Comments on: Friday Free-for-all

By: realpaul

realpaul — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:43:33 +0000

#124 Anon, I caught that too, a petulant come back and a nasty slap at the homosexuals. Apparently 'lady boi' is the baddest swear word this chimp can muster, pathetic. Whats next? Grrrrrrrr I just hate realpaul, he hert mi feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!! #116 NLL, the current capital gains tax statute is somewhat nebulous. Although the intention was that residence of a specified was a must, I have heard from lawyers that this isn't the case. One lawyer insisted he had played this one out in court and was found successful in an alternative interpretation. So, what would the 'exemption' actually manifest itself as through the CRA? Case by case? I would hope that the Conservatives would overturn the capital gains exemption on all real estate holdings no matter what the situation. It would wake the population up and we'd have some genuinely interesting political times in this country for a change. A cash grab like that would have to be done at gunpoint.

Current score: -7 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: pricedoutfornow

pricedoutfornow — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:57:45 +0000

I think people have been able to hang on due to low interest rates. But you're right, lots of listings on craigslist ($10,000 to rent a townhouse during the Olympics in New West, anyone? what a steal!) possibly those who think things will turn around after the Olympics. If I had a dime for everytime I heard the phrase "We'll sell after the Olympics" I wouldn't be spending my time on blogs, I'd be retired on a beach somewhere. ;p

Current score: 5 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: observer

observer — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:16:09 +0000

I have a hunch that weakness in the housing market will rear its head via the rental market (witness listings on craigslist). There is an oversupply of units but many are trying to hang on by renting out. When this fails, we may see a second wave of inventory rises, possibly as soon as the holiday break.

Current score: 8 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: Drachen

Drachen — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:59:44 +0000

The "conservatives" have been betraying their fiscal roots since before they got in office. Theoretically they are the party of fiscal responsibility, and I think everyone knows that if you're fiscally responsible you work to pay down your debts before you go on a spending spree but they were ELECTED on the promise to cut the surplus from the national budget. How crazy is that? Only short term thinkers like Dave could possibly see the benefit in that, it's a political gimmick give the people something they want now and who cares if it leaves the country worse off than they found it?

Current score: 6 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:10:22 +0000

"Bill Frank, a Detroit realtor trying to buy a small house for a just-married friend, found himself repeatedly outbid. "Speculators are often not good for a city and, from my experience, they are going to lose a fortune," he said. "But there are no easy answers. It's a declining city.""

Current score: 1 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: RVW_0824

RVW_0824 — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:09:22 +0000

Check out the CMHC's website under Corporate Governance. It's scary. 90% of these people including the CEO are lacking the formal training to run or govern an organization that is moving towards being the largest bank in Canada (over even on 1/10 of its size). Give me a break....look at the bio's of some of these people. A bunch of senior management folks from real estate companies or government lackies. And look at the Minister responsible for it. Zero background to be overseeing something of the CMHC's size and importance. This might have been OK when they had under $100B of mortgages on the books but as we are now over $1 trillion...yes that $1 trillion once you add in what all of the tranches they back (included backstopped securitized, insured, etc.) - it is now 10x the size of what it was less than 5 years ago. Unfortunately we are all going to pay the price as taxpayers. Very interesting comments above on how counterintuitive it is that banks will lend you less if you put more down and are not CMHC insured but makes perfect sense...can you say Moral Hazard.

Current score: 21 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: domus

domus — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:59:53 +0000

@patriotzed: Patriotzed, how very right you are. My exact same thought: completely wrong move on their side, and the timing was almost ironic! These guys should have to revert the error and apologize.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: domus

domus — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:57:50 +0000

@No Longer Looking: That's peanuts, even if true. The only way to go back to sanity is to force banks to carry GENUINE risk of lending. They must be in a position to lose money from bad loans. Otherwise the circus will go on and tax payers will foot the final (huge) bill. Any politician brave enough to say this loud?

Current score: 9 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: patriotzed

patriotzed — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:56:40 +0000

@Dave:

I agree with the tax cutting done by the Conservatives

I don't. In particular, the cut in the GST from 7% to 5%, at a time of record low savings and low unemployment, was one of the most ill-advised fiscal moves ever made by a Canadian government. It was tailor made to induce an unsustainable surge in consumer spending and increase consumer debt even more, and greatly weakened the fiscal capability of the government to deal with the current recession. They should have INCREASED the GST, and then they would have had some room to cut it, or better to cut income taxes, NOW when we need the stimulus.

Current score: 13 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

By: No Longer Looking

No Longer Looking — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:31:02 +0000

I found this rumour on Greater Fool:

http://www.greaterfool.ca/2009/10/23/dude/#commen…

#104 OttawaMike on 10.24.09 at 7:48 pm

Rumour heard today from one of my R.E. broker buddies:

The feds are mulling an end to the capital gains tax exemption on profits from sale of principal residence.

She told me it may also just be a modification to the one year rule, where the owner may have to occupy a property longer in future to be tax exempt.

Could this be a way of tempering the bubble?

I think a modification is quite possible.

Current score: 3 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)