The Non-capitalist Solution to the Housing Crisis
2022 ж. 31 Қаз.
1 358 783 Рет қаралды
Thank you to @vancitycu for sponsoring this video! Find out more about how they support non-market housing at rethink.vancity.com/actions/a...
Instagram: / aboutherevideos
TikTok: / aboutherevideos
Twitter: twitter.com/aboutherevideos?l...
Facebook: / abouthere
Website: abouthere.ca
Great video Uytae! One minor caveat. At around the 4:30 mark you talk about paying off the mortgage and then rent being like really cheap. Many co-ops have used the financial room provided by paying off their mortgage allows them to reinvest in the physical asset to maintain high quality housing, while still keeping reasonable housing charges.
And the other option likely favored by investors: in a market with high prices already normalized, just keep the rent super high and keep raising it for pure profit.
@@KingBobXVI Tell me you dont understand housing co-ops without saying you don't understand housing co-ops.
Some co-ops that have lower costs, such as from paying off mortgages, may also choose to create their own subsidies to help those with lower incomes gain housing in the co-op. As government subsidies for rent-geared-to-income supoort is drying up, some are doing this as part of their mission to provide mixed-income housing.
and capitalism? co-ops are totally compatible with a free market...
All these are not solutions to anything. They never were, they never going be... Do you want to live in a 4 bedroom Greek Villa with a swimming pool and private access to the sea? The rent is $600 CAD. The construction and material cost is almost nothing compared to the fees and taxes you pay to the government. Just getting water to your lot costs you over $100k.
"Sending a reminder that ultimately housing is for people, not profits" wow this hit hard, how to we get this message across to the government?
So financial sustainability is a problem now ?
Well, first you'd need to change the government and get them to change policies that would enforce rules upon the private market. Don't know why you'd do that though, I think that market is mostly fine. If anything it would be nice to have buying of land more profitable.
The sad part is the world is full of leeches who don't have a shred of humanity in them. Plenty of "landlords" are just like that. Never worked a day in their life, never earned a dollar, only exploited others to get it. They'll pretend it's somehow their tenants' faults, but really the sole problem is that they're greedy apes who invariably got all their land and wealth via inheritance, not hard work.
end speculation buying, end corporate buying, end agents over-valuating for commissions, replace income tax with rental investment tax
But but communism
I remember in 2007 when I was working in real estate seeing people buy homes new from builders with the intention of selling before close of escrow to a new buyer for profit. The crash was so brutal and fast that I remember seeing a lot of these units foreclosed on with the builder plastic still on the carpet.
Most people find it difficult to handle a fall since they are used to bull markets, but if you know where to look and how to maneuver, you can make a size-able profit. Depending on how you intend to enter and exit, yes.
Home prices will come down eventually, but for now; get your money (as much as you can) out of the housing market and get into the financial markets or gold. The new mortgage rates are crazy, add to that the recession and the fact that mortgage guidelines are getting more difficult. Home prices will need to fall by a minimum of 40% (more like 50%) before the market normalizes. If you are in cross roads or need sincere advise on the best moves to take now its best you seek an independent advisor who knows about the financial markets.
My portfolio has been in the gutter for the entire year, so I started researching new ways to profit in the market, but everything I tried just seemed to miss the mark. Please let us know the name of your financial advisor.
Credits goes to " Sonya lee Mitchell" one of the finest portfolio managers in the field. She's widely recognized; you should take a look at her work.
I think a housing crash will happen because all those people who bought homes over asking price, although it was at a low interest rate, they are over their heads. They have no equity if the housing prices continue to go down, and if for whatever reason they cannot afford the house anymore and it goes into foreclosure because even if they try to sell, they will not make any money. I think this will happen to a lot of people especially with the massive layoff predicted for the future and the cost of living rising at a high speed.
I suggest you offset your real estate and get into stocks, A recession as bad it can be, provides good buying opportunities in the markets if you’re careful and it can also create volatility giving great short time buy and sell opportunities too. This is not financial advise but get buying, cash isn’t king at all in this time!
You are right! I’ve diversified my $210K portfolio across various market with the aid of an investment coach, I have been able to generate a little bit above $430k in net profit across high dividend yield stocks, ETF and bonds.
@@hasede-lg9hj Could you kindly elaborate on the advisor's background and qualifications?
The advisor that guides me is Vivian Carol Gioia, most likely the internet is where to find her basic info, just search her name. She's established.
Very unintelligent take, it doesn't matter if the hosue was bought over ask, all that matters is they have a VERY low note and CAN afford it compared ti anyone trying to get a average home and having to pay about 2500 a month now. Those who got in before Biden are still paying 1200-1500 for reasonable houses. You can't pay less than 2k a month now for even a 175k house
The fact that there is already an excessive amount of demand awaiting its absorption, despite how everyone is frightened and calling the crash, is another reason why it is less likely to occur that way. 2008 saw no one, at least not the broad public, making this forecast, as I'll explain below. The ownership rate was noted to have peaked in 2004 in the other comment. Having previously peaked in the second quarter of 2020, we are currently at the median level. Between 2008 and 2012, it dropped by 3%, and by the second quarter of 2020, it had dropped from 68 to 65.
You're not doing anything wrong; the problem is that you don't have the knowledge needed to succeed in a challenging market. Only highly qualified professionals who had to experience the 2008 financial crisis could hope to earn a high salary in these challenging conditions.
Actually, I'm not sure if I'm allowed to mention this, but I'd recommend looking up " Margaret Johnson Arndt” because she was a big deal in 2020. She manages my portfolio and serves as both my coach and my manager.
Canada's housing situation is different though. I can't lis everything but for starters mortgage criteria are stricter so less susceptible to what happened to the US.
@macClinton-di6qvdoodoo
doodoo
We just have to convince the people who made this crisis and have everything to gain from it and are simultaneously in charge of handling it that they should do this!
This “crisis” is made to give a green light to this communist agenda. The government created that “crisis” have ties to those “nonprofit organizations” to get private homeowners kicked out from the market when everyone rents those non-market properties owned by WEF guys and people eventually own nothing and “happy”.
Facts
@@Riorozenyou just described capitalism. Capitalism is the problem
@@piledykstrabut... He described what the government did, not the capitalists. The capitalists would build more housing
@@piledykstra It takes years and years of bureaucratic bullshit to get a house built in Vancouver and it's all low density housing even though it has a huge population. The housing crisis is pure government incompetence and nothing else. The population went up by a million last year and we only built 200,000 new homes. How the fuck is that sustainable?
I moved into non-profit housing for the first time, a year and half ago. For the first time in my life, everything makes sense and I am getting ahead financially. I love my place and my rent is a pleasure! I qualified for this non-profit housing by being over 55. Since moving here and seeing my life flourish I have come to believe we should have this solution available for everyone! I live in Squamish, BC a small town with (guess what?) a housing crisis. Rents are approximately Vancouver level. Not mine. Plus I feel security for the future and more connected with my neighbors and the people who run the society that produced this non-market housing. I don't see why we cannot have this in Canada.
"Why we cannot have this in Canada," because of senseless public opinion from those who benefit from the housing crisis. Want to change all this? Take these NIMBY folk to court.
You living in a non-profit building means someone else is covering your cost of living and losing money Why should someone have to work for free just so you can get ahead financially Do you like working for free? No. You go to work to make money. So why should someone else have to build a house for you for free.
@@mortgageapprovals8933Did you watch the video??? Nobody loses money, you get all of your money back at a certain point and other organizations can help. you are not working for free, you're just providing a human right without being greedy. This ultra capitalistic mentality of work profit work profit is what is killing the world.
@@clover7726uh, they need huge grants from government to build…
@@CrimsonA1the nimbys are the wealthy ones, why would poorer people take them to court?
