The Arrogant Worms Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 17 minutes ago, Sapper said: The first generation of adult workers entering the workforce where the majority would not be under any employer pensions was during the Mulroney term and those worked are now hitting 60 and will begin retiring in a few years The worked who started in 75 are at or over 70 and many still had baby pensions they earned before the 80's anti union and worker pay movement Many of those people are the ones you see now living in RV's in rest stops etc I remember at a pension forum years back it being provided that workers finishing their life's work and retiring during the period 1980 to 1990 was the last generation where greater than 51% of males and 33% of females retired with some form of pension not just cpp. Since 1990 that has steadily declined and after 1990 virtual no private workers.have access to a full career pension plan with their employer other than auto workers and a few others. The only group keeping that stat from flat lining is public workers. Many families the man works private industry no pensions but higher wages and the wife works public with lower wages but a pension plan. It's the only way some families are able to survive in retirement I was born in 58. I know many people who cant afford to retire at 65. My wife makes great money but no pension plan. I also have no pension plan. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 meh, overshared and changed my mind. hehe, carry on, no show here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johngould21 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Most people of my generation, I was born in 1948, had it pretty good. We did get through 15-21% mortgage rates. Our first home in Burnaby was bought with a 12 1/8% mortgage in 1976. The house cost $59.9k. We sold 10 years later for around $108k. Then moved to our current home with a rate of 10% in ‘86, which cost 139.9k. A reno including an in-law suite in ‘99, has really helped in our retirement. We rent to SFU students and both my wife and I have good union pensions, as well as our gov’t pensions. Thank god for a good union pension! I have no idea how anyone is going to be able to buy a detached home in the LM in this day and age. Lot value in Burnaby alone is close $1.9M. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 32 minutes ago, Johngould21 said: Most people of my generation, I was born in 1948, had it pretty good. We did get through 15-21% mortgage rates. Our first home in Burnaby was bought with a 12 1/8% mortgage in 1976. The house cost $59.9k. We sold 10 years later for around $108k. Then moved to our current home with a rate of 10% in ‘86, which cost 139.9k. A reno including an in-law suite in ‘99, has really helped in our retirement. We rent to SFU students and both my wife and I have good union pensions, as well as our gov’t pensions. Thank god for a good union pension! I have no idea how anyone is going to be able to buy a detached home in the LM in this day and age. Lot value in Burnaby alone is close $1.9M. Vote labour vote often. An old joke but one I agree with. If you aren't in the top 5% of incomes in Canada, voting conservative is a vote against your own best interests. If you work for a boss, unions are your friend 99% of the time. I vote progressive my whole life, and from time to time the party changes that gets my X but the basic idea of supporting labour is rock solid. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, Sapper said: I've got a few friends that do home construction ( a few houses per year so small scale ) and they are very concerned about any government intentionally flooding the market with new builds. Their concerns are more then just the lowering of prices with over stock ... But there bigger fear is it would leave the trades in ruins as with lower prices and unsold.supply developers would have to drastically cut wages to be able to get any profits. The trades which are a transient work force would simply pack up and leave to move to where capital projects are happening so they could maintain their current pay levels That means leaky condo 2.0 as contractors have to take.whats left for workers and cut corners Also low interest rates or not ...an entire generation who started work post 1985 is getting ready to retire and the majority of them have no workplace pensions.and are banking on their house values to survive. Those values fall any significant amounts and they can't retire.... Ever. I do agree with you that low interest rates killed the dream. I purchased my first house for 130k and 5% interest. My mortgage payments were 35% of my pay. That same house now would cost 850k and in that same job the mortgage would be double the full salary The push for near zero interest did fill the cash registers without having to give big pay raises but have left us with grossly overpriced housing and vehicles and record consumer debt Any and all solutions will be catastrophic to 1/2 the population.... Expect large corporations..... They won't miss a blink I think that'll be the reality for a lot of people going forward, possibly sooner than later. I think retirement being a norm will be a thing of the past, Gen X and older may be the last generations to have retirement as a widespread norm. Lot of middle aged and older folks are having a tough time just getting by now, I don't envision things looking any brighter going forward given folks have been living longer and longer. Folks 85+ are one of the fastest growing demographics, over the next 25 years the age 85+ population could triple. Factor in an aging Canadian population, rising costs of living, and several other factors and I question how folks are going to get by without working in some capacity. Lot of younger folks don't ever expect to be able to retire nowadays. