Forum

Broker news forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Notify me of new replies via email
Mortgage Broker News | 23 Jan 2017, 08:15 AM Agree 0
Markets observer slams industry professionals’ attempts to pander to first-time buyers
  • LanceH | 23 Jan 2017, 09:40 AM Agree 0
    problem with Carrick's assessment, is he forgets that buyers can't "stretch" their income. We still have 35/42 ratios to stay within. There's no stretching! If he's worried about affordability over the long term, he should suggest they get something with rental income. Best Plan B available.
  • Gary | 23 Jan 2017, 09:50 AM Agree 0
    Carrick seems to forget what the National Housing Authority (NHA) was originally formed for--ad subsequently CMHC formed to administer it...to make home ownership possible and affordable for Canadians. It seems that the government has also forgotten about this
  • John | 23 Jan 2017, 09:55 AM Agree 0
    I haven't seen any numbers on how much money they have set aside for when these so called mortgage defaults are expected. From what I can see mortgage defaults have been at all time lows for 10 years and they have been raking in probably $50million a year in premiums. Where is that money and why is that not enough of a buffer? They should have $300million sitting in the bank somewhere!
  • Geoff Lander | 23 Jan 2017, 10:27 AM Agree 0
    Oh where to start with this Carrick guy. @Gary...spot on. I thought we as a society determined that home ownership was good for us as a whole, not just those of us that already own homes. In fact the realistic desire to buy a first home is incredibly powerful highly positive motivation for a lot of young people and new Canadians. So defending the opportunity for first timers is consistent with the societal view and the fact it lines up with the interests of those of us who are in the business is irrelevant. Its the same as dismissing the opinion of a Doctor who argues against the reduction in universal health care for all of us.

    Furthermore it could be conversely argued that those of us in the business have a far greater interest in ensuring the long term health of the real estate sector given that without it we don't have our livelihood. Perhaps even more so than any government worker who's livelihood seems to be protected regardless of the results, or lack thereof.

    Sure there's some sketchy knuckleheads out there in our business who would put their own self interest above all else regardless, but I'm the sure the same could be said for most industries, perhaps including journalism.
  • Anthony C. | 23 Jan 2017, 10:35 AM Agree 0
    @ Geoff Lander

    ...well said.
  • Leon | 23 Jan 2017, 10:53 AM Agree 0
    John, last I looked I think CMHC when combined with other insurers guarantee somewhere in the ballpark of $600 Billion in Canadian mortgages. So the $300 Million you cite would still be insufficient to survive a material shock without huge loss to the taxpayer.
Post a reply