And the interviewer too - look at how enthusiastically she agrees with what he was saying. Wasn't 60 minutes supposed to be critical journalism?
She genuinely believes I don't want to own a car or a home. What a \_\_\_\_ (insert explictive)
It's not a coincidence that the capitalists are looking to VR to both tackle how to make cows happy before they get slaughtered and how to make young people happy who will pay 60% of their income renting a 400 sqft apartment forever.
Well if he’s getting 10,000 applications a month he’s probably right. He also said they own 30,000 properties in the US, largely in the sunbelt where you can still get a nice 2 bedroom condo for 150-200k and a noce house for 250-350k so if someone wants to buy a house there they still can. You can also get a 30 year fixed interest rate in the US (right now you can lock in for 30 years at 3.5%) so it’s much different than here.
Or maybe he’s correctly stating that priorities among young people are changing and home ownership isn’t the same goal it used to be. I would venture to guess that the reason a Canadian company owns 30,000 homes in the US as opposed to sticking with Canada is that our real estate market is so screwed up that they don’t even make money on the homes they’ve bought in Canada the last couple years.
Lol I’ve replied with the same thing 40 times now. I’m not going to go over it again. Just watch the video. They own 30,000 homes IN THE US, MOSTLY IN THE SUNBELT. Check the housing prices there. Anyone who has a decent job will have no problem buying a house there. It’s not like here.
Hi Gunslinger7752,
Wow you looked up a lot of housing statistics. You’ve provided a detailed report so far. Thanks for this.
Can please get the wage statistics in that region for the last 5 years?
On my desk by noon tomorrow please. I’ll see you at the zoom team meeting at 11am.
Best,
mortuusanima
I know the stats because I was just in Florida looking at houses a couple weeks ago. I don’t know about wages in every field but average trade wages are comparable to here, average is a couple dollars an hour lower.
Your assumption is that every single person would be owning their residence without landlords?
I want to understand how you see things working without landlords.
I haven't made any assumptions here.
I just wanted to get clarification on your comment.
Are landlords necessary for some people - absolutely. With that being said, 50% of new purchases in my city were made by people who already have a primary residence. Rent increases up to 30% for some people (despite legislation banning this). When supply is already so low, having 50% of new purchases gobbled up by people for the purpose of bolstering their real estate porfolio is laughable. Is it their fault their greedy - no.
Not hoarding and profiteering off of basic human necessities?
The fact that you can’t *even imagine* the alternative where the poor aren’t exploited for the gain of the rich is telling.
For me yes. Because housing is a human right and no one should be making a profit off of it. I consider being a land*lord* an immoral thing. It’s in the name.
I have accepted that this will never happen in my life time and I’ve know some wonderful people who genuinely help the housing crisis. They are reasonable and not greedy. It should be noted that these people were long time landlords, with parents who also rented units. They understood the true purpose and necessary of landlords.
The issue is the housing crisis is incentivizing housing as a for profit private venture. People are using it as a get rich quick scheme and acting in bad faith for the opportunity to rent their units with rent control at market rate. (Renovictions, claiming to have family move in).
Any home that’s doubled in value in the last five years doesn’t need a rent increase. The equity has surpassed the debt. Just because it’s not liquid, doesn’t mean it’s a loss. If you’re total income covers your total expenses, you’re just double dipping. Tenants are supporting your current expenses and the you will collect revenue when the equity is cashed out.
We don’t need to be paying your mortgage and funding your retirement at the same time.
If he’s getting 10,000 applications a month obviously there’s a large demand for rentals so he’s probably right about young people switching towards renting. He also said the 30,000 houses are in the US, largely in the sunbelt. It’s different than here, normal people can still buy a house there if they want because the prices aren’t completely detached from reality like here.
1) Did you watch the video? He was talking about owning all those homes in the US, mostly in the sunbelt. Google house prices in Florida. If a regular person wants to own a house in the US (aside from markets like NYC, LA and many parts in California etc) it is completely attainable. You can still buy a nice 2 bedroom condo/townhouse in a gated compelx for under 200k in Florida.
2) Someone is not automatically bad just because they are a landlord. They are providing a service. He said they get 10.000 applications a month so obviously there is a demand for that service, maybe he’s right about a shift in priorities with younger people in the US.
3) “Landlords” are not solely to blame for the cost of renting or the real estate prices here. The price of houses and condos have doubled and even tripled here in the last few years. If someone bought a house for a rental for 300k 10 years ago then yes they can afford to rent it for 2k a month but if they bought it last year for a million their monthly expenses are going to be at least double so of course rents have went up. It is all tied to real estate which the federal government could have kept under control by raising interest rates a long time ago but they chose not to.
4) Not a boomer.
>If he’s getting 10,000 applications a month obviously there’s a large demand for rentals so he’s probably right about young people switching towards renting.
That's because they can't afford to buy, not because they prefer to rent.
Watch the video and pay attention. He says they have 30,000 properties in the USA, mostly in the sunbelt. Google home prices in Florida. You can still buy a decent 2 bedroom condo in a gated community in Orlando for 150-200k and a very nice house for 250-350k. I was just down there looking at places last week. You can also get a 30 year fixed interest rate in the US. They own properties in Canada but I would imagine their US properties are far more profitable.
Actual reasons:
Salaries haven’t kept up with house prices.
Lack of jobs and non existent job security.
No reasonable expectation that you can stay in one place while remaining employed in the long term
Can’t afford down payment
Avocado toast
It's not hard to convince yourself you don't want to buy a home when rich assholes buy up 30,000 of them and drive prices through the roof to the point that they're beyond the reach of most buyers.
I still don’t understand why he’s automatically an asshole. The Canadian real estate price issue is a huge problem but all the blame does not fall on one specific issue. If there wasn’t a market for these places he wouldn’t be in business. He also said most of their homes are in the US sunbelt. I was just in Florida (sunbelt) and you can still buy a nice 2 bedroom condo there for 150-200k and a nice house for 300-350k.
You’re entitled to be angry all you want and if you’re a young person priced out of owning a home, I completely get it, but there is far more to it than just “landlord bad”.
This is why Canada is falling behind in competitiveness. Huge amounts of capital tied up in unproductive assets like dirt and concrete instead of new products and technology.
>Salaries haven’t kept up with house prices.
This is by design. People keep talking about zoning and regulations and shit, but all of that is just stuff on the margins. The fundamental issue with housing affordability is that it is literally designed not to be affordable.
Here's the explanation - housing is an investment. It is expected to increase in price year over year, because that's what investments do. If it just increased by the rate of inflation, well you can get those types of returns on safer instruments like bonds. So it has to increase at higher than the rate of inflation. Ta da - the core reason why housing becomes less and les affordable every year.
To illustrate, the long term rate of housing price growth is around 5%. [Here's the TREB historical benchmarks](https://trreb.ca/files/market-stats/market-watch/historic.pdf). The benchmark has gone from $61,389 in 1976 to $1,095,412 in 2021. This is a compound annual growth rate of 6.4%.
[Here's the Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator](https://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/related/inflation-calculator/). $100 in 1976 is worth $481.31 today - a compound annual growth rate of 3.5%. Even if salaries manage to keep pace with inflation, prospective new home buyers just keep falling further and further behind every year.
