Welcome!
VancouverPeak.com- jesse and Makaya are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic Sandbox. in the group Housing Data
- jesse posted an update: CMHC starts, completions and under construction in Vancouver […]
- The Ant started the forum topic BC Population Growth in the group Housing Data
- jesse and The Ant are now friends
- jesse and wreckonomics are now friends
- wreckonomics posted an update: New Year, New HPI. ”Selection Broadens and Demand Eases to […]
- Best place on meth and admin are now friends
- jesse and Best place on meth are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic February 2012 Daily Numbers in the group Housing Data
Wordpress theme by Abhishek Tripathi of Mediawick Digital Solutions
May 22nd, 2007 at 7:37 am
Warren hows about a hint as to what industry or
particular services the business provides so we can
get an idea of what your talking about. I’m sure that
you can reveal that with out fearing villagers with pitch forks storming your lunch room.
May 22nd, 2007 at 5:23 am
No way.
I read it on a financial blog somewhere, can’t remember but it stuck with me. The point is that most people tend to jump in and out of the market at the wrong time. Which is why I try a long term strategy.
May 22nd, 2007 at 5:19 am
Warren, your company hires people at $55,000 fresh out of school? Can you provide a link to a job posting?
Warren is full of BS, and won’t be replying.
Yes, I’m really going to expose myself and my company to random people like you, who obviously have an axe to grind.
Suffice to say its true. I’m talking people who have taken 2 years at BCIT, nevermind a full university degree. Maybe you can stop flipping burgers and make some money.
Just like the time he got busted bragging about how much his East Van house appreciated.
I don’t own a house in east van. Get your story straight.
May 21st, 2007 at 8:45 pm
“PUCK REBOUND SCORE A GOAL”
there was a deckline since last quater of 2006.
we saw some dipty doo since jan 2007.
but in april 2007 puck was rebound some body shoot that to score a big goal.
GO R.E. GO
I think the pope will explain more to users later.
May 21st, 2007 at 6:17 pm
5 YEAR 126%/27 YEAR 200%
hey you can’t be loser if you do not buy.
some one did not lose since 2001.not even since 1981 keep on arguing because people who have money they are not realy taking any chance to jump into grab a peace.if you indulge your self in arguments you can’t buy anyway because buying will make you loser for your argue.
I wish best of luck to those who are opposing r.e.boom,wish your kids will forgive you when they will be 18.
May 21st, 2007 at 6:01 pm
“That’s why the stock market averages 10% returns while individual investors in the market average 3.5%. “
No way.
May 21st, 2007 at 6:00 pm
“The claim was that net migration to BC is 200k annually. “
Off by a factor of 4, according to these guys anyways:
http://tinyurl.com/2x6emm
“On average, the Council expected total net migration to BC to rise in 2007 from 2006 levels, with forecasts averaging 44,841 people for 2007 compared to 42,973 people in 2006. ”
May 21st, 2007 at 5:55 pm
“If you’re down on it now, what will you be like when times are rought? Its one thing to prepare for a possible downturn, and another to predict it around every corner.
“
Well we are all entitled to our opinion, but I think your comments are bullsh*t. If RE wasn’t priced for perfection, it would be a case of the usual easy come easy go that comes with having a cyclical economy.
You seem to imply negativity for the sake of negativity. The more positive news, the more the negativity. Again, your opinion, but I think you are wrong. In a sense, things ARE different this time. There were large feedback loops between prices and the economy on the way up. Why shouldn’t it be a concern on the way down?
In a sense, I feel that our “strong” economy is built on a house of cards. I am not “negative” because things are going well. I am “negative” because I don’t think things are going as well as we think they are. Definitely not as well as our RE prices seem to indicate. That is my opinion, and it has nothing to do with raining on B.C.’s parade. If I turn out to be right, was it still “negativity”?
May 21st, 2007 at 5:23 pm
condohype asks:
Warren, your company hires people at $55,000 fresh out of school? Can you provide a link to a job posting?
Warren is full of BS, and won’t be replying.
Just like the time he got busted bragging about how much his East Van house appreciated.
May 21st, 2007 at 4:07 pm
On the news1130 radio, I’m hearing a lot of pumping on RE. One specific example is “how boomers are changing demographics” as a news segment, citing an expert from Coldwell Banker. The claim was that net migration to BC is 200k annually. I wonder where they get this number, or is that a “projection”?
