You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Send this page to someone via email

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) issued a report this week with some ideas on how to calm soaring home prices in overheated cities like Toronto and Vancouver.

And its main conclusion was familiar: encourage more supply.

Coverage of Vancouver housing on Globalnews.ca:

Story continues below advertisement

The report was 225 pages long, and it was the result of “advanced, data-driven quantitative and statistical analyses” looking at a multitude of factors such as housing starts, population growth, interest rates and zoning.

But there’s one analysis that the report did not carry out: how foreign buyers’ taxes have affected home prices in Canada’s hottest housing markets.

READ MORE: Foreign homebuyer tax? Not the best fix for Vancouver, Toronto: CMHC

The CMHC carried out its research at the behest of the federal Ministry of Families, Children and Social Development, which wanted answers about why home prices have sprung up so rapidly in major Canadian cities since 2010.

The report looked at home prices in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto and Montreal, using data from 2010 to 2016.

Vancouver and Toronto stood out for home price gains in that time frame: the West Coast city saw prices jump by 48 per cent, while in the Six, they climbed by 40 per cent.

A chart showing the average seasonally-adjusted price of a home in five major Canadian cities in 2010 and 2016. CMHC

The CMHC said it had numerous reasons for only looking at data up to 2016.

Story continues below advertisement

First, that was the only data they had; second, they wanted to examine the “period of price growth in Canada, and not the policy reactions that happened in late 2016 and 2017.”

But a lack of analysis of those policy changes didn’t stop the CMHC from issuing a strong conclusion on what should be done to alleviate house price pressure.

“Measures targeted at alleviating supply challenges are more likely to have positive impacts on high-priced markets than measures focused on the demand side,” the CMHC said in a news release. Tweet This

Foreign buyers’ taxes have been implemented in two regions across Canada.

B.C. introduced a property transfer tax (PTT) of 15 per cent for the Metro Vancouver area in August 2016, while Ontario rolled out its Fair Housing Plan, which included a 15-per-cent non-resident speculation tax (NRST) for the Greater Golden Horseshoe region (including Toronto and surrounding areas), in April 2017.

The CMHC may not have analyzed the effects of those taxes, but others have.

This chart shows that Vancouver home prices started dropping pretty clearly after July 2016, the last month before B.C. instituted a property transfer tax on foreign buyers. BMO

A chart produced by BMO chief economist Douglas Porter in January 2017, showed that Greater Vancouver home prices were yanked down compared to other cities across Canada following the introduction of the tax.

Story continues below advertisement

At that time, Vancouver was the only region with a foreign buyers’ tax. The measure didn’t apply in Victoria, and a tax hadn’t yet been introduced in Toronto.

Prices just kept climbing in those cities.

This chart shows the house price index for Vancouver up to June 2017. BMO

A subsequent chart, issued by Porter in June 2017, showed that Vancouver home prices stayed mostly unchanged in the eight months after the foreign buyers’ tax came into effect — a significant change from the 20 per cent runup in prices that happened in the eight months before it was implemented.

“One narrative we are hearing a lot of recently is that the Vancouver market is supposedly shaking off last year’s non-resident tax and is firing back up,” Porter wrote at the time.

“While it is true that sales are coming back from the depths, the market is much better balanced now than a year ago, as evidenced by the calm in prices.”

Story continues below advertisement

READ MORE: Vancouver home prices may have finally shaken off foreign buyers’ tax: index

Porter observed a similar trend in Ontario after the implementation of the Fair Housing Plan.

He compared Kitchener-Waterloo, which was affected by the foreign buyers’ tax, against the Windsor-Essex area, which was not.

This chart shows the average sale price climbing in Windsor-Essex following the introduction of the province’s Fair Housing Plan, and falling in Kitchener-Waterloo. BMO

There’s also evidence to suggest that the foreign buyers’ tax and other measures helped to clamp down on speculation in Vancouver.