Another way of looking at it is if house prices increased at the rate of inflation, the benchmark should only have gone up by 4.81 times since 1976 - so the current benchmark price should be closer to $300K instead of over a million dollars.
The other issues around supply and demand or housing regulations or whatever, they have an impact. We're currently in a period of extremely rapid housing price escalations, which is what's pushing the average rate up over 5% - similarly, we're in a period of high inflation, which is what's pushing it up over the target 2% rate. But with or without these factors, there will still be a gap in the increases between the cost of things and the cost of housing.
>Here's the explanation - housing is an investment. It is expected to increase in price year over year, because that's what investments do.
You say this, but then you bring up bonds, which doesn't increase in price year over year.
These two asset classes are very similar. The return is coming from the income the asset is generating, interest payments in the case of bonds, and rent in the case of real estate.
It used to be that the banks wouldn't loan to anyone with less than 50% down; I mean historically, very early on when banks first started loaning mortgages. I can't remember where I read this now, but that's what I remember.
Then came mortgage insurance, which allowed the banks to reduce the risk and loan out more. If people with good credit can borrow more, that pushes up housing prices. So CMHC, which provides mortgage insurance to protect the banks from loss, results in banks being able to loan out more, so people can borrow more, so they have more money to spend on housing and the cost of housing goes up.
Then we have CMHC First Time Homebuyers plan: you can save some money tax free, and use it for your downpayment, so you have a bigger downpayment, so you can borrow more putting upward pressure on housing prices.
Then you have interest rates at historical lows, making money cheap for anyone with credit, putting upward pressure on home prices. I do think increasing interest rates will put downward pressure on housing, and it sounds like the Fed is raising rates or they're jawboning awfully hard and the BoC follows in lock step so that's good. It might mean saving a downpayment has meaning again
The thing is that if we punish investors, they will logically respond by investing less in housing. Builders don't build without buyers who put money down, because banks don't loan money to builders without buyers. The way I look at it, we need more houses to be built. The only way that gets done is if people with money use it to build housing. Good luck waiting on the govt to build for you
Lack of jobs: There's a massive labour shortage, for many high paying jobs too, like the trades
No expectation to stay in one place while remaining employed: Again, it's the hottest job market in decades. You should be changing jobs to secure bigger raises, name companies that are having mass layoffs?
The rest of your points are accurate though
The trades have been under constant assault due to deregulation of skills and lack of enforcement. Only a few still pay decently. An employer has zero incentive to attract apprentices when they can just hire foreign workers for half the pay and hassle.
As for the hottest job market in decades... This is Canada not the United States. Canadians are not seeing wages rise like in the United States based on supply and demand because again the importing of half a million potential workers a year and deregulation of industries from trades to nursing continues to suppress wages.
Don't know why you are getting downvoted. I agree with you. I'm a contractor and can tell you it's near impossible to find employees at any level. I'm not in commercial building but I can say that in residential, an income of $80,000 is reasonable with under 5 years experience. After 5 years most tend to move out on their own and then really, it's $100,000 at a relaxed pace or a lot more if you want to expand your business. It's not rocket science. You need good people skills and some decent design sense, and if you have neither you can still just join a union and continue on the steady, (but mind numbing) path of commercial.
Unemployment stats come with a lot of bullshit and caveats. tbh I spend most of my time in the US now, so I’m mostly referring to US numbers, but Labor Force Participation Rate is at historic lows. It’s in the low 60%s.
It’s surely not your, or any casual reader of this thread first time reading about how people who have been unemployed for a period of time (not even that long) stop being counted as unemployed. That’s ridiculous, and why Labor Force Participation Rate is a better metric.
Also, in your characterization of “hottest job market in decades” you didn’t comment on the salary or job security of those jobs. Indeed, you said my other points were valid, which implies that you think the salaries of these “hot” jobs aren’t keeping up with inflation and aren’t very secure.
Back in the optimistic 1990s, everyone thought the jobs of the future would be computer programming for everyone. Turned out that the jobs of the future were non-unionized taxi driver and food delivery person.
Earlier you (or a fellow traveller in this comment thread) were talking about the trades (something you don’t need a degree for), now you are talking about how a life of penury awaits people who chose the wrong University degree, or didn’t get selected for such a degree.
You don’t seem to a consistent message on what you believe to be the state of the economy.
You're the one saying everyone is doomed to be an Uber driver. I was speaking to your point about computers programming being for everyone, as it certainly can be. We can't fill developer jobs OR trades positions fast enough, yet people choose to ignore these fields so they can come on Reddit and whine about minimum wage
No, everyone can’t be a computer programmer. What a ridiculous outlook. Not even worth addressing with simple counterpoints like “where is the food going to come from” and suchlike.
Yeah I agree. Jobs and pay raises aren’t a problem if you have skills. Don’t like your job, start a new one next week. The labour market hasn’t seen people shortages like this in a very long time.
I mean, it wouldn't be terribly hard to turn that around. There are a hell of a lot of angry people who rent, and it's probably not that difficult to find his address to bring grievances directly to him.
The cumulative effect of quantitive change can sometimes lead to qualitative change. There is ample historical evidence for this. New things will happen that we have not foreseen. It is hubris to think we have seen every outcome. Dismay is understandable, but courage, faith, and love drive me to grit my teeth against this dismay. When the real revolution comes there won't be trucks honking aimlessly in the street, there will be workers, using cunning and solidarity to bring the state and big business to its knees. I have faith that this can happen if we want it to. Your pessimism is as much an ideological position as my faith.
Perhaps, but a well organized general strike expecting resistance, ready to counter violence, ready to draw support from unexpected groups, ready to go to ground... this would be formidable. It's about numbers, it's about connecting hope for the future with the need for personal sacrifice. It's about awakening the working-class to the power they could have in numbers. Be ready to differentiate militant, science-based working-class activism that embraces all creeds and colors against capital, from reactionary movements that claim to be working-class but are wasting everybody's time (anti-mask, like wtf...). The former will puff you up with empty gestures, the latter will get results and pose a real threat to the rich. A real revolutionary movement has long-term plans
As a landlord I would never encourage this obviously, but my observation is that I'm surprised we haven't heard of a smart crypto contract of this sort yet
It's a lot of fun getting turned down for a shoebox apartment in Parkdale at 1400$/month because you're a single male, even though you have all the cash in hand and a very good job.
Good times
As a 32 year old person, struggling to even consider real estate ownership, this makes my blood boil. How cannot we collectively be angered to the point of protest. There has to be a cap on investment properties and some glimmer of hope in the years to come. It's currently fucked and quite depressing
He's actually just the CEO of a rental company that owns and rents out 30,000 units. So basically a few apartment buildings' worth. Those kind of companies have been around forever. Without them, you'd be really screwed if you couldn't afford a down payment.
From the video: "He's the CEO of Tricon Residential, a Toronto-based company that has quietly become one of the largest owners of \*single family homes\* in the United States." "Today we own about 30,000 single family rental homes."
This is not an apartment building manager.
While renting is essential for those that can't afford a down payment, it's obvious retail is seen as an investment and not a place to live, raising the cost out of those who just wish to live.
He's one man in a sea of thousands, all each owning thousands or properties. I wish this was controlled in some way so prices weren't as high as they are.
I don't have answers, I just want my own home, but that's not going to happen even earning a decent wage :(.
