much of the inflation, and therefore you have a housing bubble.
Interesting how the author doesn’t talk about the impacts of rampant money laundering, rock bottom property taxes, abuse of principal residence exemption, NIMBYs blocking new developments outside of the downtown cores, sky rocketing DCC, outdated zoning bylaws, the major shift of Canada’s big 5 banks toward real estate lending, prolonged periods of low interest rates, promotion of foreign ownership, rise of AirBnB and short term rentals and so on.
Canada’s regulatory and tax environment encouraged real estate speculation by making it easy to borrow, buy, sell, and receive preferential tax treatment. The local and provincial governments were happy as they received billions in property transfer taxes for the continued buying and selling of the same properties.
The CRA assessed 1.4 billion in unpaid taxes between 2015-2023 in BC and 1.6 billion in Ontario for the same period. Far more has probably gone unreported if this the amount they agency uncovered.
The author is right in a sense that building homes that only a small group of the population can buy does not improve affordability.
1.3 million ppl in 2023 / 2.5 ppl per roof / 365 days / 4 metros (Van/Calgary/TO/Mtl) = *357 completed units per metro per day.* That’s like two brand new towers per metro per day…
Yes municipal red tape is a dumpster fire and municipal governments can fuck right off. But there is no level of supply/density that can contain this level of demand. Going to the moon in the 60’s was more realistic.