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/98-200-X/2021004/98-200-X2021004-eng.cfm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 I was chewing through this earlier, it's more BC-centric Even the abstract paints a rather grim picture, hopefully things improve over time The state of long-term care and elder-care in Canada is unsettling to think about as someone who's parents are approaching their mid 60's Most folks don't want to end up in any sort of facility, but some needs and scenarios are too demanding and complex for family and loved ones It doesn't help that facilities such as retirement homes, long-term care facilities and so on are expensive, even on the cheaper side of the spectrum I don't know how any of this is resolved, and the issue will likely draw more attention as the aging of the Canadian population accelerates, without the federal and provincial governments stepping up and spending money https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/anti.12711 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 hours ago, Warhippy said: You should check the new municipal zoning and provincial laws regarding zoning and allowable builds for lot size. Bill 44 and Bill 47 have nothing to do with subdivision. Those big lots will now be able to become multi family lots, up to 6 units in some cases. And lots near TOA's can now assemble together and create higher density through mid and hi rise buildings. The BC government has not yet established whether those multi family units can be stratified and sold separately however. Apparently, they are going to leave that decision to each individual municipality. And we should find about this after June 30. So in Vancouver for example you may be able to build a fourplex and sell it all off as 4 individual units. But in Surrey, you may only be able to resell it as a fourplex... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 10 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said: I was born in 58. I know many people who cant afford to retire at 65. My wife makes great money but no pension plan. I also have no pension plan. I'm in a similar situation.... I have a work pension now, but I've only been in BCGEU for 8 years. I have to work until I'm 71 (63 now) if I want to retire with a decent pension. Since I work in IT, I can probably do it. (That's the plan right now, anyway) The wife works in the same place, but she's been here much longer, so she should be able to retire at 65. (In 6 years) All of that being said, we'll probably end up selling our current home (which is much bigger than we need) and buy a smaller fixer-upper. Hopefully, that will cover the Mortgages and allow us to live on the pensions.... 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 2 minutes ago, bolt said: When does he call everyone racist? Did this tweeter post the wrong vid? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maninthebox Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Is anyone familiar with leasehold properties? More specifically, does anyone have practical experience they can share? My retirement plan currently consists of a few bags of empties and some old hockey cards... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 10 hours ago, Optimist Prime said: Vote labour vote often. An old joke but one I agree with. If you aren't in the top 5% of incomes in Canada, voting conservative is a vote against your own best interests. If you work for a boss, unions are your friend 99% of the time. I vote progressive my whole life, and from time to time the party changes that gets my X but the basic idea of supporting labour is rock solid. I suppose what I would throw out there is you do you want left/labour parties or leaders running your pension plan? There's also the matter of choice, if someone chooses a career or job path with no pension, who's responsible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 minutes ago, Maninthebox said: Is anyone familiar with leasehold properties? More specifically, does anyone have practical experience they can share? My retirement plan currently consists of a few bags of empties and some old hockey cards... I like these for some folks, and happen to believe it's the only way we can get most of gen z in the market. Granville Island is a good area for you to research to find out what these are all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 7 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: When does he call everyone racist? Did this tweeter post the wrong vid? If you feel like you're being called a racist hearing that, that's a clue . 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: If you feel like you're being called a racist hearing that, that's a clue . I swear some of these con campaigns are doing the work for JT. They keep up this daft stuff and we might just see him pull off the inconceivable. Edited April 12 by bishopshodan 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 24 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I suppose what I would throw out there is you do you want left/labour parties or leaders running your pension plan? There's also the matter of choice, if someone chooses a career or job path with no pension, who's responsible? we are all responsible for our own paths, that is certain. As for who i want to run my pension plan: Alberta's right wing governance moved most of the provincially controlled pension funds into Fossil Fuels. WHy would I want the right to run my pension plan? There will be a reckoning with the pensioners at some point in the next few years as that money.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 8 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: we are all responsible for our own paths, that is certain. you don't see it as a young person a lot of the time, you just don't think much about these things starting out. 8 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: As for who i want to run my pension plan: Alberta's right wing governance moved most of the provincially controlled pension funds into Fossil Fuels. WHy would I want the right to run my pension plan? There will be a reckoning with the pensioners at some point in the next few years as that money.... perfect point. We don't want this level of government diddling in our pensions. But the NDP also has some really bad ideas about pensions too, but as a 3rd party they get to say that stuff. For me, I find labour groups love to push the us-vs-them narrative which I think can be really unproductive. If you check your union pension closely, you'll see that you rely heavily on dividend paying companies, the so-called "them" in the equation. Where I do think the gov't can be useful is in things like determining the level of CPP contributions, which I do think should increase. The CPP is very well run, and doesn't take direction from any particular government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, bolt said: unsure what i am seeing here, doesn't look like what the caption