withabix

Whilst there is a growing population and no surplus housing, there will be no correction.

In the UK, there is no housing surplus and a growing population. So there was no significant 'correction' and there won't be. Prices have started to rise again this year.

Western Canada (and indeed most of Canada) is the same.

Spain on the other hand has so many surplus newly built homes, that they would not run out of new houses for over ONE HUNDRED YEARS, even if they stopped building today.

That's why they are having a correction and a massive financial crisis.

bra_boy

http://greaterfool.ca

Whatever you do, don't buy in the next year or so!

orly

Missing the obvious fact that in some parts of the UK prices are down over 50% since 2007 and they fell steadily (or drastically) for 5 years or more. In Northern Ireland for example everyone was loving it circa 2006 when prices were going up 30% a year. By 2008 the average house was well over 200k. Fast forward to 2012 and the average house is barely 100k. N.Ireland was by no means unique. Even with a shortage of houses and plenty of immigration the UK market fell off a cliff.

When houses become grossly overpriced they are so called because the vast majority of people who have no ability to get mortgages on them even with historically low interest rates. Those who are in the houses probably won't be if rates go up even to averages of the past. It doesn't matter how much "demand" there is if the demand is from people earning average wages and not being paid like a tenured Professor.

Canada (parts of) can be artificially buoyed for years, potentially decades, by the flow of immigrants and richer types from abroad but it only lasts so long. Actual sales in Vancouver are down over 1/4 in the past 2 years. Why? Prices are beyond sustainable and there aren't enough people with the wage packet to even attempt buying them. This should be a very clear indicator of what is coming down the pipeline soon enough.

ExKiwilass

He doth protest too much

ExKiwilass

I read the NZ and Oz forums off and on, there is an equal amount of ranting about Auckland, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney prices.

Can't speak for TO but Vancouver is a pac-rim city like the others I've mentioned, and there is a similar demographic shift going on as well as being more tied to Asia. Vancouver is one of the largest ports in North America and the largest in Canada - all that Asian trade.

Prices may fall, they may rise. All that matters is that you buy a place you can afford comfortably and that you won't need to sell any time soon If you do that, it doesn't matter what happens to prices.

ExKiwilass

That's not true, actually. You might not want to live in them but lots and lots of families do. The trade-off, if you live in a condo in say, Yaletown, is a fantastic lifestyle that makes up for the lack of space for those people. There are schools, parks, plenty of activities for the kids. I know of many families living in highrises, townhouses etc and we did ourselves for a long time. There's still something tempting about it, I miss living downtown. I doubt there is much of a brain drain to the US. There's the visa issue, and the healthcare issue. Those are big minuses.

withabix

Northern Ireland is the only area AFAIK. They had their own bubble which they shared with the Republic of Ireland.

The rest of the UK was between 8%-21% down from the peak at maximum.

Flats fared worst. They always do.

Many areas have recovered to, or exceeded pre-recession levels.

Except it didn't. There was no crash.

The market slowed down because people couldn't afford to move up the ladder and lending became stricter.

Prices fell a bit. They are recovering or have recovered, depending on where you live.

The UK only has approx 7 months worth of available housing stock at any one time. Spain has 100 years worth...

BristolUK

Dead right.
Oh...unless your property taxes are geared to value.

There's something very appealing about not having to cut a huge area of grass or shovel snow off the steps and driveway - not that the latter is particularly relevant to Vancouver.

It wasn't a condo, just a six unit apartment building, but I look back fondly on those 9 months of much lower heating costs and not needing to mow or clear snow before buying our home here.

As long as there's a balcony and nearby park it's fine.

ExKiwilass

That's a reason I hope prices stabilize/go down..less tax

colchar

Because of population density and the demand for property.



Families do want to live in them or investors wouldn't be buying them as they would never get them rented. They buy them because they know they will be able to rent them out due to demand.



But we get a lot more for our taxes here than they do, with healthcare being the prime example.




Property prices are not the only, and possibly not even the main, factor in any brain drain.



There is because their economy is booming and there are jobs available.

ExKiwilass

yeah I agree. Having a detached home means a lot more maintenance. We were downtown yesterday, I found myself looking longingly at some of the new condo buildings and thinking about how much more time we'd have on our hands if we lived in one, not to mention the whole place doesn't shut down on a Sunday like my current town does. I love my neighbourhood and my friends, but it is definitely more time-consuming living in a house in the burbs.

EnglishPatriot

Not really comparable. The majority of US health care spending is private through insurance companies.

The high amount of spending on health care is a mixture of America being generally speaking an unhealthy nation and also a culture of US doctors and hospitals in general seeking to maximize their charges to the insurance companies.

However, that doesn't mean on an individual level you would be paying more for insurance than you would overall in taxes in Canada, considering that taxes are lower in the US so your health insurance isn't actually costing you any more.

The biggest benefit in the insurance system is that as hospitals seek to make the biggest profit possible, they will give a patient every single test they can justify because it earns them more money in the long run.

In contrast, countries with universal health care tend to try to minimalize the amount of treatment they give to patients to save public money.

ExKiwilass

exactly. it costs more in the US because the system is inefficient and poorly run. Orly is right. I don't know why this makes the US not comparable to other countries, except that it makes the US look shit - which it is in this area.

I call bs on the lower taxes thing, it depends where you live and what kind of taxes you are talking about. Are you talking property tax, sales tax, income tax, provincial vs federal vs state, municipal - what? Waaaaay too many variables involved.

We were just in Cali, allegedly they don't like taxes there. You can tell, the place is falling apart though I hear the wealthy areas are okay like Santa Monica. This is what I don't get about the low tax obsessed - taxes pay for stuff, like, schools! and roads! and transit!

IT did not appeal to me at all. I was glad to come back to clean, well-run BC with it's good infrastructure (by comparison).

ExKiwilass

yup, inefficient.

Does everyone need every ding-dong test? Probably not.

dbd33

That may have been true before the advent of HMOs but it sure aint now.