- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- britishcolumbia
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- britishcolumbia
cross-posted from: /c/britishcolumbia
“For too long, the idea of home ownership has been out of reach for way too many people — people who earn a decent income, who are priced out of the market and do not see any path to home ownership,” said Premier David Eby, speaking at the project unveiling on Thursday.
You must log in or # to comment.
700,000 is “Affordable?” ???
I’m not up with the play but I’m on the opposite side of the world to Vancouver and I distinctly remember it being used as an example of where house prices are utterly insane. It’s basically the poster child of the housing market being fucked.
It’s innovative. It’s a great idea. A fantastic way to invest public money in housing. But it has to be done in conjuction with other measures that stimulates housing development.
in conjuction with other measures
From free standardized designs to building code changes to allow single stairways (Why North America Can’t Build Nice Apartments) to fixing outdated zoning rules that pisses off the NIMBYs plus hundreds of other initiatives, Ravi Kahlon has been an amazing housing minister.
90% more to go before I can afford a house
Eby said the 40 per cent from the province is not a grant or ongoing subsidy, but financing that is to be repaid at the end of 25 years, or when the owner sells.
Is that an exclusive or an inclusive “or”?
yeah sorta needs a whichever comes later in which case I would take that deal. Sorta funny though. Like bundling a mortgage and reverse mortgage at the same time.
It sounds more like a "whichever comes first, which I’d argue makes a lot more sense. The mortgage on the 60% would be paid off by 25 years and if you sell early you’d basically use any appreciation/the full value to pay back the 40%. In your scenario you could just immediately sell it and pocket the 40% for the next 24 years.
see that is scary given where the person may or may not be in 25 years.
Exclusive or would mean that if the owner happens to sell at exactly 25 years, then there’s no need to repay. It wouldn’t make sense.
Based on the other comments, it sounds like you mean “and” rather than “xor”?
