HawthorneVillager.com

Hawthorne Village (Milton) Discussion Board
It is currently Sat Jun 13, 2026 2:07 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1889 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 126  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 3430
dtc wrote:
Dabills wrote:
some people in metro areas rent all their lives and are very successful, europe especially.


They rent in metro areas like London (just like Manhattan) because even a professional can not afford to own. Land in those areas is at a premium and real estate is not within reach for an average person in those areas. Only the rich can afford property now.. those that bought after the war and those that now make 6 figure salaries.

This is what happens when the population continues to grow in the same region year over year and there isn't anywhere for them to live.

We are lucky that Toronto isn't as populous right now -- in fact I think the London/New York have the population of all of Canada.. but one day, it will be -- and those that own property will be the "rich ones" and those that don't will rent (Or live further away)


Toronto is more expensive than Vancouver, and Vancouver is more expensive than many European cities actually

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/T ... story.html


Thing that baffles me is Dabills & Ol Skools idea that renting is better than owning, especially when most major Canadian cities are so expensive to rent in


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
http://www.moneyville.ca/article/102567 ... n-end?bn=1

Another interesting article. I would though like to point out this statement which mirrors my thoughts on all of this:

Quote:
The key to the unusually long running upward cycle for the market is that interest rates have been a lot lower for a lot longer than most analysts had expected.

After terrorist attacks in New York in 2001, central banks kept rates low to keep the economy going. A subsequent global financial meltdown in 2008 also had banks priming the economy. But that cycle looks like it will end as the Bank of Canada is expected to start raising rates again by the end of the year or even into next year.

Then again, that was what analysts forecast earlier this year. And they were wrong.

“Some days you just don’t know what to believe. The economists have been calling for the death of the market for years and it hasn’t happened,” said veteran realtor Paul Swartz. “I can’t tell you how many people are angry at me after I’ve told them to stay out of the market because it might fall, and four years later it’s still going strong.”

Still, Swartz remembers the bubble market of 1990, when prices crashed and remained depressed for seven years.

“Things turned on a dime. And there are buyers out there who just know the good times. I’ve given up trying to predict the market. But I always tell my clients that it’s important to remember that the good times don’t last forever.”


I've never once said prices can never go down. I've said that it is an impossible prediction and there has to be a catalyst to cause it to happen.

As long as people have jobs and credit is cheap, and supply of houses for sale is low, prices will continue to climb -- debt or no debt.

The minute we see a faltering economy (caused by whatever reason including debt ceiling), mass job loss, expensive debt, or increase in supply of houses for sale, etc. -- prices will drop.

My point has always been -- nobody can predict it. Everyone can easily say "it's going to rain some time this year" -- Very few can say "It's going to rain today at 1:24PM for 8.87 minutes". Do we forgo going to the park for the next few months because "it's going to rain some time this year"? No, we make a choice, and go with it.

This is the same as predicting the market. If one could easily do that, they'd be billionaires already.

Now, I will say -- if you look at the odds -- like a game of poker -- right now the odds are prices won't increase at the same rate in the past. If you aren't a gambling person, I'd not bank on that happening.

Of course, when the BOC dropped rates to near 0% a few years ago, I'd also say the odds were that interest rates would go up very quickly -- and I'd have been wrong.. and the gambling person would have prospered.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:18 am 
RichardAndLiz wrote:
So have we agreed renting for 4-7 years and up is a bad investment? At least lets all agree to that.
ill move on when you stop spewing your b.s.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:21 am
Posts: 4035
f wrote:
RichardAndLiz wrote:
So have we agreed renting for 4-7 years and up is a bad investment? At least lets all agree to that.
ill move on when you stop spewing your b.s.


Did you take offence to that?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:46 pm 
ha. ha. no sorry Richard. i did mean to quote daaabills. not drunk today, maybe stoned. not worth discrediting you dabills as you do it yourself.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 11:46 am
Posts: 949
Dabills wrote:
Thanks buddy, enjoy your weekend.


Always having to get the last word in......can't just leave it rest. You must have some serious passive aggressive issues that you are dealing with.

Let's get back to the topic of the original thread....when will housing prices drop 10%. Not, is it better to rent vs. own in today's market, people are extending themselves on credit way too much, the Evil pitfalls of the HELOC.....

If you take a look at today's reports, most banks believe that there will be a correction, however, it will be minimal (yes, maybe 10%) at the end of the day, who cares....I dont. I am well into paying off my mortgage.....and yes, I also agree with some of the things you say Dabills and others.....for the younger 20 somethings, paying 5% down on a Single family 400K plus home is crazy. Yes, rent for a few years to be able to afford what you want, or can realistically afford. If you want that 600K home in Oakville, be realistic if you cant afford it and buy that town or semi in Milton or Burlington instead.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 3430
Dabills wrote:
sorry shawn, i dont get it. how can vancouver and toronto be expensive to rent in when it is much cheaper to rent the same property?