It’s said to see the “boomers are coming” nonsense being used in Vancouver, after it’s been used so many times in California, Florida, Nevada, Carolina, etc.
May 21st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
craigpbbrett: In 2004 election, the BC liberals, despite having a booming economy, only won 40% of total vote. If economy is the primary concern of voters, Al Gore, as the vice president during the booming 90′s in the US, would have easily won the election. The BC liberals are not as secure as many people think, strong economy or not. All you need is one scandal, no matter how minor, and we could be back to NDP rule for a while.
May 21st, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Warren: I agree that rental supply in GVRD has been tight for a few years, but prices have been reluctant to go up except for the past year. For a market composed of numerous small buyers and sellers, I find that interesting. I guess the mild climate of Vancouver makes living on the streets practical, allowing an extremely small vacancy rate to persist for a long time.
The economy in BC might be great, but a large part can be attributed to construction related employment. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, but bubbles can collapsed on its own weight. The construction driven economies of Inland Empire in California is one example. As for IT replacing forestry in BC, it’s quite unlikely. Being geographically remote, and small in population, I don’t see why Vancouver can become an IT capital.
May 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Warren, your company hires people at $55,000 fresh out of school? Can you provide a link to a job posting?
May 21st, 2007 at 11:07 am
warren said: That’s why the stock market averages 10% returns while individual investors in the market average 3.5%.
An interesting statistic. One that will, of course, depend on the definition of the term ‘individual investor’.
Could you give us the source, please, warren?
May 21st, 2007 at 9:43 am
It’s amazing how this appears to be so widely known, yet so rarely followed.
That’s why the stock market averages 10% returns while individual investors in the market average 3.5%.
May 21st, 2007 at 8:03 am
Rainy Long-Weekend Vancouver RE Conundrum.
(Test your wits!)
Consider this high-end property:
4524 LANGARA AVE, on the Westside.
According to the official MLS 2006 sales records publication, it sold for $2,350,000 on October 17, 2006.
However, it is now relisted as V646680,
at an asking price of $2,525,000.
We could have a chat here about whether this resale represents a flip attempt (and the questionable math involved) OR whether this represents a quick resale after buyer’s remorse.
BUT, that is not the point of this post:
When you read the current realtor ad copy on MLS, you find this:
“modern style home custom designed for the site and present owners by Lassere Architects.”
How can that be?
There has been no recent reno or rebuild.
The current owner bought this house exactly as it is now 6 months ago.
Or did they?
Any ideas?
May 21st, 2007 at 8:01 am
Thanks Warren Aaron, because of you, now I can see how an elephant is like a tree.
Tick Tock, Tick Tock
May 21st, 2007 at 7:46 am
“Whether or not their policies were optimal is of course debatable.”
Debatable? Under the NDP, British Columbia plunged to the bottom of the provincial rankings in almost every vital economic variable, from growth to employment to to migration to income. Today, we’re near the top.
That anyone can consider the cack-handed, moronic rule by those socialist imbeciles “debatable” is amazing.
I moved back here in no small part because the NDP were removed from power, and I’m sure thousands of businesspeople did the same.
That anyone could conceivably hand control of our economy over to Carole James, Jenny Sims and their coterie of happy travellers just beggars belief.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:35 am
RE prices are so far removed from economic fundamentals that when the bubble pops, economic fundamentals, even if they are good, will remain relatively irrelevant.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:22 am
“..the best time to buy anything as an investment is precisely when everyone else thinks it’s a bad idea.”
It’s amazing how this appears to be so widely known, yet so rarely followed.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:17 am
freakoWhat is your beef with “negativity” anyways? Do you think it will jinx us, or are you tired of listening to it?
Just tired of listening to it, right now, since like-it-or-not, we’re in probably the late stages of a huge boom. If you’re down on it now, what will you be like when times are rought? Its one thing to prepare for a possible downturn, and another to predict it around every corner.
further upside is severely limited, and downside is huge, especially if conventional limits once again become the norm.
If I remember correctly, “conventional limits” when it comes to Vancouver are still high compared to other Canadian cities. I don’t doubt a correction is coming, but if the economy continues on its current pace I think it will be a very slow slide.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:12 am
As for the IT jobs, comapare your #s to how many were created in China or India.