Social housing was a massive stabaliser in the UK until Margeret Thatcher introduced the Right to Buy scheme, it was seemingly a chartiable policy, allowing tenants to buy the houses from the local councils rather than renting. Eventually though, you now have an entire generation that have since brought these social houses on the cheap in prime central locations, sold them at record profits and then gone to spend their retirement in a lovely country home, these homes were of course sold to private landlords, who will now rise the rent and profits and you have my generation, who can never afford a house and can barely afford the predatory rent, and no actual social housing solution, since they were all sold away into the private market. Alas, today a house in the place I grew up costs upwards of 1 million where it was sold for 60k in the 90s But of course our wages have not seen a 2000 % increase to match
Exactly same thing as Australia in the late 70s early 80s. They sold a bunch of gov houses at discount. Since then, have built fuk all! while the population has grow some 30-40% It's sad people are so me me me now, if they think their taxes go to broken people they cant get tax subsiding in their already flourish business.... Sometimes. WE need to just care a little and it goes a long way. ❤
Yep, the elders f*&ked us all up. The boomers have grabbed all land and housing while the 80s, 90s, and 2000s babies have nothing to take and call our own. Many people have 2, 3, 5 homes, just renting them out. Greed! It's pretty disgusting and if I dwell on those thoughts too long, I get physically sick. Becoming a homeowner seems hopeless.
most social housing in the UK is owned by housing organisations now, and not much of it. I live in one, really cheap rent that barely went up over 10 years :) half the people who live here have nice mercedes, audis and the odd ranger rover. makes no sense
@@anonymousone6075 I was in gov housing for my 20s and was grateful for it. It gave me dignity, and the chance to rebuild myself into an independent adult by my 30s. It took time but it happened, and now I hope to repay that by being a good parent to my kids role model strong values. Soon as I was stable I moved out. But yes you get some people who stay forever, even if life takes a good turn, they don't want to give up such a good thing. They have money, secretly rent to other people and make huge savings and refuse to give the next an opportunity. But it can take a person some 10- 20 years to get on track if they were not raised well. But for the few that get there, we should finally share with another to gain entry into a very tight small market. Average wait to get in at Sydney is about 20+ years if you even get accepted anymore. 20 years, your a different person.
@@anonymousone6075 part of the reason people are owning cars like that might exactly be the cheap rent, much easier to save for a nice car even with a lower income in that case.
The problem I see in my town in the US is that there are droves of people moving here, buying multiple houses, and instead of renting, they are turning them into AirBNB's and timeshares. The average individual income is $28,000 for an individual here, while the average rent is $1450. You need to spend over 60% of your income on rent alone, excluding utilities, rising gas and grocery prices, loans and other bills, etc. The wait time for low income housing is approaching 3 years. Every town council meeting I watch only concerns more benefits for seniors and retirees, while swarms of younger people are moving out because literally cannot afford to rent an 800 square foot studio. Almost every business I see is desperate for workers. Some have had to close down permanently. It's getting ridiculous, but sure, let's keep lowering the cost for the retirees so they can have more money to spend at the closed down stores while they struggle to find somebody to drive them there.
The real stats might even be worse. You used mean, instead of median. Median income is usually a more accurate number and is usually lower than mean.
You touch on a lot of issues here … people flooding into the city while units are becoming airBNBs obviously upsets the supply/demand balance, often to the detriment of young renters. That is a major problem around the world. However, not sure I understand what seniors have to do with it? What benefits is your city council providing for seniors? Obviously doesn’t make sense to be providing benefits solely for seniors while driving out the young.
@@bl9531 The retired are usually the ones who attent town hall and zoning meetings and the like, so their concerns are the ones that are usually heard. Other than them, it's NIMBYs in general. So things that those groups of people don't want get blocked, making the trend continue. There needs to be more civic engagement and education in the general population.
@@WindsorMason all true no doubt, but what are the specific measures City Council takes to lower costs for seniors. Hard to say if it is fair without knowing what he is talking about.
The problem is all new construction in The US- virtually all Is Market housing!! That’s why even someone working full time can not afford rent. The standard used to be 25% of one’s income should cover housing. Wages have not kept up with increasing cost of living. Thanks unfettered capitalism and corrupted politicians for creating policies that drive income inequality to ever increasing chasms!
I work for Vancity and I wish we did more advertising like this. Giving away 30% of our profit each year allows us to make some really impactful changes in our communities. Just imagine if all banks did the same, or if everyone decided to more their banking to FIs with these same values. We could legitimately erase the housing crisis.
*cough* financial cooperatives 😅
Dude, if everybody knows businesses pay the least tax why doesnt the law change in order to accommodate for that. I mean in 2015 people were literally calling it a "loophole", and no one in government thought that it would create a big enough financial disparity in the future to fix? The governemnt isnt governing:/
What is the other 70% of profit doing? I hope that it is being invested somewhere, and the returns from that investment used to fund more housing.
"it is easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism"
That line is repeated so much it loses all meaning. Use your imagination and stop saying it’s too hard.
I don't want capitalism to end! Ya'll seem to forget that capitalism is like ice cream: there are different flavours. Social market economy, as practiced in most of Europe (more social in the north) is something I really vibe with. Y'all be hating on capitalism, because all you know is the anarcho capitalistic hellscape in NA. That's like someone saying ice cream sucks, only because they dislike salted caramel flavour and have not tried anything else....
@@leviathan5207you act like socialism hasn't been tried many times over...
Non market housing is projects. He wants to bring back slums. If liberals stopped "helping" people it would solve most of the worlds problems
@@Rays_Bad_Decisions social market isn't socialism. Socialism is Socialism. I really think we gotta stop coming up with misleading names like this.
The issue is similar in USA. California has extremely high rent but whenever anyone tries to build something homeowners come out in mobs to contest it.
Especially here in Palm Springs where those homeowners often are only here for a couple months out of the year.
because they build more houses but don't build more dentists, doctors, hospitals, schools, nurseries or any other infrastructure with it.... but dumping a few thousand more people there is fine apparently
@@anonymousone6075that’s not the problem I see here in Silicon Valley. The problem here is that the cost of living is incredibly high, because people working at Google or Facebook can afford to pay ridiculous amounts for those houses, and for rentals in the area. This means that the teachers and restaurant employees can’t afford to live here in the city. We need to create more actually affordable housing, including larger multi family houses, non-market housing, and to change our zoning laws to allow more tiny houses/ADUs, and actually walkable neighborhoods.
@@anonymousone6075 The problem is the people already live here. They just live in their cars, with their families, in homeless shelters, or in overcrowded apartments. 20,000 people in LA live in their cars -- and most work full time jobs.
Wow @@peaceness888
You missed some points about non-market housing. Co-ops, which are managed by residents on a cost-recovery basis are great. But paying down the mortgage doesn't necessarily mean that it gets cheap. My co-op had to take out a large, multi-million dollar loan to pay off the existing, higher-interest rate balance on our previous mortgage and to pay for maintenance that is now needed on our 40+ year-old development. It is a large development, with well over 100 units. So housing charges (the equivalent of rent) do go up every year because we have to recover costs and costs keep rising. However, we're still about 60% of the cost of private rentals in our area. But the great thing is that all residents have a vote and nobody is making a profit, we just have cover our costs. The problem with trying to build more co-ops is that politicians get fat bribes...oh, sorry, "donations" from developers who sell them public land for cheap. Back when my place was built, the area was a rundown industrial zone. Now it's a very desirable area and non-market housing was a pioneer of the transformation. Now the private developers are here and there is no talk of more co-ops. And if the topic ever does come up, the developers just muddy the waters by calling it "public housing", insinuating is the poorly run and maintained developments that the government uses to house the poor. One challenge for co-ops is that market conditions are diluting what makes co-ops really special--self-determination. Whenever the waiting list is opened, it gets filled with lots of people who don't want to participate in the work of running the place, they just want a cheap place to live. There's also the challenge, in older co-ops of it getting insular. In some cases you'll see families where two, three, or even four generations live in the same co-op. They have no experience of the private rental market and get some pretty kooky ideas.
Co-ops are certainly an interesting opinion, but I don't think they should be the norm for non-market housing (in the US and Canada at least). Simple not-for-profit corporations with fairly conventional management structure really should be the most common form of development IMO. The problem, of course, is raising the initial capital... Which is incidentally something federal governments can do very well. The basic idea is that the federal government would provide the loan (at a rate only to offset risk) for housing development projects which are approved by the local government (which have to review and approve those projects anyway). Just take the "rent taking" profit motive out of it. Everyone who actually does any real work still gets paid, just not the lender or mere owner.
Thanks Clark. I believe we all need to politically organize to (in a civilized way!) debate & challenge the Developers on the havoc they wreck on the rest of society by maximizing profit and the lies they tell & bribes they pay to get away with it. Are their already organizations that do this? And like almost every single political issue ever, it is ruined by the power of money in politics - named that Elections & Lobbyists are privately funded, rather than Publicly funded. This would make both much, much cheaper too, as well as gearing both more towards the public interest. "Those who pay have the power".
