Canada, economy, predictions

CMHC: Boom to end in 2016

161
161 Comments

Hmm. This sounds familiar.

The CMHC is predicting that the Canadian housing boom will come to a screeching halt next year and barely keep up with inflation:

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. issued a dim forecast for the housing market for the next two years on Monday, predicting dismal price growth — but at least one economist thinks the Crown corporation’s numbers may be off in Canada’s most significant market.

CMHC, which advises the federal government on housing policy, isn’t predicting a massive correction for housing, but it did say that consumers can expect prices to barely keep pace with inflation through 2017 and that sales and new construction would slow down.

Read the full article here.

161 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

[…] –Overvalued, but no worries –Math check on profit –We’re 94th! –Mr. Robertson… –Silicon Valley Bubble redux –Sweden goes negative on rates – […]

0
0
Chabar

@154

Of course, they are the future, people of tomorrow, the chosen. The rest of us will just fade away and disappear (already in process)…

0
0
w

HAM families first.

0
0
GreenSalad

Best place on meth Says:
I was hoping they were going to announce a no-child policy…….

No….that policy is now local….cost of living here is too high to have kids. Debt rules and nobody cares.

F-A-M-I-L-I-E-S F-I-R-S-T !!

0
0
Egg Hunt

> #148 Oracle

we will get about 1/3 of those (divided amongst USA/China/Australia).

No, not yet…, we are not China yet….

0
0
Shut It Down Already

Crikey, fair enough. But your position is still absurd. Basically they made a bit of money if they lived there, and didn’t so great if they were an investor. But in 2012 (the year of purchase) this blog was full of squawks of an impending 40-70% crash. Remember that? The real world outcome was a little more down to earth, no? In fact, Dave was spot on.

“LOL” indeed.

0
0
Oracle

And regarding my ethnic background, a directive has come from sikh high priests that each sikh have 4 or more children. I kid you not.

Its to increase relative population.

0
0
Oracle

Been Living in guilford area of North Surrey the last year since selling in North Delta…

Its a zoo here now…the traffic…no mixing of cultures…time to move on from here.

0
0
Oracle

Why BPOM?

The dominos have started to fall and there is no stopping them now. Even if 0.5% of Chinese end up emigrating over the next 10 years then we will get about 1/3 of those (divided amongst USA/China/Australia).

Thats about 2-3 million. About 1-2 million will come to Metro Vancouver.

It will be a majority Chinese city…

The big question is when do the powers that be tell the Real Estate Lobby and the Corporate Lobby that this is treason?

0
0
Best place on meth

I was hoping they were going to announce a no-child policy for the next 35 years.

This is hugely disappointing.

0
0
history

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20151028/BLOGS02/151029830/emanuel-gets-his-huge-property-tax-hike?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1#utm_medium=email&utm_source=ccb-dailyalert&utm_campaign=ccb-dailyalert-20151028

the MJ story diverts me to Chicago RE where politicians are enacting a large property tax hike. Chicago buckling under deflationary pressures, and unsustainable debt levels. Who hasnt noticed where that city is positioned next to HK, London, Sydney and Vcr?

Is this our inevitable fate? And how will they collect when loopholes are considered our finest art?

0
0
paulb

New
135
Sold
288
TI:10610

http://www.paulboenisch.com

0
0
crikey

#112 Shut it down said:
“Crikey, since when is 42 months (3.5 years holding period) of $2100/month only $38K? ”

I have clearly indicated several times in my posts that the assumption is the place was lived in for 1.5 years (18 months).
That is because the listing site shows it as “1 year old”, which for a salesperson listing could very easily mean between 1 and 2 years old.

So, the assumption is that the purchaser put money down before the place was built (2 years before, in fact), and then lived there for 1.5 years.

LOL. I’m not “angry”, but there really is no point in you disagreeing or questioning my assertions if you don’t even read what my assertions are.

0
0
Confucius

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/cmhc-housing-overvaluation-1.3294443

“The CMHC’s report Thursday suggests the problem may be more widespread than possible local bubbles in those two cities.”

Ruh roh…..