I recommend reading “The World is Flat”. It has a lot of great points about the “threat” of China and India, and globalization in general. The system isn’t perfect, but this economic interconnectedness does a lot to foster freedoms, peace, and raise the living standards of everyone in the world who joins in.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:04 am
In case anyone forgot, BC’s economy was the only one to shrink in GDP during the tech boom of the late 90s.
May 21st, 2007 at 4:42 am
I forgot to mention…about the stolen TV cameras.
They won’t turn up in any garage sale, or flea market or pawn shop.
They’re being used for a higher form of pimping.
Coming soon: “Debbie Does The Best Place To Live With The Best Weatherâ„¢”
Sweet.
May 21st, 2007 at 4:31 am
” Hope they’re enjoying our beautiful weekend weather right now, its such a shame when hype runs head first into reality.”
That was the funniest news story I’ve seen in ages.
A strictly Nelson moment… Ha-Ha.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:58 am
LOL. Shows how little you remember the early 90′s. No one was posting news stories on the internet.
Um, are you saying that there is no information on the Web about anything that happened prior to 1995 or so? You have no facts to back your argument, period. This blog is not the place for people who say “It’s true because I say so”. That’s the profession of people like David Lereah.
The fact is that the BC NDP government, like every other government in Canada, publicly advocated the growth of high-tech employment, and indeed growth took place. Whether or not their policies were optimal is of course debatable.
And getting back to the topic of this blog:
But there is a bottom for Vancouver RE prices, and 50% would be close enough to buy in for those who want to buy a long-term home rather than an investment.
Of course, market bottoms are the best time to buy for investment, rather than just for a long-term home.
Reason being, of course, is that the best time to buy anything as an investment is precisely when everyone else thinks it’s a bad idea.
May 20th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
I guess even beautiful cities have problems. I wonder if they will mention the theft of their equipment and footage in their coverage of Vancouver?
Hope they’re enjoying our beautiful weekend weather right now, its such a shame when hype runs head first into reality.
May 20th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
It used to be the sociopath “usual suspects†often dredged out the old
“ we are the California of the Northâ€
argument in support of their fantasy that RE couldn’t crater here.
It seems, as of late, the same deceitful low life fraudulent, peddlers are staying away from references to California.
In fact, I noted they are using and old basic sales trick, which is to anticipate the objection and addressing themselves.
I also noticed the timing of those independent studies I had anticipated would be released.
May 20th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
While I was not a fan of the NDP government, it was so unpopular in so many areas that people (including many media people) were inclined to blame it for everything under the sun, and it seems many still do.
I even voted for them once, in my naive youth. I have no axe to grind, no reason to falsely disparage them by fabricating incidents from decades ago.
As for the ‘high-tech sweatshop’ timeline and associated media coverage, I clearly remember it being discussed at school when I was studying Bus. Admin at SFU, in the early 90′s. But I’ll debate it no further here, as I have no supporting evidence and my detractors consider their lack of memory sufficient evidence to the contrary.
May 20th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
> I can’t speak for every neighbourhood but people are being evicted left right and centre around kits from small apt buildings and multi suite houses to make way for bigger developments. I’ve lived here for 5 years and this year the activity is almost equal to the previous 4 combined < <
I’ve done time in Vancouver for the better part of 20 years, and it always was pretty crazy.
Now it’s off the richter scale. People talk…maybe it’s the real estate bubble…maybe it’s the upcoming Olympics…maybe it’s the influx of ‘new canadians’. But something has definitely changed.
The bulls think this is magnificent, everybody else just deals with the fallout.
May 20th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Speaking of high tech sweatshops, I believe this term came up in early 1999 when the provincial government made high tech firms in BC exempt from overtime rules. As I recall, some union people did make pretty critical comments about digital sweatshops at this time in the media. The provincial government of the time was the NDP. I do read the media, and I do not recollect anything earlier about government resistance to making parts of BC into a silicon valley, though the idea was certainly bandied about a fair bit, and even promoted.
While I was not a fan of the NDP government, it was so unpopular in so many areas that people (including many media people) were inclined to blame it for everything under the sun, and it seems many still do.
May 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
That last post was a note of bitterness, in case it wasn’t noticed.