@@travcollier Sure Travis that's another avenue, but pls see my comment too if you would 😁
@@travcollier Turning over the running of non-market housing to bureaucrats with no skin in the game is how you get the many public housing disasters that litter North America. Non-equity housing co-ops (there are equity co-ops in which people own their units) are managed by a board of members but the work that requires expertise is done by experts. We have accounts, maintenance staff, profession admin people. There's repairs being done to the brickwork of the building (40+ years, that's gonna need to be done). That's all being done by professionals. As for the issue of land acquisition, that can be done in many ways. First of all, any publicly owned land that is to be developed should prioritize non-market housing. Second, private development can have a levy applied that is used for such acquisitions. There's also the power of expropriation. Getting funding needn't be complicated. Back in the heyday of co-op development (60s and 70s) government-insured loans did the trick. There's simply no political will, though. Those who are lucky enough to own and private developers are a loud voice that politicians listen to.
Very flattered to be pinned. Thank you. I'm glad you made this video. There is never any mention of non-market housing in all the hand-waving that politicians do about "affordable housing."
im glad you mentioned that it's relatively cheaper because frankly nearly 2k a month is still an insane price to pay to exist in someone else's building
pedantic point, but it’s not “someone else’s building”; the residents own the building
@@JulianFortune I was unaware of this, the way the information is presented in the video led me to understand that it was just not-for-profit rent. thank you for correcting that!
@@JulianFortune the non-profit owns the building. that's what renting is. you can't rent a building from yourself
It's totally fine due to the location. The 4,500 is just crazy
No it’s a normal price. Your expectations are ridiculous if you think you can live in such a location for less than that
The UK used to have a large supply of council housing which operated as non market housing. These were built and maintained by local councils and often used for people who couldn't afford normal market rent. This was effective until they got sold off in the 80s where it's really been going down hill since then.
Thatcherism is the most successful political idology ever to hit the world. The most successful in adoption, not outcome. The outcome is poverty, loss of skills, an education system that doesn't, social disintegration, deindustrialization etc.
Oh the eighties, a time when perhaps the richest generation the west has ever seen decided they wanted to be richer, and that everyone else (past and future) should suffer to make it happen.
@@notgabby604 Yeah because life in 1979 under Labour before Thatcherism was very successful. - Electricity 3 days a week because of strikes. TV switched off after 10pm (so think internet nowadays) to conserve electricity. Bus stations closed on Thursdays. - Garbage all around the country from strikes - UK becomes the first developed country to beg the IMF for a bailout because the government was bankrupt - Recession, 10% unemployment, 22% youth unemployment, 14% inflation - Salaries fall below Italy for the first time in 200+ years - Germany bans imports of British cars in 1977 because the quality of Britain's nationalised car company, British Leyland, was so bad they feared for safety of drivers and passengers. (They later went bankrupt in 1986 because nobody wanted to buy their cars, not that they produced a lot anymore, they were usually busy on strike) - British Overseas Airways, while still a nationalised company, miraculously went bankrupt in 1974 despite having a monopoly on all flights from Britain. Apparently even when you're the only airline that can exist, you can be so bad that still nobody wants to fly with you. Or maybe the crap economy meant nobody could. Either way, they died. As everyone who lived through the 1970s knows, 1979 under Labour was peak civilisation, and since Thatcher ruined the utopia that was handed to her on a plate, everything has been going down since the Golden Age created by the 1974 election and all the intellectuals that spawned.
@@asoton957oh you mean the same 1970s where we built more homes in a single decade than we have both before and after. Mate the 80s were shit too; or did you forget. We've had one good pm in the last 50 years and that was John major. He was a good man, that at least cared when he messed shit up. The rest are soulless, they've have done nothing but systematically ruin our country bit by bit and we we're all to young or too busy to notice
@@asoton957 I think the point of the video and this discussion in general is that nonmarket housing stabilizes the housing market. That way, you don't end up with a crazy situation like what you're describing. The goal of any society is stabilizing the market and society so they can progress, and less about pushing an extreme political ideology that might be convenient at a particular moment in the 80's. Now everyone is afraid there will be yet another financial crisis and living with uncertainty even when there is a lot of money moving around. In the US at least, basic services are inflated to Weimar Republic levels and there is a lot of political violence from that.
The thing I’ve always hated about renting, is that they’ll charge huge rates on you, and then talk about how they charge those rates to fix things, but if you’re fixing things so much that every tenant has something broken once a month and it takes more than a thousand dollars to fix, then there’s an issue with the building, or the people who own it, or both. And if their excuse is “oh, but it may not be you that’s causing things to be broken” then great, lower my f*cking rent, and stop making me cough up dough for what other people break. And so when you get down to it, it really is just them taking advantage of people in desperate need of housing.
I really really really appreciate how you treated price-regulated housing and increasing the supply the housing as not just compatible, but actually complementary. The worst part of housing debates among progressives is when it devolves into "nothing but rent control" vs. "nothing but new market construction", and this is one of the most elegant avoidances of that tendency I've seen!
If I've learned anything about social issues, it's that problems almost always have more than one cause, and the best solutions have more than one part! "Nothing but x" very rarely is actually the best solution
Another critical part of fixing the housing issue is zoning laws, between mixed use zoning, vertical zoning, better public transit access (there are some cities in canada that are 40% parking lot) and non market housing there is a lot of good ways to combine these to form sustainable communities. Unfortunately NIMBYism tends to cause problems.
THIS - exactly. Moreover, municipalities are in competition with each other to maintain the status-quo - any neighbourhood or municipality that liberalizes their zoning rules will get an entire region's-worth of development. This is reform that needs to happen at the provincial level - the municipal charter needs to be amended to unify zoning rules around zones that can't be used to stop development. No public hearings, no community action. What your neighbor does on his property (even if that neighbor is a developer) is none of your damn business.
‘Vertical housing’ in the USA usually has a ton of bs fees and ‘maintenance’ charges, insurance etc. That’s a huge part of why many only consider single family homes.
If you own a house, then you will also hate the idea of an apartment being built behind you.
🔥 comment
I don’t like fees either but it isn’t BS. You have to buy insurance for a single family home too. And the maintenance fee is in lieu of mowing your lawn every Sunday.
my dream was always to buy or build an apartment building with all my friends, rent it out at market rate until we get back twice the initial cost then hand it over to the tennants as a renters coop then build two more, then repeat. we'd probably get even more donated from the coops we create or they'd continue the same process on their own and in 50 years or something housing just wouldnt be a commodity in our area.
That's called charity. Once you build a solid business as a landlord, you can give to charity in unlimited ways, including offering lower rents to tenants or paying for kid's cancer treatments or any other number of ways that you think will help create a better world. The best thing about a monetary system over a barter system is that a person can earn profit in whatever they are good at or love to do and use it to help people in any way, not just in the field where they make their money. The key to that is creating something that has value. That value basically translates as profit. We have to be very careful about demonizing profit when in reality it is at the heart of a dynamic, prosperous society. We also have to be very careful about transferring profit away from people who earn it and turning it over to government officials who didn't. In most cases, government projects cost much more to build due to inefficiency and corruption than a private individual who has hands-on control over their projects from start to finish. Politicians and bureaucrats will often direct funds to friends and family and insider lobbyists or other political interests.
@@billworden6642 landlords dont earn anything, they're parasites who live off of others hard work.
Until you get back TWICE your initial investment? That's like a 25+ year wait.
Currently paying $3500 for a 1 bedroom 20ish minutes outside of downtown Miami. When I moved here a few years back I was paying $2400 for a studio and that went up since then as well. Truly so crazy and I’m not sure how people can afford to live in this city as it continues to rise
Any city at this rate. Something’s gotta change.
You can thank the Government. Raising Property Tax, Fees, Permints etc. I mean for everything. We already Over Pay in taxes. Now they charging us more in in so called Fees and Permints. Guess what landlords do. They pass that expense onto us! That the Government fault! Government is also making new jobs. I went with landlord to one to see why they where charging more. They said this office is for more protection for landlords and tenants. But their was a fee to be paid. Which they suggested the Landlord to pass on to the tenants. I stated I do not need more protection from you. I rather keep my money. You are making my rent go up!
You would pay half of that to buy a 2 bedroom condo in Miami.
