Is it OK to covet your neighbour’s pricey house?
While it’s no longer de rigueur to quote the Bible, especially here in the yogachic, spiritual, eco-humanist Mecca of Vancouver, now might be a good time for people fuming about realestate prices in the city to reacquaint themselves with the Good Book, specifically its admonitions about the dangers of envy.
It’s right there in the Ten Commandments, which include (in some variation): “You shall not covet your neighbour’s house ...” It also warns about not coveting your neighbour’s wife, servants, ox, donkey, “nor anything that is your neighbour’s,” which in Vancouver, one presumes, must also mean their Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bentleys, Maseratis or even Mercedes, if those are even considered a luxury car anymore in this cash-dripping metropolis.
Let’s face it, envy is driving much of the public discussion about home prices in Vancouver, especially when it comes to real or suspected foreign buyers.
People come up with all sorts of arguments to oppose the buying habits of certain classes of realestate investors, but when you get to the bottom of it, they are really just saying, “That person has a house that I should be able to afford but can’t and I’m really angry about it.” Well, boo hoo. Welcome to life. Vision Coun. Geoff Meggs personified this uniquely Vancouver, juvenile attitude in December while being interviewed by a Canadian Press reporter, saying, “I’m offended, as everybody else is, by the thought that someone has so much money they can buy a house and just sit and speculate on the land value.”
Everybody is offended? Really? What Meggs is actually saying is that like all good socialists he is offended by wealthy people, which he is entitled to say, but it’s a silly opinion and he certainly shouldn’t speak for everyone.
I wonder if all the wealthy developers who finance Vision know that Meggs is so offended by them and their industry? And how does he feels about his wealthy boss, the mayor, who owns (or owned) property that sits empty most weeks of the year? I guess it’s OK if one of your buddies does it.
This same covetousness is also partly behind the recent protest about plans by the owner of a 20-year-old house on Adera Street to demolish it and build something more luxurious.
They claim to be upset by the waste of knocking down a perfectly good house, but resentment that someone wants an even fancier home is behind the protest.
I’m sorry, but it’s not clear why anyone thinks they have the right to tell anyone what they must do with their private property, within the law, of course. Frankly, these people have a lot of nerve.
Do we really want to live in a society where bullies get to stick their noses into other people’s private affairs? I sure don’t.
The Province has reported extensively on shady, complex realestate transactions. But the Globe and Mail’s breathless investigation a few days ago into house flipping involving “assignment clauses” — and the reaction by NDP housing critic David Eby and others — had me shaking my head.
Assignment clauses are common and there is noting illegal about them. They are similar to stock options or futures trading. The notion that they are being “abused” is ridiculous; they are simply being used, as they often are during rising real-estate markets.
Some people, Eby apparently, are simply offended that people are making money from the buying and selling of real estate. But realestate speculators can lose money — sometimes lots of it. They are the ones taking the risk, which should mean that their deals, so long as they are lawful, are nobody else’s business. We shouldn’t forget that just because housing costs are rising.
We are warned not to covet, theologians say, so that we won’t be tempted to take sinful action to obtain things that don’t belong to us. Recent hints by the provincial government that they plan to interfere with the real-estate market sound like just that kind of improper action driven by people’s envy.
In attempting to win political favour from one group (those wishing for lower housing prices) by levying new taxes or other restrictions, Victoria risks harming the equity of thousands of property owners. It’s not clear how hurting one group to help another is good policy or fair.
That’s not to say that Victoria and Ottawa shouldn’t crack down on other real-estate scams we’ve learned about in recent days, especially fraudulent use of fake addresses to hide money laundering or misconduct by a few realtors. Slam the crooks, but leave the market alone.