The May long weekend marks the time for everyone with a nodding acquaintance with land to start planting.
Never mind. This is a REAl ESTATE PLACE. Nothing else matters.
May 20th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
This is a wonderful weekend.
Never mind about the NDP vs. Liberals or about Olympics politics. This is the weekend we have been waiting for. The Best Place To Live With The Best Weatherâ„¢.
It’s a gardening paradise.
May 20th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I’ve said it before here re the “absence of vacancies” conundrum.
This is purely anecdotal but it makes sense to me.
In my neighbourhood 10-15% of available units are either in the process of being sold, under development application or currently being renovated/developed/demolished/built
I can’t speak for every neighbourhood but people are being evicted left right and centre around kits from small apt buildings and multi suite houses to make way for bigger developments. I’ve lived here for 5 years and this year the activity is almost equal to the previous 4 combined.
May 20th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
there is unexplained evidence (not on this blog at least) which is inconsistent with the bubble theory. Namely there is extremely low rental vacancy rate in Greater Vancouver. How could it be with all the construction going on, people buying properties and moving out, and with the population statistics showing very little growth?
That is a puzzling question and I don’t have the answer. But a look at the CUER data (UBC Centre for Urban Economics and Real Estate) shows that vacancies were also very scarce just before the peaks of the 1980, 1990 and 1994 real estate booms.
David Baxter estimated that as many as 59% of downtown condos have been bought by individual investors. (Moratorium on conversions won’t end rental crunch). There are also about 25,000 secondary suites in Vancouver. Neither are counted in CMHC’s 0.7% vacancy rate.
May 20th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
“But many other people invested in them, and cashed out at the right time.”
That is a zero sum game. For people to cash out, other bag holders had to buy in. The criticisms of tech stock overvaluation and misallocation were valid. The fact that some walked away wealthy does not change this fact.
“Its one thing to be aware of the risks in the market (housing, stock, job, whatever), and its another to be chicken little, afraid to take any chances or make any moves.”
So who are you callig Chicken Littles?
Our economy is hot, good on it. We should be happy, and presumably we are. Just the pronincial liberals don’t deserve credit, nor do the hard working people of B.C. Our good fortunes are due to factors outside of our control (resource prices). Resources are cyclical. By all means, accept the spoils of this cycle. But don’t forget about the flipside of cyclical industries. As discussed in the past, when affordability is poor at low rates in a hot economy, there is HUGE downside.
What is your beef with “negativity” anyways? Do you think it will jinx us, or are you tired of listening to it?
“I agree with you to the extent that prices are way beyond fundamentals, yet rents are tight and there seems to be some “other force” out there that the statistics don’t show.”
Yes, this one does concern me. If we don’t see some downwards pressure on rents soon, we may have to reevaluate those Statscan population growth numbers. Prices are still insane, of course.
“Also, I believe its freako who pointed out that rents are the true price that people are willing to pay for shelter.”
Yes, true in the sense that it is a spot price of PRESENT demand fo housing, and there are no subjective forwards looking valuations.
“The exorbitant price to purchase a home is based on the estimation of its future value, not any value you are getting from living there now (which is incredibly small).”
Yes, that is how it should be. Thus the markets expects sharp increases in rents. Or its just mispriced. In either case, look at rents at Sauder. Down in real terms since the early 70′s. Those numbers are not adjusted for densit increases, so not fair in that sense. I think SFH has a fair portion of validly priced in density increase potential.
“So what is causing it? Some suggestions:”
Personally, I believe that most of it can be explained by temporarily inelastic demand and the pushing affordability limits. We have gone beyond the “recommended” income requirements, to the absolute limits physical limits of affordability. If that is correct, further upside is severely limited, and downside is huge, especially if conventional limits once again become the norm.
May 20th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Patriotz: If this was all over the media like you say, there should be a lot of links to the stories. Let’s see them.
LOL. Shows how little you remember the early 90′s. No one was posting news stories on the internet. People were still using TELNET and BBS’s. No wonder you don’t remember what else was going on.
I’m not going to visit the Vancouver Sun archives and look through microfiche; you can safely continue in your disbelief.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:59 am
Bottom line:
The NDP/ Liberal argument should be filed with:
the Olympics, running out of land, everyone wants to live here, it’s different this time…
And besides, Warren, Rennie the Great disagrees with you.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Quite frankly, I don’t believe you.And if you’re referring to what some non-elected blowhards might have said, spare us.