That’s why sexyy red was down in Miami looking for the hoochie daddies
Is because people rather pay 4x times to live in a city than in any other place
I remember the "promise" prior to the 2010 Olympics that Olympic Village would be affordable housing. Didn't quite work out that way.
I don't even live in BC and I remember that promise.
As someone in a "third world" country, I find it interesting that 1,000 Dollars a month is considered affordable. What you get for the same amount of money varies rather wildly depending on where you are.
@@ralphwarom2514 Those rents are quite insane tho. Even Munich one of the most expensive city in Germany and Europe isn't as expensive as that. (4.500€ for a normal flat,...)
@@lexxihd5843he literally explained how govt funds those European housing markets so it’s cheaper, we have a private market so demand= high rent simple
That's because the 2010 Olympic bid was mostly about making Jim Pattison rich(er).
There is one minor problem that makes things significantly more complicated. The government subsidizes losses on empty apartments. This has led, in my city at least, to hundreds of empty "ghost buildings" making money by literally standing empty. These buildings got built on the hope to solve our housing crisis, on all these promises and more, only to make it significantly worse. Now we have more homeless than ever before, sleeping under the awnings of apartments designed to stand empty.
That makes no sense. Who is making money in that case? That doesn't sound like public housing but privately owned subsidized housing which is just more for profit property. If the state owns the housing who are they paying to and who is benefitting from the houses being empty? Your story is bullshit and/or you really don't understand the problem nor the proposed solution.
@@eleSDSU Compamies who build and maintain these empty buildings earn money, from the government, and government oficcials are interested in these profits (and they don't care about losses for the government)
U act like they would be empty so many places like this will sold out
That's not true. It's the Vancouver model. Those apartments are held empty by the fentanyl money laundering
@@JJzerro "Companies" as in privately owned by capitalists which is my point, these are privately owned housing whose goal is to make profit by being subsidized and generating artificial scarcity as opposed to public housing intended for people to live there. OC has no idea what they are talking about.
I'm hoping there will be a housing crisis so I can buy cheaply when I sell a few houses in 2025. As a backup plan, I've been thinking about purchasing stocks. What advice do you have for choosing the best buying time? On the one hand, I continue to read and see trading earnings of over $500k each week. On the other side, I keep hearing that the market is out of control and experiencing a dead cat bounce. Why does this happen?
You're not doing anything wrong; you simply lack the expertise necessary to make money in a bad market. In these difficult circumstances, only really skilled experts who were forced to witness the 2008 financial crisis could expect to generate a large wage.
Recently, I've been considering the possibility of speaking with consultants. I need guidance because I'm an adult, but I'm not sure if their services would be all that helpful.
Well, there are a few out there who know what they are doing. I tried a few in the past years, but I’ve been with “Tenley Megan Amerson”” for the last five years or so, and her returns have been pretty much amazing.
I deeply appreciate this invaluable advice. Swiftly, I conducted a search on the name, crafted an email outlining my financial market ambitions, and scheduled a call.
How money works has a video about how a housing crisis will not make housing affordable for you. Hope it helps. kzhead.info/sun/qLhpm6ydrpywnn0/bejne.htmlsi=7Oi-02c8Yp5Ucl3R
I love this video. I've been making this argument a lot the past few years. I also like to tell people that there's little point in raising the min wage or providing a UBI unless we first address the housing shortage, bc otherwise all the extra income will just go to increased housing prices. And for the cost of 1 year of UBI we could build enough homes to end the housing crisis.
A land value tax (of like 80-95$%) would solve this issue... and since all wealth comes from land, it would be more efficient when it comes to raising money for a UBI :)
I live in a post soviet Eastern European country in what I'd call a multistory concrete jungle. Yet there are plenty of stores, restaurants and even private houses in the area. From what I know about north America, the zoning laws prevent that from happening, making them dependant on a car. I think if you sell to people how much more convenient their life will be without zoning laws, that might help with the housing market in general.
The solution isn’t removing zoning laws entirely, but design zoning that benefit the people living there instead of the automobile industry for instance.
@@antoruby I dunno man, I think removing laws is better than changing laws, because changing might give a reason and loopholes to do nothing at all.
@@antoruby The people living there own the land and houses. The current zoning bylaws do benefit them, greatly.
@@alittleofsomething some zoning rules are definitely required. You wouldn’t like a noisy factory as your neighbor. What you have in your country seems to be a balance of local commerce and housing, this is the result of a good zoning policy.
@@antoruby I don't really care where my house is. I found an apartment that's right next to a train facility with regularly running trains, and the thought of living next to that doesn't bother me. My local concrete jungle is result of Soviet Union.
I've missed your content like you wouldnt believe. This is civic engagement at the highest level
just yesterday i found myself wondering when we were going to get more of this stellar content
@@brettcraigie6976 The radio? XD
There are solutions, but like you said it takes a lot of work and those solutions need tweaking as we work through this… but it never hurts to try and educate others on solutions like these. I work at a non-profit and I know how hard it is to come up with money for the cause you’re working for. In my city we’re so lucky that a new zoning code that limits single family homes and adds more mixed zoning and density was passed. Super great video and it definitely makes me think of all the solutions that could be.
This is happening all over the world in major cities.. I like the idea of a decentralized model of housing.. Great video!
Yes is a worldwide house crisis show that all have same problem profit over living
Years ago I ran for election on the platform on Community Land Trusts in combination with Limited Equity Cooperatives. It was extremely popular in conversations while door knocking. Unfortunately I was outspent 17x1 and lost to someone taking donations from the real estate industry and land developers.
We need more people like you
There are too many self-serving NIMBYs in Vancouver. They will agree with the idea of affordable housing in conversation, but they will never vote for someone who will bring affordable housing into their neighbourhood in fear of bringing down their property values.
@@empi492 Same things happens in my suburbs right outside a major U.S. City
Hi Dana, I'm curious to know more about your plan! I ran in a local election and lost to the incumbent (but got more votes than his previous assistant - small victories), but I'm still trying to push for more solutions to housing crisis. I'm wondering if you have any good books/articles/etc about this topic?
@@denimdaphne "American Apartheid", by Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton was an eye opener for me. I have a degree in planning and learning the history of urban planning was critical in my policy proposals. So I'd suggest going to well established Urban Planning programs at different universities, look up the syllabi for any courses that focus on historical aspects of urban planning, and read the books they lists out.
I'm currently renting a non market house with friends. It's not much cheaper than for profit landlords, but it's a solid 40% bigger, much newer, and is kept to a much higher standard. There was nothing even remotely comparable from any for profit landlords.
If you get more area for the same price it sounds like it is cheaper than for profit landlrods
@@Beazice Agree. Price/unit area
Not much cheaper? But you're comparing it to the apartments that are 40% smaller. Lol
This is really such a silly comment lol.
Hey, I'm a landlord and I keep my properties in really nice condition
The reason non-market housing can get so much relatively cheaper is that the supply of housing was unnaturally restricted. There is a certain NPV to a building and if property values aren't being pushed up by supply limits then you are just back in the a bit cheaper but not much situation. The stabilization in Vienna is just about building *enough* housing period. Of any kind. Look it's nice if people build non-profit housing other things being equal but having lived in places like Berkeley my fear is that dislike of developers and landlords means that non-profit housing will be used as an excuse to leave barriers in place against profit housing.
Had the pitchfork ready. Glad I took the time to listen. We can't count on the government to get us out of this. Their plan is to do this, but give it to huge wall street companies like BlackRock. Tell your politicians no to wall street and yes to this. ⬆️
Hilarious when even the "affordable" option is miles outside my budget
Lol, get a better job bro
@@starmorpheus real question, how is some one supposed to support themselve on a 20 dollars an hour job? Yet , we need those people because they work in the retails of the city.
@@starmorpheus also , 4500 dollars is a respectable engineer salary In québec. That makes no sense .
@@starmorpheus yeah cause it's just that simple if you're living paycheck to paycheck
@@starmorpheus don’t be a dick
This should definitely be a part in every city. 40% at least, 60+% at best. Vienna is wonderful in this regard, imagine paying so less for such an apartment. It's ok if landlords make their profit, but those prices today are getting ridiculous, shouldn't be an infinitely rising and uncontrolled profit driven.
No
No profits for rent or other utilities. Cost should be set to reduce waste as needed.
@@justcommenting4981 Ideally yes, but try to get enough people on board with that in this current social climate. I say there should, at the very least, be an enforced profit cap-off to prevent landlords from raising rent and mortgage prices to such ridiculous heights.
