Here's the thing about housing:
The delegates insisted on one hand that “housing is for living not speculation”, but on the other, emphasised the critical importance of real estate to China’s economic growth.
In other words, things are complicated. We want housing to be affordable to more people, but at the same time, we recognize that housing appreciation is kind of useful for overall economic growth. So we're a bit conflicted. And that may be why we tend to take contradictory actions.
Broadly speaking, the current playbook in Canada seems to be as follows: heavily tax new housing, force those who can afford new market-rate housing to subsidize those who can't, and then tax/ban foreign buyers.
https://twitter.com/donnelly_b/status/1611177601220968449?s=20&t=6fy7zjUvjlQEEEhYKURIGQ
Canada's new foreign buyer ban came into effect on January 1 of this year. And for the next 2 years, it prohibits companies and people who are not Canadian citizens or permanent residents from acquiring non-recreational, residential property in Canada. (What is the definition of non-recreational?)
While this may sound good to some -- finally, more homes for Canadians -- we're talking about a relatively small portion of the market, which is likely why there's also little evidence that any of our foreign buyer taxes have been all that effective.
It's really hard to imagine this one working much better. But it certainly sounds like something.

The Journal published a piece this past week talking about China's $52 trillion residential property bubble. According to a recent study by Goldman Sachs, this is the current value of all Chinese homes (built homes and developer inventory). And to put this number into perspective, it is twice that of the U.S. residential market.
Now, I don't know all that much about the Chinese housing market and I have no idea where prices will go next. But it is interesting to look at some of the data, particularly in light of this current pandemic. Urban home prices in China were up 4.9% year-over-year in June, and 1.9% year-to-date. Shenzhen appears to be one of, if not the hottest market. Why is that?

At the same time, it is believed that about 21% of urban homes in China were vacant as of 2017. I don't know what the figure is today, but this is a high number. As of last year, urban China also had a homeownership rate of about 96%. (Here is a look at how this number compares with other countries around the world.)

What is clear is that Chinese households are going long property, and eschewing other investments such as stocks and bonds. Above is a chart showing how China compares to the US, where bonds lead, followed by stocks. Presumably it is because property is viewed as a safer and more lucrative investment in China.
According to a report by China Guangfa and the Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, urban Chinese have on average about 78% of their wealth tied up in residential real estate. Many own multiple homes. In the U.S., this figure is about 35%. (I don't know what the number is for Canada, but I would be interested to know.)
Call me old fashioned, but I think it's important to keep in mind things like rental demand and cash flow when thinking of property.
All figures and charts from the WSJ.