Like another commenter above, I’m curious as to how you have the at-risk amount by neighbourhood (i.e. what is the source). And I will also echo that it would be nice to see the hood name when you hoover. And it would be nice if you addressed some of these comments. Otherwise, people aren’t going to remain engaged (I won’t bother commenting again if it’s just going to be ignored). Nitpicking aside, I was interested to read the article and liked some of the points, so keep at it!

What information did you gather to determine at risk zones?
I doubt you have everyones mortgage rate and amount.
Are you making mortgage assumptions based on house prices?

These are very cute. Could you give a little background on your economics background?

Are your points wrong, not necessarily, but are they VERY complex topics? Indeed.

The simplifications here are INSANE, were they written by Donald Trump?

Inter-generational money is part the increase in available funds.

There is also a wording error of some magnitude. Canadians are not spending 164% of their income, they OWE 164% of their annual income. That is up for sure, but it’s up from an average of 100% 20 years ago. If you were to frame it as income over the life of your mortgage of 25 years that debt would be 6.56% of your total income. No one loves paying mortgage, but I think you can afford 7% of your income to pay for your house.

There is a fair chance that there could be a serious crash / correction sometime in the future, but it’s NOT going to be for the reasons you presented (in the way you are analyzing them).

I don’t think you understand that the private bond sale CIBC conducted was not for regular people, and it was to raise more capital for more mortgages.