Data provided to Global News by TransUnion in June 2017, showed average new mortgage balances dropping in Vancouver, even as they grew nationally.

Matt Fabian, TransUnion’s director of research and analysis, told Global News at the time that policy changes like the foreign buyers’ taxes and new stress tests for mortgages had helped to stop speculation in Vancouver.

Story continues below advertisement

“I think the people that were speculating on real estate seem to have stopped, and that contributed to some of the drop,” he said.

In an email, CMHC said 2016 represented the endpoint for its data because that was all it had when its research began.

The corporation added, “This report is only a beginning and there will be opportunities to study trends in the post-2016 period in future work.

“Evidence suggests that foreign buyers have an impact on housing demand and prices, but other factors were found to be more important.” Tweet This

In its report, the CMHC attributed 75 per cent of the increase that Vancouver home prices saw from 2010 to 2016 to “conventional economic factors” such as “higher disposable incomes, positive population growth and low mortgage rates.”

The corporation blamed those factors for 40 per cent of the price growth in Toronto.

And while the CMHC acknowledged to Global News that foreign buyers have an impact on housing, the corporation characterized it as a small one in its report.

A colourful sunset is reflected in English Bay by the highrise buildings of Vancouver’s West End, Jan. 5, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS IMAGES/Bayne Stanley

In reaching this conclusion, the CMHC cited a Statistics Canada release looking at non-resident home ownership in Vancouver and Toronto.

Story continues below advertisement

That report, released in December 2017 (after the endpoint of the CMHC’s data), had many findings.

One of them was that non-residents owned 4.8 per cent of residential properties in Vancouver, and 3.4 per cent in Toronto.

The CMHC also said that non-resident ownership was more prevalent among condos (seven to eight per cent) than it was among single-detached homes (two to three per cent).

“Although we do not have historical data to correlate changes in foreign ownership with increases in housing prices, the prevalence of the stock of non-resident investment in condominium apartments makes it difficult to state that foreign investment is a major causal factor in driving prices higher, given that the prices of condominium apartments declined relative to single-detached homes,” the report said. Tweet This

But different ownership levels emerged when you looked at factors such as municipality, housing type and the years in which homes were built.

READ MORE: Foreign buyers ‘not the problem’ in Canada, says CEO of Chinese overseas real estate portal

Andy Yan, director of SFU’s City Program, found that non-residents owned as much as 19 per cent of condos in the City of Vancouver that were built from 2016 to 2017.

Non-residents owned 24 per cent of such units in the City of Richmond.

In an interview with Global News, Yan said there are two ways to look at housing markets.

Story continues below advertisement

“There’s the view from Ottawa and a view on the ground, and our views aren’t necessarily the same,” he said.

“This report itself just looks at the overall Metro Vancouver market, but it doesn’t look specifically within the respective municipalities of the region.” Tweet This

Yan said the CMHC’s report represents a “beginning,” to “give us a more complete understanding of the housing market.

“But then, it also I think needs a deeper look in toward particular municipalities.”

READ MORE: In Vancouver, you’re competing with non-residents for condos worth as little as $600K

In an email, CMHC said, “We acknowledge there are pockets within markets that have higher proportions of foreign buyers than others.

“Despite the relatively high proportion of foreign buyers you are pointing out in condos, the majority of the price pressure in both Toronto and Vancouver has come from single-family homes where the concentration of foreign ownership is lower, but where supply constraints are more acute,” it said.

The CMHC stressed that it doesn’t dispute that foreign buyers affect home prices.

“What we are saying is that the combination of demand from all sources (foreign and domestic), when paired with unresponsive supply, can lead to a much larger increase in house prices [in] markets where supply can expand more readily,” it said.

Story continues below advertisement

Once more, the CMHC said its own analysis suggests foreign ownership is low.

But it added, “This remains an important area of focus for CMHC and this is why we are working with different partners to gain more information on it.”

With files from Ted Chernecki