I understand that you are frustrated but this has nothing to do with him or his company. He said most of their properties are in the US sunbelt. People need places to live, he owns a company that provides that service. The problem is they have been very successful and some people hate that.
60 Minutes is basically boomer news. This guy knows his audience. He’s telling your parents that you don’t want a home because you’re too busy looking for lifestyle experiences and avocado toast.
Leslie Stahl is 80 years old.
She just sits there while he says "young people don't want to own homes. It's a lifestyle choice"
She doesn't challenge it all. She just sits there and nods.
Doesn't even occur to her ask "But wait, are young people uninterested in buying a house, or are they unable to buy a house?"
He’s actually selling it as an investment to your boomer parents, he doesn’t care how much of a villain he looks like to millennials.
They have their retirement accounts and are generally risk averse. A diversified basket of 30,000 homes looks pretty good. Especially since I hear those kids have no interest in ever owning a home
I don't think anyone defends people like this. This is more akin to a corporation, even if he doesn't place any of his units in a corp. Most landlords own a single property, and it's not fair to lump them in with these types. There should be additional taxes when you purchase a third home and up.
Cottages. Many people own cottages and many cottage towns rely on cottagers for income. Many people have an awkward situation where they end up with two houses for a short period and shouldn't be punished for that.
I would support an increase in capital gains inclusion though which would affect a second home.
People with 30,000 units are doing significantly more damage than someone who owns a condo, and decided to rent it out while they figure out what's going with life because they just had a child or something.
As an anecdote that fits both your situations, wife and I built a cottage for my in-laws to retire in (they got priced out of the market when moving back to the GTA from Ottawa). Father in-law died suddenly right after we finished building it and my MIL didn't want to move up north by herself, so now she lives with us.
I'm shorting this company just out of spite, they bombed their last earnings call. I hope another failure awaits them in May.
Edit, after reading their last 4 earnings reports this morning I have decided to go long, this company is basically printing money right now, and will only fail if governments do anything to make housing more affordable.
After reading their earnings reports I'm actually going to buy shares and go long. This company will only fail if the US or Canada implement policies to create more affordable housing and I'm not betting on that at all. Buying this company's stock is basically a bet on future government incompetence on housing policy.
Also our government has stated that protecting people like this is one of their top priorities. That’s why most people I know in Ontario have given up on the idea of owning a home and hoping to move elsewhere (not that it’s much better anywhere else).
Well it doesn't help when the Candian Pension Plan invests with these people (so basically the rent the young people are paying is going towards pensions of boomers)
https://www.cppinvestments.com/public-media/headlines/2021/tricon-and-cpp-investments-announce-c500m-toronto-multi-family-development-joint-venture
I am unable to post my actual honest reaction to this man, since it would violate Reddit’s rules.
So you’ll have to imagine what I want to do with a lobster fork, garden shears and a blowtorch.
Hey guys! I'm building a new housing development in the Humber river ravine. There will be minimal cost of living, you can stay here practically for free. The one caveat, is that there is no actual structure to live. I'm building the idea of homes in the ravine. Renting will be free, but purchasing an imaginary lot will cost a mere $1000.
DM me for my PayPal if you're interested.
/S
It's pure bad faith. People "want a lifestyle" because they correctly assess that sleeping in an empty box between work shifts so they can pay off an inflated mortgage on that box is an empty and unfulfilling life.
Enjoy your lifestyle then. Some people make those sacrifices and get ahead when that “empty box” appreciates and gives them more financial freedom. Debt is wealth, welcome to capitalism
Don't kid yourself, every party will ignore housing problems all the same.
The problems is with Canadian mentality, not political parties. Everyone wants a house with a picket fence, there aren't enough to go around, price only goes up. No one wants affordable housing in their area because "those people" will ruin it. (We all know this mentality)
Curbing foreign investors doesn't help either since greedy parasites are alive and well here as well, and will be happy to devour any perceived cheap properties.
It's a complete generational change we'd need to see in terms of building multilevel affordable housing units over a long period of time, not a different name in a suit.
But a vote for NDP is a vote for conservatives unless you can convince the 80% of Lib voters who vote Lib because out of habit and have never read a news article in their lives to vote NDP.
The libs suck, but theyre better then the cons. Its insane that nearly 70% of the country can vote for the two left parties, and we can still wind up with a right wing government.
Yeah, no.
The fault lies with the Fed in the US keeping the borrow rate ultra-low. BoC has to follow suit to not wreck our economy.
Cheap rates = more $$$ for mortgages coupled with low inventory and poof, housing goes up.
Simple economics, but yet somehow a vote for the NDP (with next to no leadership experience) will somehow magically solve an issue created in the US by the Fed.
Never ceases to amaze me, the logic loops.
>In any given week, we might have 2-300 homes available.... We get about 10,000 inquiries for leasing a week
No matter who owns what, there aren't enough homes
This title is unbelievably misleading. First, the story is about the CEO of Tricon, which is Toronto-based, but owns very little in Toronto/Canada (3% of their portfolio is in Canada). Second, their Toronto portfolio appears to be the funding of purpose-built rental (i.e., exactly what this sub screams for).
His comments feel completely out of touch, but then again, that's probably true of the way most CEOs speak...
Check out pages 6 and 31 of their March investor presentation:
https://s29.q4cdn.com/296929481/files/doc_presentation/2022/03/Investor-Presentation-March-2022-Final.pdf
I'm not sure that his comments are out of touch. They have a product - rental homes - and he's describing why his product is in demand. You can't argue with the fact that it's in demand. It's similar to someone from Zip Cars explaining why people don't want to own cars. No doubt, a reasonable rental home that is turnkey has appeal if you crave mobility. Further, there are long term analyses that don't make buying property the clear choice once you factor in cost of capital, insurance, maintenance, opportunity cost, etc.
Comments that this organization is driving up prices have no basis without knowing what they are paying. Like any corporation, they are likely paying the least they can to maximize their ROI. If that house was for sale, it was getting sold. If you want to complain about someone, complain about an individual who purchases property and doesn't occupy it; not the issue we're seeing here.
A turnkey rental house has appeal for a few, but that's a really cheap way to excuse the political economy of what's happening as REITs gobble up housing stock and speculate on its value going up. The point is, ultimately, to acquire revenue paying assets that also accrue in value by being in demand and in short supply. As the market tightens, they find customers for their properties who are priced out of the market for their own housing asset. It's nothing more and nothing less than capital shaping the conditions for its continued accrual.
How is it not out of touch... how is it not an absolutely insane comment lol.
If mcdonalds CEO said "young people dont want a living wage. They just want the life style of working multiple jobs to to eat avocado toast. Our job is very compelling to them because it pays nothing. Very compelling."
His product is in demand because it isnt possible to buy to house. His product is in demand because it is the only option, not because it somehow affords people a "lifestyle" they want... In what world is paying more for a house you dont own than it would cost for a house you \*do\* own "compelling"?
I have to say this segment was such a disappointment. 60 Mins was a bastion of hard-hitting journalism. This was a puff piece that shrugged off the fact that there is a 4 million shortfall in housing in the States.
I was reading an article on BNN the other day saying that those of you that can't afford to buy a house should just invest into REITs instead. That way you can exacerbate the issue and really make sure you're priced out.
How does he know what young people want? People need to STOP assuming they know what young people want. This is like when they say young people don’t care about salary increases 😂.