@@peggedyourdad9560 ah. Realistically? Yes, but equally unlikely...at least in the U.S.
Landlords are by far the worst everyday people.
Actually am pretty impressed, I was expecting a lot of bias (especially anti capitalist bias) but my guy looked at both sides and came with an educated and fair video. It's an interesting idea, personally I think that fine line is a bit too fine to explore further, the number 1 thing we could do that's keeping rents and costs high is deregulate and get rid of mostly useless bureaucracy as he mentioned in the last part of the video, public housing or not, supply and demand will always play the biggest role so we need more supply, but I have to say I'm personally against public housing except maybe for the homeless, as he pointed out happened in hong kong, public housing applied in a limited space will drive prices up, not down, as the availability of land decreases, building, renting, and owning becomes more expensive for everyone, particularly the owners, restricting supply like that could be disastrous in a city with more demand than supply, but as with vienna, it could help in cities with a lot more space and a lot less demand as that would force owners to compete, but in big cities like Vancouver it also just makes it more expensive to build new housing which would then push the prices of the privately owned housing up further as everyday folks like you and me can't operate on a huge deficit like the government can. All in all the only real way to lower prices is to allow developers to build more homes, the red tape is what's causing this stuff, not greed
I’m American and studied at Emily Carr , I have never been to a city more in need of affordable housing than Vancouver; a place who’s main market is housing rich people meanwhile nearly 5 thousand homeless people try to survive. Thank you for this educational video!
11:50 my dad was actually trying to sue this guy and his company for buying our apartment complex and forcing "renovations" so that they could move people around and therefore increase the rent
or just let the building crumble? why are you against renovations when it makes the building better you want to live in a nasty run down unit?
@@mortgageapprovals8933 Actually the "renovations" they were doing were against regulations and unsafe for the residents of the building and anyone nearby. Also, with no due respect, take your uninformed judgement and shove it where the sun don't shine. You don't know anything about the situation.
One thing I give credit for is the units you showed being built actually look nice and not ghetto construction. I think that is another problem with zoning is people never want apartments in their neighborhoods because they are always built cheap and somehow use the ugliest designs. It doesn't make much of a price difference to build something pretty.
I would like to see a video on this. I absolutely can't stand the design of so much of the common "luxury" apartment complexes that come up in every city. I always get hit by arguments from ppl saying that it's obviously cheaper and is the same as all-brick buildings or concrete brutalist apartment buildings of the past, of which I both like aesthetically. I can agree to some extent but I feel like there is a lot of value in a nicely designed building, though admittedly one with pretty low tangible value perhaps. A video from About Here on this would be nice.
"I think that is another problem with zoning is people never want apartments in their neighborhoods because they are always built cheap" Correction - people _THINK_ they're always built cheap. Like the example in the video, the actual design and quality of the apartment is completely irrelevant - they could in reality be straight up luxury units, but will still get slandered as a "ghetto" because NIMBYs just assume "apartment = ghetto" and oppose any change whatsoever no matter the context.
@@botanrice8340 i live in Atlanta, all the new luxury apts look like communist bloc and they paint a mural on the side to liven it up.
@@KingBobXVI NIMBYS also don't want increased traffic, and to be honest not being a NIMBY myself I can tell you my street has gone to poop, its full of potholes because the luxury apt set all need SUVs bigger than the already jumbo ones their parents had.
@@botanrice8340 even poor Soviet Union can give 36m² home for free. Imagine that every man doesn't have be demanded to have a house before he can get married
I go to a church in New West that is currently in plan to do the same thing that Oakridge Lutheran did; Take down an old church building that needs to be replace and build a non market housing with a church attached to it. It was supposed to start construction this October and the developers we partnered with decided to drop out because the developer won't make enough money from it. So much for adding more affordable housing options to people in the greater Vancouver area 😢
The trick is that you need a government to back up these coops. For example make it easier and cheaper for coops to develop new building than it is for commercial developers. There are other ways to help them out of course.
I've always wanted to start a non-market neighborhood with tiny homes and its own laundromat and community garden.
Seen 'Some More News' and 'Second Thought' cover all this and more?
So a hippie commune?
Same life goals lowkey
The government would never allow it
@@jesseking9254 or just a neighborhood of people who don’t live with capitalism constantly threatening to take home…
Terrific video. The Vienna example cannot be talked about enough, and you explained clearly how it can impact affordability. Fingers crossed for the 2023 ballot initiative in Seattle!
The Vienna example is not all roses, you need to know the right people to get in, very corrupt system, greetings from Vienna
@@werwertuu naja perfekt ist's nicht aber ich kenn genug Leute, die ohne Kontakte ihre Wohnung bekommen haben
I guess the important thing about the Vienna effect is that it has curbed the rise of market housing.
I'm not in the know, what's the initiative in Seattle??
I agree with all the statements above, what this video fails to mention is that everything is paid somewhere - such as the extremely high tax rates in austria, where I am personally taxed at 42% effectively
You are one of the very best channels on KZhead! I'm starting to write my thesis on these sort of issues and this video really got me back into work after more than a few days of... not working 😅
the biggest advantage of non-market rentals is that once the mortgage is paid off, the rent goes way down, even with maintenance costs increasing as the building gets older. Non-market housing is pretty in certain countries like austria, and that's exactly what's happening there. edit: well shoot I should have finished the video before commenting shouldn't I? lol
I got involved with a group that had bought the apartments they were living in when the building was converted to condos, and a manager was hired to manage it, adding to the association fee. Because the owners were elderly and easily scared, they were repeatedly scammed with continual "emergency" repairs by contractors that were associated with the manager. It wasn't until I got involved and demanded expense accountability that they were stopped and a new agency was hired. When my unit was involved in a divorce settlement, there was no one with savvy to oversee the new agency when I moved out. Greed and the lack of human concern remains the major obstacles in anything these days.
Very well done. You did your research and presented some very good options. I like how you "gently" discussed how NIMBY's have really made our housing problem worse. I see them and the, "I have mine, you go somewhere else and get yours." Canada and the US are very much alike with this problem. Thank you for bringing a real solution to light. Like you said, it's not a silver bullet, but it would go a very long way in helping solve the problem.
NIMBYs are a big reason why so many things are out of whack in the US. Power plants, apartment complexes, recycling plants, etc. are all projects that get canned or moved somewhere where they're ineffective.
Man this is so positive, definitely added so much to my day. I'm glad you make these.
Yeah, it's amazing how all communist and socialist countries have around 90% of people owning and having a home while capitalists countries at best get up to 65%. Socialized housing, as with everything, is better than the capitalist alternative.
In The Netherlands the plan is to have at least 30% of social (corporation) housing for every new housing project (if the municipality doesn't already exceed 30%).
This video was so well done! My ex nannied for a couple in co-op housing and it was soooo nice. They were so cheap ($1100/month for a 3 bedroom) And nicer than even the newer buildings at double the rate. Additionally this gives renters a bit more of a sense of agency. Their particular co-op voted on changing the courtyard, intended to be grass, into a community garden. They all voted to increase rent by $50/month for 5 years so they could put solar panels on the roof and once they were paid off rent would go back down. It was truly incredible. I wish more housing was like that! Additionally one of the other problems not mentioned is that landlords are scum because of their profit motive. Like, a lawyer or doctor is incentivized to treat their customer with respect and work on things as soon as possible and keep their customer happy. Landlords will take months to fix a leaky toilet then keep your damage deposit for the damage their inaction caused.
This is something that I don't think people renting "luxury" apts get, the apts are full of the cheapest stuff on the market, flooring, light fixtures, cabinets, appliances, etc. They are mass produced just for the market so it all looks the same, and there isn't anything "luxury" about it.
@@notverynotoriousg5674 luxury is not about the quality of the product, it is about exclusivity and prestige
@@ClaimClam but there are thousands of "luxury" apartments in my neighborhood, my neighborhood is almost all rentals, very few condos. the buildings that went condo in the aughts are all rented out, the owners don't live there. Average income in my neighborhood is 80k, and 20% of the people here live below poverty level. We lose all the independent businesses to Dunkin and Dollar General. Its not a prestigious neighborhood, luxury is just marketing for developers. Slumlords like to act like this is a prestigious neighborhood, it helps them steal everyone's hard earned money.
