[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

You just don't understand what I'm saying and we are talking about 2 different things. I'm not disagreeing with you that a responsible person should buy the $1 banana instead of the $100 apple. Of course people need to live within their means and limit their expectations to what they can afford. Im tired of repeating that. .

What im telling you is open your eyes to the fact that in Toronto the apple doesn't have to cost $100 in the first place. Will it be the same price as the burbs? No. Does that mean we should just accept over inflated prices from speculative trading that exploita a market bubble? Also no.

Sometimes you have to question why things are the way they are Instead of just moral lessons on how to cope and accept unfair conditions

It's a matter of supply and demand.

In Toronto (and many other major cities) you have plenty of people chasing a smaller number of properties and prices rise because of this.

In Detroit you have plenty of property with a far smaller number of potential buyers and prices continue to fall.

Notice how there are very few speculators in the Detroit market? Maybe you should consider looking for an affordable home in Detroit instead of insisting that government use its power to manipulate the real estate market to suit your desires.

[BeaverFever]

No it's not simply supply and demand. If it were, I might say cest la vie.

Not all demand is equal, there are 2 kinds:

There first kind is demand for housing, which includes both buyers wanting houses to live in, and buyers wanting houses to rent out (such as your investments in Victoria).

The second kind of demand is speculation, where the buyer buys a house or condo for no reason except to drive up prices by reducing available inventory, and then reselling the same property and expecting an unreasonably high return.

The first kind of demand is more important than the second, because people need places to live. So when the second kind is setting the market, something is wrong.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

It's a matter of supply and demand.

As I found out when complaining about real estate prices to a friend who lived in London Engalnd one time. When he graduated there was foiur recent enigneering grad (i.e. probably making decent coin) living in a flat so small they all had to get out of town on the weeken. I complain about paying 3/4 of a million for a 1956 rancher and he laughs. Trying paying that in pounds for an 1856 fixer-upper. ha ha ha.

It's all relative.

Surprisingly, real estate in Kabul was about teh same price as Vancouver, if I recall correctly.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

For some reason, people are prone to jumping into real estate now more than ever. I know that real estate is a large investment, but the grass isn't always greener on the other side. I know people working multiple jobs to keep the home owner lifestyle, and are barely treading water. A lot of people seemingly have no idea what they are doing, instead leaning too heavily on other's advice for going this route. As such, I have no sympathy for people who put themselves into this position.

-J.

[BRAH]

Renting has more freedom than owning it comes down to what kind of life style you want, be in massive debt and house poor or being able to live a comfortable life style. A friend said if she could have done it all over again she would have rented instead because in a rush to pay off her mortage 15 years early which she did missing out on a lot.

[andyt]

She's going to be real glad she owns her house free and clear when she retires tho. Renting is actually cheaper for a lot of people, but few have the discipline to invest the money they save so it's there when they retire. So they wind up in a lot poorer position than your friend.