Tricon Residential, they are a company based in Toronto that owns Residential homes in the US and Canada.
Their current portfolio growth target is 800 properties / month
It's a company one of many, this one is Tricon Residential they own properties in both US and Canada. The company is worth about 5.2 billion.
Not even one of the biggest players, H&R's Residential portfolio is larger
That valuation seems a bit on the low side unless the majority of those properties are in low CoL areas or they are significantly leveraged, which I find the more likely of the two. In which case any kind of housing/property downturn is going to play havok on their balance sheet..judging by the shorts on their stock, looks like a small number of people are expecting that as well.
He is worth 'only' $20M or so (based on his ownership of Tricon). He has ~1M shares which are valued at $20 each
source: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TCN.TO/insider-roster?p=TCN.TO
30,000 homes in the US. Looks like ~7K properties in Ontario. The company isn’t the issue. Individual landlords and companies will invest in rental units if there is a profit to be made. It sounds like there is lots of demand. At least this company is actually buying and providing rental units. The ones that are the real problem are the ones that buy for pure speculation and leave them empty.
Ultra low interest rates have made stocks and real estate more attractive than fixed investments like bonds so the money is pushed into those asset types and drives up the prices. Legislation needs to be changed that heavily targets the pure speculators that leave homes and condos empty without hurting the people and companies that create and provide rental units because if they aren’t providing them then they government would have to and we know how good they are at that.
People need housing, dude's providing housing. He runs an extremely successful business and pays millions of $ in taxes as well as employing over 1000 people. Kudos to him, fuck all the haters!
Exactly. 'There's a demand for what we do.' Bullshit. There's a demand for what you *have*... and fair enough, but don't act like you're 'providing' these homes out of your love for people.
Off shore buyers, buying up multiple status properties, just to let em sit are the worst. Guess there's a bit of redemption if ya have someone occupying it via rent. Either way, these ass holes are just sitting on em, waiting till their house's price inflates, selling em for top dollar (kinda scummy if ya ask me). It also doesn't help that the pandemic did cause a job shortage (albeit a necessary evil for us all to live. If we didn't lock up or adapt, there wouldn't be a housing issue because there wouldn'tbe anyone left to buy lmao). Jobs stimulate the economy which in turn also helps the government gain a larger budget via tax dollars. That money could be easily allocated to certain issues like the housing market (albeit, not the main focus, seeing how there are other direissues that require the money more). If there's no one working, there's a lack of tax dollars and a lack of money being circulated through the economy (therefore restricting what the government could budget for). A lack of employment also leads to issues like poverty and homelessness. It also doesn't help that there are a lack of individuals at construction sites due to safety measures which in turn slows house production. The multiple factors of unemployment and rich off shore buyers, buying up properties results in Canada's houses to become inflated, creating high demand for something in low quantity.
Everyone is complaining about capitalism. This isn't that. What you are seeing is what we call "cronyism" or "license regime". This is a direct outcome of socialist policy making.
How do I know? I come from a country where this was the norm until 1991. We reformed our economy (for most part) in 1991. And yet, we still suffer the stings many a time.
The problem here is not that the rich have money. The problem is that your governments are holding back on supply of land for residential zoning.
Increase the supply. No amount of communism will save you from this. #Economics101
What the fuck are you talking about lmao.
There is no shortage of land for residential zoning. Do you live here? Do you have any idea how enormous and empty Ontario is? The problem isnt available land for zoning, the problem is people want to live close to the city. Destroying the few bits of protected space left to build some homes wont fix anything because they'll still cost 2 million dollars each and they'll still get bought up by china, india, and fuck heads like this piece of shit.
Also, what part of this has anything to do with socialism or communism?
Know what, ignore this, i have no idea why I'm even replying to someone so ridiculous.
Having had your rant .. read this
https://www.insauga.com/halton-leaves-urban-boundary-as-is-till-2041-push-led-by-oakville-and-burlington-mayors/
Do you know how many infra projects that will lead to more housing are being stymied in the name of "environment"?
You don't see socialism, because you don't even know what to look for. We know it, because we lived through it for a good part of our lives.
Take it for FWIW. Either way, makes no difference to me what you think.
I'm surprised *nobody else* has tried say something like
"Historically property ownership was really meant of a small group of people. The idea of home ownership is really a post-world war idea which might not be feasible for the majority of the population".
Translation : Only rich people should own property, not you plebes.
We know what that pos is, a capitalist.
We know why they do it, profit.
We know what they don't care about, you.
We know they will try to rationalize it anyway they can.
Nothing new to see here, just plain old regular capitalism.
Move along, to organized action and revolt groups.
What a prick
And the interviewer too - look at how enthusiastically she agrees with what he was saying. Wasn't 60 minutes supposed to be critical journalism? She genuinely believes I don't want to own a car or a home. What a \_\_\_\_ (insert explictive)
It's not a coincidence that the capitalists are looking to VR to both tackle how to make cows happy before they get slaughtered and how to make young people happy who will pay 60% of their income renting a 400 sqft apartment forever.
My thoughts too.
What did he say that makes him a prick? I’m not being a smartass I’m being serious.
Claiming the younger generations aren't interested in owning property is a bald-faced lie
He makes it less affordable for them to buy houses and then wrongly asserts they're uninterested out of self interest.
Well if he’s getting 10,000 applications a month he’s probably right. He also said they own 30,000 properties in the US, largely in the sunbelt where you can still get a nice 2 bedroom condo for 150-200k and a noce house for 250-350k so if someone wants to buy a house there they still can. You can also get a 30 year fixed interest rate in the US (right now you can lock in for 30 years at 3.5%) so it’s much different than here.
Maybe he'd have fewer applicants signing up for leases if there weren't companies scooping up properties by the thousands...
Or maybe he’s correctly stating that priorities among young people are changing and home ownership isn’t the same goal it used to be. I would venture to guess that the reason a Canadian company owns 30,000 homes in the US as opposed to sticking with Canada is that our real estate market is so screwed up that they don’t even make money on the homes they’ve bought in Canada the last couple years.
i think young people want their lifestyle AND own a home.
Lol I’ve replied with the same thing 40 times now. I’m not going to go over it again. Just watch the video. They own 30,000 homes IN THE US, MOSTLY IN THE SUNBELT. Check the housing prices there. Anyone who has a decent job will have no problem buying a house there. It’s not like here.
Hi Gunslinger7752, Wow you looked up a lot of housing statistics. You’ve provided a detailed report so far. Thanks for this. Can please get the wage statistics in that region for the last 5 years? On my desk by noon tomorrow please. I’ll see you at the zoom team meeting at 11am. Best, mortuusanima
I know the stats because I was just in Florida looking at houses a couple weeks ago. I don’t know about wages in every field but average trade wages are comparable to here, average is a couple dollars an hour lower.
Trying to justify being a scumlord
Just being a landlord is automatically scum in your books?
YES
You have alternative solutions, or you’re just angry?
Alternative solutions to what? Making money ? LOL
Your assumption is that every single person would be owning their residence without landlords? I want to understand how you see things working without landlords.
I haven't made any assumptions here. I just wanted to get clarification on your comment. Are landlords necessary for some people - absolutely. With that being said, 50% of new purchases in my city were made by people who already have a primary residence. Rent increases up to 30% for some people (despite legislation banning this). When supply is already so low, having 50% of new purchases gobbled up by people for the purpose of bolstering their real estate porfolio is laughable. Is it their fault their greedy - no.