Unfortunately that statement is completely true. I had one good landlord in all my years renting. Landlording is literally a parasite profession. You buy a house then sit on it charging others to live in it. Doctors and lawyers add value to society. Landlords like to think they do by providing a "service", they're really just leeches.
Smoke and mirrors to confuse gullible voters. Your Rent is through the roof because your property tax is through the roof. Which happens when one area stays hard blue and hard red over many many years. At least in the U.S. the same in other regions that similar political structures. Vote opposite to punish what you don't like. That is the point you are suppose to remember. Remember the ones profiting the most off of you are also the ones controlling the media to keep you in line.
The price of the land makes a difference. Here in Quebec a lot of (non-equity) housing co-ops were built in the 80's and 90's on lands given on rent by the City or a Church. If well managed, they can now offer very affordable rents to their members (600 CAN$ for a 2 bedrooms in a very central neighbourhood of Montreal). If you have to buy the land and pay for the construction of the building, it's a different story, especially now that the prices have skyrocketed pretty much in every big city in Canada. Love your videos btw ;)
Seen 'Some More News' and 'Second Thought' cover all this and more?
Lol where tf are these 600$ apts? Youre insane. 1500+ for a 2bed is basic these days. Coops are nowhere to be found
@@team419 There are rare because it's been really harder to build new one since the late 90's, but they exist. I live in one of them here in Montreal. Some of them are even cheaper in smaller town, at least the one built in the 80's and 90's.
@@loturzelrestaurant nope
@@team419 yup
Interesting to include Hong Kong in the comparisons. It's wild the difference in that city and how extreme it is the price of private vs "government" housing and the limits on who can buy non-market housing. Overall well done with the video! Great production quality and I enjoyed it.
What I like about these videos is that you give us the power to take action. It's more than just empty information, thank you for providing good news
Really enjoyed this video. I'm constantly asking myself what kind of solutions can help ameliorate the housing situation in Canada. I appreciate all the research you put into the videos and of course the fantastic presentation!
Thanks so much! Means a lot coming from a channel like yours :)
The solution is to nationalize the land. Abolishing the rent relation entirely. There are plenty of empty buildings around Vancouver. But this video is sponsored by a bank... and banks want profits.
@@ccchhris Georgism ftw
@@lordgemini2376 nah just go to communism
@@ccchhris Finally someone said it. In a socialist system there wouldn't be any rent to a landlord, but banks in Canada right now cashing in on 71% of your monthly mortgage payments in interest, and tell you the solution is more private sector dominance.
Coop is just being your own land lord. It's only substantially cheaper after you pay it off. Is that a better deal than renting? Sure, as long as you want to be there very long term. In addition to the huge costs, there is substantial risk that you might not actually come out ahead on the investment. You are also stuck dealing with the other people in your coop. If you rent and end up hating your neighbors, you can just move and not have a huge amount of your net worth tied up in the building you are trying to get away from. This isn't "non-market" or "non-capitalist". It's just you being the capitalist yourself. You can do this for food by planting your own garden, or clothes with a sewing machine. It's beneficial if you are willing to take on that work and risk, but most people don't. There is a good reason we have specialization of labor. It's overall much more efficient, and hands off a lot of concerns to other people so you can focus on your specialty.
Yes, yes, "the state should fund it". If you want to see how that tends to work out in the long term read history.
It's not though? A renter in the coop building doesn't have to stay long term... What are you talking about? When had "hating your neighbors" ever been someone's excuse for literally moving house?? This is super disingenuous. Return on investment? Again I don't think you get what a coop is?
@@thomasmiller8289 Sure, in the same way that if you buy a house you don't have to stay long term. You could rent it to someone and find a different place to live, but it's the same situation. You own it, so you have to either utilize it, sell it, or I guess you could just let it sit, but then you spend your money for nothing. People move all the time because of their neighbors. I'm not sure why that's a crazy thought. If you put a bunch of money into a coop you probably want to get something out of it over time, that's your return on investment. Combining your capital with other people to do things doesn't make it not capitalism.
@@ageofdoge ok so youre referring to the people who participated in the initial buy. Sure i guess, it sounded like the focus was on the people treating it as an alternative to higher rents elsewhere though. Maybe im the one who doesnt understand - do new incoming tenants in a coop have to buy in versus just “renting”?
@thomasmiller8289 Well generally speaking they would become members (part owners). Now, there are a lot of ways to do a coop, some do have non member customers, but if that's the case then it's just a normal rental relationship.
Yup totally agree, it's a mix of more housing supplies, both non/for-market housing, enforcing hard cap rent control, and highly taxing investment properties. Housing is for people, not profits.
I'm glad that you pointed out surrounding rent because $1000/room is still very unaffordable
Oh no, I loved your video until you mentioned Vienna, Yes 60% live in non-market housing BUT 100% try to get into non-market housing and the waitlists are crazy long, I am in a waitlist for 10YEARS now. And while it’s subsidized, for those 40% it feels like they pay for the other 60. And those 40 are NOT extremely wealthy people. There is a lot of corruption in the decision making and f who gets a non-market apartment in a good area. Such as politicians or their friends. Always happy to talk more about this if anyone is interested. And yes it is not all bad, but the bad is really bad.
Getting an ad for a get rich quick scheme about flipping Airbnb mattresses was the icing on the cake while watching this video.
I've lived in Vancouver since the 90s and it frustrates me how slow (re)development is because of zoning laws, regulations, bureaucracy, resistance from residents, etc. so housing supply, market or otherwise, is limited. The low-income/affordable housing that the government is prioritizing would only serve a fraction of the population. Good video.
Finally, someone who gets it. The city, province and feds are 100% of the problem. The feds allow the population to increase at a much, much faster rate than new housing, and new housing is insanely slow to get approved and it costs a third of a million bucks in Vancouver just for the permission to build a single family home. That's insane. For a condo it's a quarter million. Governments need to stop making the problem worse, then work on making it better. Blaming it on investors is insane. Prices are high. What does that do? It gives a massive incentive to build more and more units. People there think developers see high prices and don't want to get that money? Of course they do. That's why actual markets work just fine. There's money to be made so people will increase the number of units until that makes the prices drop because of over supply. It's a self correcting mechanism if the damn government would get out of the way. I can buy a whole home for a third of a million in many places in Canada.
I was searching for a video like this on this topic. Thank you for making this! I had been discussing this topic so much lately in my personal life and it is nice to have a video to source back on these thoughts.
When Oakridge said, "Dance is part of life" I really felt that.
Social housing is provided in the Netherlands by co-operations too. At very cheap prices of maximum 700 Euros, 550 Euros even after tax break. The downsides are: long waiting list of 10 years and people who earn too much can stay in their houses for ever. The co-operations are semi-civil servants, so the government has decided that granted asylumseekers can at the nr. 1 spot on the waitinglist.
The main problem in the Netherlands and Amsterdam especially, is that there is simply too much demand and too less supply, the city is overcrowded. I study in Amsterdam and I received an email from my uni that if I dont find housing until September, i shouldn't come here to study at all :/
Sounds like France. Takes 10 years to get into your HLM. If they ever take it away from you, it'll have your teeth marks on it.
Id like to add that the Dutch government was litterally paying for ads in the UK in the early 2000's to 'invest in Dutch real estate!', so many houses are owned by foreign investors which was even pushed by the right-wing government. At the same time tax cuts were taken away from social housing organisations, not making them able to invest in making new buildings. At this moments it's normal to bid 20k more when trying to buy a house, because otherwise they won't even look at your offer (a friend of mine just bought a house in Amsterdam). This problem was created, not grown like this. So sad.
Great video! As a conservative I'm a big fan of Co-ops and, as a rural American, grew up getting my electricity from one! They are often overlooked solutions to competing and controlling a capitalist economy without removing basic market freedoms!
Love your channel man! Watched your waterfront walkway video, and this one about co-op housing, your topics and research are right-on the money - literally.
As a business owner that has invested a lot of time and effort into providing services for co-ops I can say that, even for some of the shortcomings and human effort needed, cooperative housing IS a solution to the housing problem. I'm proud to work with CHFBC and with the members of numerous co-ops.
My Grandmother lived for 25 years after she retired. Her retirement did not keep up with inflation. She told me that had her house not been paid for she wouldn't have been able to survive. For this to truly work, there has to be a path to ownership so that seniors on fixed/low incomes will be able to have security in their old age.