LOL. It was in the media, much discussed. And that you were ignorant of it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It was in the early 90′s, and I don’t know how much of the info would be available online as the internet hadn’t yet gone mainstream.
I’m merely reporting what I know happened and have no interest in spending my time justifying it for you. Believe what you like; I really have no interest either way.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Wouldn’t the 50% drop make you (and the rest of Vancouver) think the economy is is terrible shape?
It would be in terrible shape at that point, as it was when prices dropped that much in the early 80′s — which is why investors didn’t jump in and snap up houses at that time. And investors won’t be jumping in this time either, particularly as most investors specializing in RE will have already lost their shirts.
But there is a bottom for Vancouver RE prices, and 50% would be close enough to buy in for those who want to buy a long-term home rather than an investment. For such people with cash and good credit, there will be many excellent buying opportunities.
Even in a severe recession like 80′s, most people keep their jobs. Unemployment especially affected new hires — young adults with little experience and no job security.
Conversely, people who had jobs and money did very well for themselves at that time, as there were bargains to be had in all markets.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:39 am
At some point in the early 90′s there was much public discussion of making Vancouver into a ‘Silicon Valley North’. It was in all the media for many months. The NDP and their union-labour bedfellows consistently trashed the idea, saying they didn’t want any “high-tech sweatshops” here
Quite frankly, I don’t believe you. One, Harcourt would never have said such a thing. And not Clark, in public anyway, or anyone in the caucus as far as I know. And if you’re referring to what some non-elected blowhards might have said, spare us.
As I already said, the NDP government actually changed the Employment Standards Act to allow more “sweat-shop” like work hours. It also established BC Tech U out in Surrey as an explicit move to foster the high-tech industry – you may question the economics of this, but not the motivation.
And why would anyone care what the unions thought about a non-union business?
Two, the Vancouver high-tech community would have gone into orbit over such a thing, and I heard nothing of it.
Three, do a little research into the histories of companies like Electronic Arts and Sierra Wireless. I reiterate, there was a lot of expansion of high-tech in BC in the 90′s. Regardless of what the business leaders might have thought of the NDP, they had no problems with expanding here.
If this was all over the media like you say, there should be a lot of links to the stories. Let’s see them. There are plenty of valid criticisms of the NDP regime – I have lots of them – but not this.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Bubble situations in Florida and San Diego at resulted in overbuilding and in “investment properties†sitting vacant for years.
Vacant but not on the rental market, and apartments were being converted en masse to condos; consequently, Florida did have a low rental vacancy rate. It’s only recently that investors have thrown their non-selling houses on the rental market and condos were reconverted back to apts that the vacancy rate changed.
Renting in downtown Vancouver will always be tight, but the burbs is another matter.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:11 am
flip this:P.S. Please somebody tell me that I am wrong, I want eventually to buy a house here…
I agree with you to the extent that prices are way beyond fundamentals, yet rents are tight and there seems to be some “other force” out there that the statistics don’t show.
However the rental controls exercised by the government will limit the speed of rent increases. Also, I believe its freako who pointed out that rents are the true price that people are willing to pay for shelter. The exorbitant price to purchase a home is based on the estimation of its future value, not any value you are getting from living there now (which is incredibly small).
So what is causing it? Some suggestions:
1. Illegal drug trade/crime – possible, I think the effect is understated, but Vancouver is not the only place with crime. Is it the mafia that keeps prices high in Manhattan?
2. Offshore money – immigrants aside, how can we track the money flowing into Vancouver from Asia and other places? I don’t think stats can account for that very well. Are these mortgages obtained by “locals” in fact being paid from overseas? Is there a loophole being taken advantage of here? What is the difference between a local and a foreigner getting a mortgage here? I’m sure a foreigner needs to put down at least 25%, among other factors.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Warren, you are starting to sound like Aaron of Chipmanland.
As for the IT jobs, comapare your #s to how many were created in China or India.
May 20th, 2007 at 10:03 am
IS IT DIFFERENT HERE…
I’ve been following discussions on now defunct VHB and on this blog for quite a while. The most often cited arguments in favor of housing bubble hypothesis are price to rent, and affordability ratios. It is difficult to disaree that both metrics point to extreme overpricing. Plus there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of general hype surrounding residential real estate, which is indicative of speculation activity.