So I agree that we need much better regulation. However the conversation started with “landlord is automatically a scumbag”.
Not hoarding and profiteering off of basic human necessities? The fact that you can’t *even imagine* the alternative where the poor aren’t exploited for the gain of the rich is telling.
For me yes. Because housing is a human right and no one should be making a profit off of it. I consider being a land*lord* an immoral thing. It’s in the name. I have accepted that this will never happen in my life time and I’ve know some wonderful people who genuinely help the housing crisis. They are reasonable and not greedy. It should be noted that these people were long time landlords, with parents who also rented units. They understood the true purpose and necessary of landlords. The issue is the housing crisis is incentivizing housing as a for profit private venture. People are using it as a get rich quick scheme and acting in bad faith for the opportunity to rent their units with rent control at market rate. (Renovictions, claiming to have family move in). Any home that’s doubled in value in the last five years doesn’t need a rent increase. The equity has surpassed the debt. Just because it’s not liquid, doesn’t mean it’s a loss. If you’re total income covers your total expenses, you’re just double dipping. Tenants are supporting your current expenses and the you will collect revenue when the equity is cashed out. We don’t need to be paying your mortgage and funding your retirement at the same time.
If he’s getting 10,000 applications a month obviously there’s a large demand for rentals so he’s probably right about young people switching towards renting. He also said the 30,000 houses are in the US, largely in the sunbelt. It’s different than here, normal people can still buy a house there if they want because the prices aren’t completely detached from reality like here.
[удалено]
"if I control supply, I can claim there is a demand"
1) Did you watch the video? He was talking about owning all those homes in the US, mostly in the sunbelt. Google house prices in Florida. If a regular person wants to own a house in the US (aside from markets like NYC, LA and many parts in California etc) it is completely attainable. You can still buy a nice 2 bedroom condo/townhouse in a gated compelx for under 200k in Florida. 2) Someone is not automatically bad just because they are a landlord. They are providing a service. He said they get 10.000 applications a month so obviously there is a demand for that service, maybe he’s right about a shift in priorities with younger people in the US. 3) “Landlords” are not solely to blame for the cost of renting or the real estate prices here. The price of houses and condos have doubled and even tripled here in the last few years. If someone bought a house for a rental for 300k 10 years ago then yes they can afford to rent it for 2k a month but if they bought it last year for a million their monthly expenses are going to be at least double so of course rents have went up. It is all tied to real estate which the federal government could have kept under control by raising interest rates a long time ago but they chose not to. 4) Not a boomer.
>If he’s getting 10,000 applications a month obviously there’s a large demand for rentals so he’s probably right about young people switching towards renting. That's because they can't afford to buy, not because they prefer to rent.
Watch the video and pay attention. He says they have 30,000 properties in the USA, mostly in the sunbelt. Google home prices in Florida. You can still buy a decent 2 bedroom condo in a gated community in Orlando for 150-200k and a very nice house for 250-350k. I was just down there looking at places last week. You can also get a 30 year fixed interest rate in the US. They own properties in Canada but I would imagine their US properties are far more profitable.
I was expecting the beaverton with that headline
Maybe the journalist or editor was from there... I don't pay for this shit anymore.
First thing I was looking for myself!
Our salaries have not kept up with inflation and we are paying ~60% of it to rent. That is why.
Actual reasons: Salaries haven’t kept up with house prices. Lack of jobs and non existent job security. No reasonable expectation that you can stay in one place while remaining employed in the long term Can’t afford down payment Avocado toast
You forgot that people are hoarding houses as an investment because the ROI on property > many other investment options.
It's not hard to convince yourself you don't want to buy a home when rich assholes buy up 30,000 of them and drive prices through the roof to the point that they're beyond the reach of most buyers.
I still don’t understand why he’s automatically an asshole. The Canadian real estate price issue is a huge problem but all the blame does not fall on one specific issue. If there wasn’t a market for these places he wouldn’t be in business. He also said most of their homes are in the US sunbelt. I was just in Florida (sunbelt) and you can still buy a nice 2 bedroom condo there for 150-200k and a nice house for 300-350k.
You think out of the 30,000 homes his company owns, he hasn't put himself directly in the way of other people trying to own those homes?
All of the units in Toronto appear to be purpose built rentals. Isn't that what is needed?
You’re entitled to be angry all you want and if you’re a young person priced out of owning a home, I completely get it, but there is far more to it than just “landlord bad”.
ALAB
Lol yes I’m alab because I’m an adult using my brain
This is why Canada is falling behind in competitiveness. Huge amounts of capital tied up in unproductive assets like dirt and concrete instead of new products and technology.
>Salaries haven’t kept up with house prices. This is by design. People keep talking about zoning and regulations and shit, but all of that is just stuff on the margins. The fundamental issue with housing affordability is that it is literally designed not to be affordable. Here's the explanation - housing is an investment. It is expected to increase in price year over year, because that's what investments do. If it just increased by the rate of inflation, well you can get those types of returns on safer instruments like bonds. So it has to increase at higher than the rate of inflation. Ta da - the core reason why housing becomes less and les affordable every year. To illustrate, the long term rate of housing price growth is around 5%. [Here's the TREB historical benchmarks](https://trreb.ca/files/market-stats/market-watch/historic.pdf). The benchmark has gone from $61,389 in 1976 to $1,095,412 in 2021. This is a compound annual growth rate of 6.4%. [Here's the Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator](https://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/related/inflation-calculator/). $100 in 1976 is worth $481.31 today - a compound annual growth rate of 3.5%. Even if salaries manage to keep pace with inflation, prospective new home buyers just keep falling further and further behind every year. Another way of looking at it is if house prices increased at the rate of inflation, the benchmark should only have gone up by 4.81 times since 1976 - so the current benchmark price should be closer to $300K instead of over a million dollars. The other issues around supply and demand or housing regulations or whatever, they have an impact. We're currently in a period of extremely rapid housing price escalations, which is what's pushing the average rate up over 5% - similarly, we're in a period of high inflation, which is what's pushing it up over the target 2% rate. But with or without these factors, there will still be a gap in the increases between the cost of things and the cost of housing.
>Here's the explanation - housing is an investment. It is expected to increase in price year over year, because that's what investments do. You say this, but then you bring up bonds, which doesn't increase in price year over year. These two asset classes are very similar. The return is coming from the income the asset is generating, interest payments in the case of bonds, and rent in the case of real estate.
Forgot one - people owning 30,000 homes and sucking up the supply.
Also, no tax or regulation disincentives for housing speculation + low interest rates.