My grandmother had this issue as well. And as the child minder for the neighbourhood she never went back to working in a factory after having kids, so no pension on her end. My grandfathers was cut in half after he died. If you go into a co-op as a young adult and stay their your whole life can you be kicked out when you no longer have an income?
That is an other issue.
Removing property taxes on seniors and not charging income tax on their pensions would help...
@@libertyoverbondage It's a crime that we charge taxes on the elderlies meager pensions. And it is too a crime we charge much if any taxes on their property in retirement. This is a youngster (compared to a retiree I still have decades left before reaching 60) demanding we treat our elderly with much greater appreciate and care. Of course I'm speaking mostly as a US citizen with our barbaric various non-existent healthcare system and housing systems.
@@jmitterii2 We must also take care of our elders in developed western nations, it's disgusting the culture of abandonment in old age homes by the ungrateful children here. Having lived in South America, we live with our grandparents and care for them. Something is wrong in a society when the elderly are abandoned.
The fact that non-market housing lowers the cost of all units in a market (provided there is enough of it) is a perfect counter argument to the faux YIMBY "just build more luxury apartments to lower the cost of rents in the city" argument that's been driving me crazy on my hometown's subreddit when arguments about affordable housing come up.
Absolutely stunning content coming from a newer channel. You're going to hit a million in no time. Incredible production value! subbed.
And here i am sitting in a 3 bedroom appartment in Hamburg, Germany - paying 900 euro per month and wondering, where it all went wrong in Vancouver.
Damn $1900/month is still crazy expensive! My current rent is about $1700/mo and my gross income monthly is about $3K. After taxes it doesn't leave a lot left over. I'm working on increasing income eventually.
Vienna,Austria has the right idea. Great video!👍 People first, not profits. Totally agree.
Great vid Uytae! Cheers from Dartmouth - it's great to see your videos are getting much deserved recognition. You're a hardworking and talented dude. Enjoy the west coast!
I've been thinking about how boarding houses might make a comeback. You have your private space, but many of the amenities which are often needlessly duplicated are shared. Meals and maybe cleaning included. Would be great for young people that are becoming more independent, but maybe can't afford their own place and perhaps can't cook. It's basically what college dormitories are.
I totally agree, but I'd like to see them look more like the Community Alternatives Coop in Kitsilano than the SROs that don't give their tenants a voice in their building.
Personally I think this should be provided as Government run public housing. I also think its a big missing part of the market, and being relatively inexpensive to build its a great way to pull people out of the market who are young in particular.
In a way, boarding houses are already back in Vancouver. So many suburban houses have been converted into dorms. Living rooms and offices are turned into bedrooms. They go for $700-1300 a bed. What would be nice is buildings actually designed to be boarding houses and we had a lot more of them. Also, this used to play a vital role in housing. People who couldn't afford more than a single tiny room with a shared bathroom at least had a place to store their belongings and take a shower, so they could hold a job. Now we have families living and young adults in tents on the streets. I feel like I'm one mistake away from the street too.
Fun Fact! /S: Unfortunately in most municipalities, unrelated people are not permitted to live together by law over a certain number of people. Roommate situations in university towns are generally permitted in by-laws, and many municipalities have rules permitting licensing for rooming houses, however it is not an "as of right" land use. To some extent that's a safety precaution, but these rules were also enforced to keep out "the rabble" from single family neighbourhoods over time. To bring back boarding houses, we need to push for a change to these regulations!
They already exist, and they're called SROs.
Zoning in North America: **year long arguments and protests over one new building** Zoning in Sim City/City Skylines: **Haha I made everything high density zones and I'm the mayor so I can do whatever the hell I want**
This is very quickly becoming my favorite channel! Thank you for the insightful and important videos
I am a landlord and working on my first multi unit project, I am working on keeping my prices as low as I can while still providing good housing. an income for myself, and at a price supportive of people whom are in the area. My current goal is to keep the prices profitable but also below 25% of the median monthly income for people in the area. It is possible but made me look more closely into what I will be building.
This guy is great. I like each new video of his more and more. He actually confronts these issues in a way we can understand instead instead of just going around them in circles like most political talking points do.
The solution is to nationalize the land. Abolishing the rent relation entirely. There are plenty of empty buildings around Vancouver. But this video is sponsored by a bank... and banks want profits.
@@myratsalad yea our current western governments "steal" you mean nationalizes businesses all the time anyway.
I think it's always good to have a set of solutions to a problem. In this case, fixing zoning and nimby, non market housing, public housing, etc. However, in Canada the problem is mainly zoning. That's the biggest difference between Vancouver, and Vienna.
The problem is the way to "fix" NIMBYism requires overriding those selfish AHs who use their lobbying and "concern" efforts to artificially jack up their own property values. But those same individuals will cry that they're being "0ppr3ss3d" for being prevented to act like gh0u1s. The only real solution is to wait for these people to pass from old age.
$1900 dollars for a 2 bedroom is still insane
yes, thanks
Great video, really shows the need for a follow up video on the reasons why non market housing virtually stopped for nearly 30 years.
In "my" countries which are Croatia and Greece, there is too much focus on owning rather than renting. The "help" given to younger people (with an overwhelming advantage to people with children while neglecting anyone who can't procreate or chooses not to), is often in some specifically designed mortgages, sometimes for specifically designated housing units. It means that 1) people still need to be able to afford a loan (will not go into many details about it, and it differs between the two countries), 2) smaller interest rates of these special loans lead to even higher prices, as market always adapts to an idea that buyers could pay more, 3) (this for Croatia specifically) if it is a property designated for "affordable housing", some people will buy it and then rent it out resell it for market prices as there are no enough strict rules who can get it or what should they do with that - the only criteria is that they have to be younger than some age limit and they need to be a family, a couple with one or more children.
“Only 1900$ so cheap” literally my current monthly income 🤣
Don’t worry…it gets better as you get older and develop more skills. I vividly remember my early 20’s, making $800/ mo and paying $250 in rent (with roommates) and a $270 car payment…
@@ShawnWi im in my late 30's :) and there's no apartments with roomates in my country for less than 400$ that's like the minimum you'll probably find and with a couple of roommates, shitty conditions and far from the main cities
@@m3talust782 $400 sounds pretty affordable, and having housemates can be a good thing :)
Yeah, well everyone's gotta start somewhere. If you are 19 yo and working at Starbucks making $22,000 yr, that's very different from being done with school and working as an engineer making $150,000 yr at 35. Combine that with how much rent and property were just 6-8 years ago and you got problems now. My mortgage is only about $1100 on a house but if I were to rent in the same neighborhood I'd be paying $1800-$2500 where I'm at for an apartment. According to your income you shouldn't be spending any more than a little under $600 on rent which isn't happening unless you have a roommate or are renting a room from someone.
@@m3talust782 man you need to get more skills man. Go save up, take small loan or ask your room mates if they can cover rent for a month so that you can go to a trade school. Anything is better then nothing man.
You have the best, most nuanced, and expansive deep dives into these topics!! Appreciate it so much
Incredibly informative video! While non-market housing and increasing supply is the main take-away, some counter-measures can be taken to lessen the blow of rapidly increasing rent prices, that of governmental regulation that gives power to the tenant. Here in Quebec, tenants have a lot of rights, such as the right to remain, where you cannot be evicted unless they have a really good reason (renovictions are NOT a valid excuse) such as not paying rent or breaking building rules and the right to refuse a rent hike if one believes it to be too high, where either the tenant and landlord must negotiate or the government steps in and fixes a price that they believe is fair (usually a 3-5% increase per year). There are plenty of other rights, but I find these to affect rent the most. This causes rents that are more than fair for living in one of the biggest cities in Canada, with the highest rents I've seen (in luxury high rise apartments in the center of downtown) in Montreal being on par with some of the lowest shown for Vancouver in the video (about 2400 for 2br). Of course there are other rights afforded to the tenants, such as security deposits being illegal (landlords can ask for the first month's rent up front or part of it but nothing more), or how the apartment must be able to let the tenant have a peaceful enjoyment of the apartment, such as no bug infestation within a building or free of excessive noise.
