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
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
it depends on the house and the buyers
Only for a limited number of years
No. Limit number of homes bought by single person or corporation
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.
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
I am unsure of this question so I am neutral
No one should get subsidies for housing based on their income level.
I support government subsidies but at a lower threshhold. 120K seems high.
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.
Yes but it should help poor and low income families (less then 40k 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.
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.
It depends on how many household members they would be supporting
Depend if they need to support their family.
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
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.
Yes, but the government should also lower the cost of homes.
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
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.