Ok that is not even english...
What are you trying to say?


Dabills wrote:
toronto is an expensive city to live in, its a much more expensive city to buy a property than rent one. i am not sure what you are saying, sorry.


It really is not that much cheaper to rent instead of buying (unless you are a short term visitor or something)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:25 am 
tsk, tsk old skool, others read the papers as well. no one has agreed to a 10% decline, please post your facts. the 2 leading economists are overseas, these guys predict 25%. imagine that. Scotia has predicted flat line for prices. remember the economists have been wrong the last 6 years. i guess it will be like you when they say told you so. the stars front page yesterday was housing bubble, irresponisible media. most reputables finance houses are calling that prices will not see double digits as they have been, then again they said this last year, and the year before that,


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Ol Skool wrote:
What is your definition of "expensive debt" by the way? A mortgage debt consists of two items, interest AND principle. I would argue the balooning of the principle that has taken place which declines very slowly in the first decade of a 30 yr. mortgage even as interest rates fluctuate is "expensive debt", especially when over the life of that mortgage going forward rates will be higher. We were actually much better off going forward after the early 80's flash crash when we had 20% interest rates, but principle was very low, interest rates were heading for a two decade decline and incomes weren't stagnant. If I had a choice between a $60,000 mortgage and a 20% interest rate. I would take that over a $600,000 mortgage at 1%.


I fully agree, but the reality is, housing is principal + interest. If interest rates were higher, prices would be lower. Given the current situation, many are paying down their principal at a much higher rate than they would with a more normal interest rate.

On a 350,000 mortgage, at today's fixed rates, you would pay down around $48,000 of principal. At say 8%, you would only pay down $27,000 in principal during the first 5 years.

This means that 350,000 house is equivalent to buying a 329,000 house at a normal rate over the first 5 years. In both situations, you would have the same equity/amount owing after 5 years. That represents an almost 10% increase in prices to equal out.

Sure, in 5 years it could be an entirely new world. But the reality is, nobody knows what will happen in 5 years.

The reality is a 20% interest rate isn't very likely to happen again. It would mean SUPER inflation which is what the BOC rates are used to control. Generally, if you have super inflation, you have super wage increases. If you don't have wage increases in-line with inflation, you have major problems in the economy.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:54 pm 
because they have been wrong the last decade.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 8:10 am
Posts: 2130
Old skool - what a novel idea...people buying a house they can actually afford. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:15 pm 
most people take a 25yr mtg. at $1450 thats affordable. cheaper than rent by far, plus your building equity for yourself, not someone elses. he will have a paid off house, a renter will have nothing. all it takes is to read the papers and there various economists with different views. if your relatively young as you say, you will see selling in anticipation of a meltdown is a money losing venture. youve already lost. no worries dabills, i wouldnt sleep at night either. all good, no worries.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:17 pm 
Ol Skool wrote:
dtc wrote:
Ol Skool wrote:
What is your definition of "expensive debt" by the way? A mortgage debt consists of two items, interest AND principle. I would argue the balooning of the principle that has taken place which declines very slowly in the first decade of a 30 yr. mortgage even as interest rates fluctuate is "expensive debt", especially when over the life of that mortgage going forward rates will be higher. We were actually much better off going forward after the early 80's flash crash when we had 20% interest rates, but principle was very low, interest rates were heading for a two decade decline and incomes weren't stagnant. If I had a choice between a $60,000 mortgage and a 20% interest rate. I would take that over a $600,000 mortgage at 1%.


I fully agree, but the reality is, housing is principal + interest. If interest rates were higher, prices would be lower. Given the current situation, many are paying down their principal at a much higher rate than they would with a more normal interest rate.

On a 350,000 mortgage, at today's fixed rates, you would pay down around $48,000 of principal. At say 8%, you would only pay down $27,000 in principal during the first 5 years.

This means that 350,000 house is equivalent to buying a 329,000 house at a normal rate over the first 5 years. In both situations, you would have the same equity/amount owing after 5 years. That represents an almost 10% increase in prices to equal out.

Sure, in 5 years it could be an entirely new world. But the reality is, nobody knows what will happen in 5 years.

The reality is a 20% interest rate isn't very likely to happen again. It would mean SUPER inflation which is what the BOC rates are used to control. Generally, if you have super inflation, you have super wage increases. If you don't have wage increases in-line with inflation, you have major problems in the economy.


I'm not saying a 20% interest rate will happen. I am just saying you are focusing on that interest rate side of the ledger way too much with respect to debt. My point was if your mortgage was $60,000 like the early 80's with a 20% interest rate you were in a much better position than now with a $300,000 with a 3.5% rate so principle is more important than interest rate. With a low principle a high interest rate has a marginal effect on you. Banks care more about the principle than the interest rate because it is the principle that raises the money supply in the economy through fractional reserve lending. That's why they put HELOC's in place in the late 1990's to begin with because it converts equity back into debt. People were burned from the last bubble and started paying down their mortgages more aggressively in the early 90's to protect themselves from future shocks and paying down debt (debt destruction) which pulls money out of the economy because money is debt causes the economy to contract.

