Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does that include migrants seeking legal status? They take up housing too. I would have thought the U.S. takes in more than Canada, even after adjusting for population.
I can't find the source that I got the 2X figure from precisely but this does back up in a general sense what i am saying
From 2016 to 2021, Canada's population grew at almost twice the pace of every other G7 country. While the pace of growth slowed in 2020 with the COVID-19 pandemic, it rose again in 2021 and, from January to March 2022, it was the highest of all first quarters since 1990..
So in absolute terms the U.S takes on more but in relative terms no - Canada is at about 2X its rate.
It accounts for growth so i'm assuming it would include immigrants, refugees and natural growth factors - with immigration being the biggest factor.
Fusion, your point about immigration I understand and agree with to an extent but I think while reducing immigration might be the obvious answer, it could be a win win for our tax base and economic growth driven by immigration if we can also provide enough housing at the same time. I think it is possible if we think outside the box. Things like prefab homes, redrawing municipal boundaries, “new towns” or planned communities I.e. the post war era, federal subsidies for construction of rental properties. I think eventually the immigration “taps” are going to “run dry” so to speak as world population stops growing and formerly developing nations in places like Latin America and Asia become developed nations, like what’s happened in Europe. The economic consequences to Canada can be delayed by increasing our working age population now while world population is still rising.
I don't disagree with you here and I see the logic in immigration in order to deal with our labour issues in this country. So if we are able to execute out of the box solutions i'm all in for going back to higher immigration levels. We need a diversity of housing solutions - prefab, tiny homes, heck container ship solutions.
However Hodgepodge did make a good point earlier about Nimby's and I really think Canadians need to have a paradigm shift in our thinking about housing and density. So I just want to be clear, i'm fine with higher immigration levels so long as we get ourselves into a collective mindset that our supply output needs to be more in harmony with demand levels. Clearly, economically in the long term we need immigration in this country to avoid contraction and the new set of problems that entails, but I also think we have take better care of the most basic fundamental in Maslow's hierarchy - food and shelter. The latter got lost along the way in our pursuits.
The good thing is - I think housing is really on the mind of our Politicians in ways it hasn't been before in a long time, and Canadians are starting to change their views on housing as well and that not everyone in this country can live in a 2000 sq ft home with a nice large lot.
The O.P. seems to think that the government cap the number of houses that can be built in most cities in Canada causing sky high prices.
to order the increase of housing and keep the supply of housing steady with population growth. In some authoritarian or hardcore socialist nations that may be the rule but not in a free market economy such as that of the U.S. and Canada.
OP thinks the US is more liberal when comes to building homes and have more hands of approach even in democratic states.
There is no other straightforward explanation as to why the housing market in the Golden Horseshoe Region is behaving like this other than demand is simply outstripping supply. As to increasing supply, developers have to have incentive to increase supply and population growth alone is not enough or otherwise there'd be sufficient housing for everyone already.
So in absolute terms the U.S takes on more but in relative terms no - Canada is at about 2X its rate.
It accounts for growth so i'm assuming it would include immigrants, refugees and natural growth factors - with immigration being the biggest factor.
The problem with Canada is because of the weather a lot of people live in Vancouver or southern Ontario. The US can well take in lot more people there is lot more cities to choose from.
The government of Canada should start going to other countries and say to the people we have job in say Regina, Saskatoon, Thuder Bay, Brandon so on do you want to move to this country and have job and house and work there.
Interesting you say the most successful developers but are all developers the most successful. For those who aren't be interesting to see how important they are for housing development. I say this because I have reviewed a number of items on the topic and the general consensus is that increased borrowing costs for them and slower sales is starting to negatively impact development. This at a time when the last thing we need is slowing development.