Rental prices in US are insane too. For $1800 in my state, I would only get a small, dingy apartment, usually located in a rough neighborhood with lots of homeless and drug addicts. Bigger and better located apartments are $2400 and higher. That’s more money than my parents paid for mortgage each month. It’s actually cheaper to buy a house with a long 40 year mortgage than to rent. People have extended families living together. Kids move back in to parents home with their own kids, siblings or close friends moving in together. It’s the reason why housing investors can charge so much. People have no choice, but to live together in homes designed for single families. When I visited my Brother who lives in a smaller city in Japan. I was floored how little he pays for his apartment. Note that he lives in a smaller city in the Hiroshima prefecture so rent are much lower than Tokyo. He pays a bout $500 dollars US equivalent for rent teach month. His apartment is small, but way bigger than ones in Tokyo. He actually has two small rooms. It’s perfect for him as he lives alone. People in our home state in US would kill to pay $500 bucks for an apartment like his. His neighborhood is nice too. It’s so quiet and safe at night, there is many shops an restaurants that are a short walking distance away. A major train station that has access to commuter lines and the Bullet Train is only a 20 minute walk away. The neighborhood has single family homes, apartments, and shops all mixed together. I think people in North America should see mixed use Zoning first hand so they know how much better it is than the car dependent zoning laws we have here.
Thank you for making this video. I have been preaching, and teaching, this principle to people around me for years as a building contractor. It makes me very happy to see this message put together so well, and reaching a larger audience. Thank you!!!!
One of the insidious things the student residence I was at tried to do was increase the rent of the basic room more than the room with AC. Encouraging students to switch to AC rooms and pay an extra $100 per month for a feature only important half a year.
I am a strong supporter of Social Housing in Scotland, local housing authorities have been mass building reasonably aesthetic housing in my small city helping stabilise rents to less than £1000 a month! I personally think this is the way forward
Great video, and nice to see a progressive credit union highlighting its role in facilitating this activity (unlike corporate banks). I'd add the importance of Community Land Trusts here, where a plot of land is taken off the market and placed under control of a local non-profit. The concept is also non-market, but can be used at any scale to make housing permanently affordable both for large cooperatives and for smaller single-family homes.
Thank you, Colin! We were thrilled to partner with Uytae and About Here to show the great work we're doing alongside our partners and community. And how our member's money is making a difference.
@@vancitycu even poor Soviet Union can give 36m² home for free. Imagine that every man doesn't have be demanded to have a house before he can get married
Admittedly I wasn't alive during the height of CMHC investing, but I still always bring it up. I want the federal government to fund housing - especially as people travel across Canada to seek refuge in Vancouver, and we have so much room for them if we just rezoned.
Luckly at has at least started to by guaranteeing loans for Co-ops
As a third floor apartment renter, I appreciate having a second stair case (mine is outdoors though) because it means I have a second means of a escape for more things than just fire. If someone were to intrude in my apartment, they can’t block both exits. My second staircase doesn’t even exist for fire safety because the whole thing is just wood haha. I’ve noticed we’ve stopped building and started taking down external fire escapes, and I’m curious about that.
Was initially going to comment on how government housing wouldn’t solve the issue, but you got it right. The real issue are the barriers for creating new housing. Reducing regulations is the first step
In my country (Czech Republic, central Europe) is a co-op still a pretty significant part of all the buildings, especially in bigger cities. Some of them were transformed into "unions of owners" with basically the same responsibilites. How does that work? Imagine a multistory "soviet style" prefab building with 5-10 entrances. Usually, as each entrance has a separate section of the house, each such entrance (part of the prefab) has it´s own "board", occasionaly few neighboring ones have one common (especially in 3-5 story prefabs). This "board" is voted for few (usually4) years FROM PARTICIPANTS of said co-op/union, and their responsibility it to do solve maintenance issue, run reserve fonds (for repairs and such), schedule improvements and renovations (elevator, painting, insulation, roof repairs...), communicate with city office and utility providers, run contracts with such etc. The key part is that such co-op here is OWNED by either people living in those flats (or their family members), making it a ownership union, or you have a co-op owned units "rented" to members. But both ways you are paying a huge money by moving into such housing (you basically buy yourself in, co-op membership or owner for market price). Co-op may be harder to sub-rent for others, but besides that you are basically owning the building (or its part) together and vote some of you to take care for amenities (for small charge). That´s it. Every year you have a meet up where cash-flow and plans are presented, new fund payments are presented and voted for (majority wins). It is relatively low, hundreds of dollars at max. But the initial investment is high. -------- Canadian coops look different from what video present. We also can have government help in these in terms of loan (discussion started after 30 years of pause), but every new co-op would need to get its funding from somewhere BEFORE it proceeds to building stage. It would be basically like setting up a new non-profit organisation where all future tenants will be participants and their share´s price will be according to square meters of their (future) flats. And people can go and new can come (if there is a space) and everyone is ruled by house-board. Many times you cannot even sell the flat to anyone you want from the street, you need to offer it to others from the union beforehand (usually a 1 month notice). I like this system and it has multiple pluses. Can it work in Canada?
Fantastic video Uytae! The breakdown of scenarios, players and costs when it comes to housing and solving our housing crisis makes your content digestible and actionable for everyone from youth to seniors, renters to developers, voters to politicians, and everyone in between. I'll be sharing this with my newly elected Council. Hope you get sponsored by VanCity!
One of the problems we see with Non Market housing in NYC is that it’s often seen that the non market housing is some of the worst quality and least maintained housing. Most of it is subsidized, because like you said breaking even is still way too expensive for many tenants to pay. It spirals into needing lots of funding to support the housing (aka not being able to get as much funding as needed, and then the overall quality goes down)
Even the worst housing is better than being homeless, and realistically that's an extreme example.
That's seems like a funding issue, though, which belies more interconnectedness--the housing crisis is directly affected by over-funded police forces, since that municipal money that could be going to subsidizing housing more thoroughly is going towards militarizing the cops.
That's the first thing I thought about. I am all for more government public services. But let's be honest. Our government cannot function properly right now. They cannot even maintain current infrastructure. It is such a huge pipe dream to think they could make good desirable public housing, Healthcare, or public transportation. It's just a pure fact the American government in its current phase could never do such undertakings. It would be such a political issue and become a right vs left thing. Also I don't trust us as a society. I don't believe low cost housing will attract good hard working people. It's a terrible thing to say but that's how it always goes. Can be better or worst depending on the part of the country. But these locations will become hotbeds of bad activity. That's how it always goes. Our culture is sick. Another thing to consider is what lots of folks from the UK are commenting where a later government comes in and ruins the programs. I think a problem Americans have is always thinking about how the world should be rather than the current reality.
thats a pure capitalism issue though. Just like the MTA, housing in NYC is underfunded
@@baronvonjo1929if you genuinely think that the us or canada are outliers compared to any other country in the world in how society functions and how willing people are to improve it you are delusional. Any country can achieve what vienna has. This is purely an issue of hypercapitalist believes
Fantastic video! Clear presentation, without hype and exaggeration. Really balanced and informative. Fist video = thumbs up and subscribed!
I really enjoy your work. It's just discussion, I never feel like you're trying to take down the otherside, and you bring real examples. Whenever I think "Okay, but there's also this to consider" and go to start typing you say "Okay, but there is also this to consider". Wonderful.
Awesome video! There are multiple types of non-market housing and we need to look at the pros & cons of each as solutions to our massive housing problems. Co-ops, public housing, social housing, etc. exist in many different countries. Personally I think we need to make investing in housing flat-out illegal, as homes/apartments are places for human being to live in, not for investors to make a profit off of.
I expect that part of the solution is also how we make cities attractive. In France for instance, prices are INSANE in Paris, but it makes sense because everything happens in Paris. The entire government is there, the companies headquarters, the museums and attractions, the train connectivity to everywhere in France etc. So we all struggle to live there and keep expending the town into dull spleeping suburbs with nothing more than "it's X minutes from the center". Meanwhile there are other cities where the housing shortage is much more manageable (not perfect, but not impossible to solve like it is for Paris). It's not THE solution, but I like how Germany has - due to history - many "core" attractive cities that can spread the housing demand across the country.
Important to note that Paris still a highly desirable place to live despite the large number of plain, rectangular and relatively featureless blocks of apartments. It's almost like density isn't actually as bad as NIMBYists make it out to be.
Thank you for this valuable contribution to the conversation on Canada’s housing crisis….of course it’s only a crisis for those of us without affordable housing and there’s a whole bunch of us. It’s so interesting for me to see the people thriving at my workplace, and so often those very people have affordable housing!! Affordable housing for everyone is important for our population to thrive!!