zlacker

> I think the Canadian mortgages linked to Chinese accounts will likely all be paid.

This is a "heads, I win", "tails, you lose" type of scam. The mortgage holders are all judgement proof. They have no income or assets to go after. So if the housing market crashes, the banks have no recourse.

It's the same as taking out a mortgage and instead of buying a house, you go to the casino and bet double or nothing. Sure, the intention to pay back is there. But it is contingent on the investment performing, and the bank is taking on unknown risks.

>>avidia+(OP)
There is probably an unlimited number of people in China would would like to own Canada real estate. As long as you don't block those sales it can continue forever.

>>avidia+(OP)
> So if the housing market crashes, the banks have no recourse

The housing market must first crash before the problem is tangible, and there's no sign of that happening.

>>raydev+pb
Yes that's exactly what the person you're replying to said

>>avidia+(OP)
Mortgages in Canada are different than mortgages in the US in that they are full recourse. If the sale price during foreclosure doesn’t cover the costs, the banks can go after you personally for the balance. So you’d have to either a) leave the country, or b) declare bankruptcy. So, not exactly a risk-free option.

>>joshua+F71
It is a risk free option. The Chinese income isn't real. You can't meaningfully garnish the wages of a part time casino dealer. They have no other assets to cover the potential shortfall.

>>avidia+8O1
You assume these are poor people, other assume they're quite wealthy and laundering untaxed income into assets in .ca. If the latter, they may even have a proportionate pile of assets to seize locally. I betcha you could restate your point to come across a little less jingoistic.

>>rokkit+1s2
> "You assume these are poor people"

The OP is right, the income isn't real. It's right there in the article: "Aurora branch had direct knowledge of faked Chinese income mortgages"

You assumed that the OP assumed something. Then you assumed that the OP's (non)assumption was motivated by jingoism.

Comments like yours are the worst.

>>rybosw+2x2
> Comments like yours are the worst.

This is HN's vaunted grace?

From what I responded to:

> You can't meaningfully garnish the wages of a part time casino dealer.

It is entirely plausible that there are oodles of untaxed income getting funneled over there from hasty emigrés.

No need to get vituperative, good grief.

>>rokkit+Z38
It's entirely plausible that you're not on the moral high ground you think you are, calling other commenters jingoistic because you didn't read the article is prime example.