In September 2019 the government introduced a plan where prospective home buyers can finance 5-10% of their mortgage via a shared equity program administered by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Households who make $120K or less and put down 5% will qualify for the program which will cost an estimated $1.25 billion.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
It depends if the home buyer can afford the home they're buying. This can be affected by area where the person is living in. A very good example of this is in Vancouver, where the average hose is 1,960,800$.
I think that the government should build more homes and decrease the prices because they are too high to live.
no, but the the government should limit the number of homes that can be bought by a single person or corporation.
In my opinion, government subsidies for home buyers making less than $120K per year could be a great way to make homeownership more attainable for individuals with lower incomes. It could provide much-needed support and help bridge the affordability gap.
Yes and No. A program that allows home buyers to elect to obtain government assistance based on an application process to ensure that home buyers are not purchasing homes outside their means is preferable than blanket subsidies. And the home buyer should be a human being.
Depends on how big the family is
The government should help them to some extends
@9BN6JRT2yrs2Y
No, The Government should introduce programs that provide guidance and assistance to lower income persons with the goal of attaining home ownership (regulated rent-to-buy and home ownership savings plans, for example)
I think they should provide assistance
It’s more complex and nuanced than that; better to allow mortgages to lower down payments to first/starter homes to 3 percent, with good rental history
@95K5YQG3yrs3Y
We should encourage Canadians to save money for a house or other future financial goals by opening avenues for them to save for it, like through TFSAs or RRSPs, even through other means like the First Time Home Buyer's Incentive, and potentially removing student debt as ways to help them achieve their goals.
it depends on the house and the buyers
@95DH7PG3yrs3Y
I would say be cautious. We should encourage people the ability to save for a house through different programs, but we shouldn't necessarily be subsidizing individuals alone. We should be making affordable housing more accessible, bringing down prices as much as possible as well as other reforms.
@95CZ6XV3yrs3Y
I actually don't even knoe.
Only for a limited number of years
@93Z55V93yrs3Y
If they we're in war for example and we're unable to work then yes, if they we're just lazy and didn't try in school then no.
No. Limit number of homes bought by single person or corporation
@924HKTH3yrs3Y
yes, but there should be thorough background checks and proof that the people aernt scamming or being lazy.
Only for first time home buyers, and limit the number of homes that can be bought by a single person or a corporation.
Yes, while also supporting the research and construction of affordable housing.
They should just build more housing.
@8W28QZ54yrs4Y
i dont have a opinion on this.
Or, try to manage cost of housing
Stop the 25k penalty for not having 20% dow.
depends on where the money is going to
The amount should depend on where you live
@8VR3ZQZ4yrs4Y
Home buyer's incentives need to be tailored to the geographic location. I.e. - what is the average salary vs. cost of housing? Vancouver and Toronto have significantly higher cost of housing and should be at different thresholds.
I am unsure of this question so I am neutral
No one should get subsidies for housing based on their income level.
@8VCGCPS4yrs4Y
I don't understand the question but housing should be for everybody. A person must not take TOO many homes for themselves, instead, they should put it on rent or something. Make housing easier for people
I support government subsidies but at a lower threshhold. 120K seems high.
@8V2225F4yrs4Y
No, but also limit the number a single person or corporation can buy
@8TWKQVV4yrs4Y
The government should subsidize home buyers who make less that $75K per year
No, we should deregulate zoning laws and increase the supply of housing instead.
Yes, but there needs to be a path for self sufficiency
Yes, but only in cities where home ownership is unattainable for the average person
Yes, but it should also depend on how many people in the household are working full or part time jobs.
Yes, they could, but I don't see why the government would ever logically do this in consideration of the national debt
Subsidize homebuyers who make lower incomes.
Yes, and the government should limit the number of homes that can be purchased by foreign buyers
Not every service can be provided by the government or should be expected to be provided by the government. 120k per year is a large salary that can comfortably support a mortgage and a family.
@8T8G8HG4yrs4Y
yes, but for the people who try their hardest not to someone who doesn't try
Yes but it should help poor and low income families (less then 40k a year)
@8T2MJNX4yrs4Y
They should subsidize homes for people who make less than $50,000 a year.
I agree with the policy of subsidies, but I think this cut-off point is too high.
No, they should subsidize home buyers who make less than 60k, not 120k.
@8RY53QG4yrs4Y
I think they should help people who make less than $100k
Yes, I think it’s challenging for young people today to buy a home. With the government granting faster citizenship to foreigners who purchase a home over $850,000 or bring in 1.2million cash. I think there should be some kind of program for young people (millennials) to enter the market. The conditions of employment, and cost of living are higher, and millennials and younger generations have had it more challenging than previous generations.
@8RCN4WP4yrs4Y
Depending how much less they make, yes
@8RB4X4Z4yrs4Y
Yes, depending on the region
@8QYZ7L44yrs4Y
Only if they are unable to work, or if they are trying to contribute to society as best as they can.
It depends on how many household members they would be supporting
Depend if they need to support their family.
@8Q7VP374yrs4Y
No, they should limit to 2 houses per family.
@8PWLS2W4yrs4Y
They should subsidize home buyers who make less than 50k
Less than 80k per year before tax
Yes, but for people with obvious financial struggles
Yes, but for people who make less than 65,000 a year.
they should for people who make less than 40k a year
yes if currently working a full time postion. no if unable to work due to injury, or excuse.
If they are a first time buyer
Should increase subsidization as the salary group drops
I think it should be 50k
No, but they should remove the lending obstacles they've put in the way
No, but people should be making better wages, and real estate prices should drop, instead of being driven higher.
Subsidized isn't the right word. Instead, we should have savings accounts, student loan pauses, and TFSA/RRSP as well as housing investment to help.
Depends on the house market prices.
Limit the number of investors and build affordable housing to increase housing supply and thereby decrease the price of housing
@9CMNJDG2yrs2Y
depends on the size/affordability of the home (cheaper home = less from the government)
Yes, and work towards paying people a livable wage so that they are actually able to save up to afford homes with their income.
Depeding on the cirumstance at which there income comes in
everyone should be entitled to basic shelter but that doesn't necessarily mean high quality shelter
No, because it won’t be fair to the others who make more and have went through more.
@8X2L3VG3yrs3Y
If they cannot buy a home with the money they currently have, then yes.
@8TMP2YH4yrs4Y
Instead of subsidizing construct more affordable new homes at affordable rates.
@8TJ5M7B4yrs4Y
Maybe less than $80K, $120K is too high.
Yes, but the government should also lower the cost of homes.
@8QZQKLK4yrs4Y
No but I think they should subsidize home buyers who make less than $80k a year
Yes only if there aren't selling restrictions on the first home. There can be selling restrictions on the 2nd and 3rd homes. This will promote more economic mobility between the bracket.
Yes and no because if you are in a situation where you make 20-30k a year, and you are a single parent, then having some help paying would be nice. But if you are making 100k a year, that a different story because it’s so much more than 20k. So I think that the government should subsidize for people marketing under 100k, but not anyone over that.
Yes, But only if the home buyer(s) have kids.
yes, with conditions such as for a basic home
The government should not subsidize home buyers as it shoots up prices.
No, but they should subsidize home buyers that are less than $60K
Housing price should be different for everyone, though quality will change
@8Y9ZZWQ3yrs3Y
i think everyone should be treated fairly, if you support home buyers making 120k, and not higher payed people its unfair to society.
No, This will artificially additionaly inflate the housing bubble.
Subsidizing makes it seem as if the government is paying for the house, which it is not. But anything we can do to help people be able to save for a house, as well as make it more affordable is very worthwhile, and we should consider it.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