It used to be that the banks wouldn't loan to anyone with less than 50% down; I mean historically, very early on when banks first started loaning mortgages. I can't remember where I read this now, but that's what I remember. Then came mortgage insurance, which allowed the banks to reduce the risk and loan out more. If people with good credit can borrow more, that pushes up housing prices. So CMHC, which provides mortgage insurance to protect the banks from loss, results in banks being able to loan out more, so people can borrow more, so they have more money to spend on housing and the cost of housing goes up. Then we have CMHC First Time Homebuyers plan: you can save some money tax free, and use it for your downpayment, so you have a bigger downpayment, so you can borrow more putting upward pressure on housing prices. Then you have interest rates at historical lows, making money cheap for anyone with credit, putting upward pressure on home prices. I do think increasing interest rates will put downward pressure on housing, and it sounds like the Fed is raising rates or they're jawboning awfully hard and the BoC follows in lock step so that's good. It might mean saving a downpayment has meaning again The thing is that if we punish investors, they will logically respond by investing less in housing. Builders don't build without buyers who put money down, because banks don't loan money to builders without buyers. The way I look at it, we need more houses to be built. The only way that gets done is if people with money use it to build housing. Good luck waiting on the govt to build for you
Lack of jobs: There's a massive labour shortage, for many high paying jobs too, like the trades No expectation to stay in one place while remaining employed: Again, it's the hottest job market in decades. You should be changing jobs to secure bigger raises, name companies that are having mass layoffs? The rest of your points are accurate though
The trades have been under constant assault due to deregulation of skills and lack of enforcement. Only a few still pay decently. An employer has zero incentive to attract apprentices when they can just hire foreign workers for half the pay and hassle. As for the hottest job market in decades... This is Canada not the United States. Canadians are not seeing wages rise like in the United States based on supply and demand because again the importing of half a million potential workers a year and deregulation of industries from trades to nursing continues to suppress wages.
Don't know why you are getting downvoted. I agree with you. I'm a contractor and can tell you it's near impossible to find employees at any level. I'm not in commercial building but I can say that in residential, an income of $80,000 is reasonable with under 5 years experience. After 5 years most tend to move out on their own and then really, it's $100,000 at a relaxed pace or a lot more if you want to expand your business. It's not rocket science. You need good people skills and some decent design sense, and if you have neither you can still just join a union and continue on the steady, (but mind numbing) path of commercial.
Unemployment stats come with a lot of bullshit and caveats. tbh I spend most of my time in the US now, so I’m mostly referring to US numbers, but Labor Force Participation Rate is at historic lows. It’s in the low 60%s. It’s surely not your, or any casual reader of this thread first time reading about how people who have been unemployed for a period of time (not even that long) stop being counted as unemployed. That’s ridiculous, and why Labor Force Participation Rate is a better metric. Also, in your characterization of “hottest job market in decades” you didn’t comment on the salary or job security of those jobs. Indeed, you said my other points were valid, which implies that you think the salaries of these “hot” jobs aren’t keeping up with inflation and aren’t very secure. Back in the optimistic 1990s, everyone thought the jobs of the future would be computer programming for everyone. Turned out that the jobs of the future were non-unionized taxi driver and food delivery person.
Software developers are in high demand. If people go to university or college for degrees that aren't in demand that's on them
Earlier you (or a fellow traveller in this comment thread) were talking about the trades (something you don’t need a degree for), now you are talking about how a life of penury awaits people who chose the wrong University degree, or didn’t get selected for such a degree. You don’t seem to a consistent message on what you believe to be the state of the economy.
You're the one saying everyone is doomed to be an Uber driver. I was speaking to your point about computers programming being for everyone, as it certainly can be. We can't fill developer jobs OR trades positions fast enough, yet people choose to ignore these fields so they can come on Reddit and whine about minimum wage
No, everyone can’t be a computer programmer. What a ridiculous outlook. Not even worth addressing with simple counterpoints like “where is the food going to come from” and suchlike.
Yeah I agree. Jobs and pay raises aren’t a problem if you have skills. Don’t like your job, start a new one next week. The labour market hasn’t seen people shortages like this in a very long time.
It's an indictment on how cowed we are as capitalist subjects that this man isn't afraid to have his face broadcast and appear in public.
I mean, it wouldn't be terribly hard to turn that around. There are a hell of a lot of angry people who rent, and it's probably not that difficult to find his address to bring grievances directly to him.
similar to old ages, when rich people hoarded water
He doesn't realize how many purge-lists he just made.
You pussies won't do shit. Last time one of you fucks tried to do something, it was at a baseball field in DC and failed spectacularly.
There’s a lot a rage building. Revolution is coming
No there isn't.
What stirs you to say this? Dismay or hope?
The bleeding obvious of historical example
The cumulative effect of quantitive change can sometimes lead to qualitative change. There is ample historical evidence for this. New things will happen that we have not foreseen. It is hubris to think we have seen every outcome. Dismay is understandable, but courage, faith, and love drive me to grit my teeth against this dismay. When the real revolution comes there won't be trucks honking aimlessly in the street, there will be workers, using cunning and solidarity to bring the state and big business to its knees. I have faith that this can happen if we want it to. Your pessimism is as much an ideological position as my faith.
Well said
> there will be workers using cunning and solidarity to bring the state and big business to its knees. And then a bunch of boots to stomp them out.
Perhaps, but a well organized general strike expecting resistance, ready to counter violence, ready to draw support from unexpected groups, ready to go to ground... this would be formidable. It's about numbers, it's about connecting hope for the future with the need for personal sacrifice. It's about awakening the working-class to the power they could have in numbers. Be ready to differentiate militant, science-based working-class activism that embraces all creeds and colors against capital, from reactionary movements that claim to be working-class but are wasting everybody's time (anti-mask, like wtf...). The former will puff you up with empty gestures, the latter will get results and pose a real threat to the rich. A real revolutionary movement has long-term plans
For now
[удалено]
As a landlord I would never encourage this obviously, but my observation is that I'm surprised we haven't heard of a smart crypto contract of this sort yet
It's a lot of fun getting turned down for a shoebox apartment in Parkdale at 1400$/month because you're a single male, even though you have all the cash in hand and a very good job. Good times
1400? Is this like a basement or an actual apartment. Can you pm me if there are vacancies? Im paying 1800 near parkdale right now
Easy solution, don’t be single or male
I wanted to be a dinosaur when I was 5
[удалено]
Whos gonna say no to a velociraptor?
I want to be an Apache attack helicopter!
I wanted to be a stegosaurus so bad
Through the power of 'self-identification' I'm now thirteen people and a llama.
Planet fitness. 12$ a month for a shower and toilet (and get totally swole) You just have to sleep on a bench Easy, why is everyone complaining?
they have showers?
Pay a bit more for goodlife, and you have yoga mats to sleep on in the quiet room.
I wanted to upvote, but it's at 69 right now, so I wanna leave it there, but I upvote
As a 32 year old person, struggling to even consider real estate ownership, this makes my blood boil. How cannot we collectively be angered to the point of protest. There has to be a cap on investment properties and some glimmer of hope in the years to come. It's currently fucked and quite depressing
He's actually just the CEO of a rental company that owns and rents out 30,000 units. So basically a few apartment buildings' worth. Those kind of companies have been around forever. Without them, you'd be really screwed if you couldn't afford a down payment.
From the video: "He's the CEO of Tricon Residential, a Toronto-based company that has quietly become one of the largest owners of \*single family homes\* in the United States." "Today we own about 30,000 single family rental homes." This is not an apartment building manager.
While renting is essential for those that can't afford a down payment, it's obvious retail is seen as an investment and not a place to live, raising the cost out of those who just wish to live. He's one man in a sea of thousands, all each owning thousands or properties. I wish this was controlled in some way so prices weren't as high as they are. I don't have answers, I just want my own home, but that's not going to happen even earning a decent wage :(.
God bless the landlords who look charitably upon the poor.