0
0
realist

@140 Yunak Your point is spot-on. The Chinese government has not developed a abrupt affection for reproductive human rights. It has been advised by its demographers that they have many millions of males entering adulthood who will never have wives or any other family – not a recipe for the stability of any society. “According to the latest census, men outnumber women by at least 33 million. Even recent birth sex ratios remain skewed, with 115.88 male babies projected for every 100 female babies in 2014 – one of the highest ratios in the world. Single men, unable to find a wife, are dubbed guanggun, or “bare branches.” The problem is likely to get worse: It has been estimated that there will be a surplus of 40 million to 50 million bachelors in China throughout the mid to late 21th… Read more »

0
0
Whistler or bust?

Now they will have two boys instead.

0
0
Yunak

This is yet another social-engineering-experiment done on the “human-livestock” by ruling party and their system architects in order to stay in power by managing resources.

Don’t be fooled by China ending its one-child policy

“When the state-run Xinhua news agency announced that the Communist Party of China will move quickly to “implement the policy of ‘one couple, two children,’ ” it was not a sign that the party will suddenly start respecting personal freedoms more than it has in the past. No, this is a case of the party adjusting policy to conditions.

And those conditions urgently demand boosting the country’s fertility rate — among the world’s lowest — to preserve economic growth and social stability, which are indispensable for continuing Communist Party control of the country.”

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/opinions/ghitis-china-one-child-policy/index.html

0
0
space889

– Cuz having tens of millions children starving to death, or live in abject povert would be such a better options too right?

30 years ago, based on what they know at the time and projected population growth rate, China had a choice between a very bad option, and even more horrible option. They choose what they thought was the least bad option.

btw, only ~30% of Chinese Han population was subject to strict enforcement of this policy. A lot of southern China areas either do not follow under or didn’t bother to really enforce it.

As for horror stories, they exists everywhere when there is unaccountant beaucracy. BC Children’s Ministry have plenty.

0
0
space889

@realist – Cuz having tens of millions starving & illiterate children would be such a better options too right? Given that back in the 80s when the policy was implemented, the planners were looking at potential annual famine and massive social support costs for schools, healthcare, etc that the country can’t afford if population growth were cut down and cut down drastically, there really isn’t many other viable options they can see. Now, with benefit of hindsight, off course everyone is now using this as a way to attack China. btw, only about 30% of China population is actually under this policy. Lots of areas of China don’t have this rule enforced or applied, especially in the southern part. As for all the horror stories, what major national policies don’t have them? Search around and there are lots of heartbreaking… Read more »

0
0
realist

@132 patriotz Australia sits on Asia’s doorstep, and entertains no fuzzy-cuddly-cute illusions about their northern neighbours. Here is more straight reporting from the Brisbane Times on this particular abomination of human rights. “The Human Suffering caused by China’s One-Child Policy” http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/the-human-suffering-caused-by-chinas-onechild-policy-20151029-gkmfrv.html “The one-child policy had a profound effect on the lives of ordinary Chinese. Notably, in a country where sons had long been favoured in rural communities, a problem of female infanticide swiftly developed after the policy was implemented. One report suggested that at least 1 million babies were killed in the first 10 years of the policy, most of them girls. “I loved my daughter,” one farmer who killed his child told The Post’s Michael Weisskopf in a groundbreaking 1985 article that addressed the problem. “But sooner or later she would get married and leave me for a husband.… Read more »

0
0
patriotz

@133: ” the unintended consequence of this action is the creation of what is now a two tiered level of service which everyone pays for equally ”

That’s what we’ve always had, and in particular there has been no home delivery in any developments built in the last 25 years or so.

So in the suburbs there is a demarcation line between home delivery and boxes. This line has shifted inward a bit over the past year. Any difference in prices between different sides of the line? None that I can see.

0
0
realist

@133 bullwhip29 says: “the unintended consequence of this action is the creation of what is now a two tiered level of (Canada Post) service which everyone pays for equally” I will comment on this point as this is a fine example of the strategy of insidious, incremental change. In “democracies” like ours, this is a favoured technique when ramming something unwelcome down the populace’s collective throat, and it needs to have attention drawn to it at every opportunity. Community mailboxes have been Canada Post’s delivery policy for decades. Most Canadians already do not receive postal delivery to their door, as all new developments finished in the last 20 years or longer have had community mailboxes. Canada Post is following the well-trod path of “insidious change is unnoticed change”, and they left the most difficult piece to last, which is the… Read more »

0
0