Canada is bringing in 2X the number of immigrants in relative terms than the U.S. So in that case, the government does and is impacting demand. The market for a variety of complex reasons, is not able to provide for this. Additionally, Per capita GDP in the U.S is quite a bit higher both in nominal and PPP terms - so I think Americans are generally a bit more able to weather general increased cost of living better than Canadians. They are more productive and are remunerated more for that increased productivity. Did you know per worker Canada has 33 Percent less investment in productivity than the U.S. This doesn't mean Canadian workers are lazier - it is that U.S firms invest more in their workers than Canadian one's in order to increase worker productivity ie technology and process improvements. So while cities like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver have very healthy growth rates due to Canada's immigration policy- the economic conditions are not as favourable as their comparable American cousins. So i'm not sure Canada has any business having 2X the immigration rate as the U.S, when we have a fundamental shortage of housing due to a complex set of circumstances. Sometimes you need to slow things down a bit - see what you need to fix and create those conditions and then once that happens start ramping inflow up again.
The US may be better now but not the west coast but will be bad very soon. I see cities like Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco running out of land for sprawl because of the water and mountains no where to sprawl out to and they start building 30 story apartments and condos. And the answers is than build up than say homes that is how bad it will be in the next 20 years.
As of May 2021, the average price of a single-family home in Victoria BC is approximately $1.2 million. This is a staggering 25% increase from the previous year. https://newcanadianlife.com/what-is-...revious%20year.
Other communities on Vancouver Island are not a lot cheaper.
I think all of southern British Columbia will be million or over million because of the weather.
If you look at Victoria or Vancouver you got very little land to sprawl out making it very difficult for city planners.
The problem with Canada is because of the weather a lot of people live in Vancouver or southern Ontario. The US can well take in lot more people there is lot more cities to choose from.
The government of Canada should start going to other countries and say to the people we have job in say Regina, Saskatoon, Thuder Bay, Brandon so on do you want to move to this country and have job and house and work there.
The problem with Canada is because of the weather a lot of people live in Vancouver or southern Ontario. The US can well take in lot more people there is lot more cities to choose from.
The government of Canada should start going to other countries and say to the people we have job in say Regina, Saskatoon, Thuder Bay, Brandon so on do you want to move to this country and have job and house and work there.
Problem is it wouldn't take a lot for the pendulum to swing in the unaffordable range in these places. If immigration continues on the same trajectory as it has in the last two years, I can't imagine these places not being impacted. People will go to them.
I'm not sure how you can force people to stay in a location either. You can market the attractiveness of these places, but I don't know how once they settle here you can anchor them legally to a location. People will and do make sacrifices to live in certain places. How do you think family/families can afford a 1.2 million dollar home in the GTA - they band together.
Problem is it wouldn't take a lot for the pendulum to swing in the unaffordable range in these places. If immigration continues on the same trajectory as it has in the last two years, I can't imagine these places not being impacted. People will go to them.
I'm not sure how you can force people to stay in a location either. You can market the attractiveness of these places, but I don't know how once they settle here you can anchor them legally to a location. People will and do make sacrifices to live in certain places. How do you think family/families can afford a 1.2 million dollar home in the GTA - they band together.
Back in the days of the Soviet Union and Communist China before the reopening, the government had a free hand in doing just this with an iron fist. It was community planning at its most extreme, and if you were stuck in a thankless place, well tough luck. In a free economy and free society like that of the US and Canada, the government of course cannot do that. The O.P.'s idea sounds great on paper until the realization that the idea is not equitable and goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Neither Ford nor Trudeau can tell anyone where or where not to move to or say to Toronto and Hamilton "Hey knock it off! You have too many people already and you're housing is too expensive. Stop marketing yourselves to newcomers so that Thunder Bay and Sudbury can catch up to you guys." I mean the whole idea sounds ludicrous and discriminatory doesn't it? The thought of why people, firms, and jobs congregate in certain places is all based on economies of scale. They congregate at places where they can maximize their potential and are willing to pay the highest price to do so or else they would not congregate there.
Come visit my home city of Boston, Massachusetts. You'll see we have the same issues of affordability, shortage of housing, influx of newcomers, and NIMBY'sm that beset the Golden Horseshoe Region. Not every city or region in the US believes in unrestricted growth you know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