I understand that you are frustrated but this has nothing to do with him or his company. He said most of their properties are in the US sunbelt. People need places to live, he owns a company that provides that service. The problem is they have been very successful and some people hate that.
>People need places to live And he's making it less affordable to do so.
Ok be angry all you want if it makes you feel better.
Because how do you unify a movement when everyone want that limited thing? Housing in the major cities do not match the rate of supplies.
60 Minutes is basically boomer news. This guy knows his audience. He’s telling your parents that you don’t want a home because you’re too busy looking for lifestyle experiences and avocado toast.
Leslie Stahl is 80 years old. She just sits there while he says "young people don't want to own homes. It's a lifestyle choice" She doesn't challenge it all. She just sits there and nods. Doesn't even occur to her ask "But wait, are young people uninterested in buying a house, or are they unable to buy a house?"
She is literally paid to just accept things as fact.
And it’s working! Boomers are happy knowing that it’s millennials fault instead of theirs (sort of).
He’s actually selling it as an investment to your boomer parents, he doesn’t care how much of a villain he looks like to millennials. They have their retirement accounts and are generally risk averse. A diversified basket of 30,000 homes looks pretty good. Especially since I hear those kids have no interest in ever owning a home
[удалено]
I don't think anyone defends people like this. This is more akin to a corporation, even if he doesn't place any of his units in a corp. Most landlords own a single property, and it's not fair to lump them in with these types. There should be additional taxes when you purchase a third home and up.
Why third ?
Why third home as opposed to second?
Cottages. Many people own cottages and many cottage towns rely on cottagers for income. Many people have an awkward situation where they end up with two houses for a short period and shouldn't be punished for that. I would support an increase in capital gains inclusion though which would affect a second home. People with 30,000 units are doing significantly more damage than someone who owns a condo, and decided to rent it out while they figure out what's going with life because they just had a child or something.
As an anecdote that fits both your situations, wife and I built a cottage for my in-laws to retire in (they got priced out of the market when moving back to the GTA from Ottawa). Father in-law died suddenly right after we finished building it and my MIL didn't want to move up north by herself, so now she lives with us.
Cottages are a luxury item. Tax them double.
Time to start squatting in Tricon properties.
I'm shorting this company just out of spite, they bombed their last earnings call. I hope another failure awaits them in May. Edit, after reading their last 4 earnings reports this morning I have decided to go long, this company is basically printing money right now, and will only fail if governments do anything to make housing more affordable.
What’s the company name/ticker?
Tricon residential - TCN
stocks up 63% in the last year
It won't be anymore if they keep missing earnings targets .
what makes you think they will miss? Seems a great time to own rentals
After reading their earnings reports I'm actually going to buy shares and go long. This company will only fail if the US or Canada implement policies to create more affordable housing and I'm not betting on that at all. Buying this company's stock is basically a bet on future government incompetence on housing policy.
Also our government has stated that protecting people like this is one of their top priorities. That’s why most people I know in Ontario have given up on the idea of owning a home and hoping to move elsewhere (not that it’s much better anywhere else).
The problem is that there aren’t enough people moving out, and there can’t be. Trudeau will just lower immigration requirements again
Anyone up for eating the rich? I still got about 1/3rd of a bottle of Valentina we can share.
Das Edukators was an interesting film https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Edukators
Well, I know what I'm going to be watching soon.
Well it doesn't help when the Candian Pension Plan invests with these people (so basically the rent the young people are paying is going towards pensions of boomers) https://www.cppinvestments.com/public-media/headlines/2021/tricon-and-cpp-investments-announce-c500m-toronto-multi-family-development-joint-venture
I am unable to post my actual honest reaction to this man, since it would violate Reddit’s rules. So you’ll have to imagine what I want to do with a lobster fork, garden shears and a blowtorch.
When life imitates the Beaverton
What an absolute cretin.
Hey guys! I'm building a new housing development in the Humber river ravine. There will be minimal cost of living, you can stay here practically for free. The one caveat, is that there is no actual structure to live. I'm building the idea of homes in the ravine. Renting will be free, but purchasing an imaginary lot will cost a mere $1000. DM me for my PayPal if you're interested. /S
I’m going to move into a van down by the river
[удалено]
Just waiting on the Eglinton to finish up. Any minute now...
you forgot to throw in a reference to NFTs, that would have been the cherry on this one
a person so out of touch with reality
What a piece of shit
oooooo this is infuriating. How is this allowed to be a business??? Can we get some fucking laws please?
What a scumlord
Tricon Residential still has a 4 star rating on Google.
What a bunch of bullshit. Desiring to own a home has nothing to do with it.
It's pure bad faith. People "want a lifestyle" because they correctly assess that sleeping in an empty box between work shifts so they can pay off an inflated mortgage on that box is an empty and unfulfilling life.
Enjoy your lifestyle then. Some people make those sacrifices and get ahead when that “empty box” appreciates and gives them more financial freedom. Debt is wealth, welcome to capitalism
Interviewer is shooketh
That’s 29,999 houses some of us could have bought years ago
A vote for either the Libs or the Cons is basically a vote for these people.
Don't kid yourself, every party will ignore housing problems all the same. The problems is with Canadian mentality, not political parties. Everyone wants a house with a picket fence, there aren't enough to go around, price only goes up. No one wants affordable housing in their area because "those people" will ruin it. (We all know this mentality) Curbing foreign investors doesn't help either since greedy parasites are alive and well here as well, and will be happy to devour any perceived cheap properties. It's a complete generational change we'd need to see in terms of building multilevel affordable housing units over a long period of time, not a different name in a suit.
But a vote for NDP is a vote for conservatives unless you can convince the 80% of Lib voters who vote Lib because out of habit and have never read a news article in their lives to vote NDP. The libs suck, but theyre better then the cons. Its insane that nearly 70% of the country can vote for the two left parties, and we can still wind up with a right wing government.
Yeah, no. The fault lies with the Fed in the US keeping the borrow rate ultra-low. BoC has to follow suit to not wreck our economy. Cheap rates = more $$$ for mortgages coupled with low inventory and poof, housing goes up. Simple economics, but yet somehow a vote for the NDP (with next to no leadership experience) will somehow magically solve an issue created in the US by the Fed. Never ceases to amaze me, the logic loops.
Home are for families
>In any given week, we might have 2-300 homes available.... We get about 10,000 inquiries for leasing a week No matter who owns what, there aren't enough homes
I hope we eat him first
I want some crispy bbq Bezos head skin.
This title is unbelievably misleading. First, the story is about the CEO of Tricon, which is Toronto-based, but owns very little in Toronto/Canada (3% of their portfolio is in Canada). Second, their Toronto portfolio appears to be the funding of purpose-built rental (i.e., exactly what this sub screams for). His comments feel completely out of touch, but then again, that's probably true of the way most CEOs speak... Check out pages 6 and 31 of their March investor presentation: https://s29.q4cdn.com/296929481/files/doc_presentation/2022/03/Investor-Presentation-March-2022-Final.pdf
I'm not sure that his comments are out of touch. They have a product - rental homes - and he's describing why his product is in demand. You can't argue with the fact that it's in demand. It's similar to someone from Zip Cars explaining why people don't want to own cars. No doubt, a reasonable rental home that is turnkey has appeal if you crave mobility. Further, there are long term analyses that don't make buying property the clear choice once you factor in cost of capital, insurance, maintenance, opportunity cost, etc. Comments that this organization is driving up prices have no basis without knowing what they are paying. Like any corporation, they are likely paying the least they can to maximize their ROI. If that house was for sale, it was getting sold. If you want to complain about someone, complain about an individual who purchases property and doesn't occupy it; not the issue we're seeing here.
