...owning a home shouldn't be a luxury afforded to only the few.
It isn't. There are plenty of cities and towns in Canada where the average (and in some cases, below average) earners can afford a home. If Toronto is out of reach, them's the breaks. I agree, it sucks, but it's the reality we live in.
You can sell and move when you own, just as you do when you rent -- and moving doesn't solve bad neighbours -- they're everywhere. And it's easy to say just move, but let's face it, moving is a PITA.
Agreed, but moving is easier when you only need to serve notice and pack. When you
have to sell, it can be much more difficult. I'm not against home ownership, but I think it gets overplayed, especially given the rapid rise in values over the past several decades. I don't think people live the way they used to anymore. Times are changing, and perhaps the ownership model needs to be more carefully evaluated, especially by younger buyers, who have seen their parents make out like bandits and expect the future to be more of the same. I'm optimistic about the future, but given the relentless gorging by the 1%, wage stagnation, and the feeling among the peasantry that debt=wealth and Kardashians=role models, I'm approaching with caution.
And they don't want to own the unit where they are either -- too small. So yes, while the rent they pay does allow them to save and invest, to find a place that better suits their needs (an actual kitchen, an office because they work from home, a second bedroom for a child) will cost them much more in rent. Believe me, they've done the math -- I've been impressed at how much thought and research they've put into this -- and in their situation, buying is a sensible decision for them based on their needs and future plans.
That's cool. My reason for not buying is mostly due to lack of real-world value. Builders are just throwing these things up to make a buck; there is no intent to be there when the places inevitably start to crumble. A Stradivarius violin from the 1600's is easily worth half-a-million bucks. The care and craftsmanship and rarity of the instrument cannot be argued. A concrete skybox sloppily encased in cheap glass and materials is not, even if people are lining up to bury themselves in debt to have one. Market value is only what people are willing to pay, and they can just as easily decide not to pay these crazy prices once they realize they've been sold The Emperor's New Clothes.
Not sure I see how renting can cost more than owning, especially if they plan on staying in their preferred neighbourhood. Ownership almost always involves a compromise on location. And with much of the "high-value" housing stock in this city being mostly decrepit, rotting, moulding, peeling, crumbling, or laced with asbestos, I'd argue that buying one would almost certainly be the most severe financial burden they will ever encounter in their lives. Fantasy, meet Reality.
Young people have been told by their parents that renting is a waste of money and that they haven't truly arrived until they buy property. This is nonsense. And in a world where people often shed jobs, relationships, and locations every few years (much more different than how our parents typically lived), the ownership model might not be the most practical or efficient way to live.
