this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
21 points (95.7% liked)

Canada

7185 readers
544 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Universities

πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
21
Changing amortization, cap on insured mortgages not the answer to affordability: CMHC (ca.style.yahoo.com)
submitted 1 year ago by sik0fewl@kbin.social to c/canada@lemmy.ca
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The head of Canada's housing agency says measures such as extending mortgage amortizations and changing the threshold to qualify for an insured mortgage are not the answer to the country's housing affordability challenges.

Even though homeowners have seen a rapid increase in what they are paying to cover mortgages as interest rates have risen, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. president and chief executive Romy Bowers is not in favour of allowing borrowers to repay their mortgages over longer periods of time.

"That just makes credit more available," she told The Canadian Press.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sik0fewl@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I found this interesting, but not at all surprising:

Bowers' view is partly based on what happened in the U.K., where the government introduced a program that gave first-time homebuyers in London "generous" down payment grants.

When the program was later assessed, Bowers explained, they found the prices of starter homes had gone up by the exact amount of the government subsidy, essentially wiping out any affordability gains.

[–] Track_Shovel 11 points 1 year ago

Its almost as if capitalism doesn't have the individual's best interest at heart.