A little Vancouver balsam as a balm on Detroit's wounds...

**davewindsor** · October-17-11, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by canuck

This paragraph explains it pretty well, loosely translated it mentions that a sane market is where housing costs are about 3x the average household income davewindsor. It doesnt take a genius to understand that kind of silliness. Besides that, Vancouver has a skytrain, fine; but plenty of other cities in the world have A1 transit systems and higher use than Van does. What else justify the cost of living in that city beside transit? The scenery? Maybe...

The market justifies the cost of living. How is it silly? Those prices in Vancouver have been like that for decades. A lot of people are crammed into a 44 square mile city. Greater population density per square mile translates to higher prices. Where do you get the 3x average household income for the same population density as Vancouver? What would the same house cost in a city with more population density per square mile like Manhattan or Tokyo? A lot more money because more people are crammed per square mile. It's not silly math. That's how the market forces work. Supply and demand. Yet, you think it's silly. Maybe you just can't understand such a simple concept.

**ghettopalmetto** · October-17-11, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

The market justifies the cost of living. How is it silly? Those prices in Vancouver have been like that for decades. A lot of people are crammed into a 44 square mile city. Greater population density per square mile translates to higher prices. Where do you get the 3x average household income for the same population density as Vancouver? What would the same house cost in a city with more population density per square mile like Manhattan or Tokyo? A lot more money because more people are crammed per square mile. It's not silly math. That's how the market forces work. Supply and demand. Yet, you think it's silly. Maybe you just can't understand such a simple concept.

For such a "simple concept", you sure have a difficult time explaining it.

Now, which is it: market forces, or population density, that causes higher real estate prices? What's the cause-and-effect here?

Because sure as shit, I can find you a house in Calcutta dirt-cheap. So let's do away with this higher-population-density-causes-higher-real-estate-prices crap.

**davewindsor** · October-17-11, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

For such a "simple concept", you sure have a difficult time explaining it.

Now, which is it: market forces, or population density, that causes higher real estate prices? What's the cause-and-effect here?

Because sure as shit, I can find you a house in Calcutta dirt-cheap. So let's do away with this higher-population-density-causes-higher-real-estate-prices crap.

If you bothered to read the second paragraph of my first post, I said it was consistent all over the developed world. Calcutta is in a third world country with extreme poverty. It's is not an economically valid comparison Thanks for playing.

**ghettopalmetto** · October-17-11, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

If you bothered to read the second paragraph of my first post, I said it was consistent all over the developed world. Calcutta is in a third world country with extreme poverty. It's is not an economically valid comparison Thanks for playing.

Is that a correlation or causation? Do you have the equation that shows the causal mathematical relationship between population density per square mile and median housing price?

Here's a thought--maybe more densely-populated cities have higher real estate prices because THEY ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE PLACES TO LIVE, and thus, have higher demand. Just a crazy-ass thought from left field.

And at what income level does a city "not count"? I know of people living in Ho Chi Minh City who pay rents equivalent to those in Washington, DC.

Stop making shit up.

**davewindsor** · October-17-11, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Is that a correlation or causation? Do you have the equation that shows the causal mathematical relationship between population density per square mile and median housing price?

Here's a thought--maybe more densely-populated cities have higher real estate prices because THEY ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE PLACES TO LIVE, and thus, have higher demand. Just a crazy-ass thought from left field.

And at what income level does a city "not count"? I know of people living in Ho Chi Minh City who pay rents equivalent to those in Washington, DC.

Stop making shit up.

Ho Chi Minh City [[formerly Siagon) is located in Vietnam, a communist country. Applying a one party communist run country to the US or Canada is not a valid comparison. Communists control the prices. Again, thanks for playing.

**ghettopalmetto** · October-17-11, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

Ho Chi Minh City [[formerly Siagon) is located in Vietnam, a communist country. Applying a one party communist run country to the US or Canada is not a valid comparison. Communists control the prices. Again, thanks for playing.

Uh yeah, sure. Whatever you want to think. Because you have first-hand experience, right? Sorry, pal. I was in HCMC six weeks ago, and it was a market economy if I'd ever seen one. Hell, they probably have MORE of a market economy than we do, since you can negotiate the price of just about anything--a cab ride, a meal, consumer goods, rent, taxes....

But please do keep making excuses for your flawed logic. It's incredibly entertaining.

**davewindsor** · October-17-11, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Uh yeah, sure. Whatever you want to think. Because you have first-hand experience, right? Sorry, pal. I was in HCMC six weeks ago, and it was a market economy if I'd ever seen one. Hell, they probably have MORE of a market economy than we do, since you can negotiate the price of just about anything--a cab ride, a meal, consumer goods, rent, taxes....

But please do keep making excuses for your flawed logic. It's incredibly entertaining.

RRRight, it's more of a market economy than we have... That's sarcasm btw. The average wage is $2.50 a day in Vietnam. If you want to run a business, you have to constantly pay bribes to corrupt communist government officals to stay in business. http://tunguyen08.wordpress.com/ You call that a free market system like ours? You want to complain about corruption? Sorry, the media is state run. Lower public officals buy their position from higher gov't officials. You don't pay the bribe, your business and assets are seized in the name of the people. You can't challenge it in the courts because it's a communist government. It's not governed by the rule of law. Make enough of a fuss and you get thrown in jail. On a scale from least to most corrupt countries, the US ranks 20, drug lord infested Columbia is 68, Vietnam is 123, Somolia is 179. It's pretty common for government officials to send their children to American universities. I know people who've had their businesses seized by the communists.

Why don't you move there if you think the place is so great?? Siagon is such a bad comparison to North America. It's a market system with incredible corruption. I'm not going to waste any more of my time responding to you.

**iheartthed** · October-17-11, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

The market justifies the cost of living. How is it silly? Those prices in Vancouver have been like that for decades. A lot of people are crammed into a 44 square mile city. Greater population density per square mile translates to higher prices. Where do you get the 3x average household income for the same population density as Vancouver? What would the same house cost in a city with more population density per square mile like Manhattan or Tokyo? A lot more money because more people are crammed per square mile. It's not silly math. That's how the market forces work. Supply and demand. Yet, you think it's silly. Maybe you just can't understand such a simple concept.

According to this link, Vancouver was more expensive than Manhattan, per square foot: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37963066...-overexposure/

I've never been there but according to wikipedia Vancouver is only a little more dense than Chicago [[Manhattan is about 6 times as dense, and NYC as a whole is about 2.5 times as dense). So I'd guess that Vancouver has some extremely restrictive construction policies that is helping to keep real estate so expensive.

**davewindsor** · October-17-11, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

According to this link, Vancouver was more expensive than Manhattan, per square foot: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37963066...-overexposure/

I've never been there but according to wikipedia Vancouver is only a little more dense than Chicago [[Manhattan is about 6 times as dense, and NYC as a whole is about 2.5 times as dense). So I'd guess that Vancouver has some extremely restrictive construction policies that is helping to keep real estate so expensive.

So I guess that's why a condo in the old Manhattan Plaza Hotel sold for $48m earlier this year http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...te-record.html Whereas, the highest price paid for a condo in Vancouver was what, $18m? About the same size http://www.canada.com/edmontonjourna...b-81a5b4ea4abb

**iheartthed** · October-17-11, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

So I guess that's why a condo in the old Manhattan Plaza Hotel sold for $48m earlier this year http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...te-record.html Whereas, the highest price paid for a condo in Vancouver was what, $18m? About the same size http://www.canada.com/edmontonjourna...b-81a5b4ea4abb

You do know what an average is, don't you?