Canadian banks win regardless of a crash or a bubble. Why? Because the principle balloons during a bubble and they can use that to leverage at 12:1. Second, when the crash happens it usually is accellerated by interest rate hikes. That's fine to a bank because although your equity starts to vanish your PRINCIPLE doesn't and that is left to be paid off at a higher rate. Default isn't an issue because it has never been one in Canada and if it was CMHC would make them whole because they are assuming most of the risk. Win Win for the bank. Lose lose for the homeowner/taxpayer.

So yes DTC, prices would be lower. But your principle wouldn't. Besides, debt is a committment of future income. In this case 30 years. If you've already committed 30 years of income and then on top of that you use current income to shorten the amortization. It is the sheer size of the principle amount that becomes the bigger issue not the interest rate.

Whatever you learn is in a bank's best interest, you want to do the opposite, because it isn't in yours. So in this environment you are better off saving more money for a much bigger down payment OR buying a house you can actually afford and not over-leveraging yourself to get into a bigger house and a bigger principle just because interest rates are currently low and so is your monthly payment because of it.
Banks win in a crash?, my god thats got to be the stupidest item you have ever written, and you have some good ones.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:54 pm 
theres only 2 yahoos that believe your bullshit, you and ol skool, that should tell you alot, buts its not, why are you even on this forum? its for local community members. your in oakville, no relevance. i can sit and cut and paste data all day, just like u do, as i said, you need to justify your reason for selling, wife on you yet? how do you sleep at night? i couldnt knowing i made a bonehead move. no need to be so angry there dabills, its all good, lifes great, right on, as you would say. move on to an oakville board and spill your bullshit there.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 11:46 am
Posts: 949
Dabills wrote:
for fun get me down to $1450 a month on the payment calculator from TD. it doesnt even add up on the lowest variable they have. http://www.tdcanadatrust.com/docs/mortC ... ulator.jsp



Wow, I was able to get to your magic number Dabills:

Highlight Summary for: Option 1 Option 2 For a 25 year mortgage for $300,000.00 at the rate of 3.00%, your Bi-Weekly payment is $711.32
Mortgage Amortization


Amortization Schedule
Total Principal and Interest Payment for Term: $92,471.60

Total Principal Repayment for Term: $51,385.86

Total Interest Cost for Term: $41,085.74

Balance at End of Term: $248,614.14




Consider adding Critical Illness and Life insurance to protect your investment.
To see if this coverage is right for you, visit a Branch for more details and ask us for a Protection Needs Assessment.




Option 1 Option 2
For a 25 year mortgage for $300,000.00 at the rate of 3.00%, your Bi-Weekly payment is $711.32. For a 25 year mortgage for $300,000.00 at the rate of 3.60%, your Bi-Weekly payment is $756.85.

Total Principal and Interest Payment for Term: $92,471.60 $98,390.50
Total Principal Repayment for Term: $51,385.86 $49,255.73
Total Interest Cost for Term: $41,085.74 $49,134.77
Balance at End of Term: $248,614.14 $250,744.27

If you question the rate of 3%, it was actually an option on the calculator.

If you were actualy having a discussion, it wouldnt be you always telling people that their opinion was wrong. Sure you post insightfull links to articles that prove teh point that you are trying to make, however, you call someone a troll for having a different opinion (with taht being said, I think f is just as bad, he is taking this just as personally as you are.
If you really think about it, for the most part, 70 pages long on this topic is rediculious, wouldnt you agree....if you were really having a discussion with people that were like minded, why dont you just PM them with your links as opposed to trolling and encouraging f and a few others to voice their dissention on the topic.

You pointed out that the topic and post had been dormant for a period of a week or so and then someone (who want you) posted a message. From going back to the history of this post, it was a question of when would housing decline 10% with everyone haveing their crystal ball out and pretending that they are the arm chair economist. Every one has opinion, hoever, not everyone has to continually be a douche and say nah, I dont see it that way, my silly leprechan relatives that I feel sorry for, my other portugese and greek relatives who really messed up, remindes me of what happened in another country...etc... Well guess, what, the topic has gone from the 10% guess to HELOC, leveraging debt, the state of the canadian economy and everything else inbetween.

What it comes down to, is you egg people on, while people like DTC and OlSkool seem to have a discussion and let things roll off of them instead of having to call someone out and try to prove a personal vendetta.

Some of your posts are just links to articles that you think others may think are interesting....if you really have no vested interest in the topic, PM it to them ans save us from another 70 pages of people trying to be the expert on predicting housing prices.

I agree that young people shouldnt take out a 400K mortgage with 7% down, but guess what, just because you say they shouldnt, they still will....and I can guarantee that you will have to respond to this post to try to get the last word in......and f....give it a rest.......they love you on here because you get soo mad.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1889 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 126  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.024s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]