Canadian real estate prices have surged in almost every market, with a typical home price doubling in many regions. A median household in major cities like Toronto and Vancouver would need to save over 20 years for just the down payment, more than 3x the historic average. Seems absurd? The outlandish scenario was apparently a […]

  • karlhungus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I think what’s being said is: if housing prices lower, you are going to ruin some people’s retirement plan – at least some of those people will have worked hard their entire life to purchase and pay off that house. There’s been some incentive to save in this way as well (first time home buyer plan, tax deductions for more ecologically sound houses, that kind of thing).

    I suspect he’s probably right, that letting house prices drop would over all make things worse in Canada. My goto solution would be to subsidize housing by increasing taxes on corporations and people/corporations that own more than one house. but i’m not any kind of expert

    • Mkengine@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      If I stay in my house for my retirement, why would I care how much it is worth? I would only care about monthly costs like energy or insurance, what am I missing?

      • karlhungus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Sometimes home owners will sell their house after retirement for something smaller, live off the difference, then sell that house and use the money from that for long term care, or inheritance.

        There’s also the obvious: they worked for something, possibly quite hard, why do they have to pay the price for others? Presumably they’ve been paying taxes all along, and have already been contributing to the greater good.

        I guess my feeling is, it’s not so simple to just wreck housing prices. I absolutely feel like corporations, and probably some ultra wealthy don’t work that hard and get most of the rewards (or aren’t even people), like if the money has to come from somewhere there is a clear set of people who could afford to lose some wealth, and not materially effect their life; and that’s not necessarily single dwelling home owners.

      • Lynda H@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        @Mkengine @karlhungus You are missing the high cost of aging in a retirement home/long term care facility. Because you retire in a home that you worked decades to pay off does not mean that will be your last “home” before death. Some retirement “homes” are charging $60,000 year.

        • anachronist@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          This is true. The idea that housing-as-asset is a gift to middle-class elderly is a false promise. The middle class elderly will have all their assets stripped by the old-age industry regardless of how their home appreciated while they owned it.