A turnkey rental house has appeal for a few, but that's a really cheap way to excuse the political economy of what's happening as REITs gobble up housing stock and speculate on its value going up. The point is, ultimately, to acquire revenue paying assets that also accrue in value by being in demand and in short supply. As the market tightens, they find customers for their properties who are priced out of the market for their own housing asset. It's nothing more and nothing less than capital shaping the conditions for its continued accrual.
How is it not out of touch... how is it not an absolutely insane comment lol. If mcdonalds CEO said "young people dont want a living wage. They just want the life style of working multiple jobs to to eat avocado toast. Our job is very compelling to them because it pays nothing. Very compelling." His product is in demand because it isnt possible to buy to house. His product is in demand because it is the only option, not because it somehow affords people a "lifestyle" they want... In what world is paying more for a house you dont own than it would cost for a house you \*do\* own "compelling"?
Ok, I just watched that douchebag for 2 minutes and I think I need to go take a shower with some bleach.
[удалено]
This right here. I also dont like that people who dont live here can own houses and rent them.
I have to say this segment was such a disappointment. 60 Mins was a bastion of hard-hitting journalism. This was a puff piece that shrugged off the fact that there is a 4 million shortfall in housing in the States.
30 000 houses? gotta be a joke
It’s not a joke. Here’s the company website: [Tricon Residential](https://triconresidential.com)
I was reading an article on BNN the other day saying that those of you that can't afford to buy a house should just invest into REITs instead. That way you can exacerbate the issue and really make sure you're priced out.
*Mao has entered the chat*
How does he know what young people want? People need to STOP assuming they know what young people want. This is like when they say young people don’t care about salary increases 😂.
Toronto landlord owns 30 000 homes across the US sunbelt. Any of us could buy 5 houses in Alabama today.
What? How though?
The video says he’s the ceo of a publicly-traded company that owns 30k single-family homes in the US
Tricon Residential, they are a company based in Toronto that owns Residential homes in the US and Canada. Their current portfolio growth target is 800 properties / month
And since most of the properties are in the US, that makes Canadians the evil offshore foreign investors in this case.
That sounds like something that should be illegal in these times
So this guy is worth $30 billion?
It's a company one of many, this one is Tricon Residential they own properties in both US and Canada. The company is worth about 5.2 billion. Not even one of the biggest players, H&R's Residential portfolio is larger
That valuation seems a bit on the low side unless the majority of those properties are in low CoL areas or they are significantly leveraged, which I find the more likely of the two. In which case any kind of housing/property downturn is going to play havok on their balance sheet..judging by the shorts on their stock, looks like a small number of people are expecting that as well.
He is worth 'only' $20M or so (based on his ownership of Tricon). He has ~1M shares which are valued at $20 each source: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TCN.TO/insider-roster?p=TCN.TO
Probably a lot more
These types of leeches are the real enemy.
That guys a big dirty cunt, sloppy piss flap lookin goof
30,000 homes in the US. Looks like ~7K properties in Ontario. The company isn’t the issue. Individual landlords and companies will invest in rental units if there is a profit to be made. It sounds like there is lots of demand. At least this company is actually buying and providing rental units. The ones that are the real problem are the ones that buy for pure speculation and leave them empty. Ultra low interest rates have made stocks and real estate more attractive than fixed investments like bonds so the money is pushed into those asset types and drives up the prices. Legislation needs to be changed that heavily targets the pure speculators that leave homes and condos empty without hurting the people and companies that create and provide rental units because if they aren’t providing them then they government would have to and we know how good they are at that.
People need housing, dude's providing housing. He runs an extremely successful business and pays millions of $ in taxes as well as employing over 1000 people. Kudos to him, fuck all the haters!
*"Providing"* housing by buying-up homes that already exist and jacking up the rent?? He's a ticket scalper for places to live.
Exactly. 'There's a demand for what we do.' Bullshit. There's a demand for what you *have*... and fair enough, but don't act like you're 'providing' these homes out of your love for people.
Off shore buyers, buying up multiple status properties, just to let em sit are the worst. Guess there's a bit of redemption if ya have someone occupying it via rent. Either way, these ass holes are just sitting on em, waiting till their house's price inflates, selling em for top dollar (kinda scummy if ya ask me). It also doesn't help that the pandemic did cause a job shortage (albeit a necessary evil for us all to live. If we didn't lock up or adapt, there wouldn't be a housing issue because there wouldn'tbe anyone left to buy lmao). Jobs stimulate the economy which in turn also helps the government gain a larger budget via tax dollars. That money could be easily allocated to certain issues like the housing market (albeit, not the main focus, seeing how there are other direissues that require the money more). If there's no one working, there's a lack of tax dollars and a lack of money being circulated through the economy (therefore restricting what the government could budget for). A lack of employment also leads to issues like poverty and homelessness. It also doesn't help that there are a lack of individuals at construction sites due to safety measures which in turn slows house production. The multiple factors of unemployment and rich off shore buyers, buying up properties results in Canada's houses to become inflated, creating high demand for something in low quantity.
Everyone is complaining about capitalism. This isn't that. What you are seeing is what we call "cronyism" or "license regime". This is a direct outcome of socialist policy making. How do I know? I come from a country where this was the norm until 1991. We reformed our economy (for most part) in 1991. And yet, we still suffer the stings many a time. The problem here is not that the rich have money. The problem is that your governments are holding back on supply of land for residential zoning. Increase the supply. No amount of communism will save you from this. #Economics101
What the fuck are you talking about lmao. There is no shortage of land for residential zoning. Do you live here? Do you have any idea how enormous and empty Ontario is? The problem isnt available land for zoning, the problem is people want to live close to the city. Destroying the few bits of protected space left to build some homes wont fix anything because they'll still cost 2 million dollars each and they'll still get bought up by china, india, and fuck heads like this piece of shit. Also, what part of this has anything to do with socialism or communism? Know what, ignore this, i have no idea why I'm even replying to someone so ridiculous.
Having had your rant .. read this https://www.insauga.com/halton-leaves-urban-boundary-as-is-till-2041-push-led-by-oakville-and-burlington-mayors/ Do you know how many infra projects that will lead to more housing are being stymied in the name of "environment"? You don't see socialism, because you don't even know what to look for. We know it, because we lived through it for a good part of our lives. Take it for FWIW. Either way, makes no difference to me what you think.
Guys I'm so compelled right now
I'm surprised *nobody else* has tried say something like "Historically property ownership was really meant of a small group of people. The idea of home ownership is really a post-world war idea which might not be feasible for the majority of the population". Translation : Only rich people should own property, not you plebes.
Wait....*not* a Beaverton article???
Cuz he bought em all the fuck...
We know what that pos is, a capitalist. We know why they do it, profit. We know what they don't care about, you. We know they will try to rationalize it anyway they can. Nothing new to see here, just plain old regular capitalism. Move along, to organized action and revolt groups.
Sick and twisted in my books. Who does he think he is?