However there is unexplained evidence (not on this blog at least) which is inconsistent with the bubble theory. Namely there is extremely low rental vacancy rate in Greater Vancouver. How could it be with all the construction going on, people buying properties and moving out, and with the population statistics showing very little growth? Bubble situations in Florida and San Diego at resulted in overbuilding and in “investment properties†sitting vacant for years. Here in Vancouver it is different: vacancy rate in downtown area is 0.7%. So, something has to give. It seems to me that there is good chance for the market to reach equilibrium at higher rents, rather then lower prices. Taking into account that rental rates increases are limited by law, the adjustment of rental rates to the prices might take some time.
I suspect that the BC population growth statistics is not correct. In reality it must be much higher to account for the low vacancy rates. Generally speaking the world population growth diagram shows exponential rise in the last 50 years. Could that influence real estate prices here?
P.S. Please somebody tell me that I am wrong, I want eventually to buy a house here…
May 20th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Provincial governments, left or right, from BC or Alberta, have had nothing to do with this world wide manufactured boom.
Governments get unfair criticism and praise for economies, however I’m going to say its 50% business cycle, and 50% policy. Can you explain why BC was falling behind in the 90s while the rest of Canada was doing well?
As for the IT jobs, most can be performed via satellite.
Tell that to Microsoft, who employs half of its 70,000 people in one suburb of Seattle. I’m going out on a limb here and suggesting that’s the top half of the jobs they provide.
Here’s my problem with your arguments: you keep pointing out the negatives of the situation we are in. That’s fine, but you seem to be able to point out negatives for ANY situation. So what will that get you? Not a lot.
Many people looked at the dot-com bubble and said “boy that has to pop, I’m never investing in tech stocks”. But many other people invested in them, and cashed out at the right time. Note: the right time doesn’t have to be the absolute peak, you could have made 100% profit in a few years, but still missed on bigger gains. The point is you took a gain and walked away.
Its one thing to be aware of the risks in the market (housing, stock, job, whatever), and its another to be chicken little, afraid to take any chances or make any moves.
If you’re so negative on the job market and the economy, when would you ever buy? If prices were to drop 50% in 12 months, you’d still be looking at a large mortgage. How can you justify buying at that time if you’re still convinced the economy is being held up by a house of cards? Wouldn’t the 50% drop make you (and the rest of Vancouver) think the economy is is terrible shape?
May 20th, 2007 at 8:33 am
“Provincial governments, left or right, from BC or Alberta, have had nothing to do with this world wide manufactured boom.”
Governments rather unfairly get set to task on the shape of the economy, when often they have little impact. Much of Canada’s economy relates to exports, so how we do depends a lot on external demand for our products. What our government is really does not influence this much.
My pet example is Alberta, where the oil revenues alone insure that a monkey could likely run the province….Actually in light of who the premier was, a monkey may have done better….
May 20th, 2007 at 7:21 am
Warren and realtors:
Developing countries pumped out a lot of goods at low costs, and kept their currencies low, while developed countries printed low cost money to pay for those goods.
Also, I see you have a sense of humor:
“Besides, if the economy tanks, as so many bears seem to hope, you’ll be worrying more about your own job than buying a house that has dropped 30% in value.â€
Only 30% maybe.
Our local economies are running at double digit inflation, the Wal-marts are importing deflation; this is a mess that will be hard to clean up.
I don’t want a jumbo mortgage or a balance on my Home Depot credit card when the piper has to be paid.
As for the IT jobs, most can be performed via satellite.
May 20th, 2007 at 6:51 am
Warren:
Provincial governments, left or right, from BC or Alberta, have had nothing to do with this world wide manufactured boom.
May 20th, 2007 at 6:14 am
beta:At some point in the early 90′s there was much public discussion of making Vancouver into a ‘Silicon Valley North’.
I remember specifically rumors of Microsoft opening a large campus here, instead of dealing with the hassles of importing workers to Redmond. They hire thousands of Canadians, and the border problems are as big today as pre-NAFTA. A friend of mine was denied a visa 3 times at local border crossings. Microsoft flew him to Toronto where he crossed at Buffalo instead and got the visa there.