RSVP for tickets to David Eby’s Emergency Town Hall on Housing Issues here: https://ebyemergencyhousingtownhall.eventbrite.ca
What: Emergency housing affordability meeting
Who: Everyone who believes there is a problem in Metro Vancouver’s real estate market
When: Wednesday March 16, 2016 at 7 p.m.
Where: St. James Community Square, 3214 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver
Join MLA David Eby and local experts for an Emergency Housing Town Hall
This meeting is to discuss the causes of, and solutions to, an out-of-control real estate market in the Lower Mainland that has little or no connection to average household income. Issues of international speculation in our housing market, shadow flipping, real estate agent accountability, and other concerns will be addressed. Bring your stories, questions and concerns. The media, along with MLAs from both sides of the legislature, both BC Liberal and BC NDP, will be invited.
This is a meeting to hear stories, demand answers, and send a message to the Premier and the government to start to value the people of Metro Vancouver who make the communities we call home possible.
Wednesday March 16 from 7-9pm at St James Community Square. Doors at 6:30pm.
Here we go again…
Mercer recently came out with their 2016 Quality of Life Survey. As usual, the media misused the survey to brag about how Vancouver is the bestest of the best. What they failed to point out is what the survey is actually trying to determine.
When executives are temporarily relocated to another city, they frequently will receive a hardship allowance. For example, when an executive in a city like Vancouver is assigned to Jakarta, Indonesia, Mercer recommends a 25% hardship allowance.
In calculating their index, Mercer considers these ten categories:
- Political and social environment (political stability, crime, law enforcement, etc.).
- Economic environment (currency exchange regulations, banking services).
- Socio-cultural environment (media availability and censorship, limitations on personal freedom).
- Medical and health considerations (medical supplies and services, infectious diseases, sewage, waste disposal, air pollution, etc.).
- Schools and education (standards and availability of international schools).
- Public services and transportation (electricity, water, public transportation, traffic congestion, etc.).
- Recreation (restaurants, theatres, cinemas, sports and leisure, etc.).
- Consumer goods (availability of food/daily consumption items, cars, etc.).
- Housing (rental housing, household appliances, furniture, maintenance services).
- Natural environment (climate, record of natural disasters).
Because these executives will continue to earn their base salary plus any hardship allowance, and will be housed by their company, local incomes and housing prices are not even considered. The idea that incomes and house prices have no bearing on quality of life is absurd. Any true measure of livability would need to consider both of these factors. This would be especially true for young families who are just starting out.
So, in light of the deficiencies of livability surveys that only consider temporarily relocating corporate executives, I’ve adjusted Mercer’s numbers to take into account incomes and house prices. For example, if Mercer thinks City A is 5% better than City B, but pay is 5% higher in City B, they would tie in my adjusted index. The same would be true if housing in City A is 5% higher than City B.
I’ve taken the latest available data from Mercer (for English-speaking cities), and adjusted the index to account for incomes and house prices. Here are the results.
Vancouver is without question a great place to live for visiting executives, home-owning retirees and the super-wealthy. But for young families just starting out — not so much.
The City of Vancouver is in urgent need of interested, engaged, effective leadership.
- Working to solve housing affordability crisis.
- Reducing street homelessness.
- Working with Province and local municipalities to improve transit.
- Fulfilling FOI requests.
Duties do not include:
- Meeting Pope.
- Solving Global Warming.
- Frequent trade missions to China.
If interested, please contact City Hall.
By now, everyone is probably familiar with the annual Demographia Housing Affordability Survey. In last year’s report, Vancouver — with a house price to income ratio of 10.6 — had the second worst affordability behind only Hong Kong.
But the numbers they used to arrive at that multiple are now a year old. How has the picture changed since then, and what is the current ratio? The median house price then was $704,800 and the median household income was $66,400.
According to the latest REBGV numbers, house prices in Greater Vancouver have increase 20.1% in the last year. And BC Stats reports that average earnings are up 3.8%.
Applying those increases to last year’s Demographia data, we can estimate that the new median house price is about $846,500, and median household income is now around $68,900.
If these numbers are accurate, then the median multiple for Vancouver is now 12.3 — higher than any US market at the peak of their bubble.
This is the new North American record for poor affordability. Congratulations Vancouver.
Last May I discovered that real estate prices in Metro Vancouver were now being driven by high-end home sales. The only logical conclusion seemed to be that foreign buying was now the primary driver of the Vancouver real estate bubble.
We now have hard data that proves the high-end is being bought by Mainland Chinese money.
In a recent six-month period about 70 per cent of all detached homes sold on Vancouver’s west side were purchased by Mainland China buyers, an academic case study shows.
Even more stunning, the study shows that of all self-declared occupations among owners — on homes worth an average $3.05 million — 36 per cent were housewives or students with little income.
How much more proof do we need before our politicians address the biggest issue in the decline of Vancouver?
The latest RBC Housing Trends and Affordability report was released a few days ago. In it, they added a new graphic showing bungalow affordability for Vancouver, Toronto and Canada excluding Toronto and Vancouver.
As most of us know, foreign buyers have been most active in Vancouver and Toronto. As far as I can tell, there is very little foreign buying going on in other Canadian cities. Here is that graphic with a few notations added.
For the last few decades, Canadian housing markets have mostly moved in tandem. But over the last several years, there has been a clear break between the two markets where foreign buyers have been active and the rest of the country. Is it just a coincidence, or is foreign buying now driving the Vancouver and Toronto markets?
The most common argument I’ve heard against recent suggestions that we should tax real estate speculators and/or limit foreign buying goes something like this, “We shouldn’t make any changes to existing policy because that would be interfering with the free market.”
This argument is completely disingenuous. Very little about the current situation is the result of a free market.
Continue reading here.