suggests and gives no context at all before hand as to what was asked as the question was obviously a follow up about a specific person. it's also a very old video in regards to this case or scenario as this is what he looked like yesterday/today https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1.7171062 Edited April 12 by Warhippy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) Liberals release plan to 'solve the housing crisis,' branding it as a call to action https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/liberals-release-plan-to-solve-the-housing-crisis-branding-it-as-a-call-to-action-1.6844545 While much of the plan was announced during the government's pre-budget tour or even prior to that, several new measures are laid out in the document, including expanded tax incentives for homebuilding. The federal government intends to increase the capital cost allowance rate for apartments from four to 10 per cent, which will increase how much builders can write off from their taxes. It's also extending the GST exemption on rentals to student residences built by public universities, colleges and school authorities. The plan also earmarks more money to tackle homelessness as communities across the country struggle with encampments and limited shelter spaces. The Liberal government is topping up the Reaching Homes program, a federal homelessness initiative, with an additional $1 billion over four years. Another $250 million is allocated to help communities end encampments and transition people into housing. The federal government is asking provinces and territories to match that amount. The Liberals are also pledging a “historic shift” in how the government uses public lands to build housing, which will involve making more land available for home construction and leasing land as opposed to selling it off. And they want to restrict large corporate investors from purchasing existing single-family homes. Other planks of the plan include training more skilled trades workers, easing foreign credential recognition and boosting productivity in the construction industry, measures that would presumably speed up the process of homebuilding. The implementation of the Liberals' housing plan will be in part contingent on co-operation from provinces and territories, some of which have already pushed back on the federal government over what they argue is jurisdictional overreach. Quebec, Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick were unhappy with Ottawa's decision to make access to new infrastructure money contingent on a set of conditions, including legalizing fourplexes. But Fraser pushed back on those critiques, arguing that Canadians just want their problems solved. Edited April 12 by The Arrogant Worms 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris12345 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, RupertKBD said: I'm in a similar situation.... I have a work pension now, but I've only been in BCGEU for 8 years. I have to work until I'm 71 (63 now) if I want to retire with a decent pension. Since I work in IT, I can probably do it. (That's the plan right now, anyway) The wife works in the same place, but she's been here much longer, so she should be able to retire at 65. (In 6 years) All of that being said, we'll probably end up selling our current home (which is much bigger than we need) and buy a smaller fixer-upper. Hopefully, that will cover the Mortgages and allow us to live on the pensions.... IT changes so much it is a field that can keep people engaged for a long time. I don't like the grind of work I'm debating whether or not to retire early and supplement income with part time work in a different field. Sometimes I feel like a change is just different problems with less money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 56 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: we are all responsible for our own paths, that is certain. As for who i want to run my pension plan: Alberta's right wing governance moved most of the provincially controlled pension funds into Fossil Fuels. WHy would I want the right to run my pension plan? There will be a reckoning with the pensioners at some point in the next few years as that money.... About 10.years ago I attended a forum for the MPP. The question came up around the plan divesting from oil and was this a green initiative. The panel kinda shocked most attending with their firm NO response. It wasn't the plans trustees but their investor group responding Pension plans have a mix of short term and long term investments with most being long term. For plan stability they map out expected returns over 25 to 50 years. For oil they said the short term still looks profitable but for long term investments anything to do with Oil and western North american agriculture and infrastructure investing is a risk for long term investments due to climate issues and a draw down dependency on oil sands oil ( 10 years ago investors said the long term gains would be in the Bakken play and not tar sands ) Government controled investment in pensions is a recipie for disaster. That's what makes BC's MPP one of the world's best and strongest. Investments are not controled by any form.of government and its fully funded so safe and untouchable by government 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 26 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Liberals release plan to 'solve the housing crisis,' branding it as a call to action https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/liberals-release-plan-to-solve-the-housing-crisis-branding-it-as-a-call-to-action-1.6844545 While much of the plan was announced during the government's pre-budget tour or even prior to that, several new measures are laid out in the document, including expanded tax incentives for homebuilding. The federal government intends to increase the capital cost allowance rate for apartments from four to 10 per cent, which will increase how much builders can write off from their taxes. It's also extending the GST exemption on rentals to student residences built by public universities, colleges and school authorities. The plan also earmarks more money to tackle homelessness as communities across the country struggle with encampments and limited shelter spaces. The Liberal government is topping up the Reaching Homes program, a federal homelessness initiative, with an additional $1 billion over four years. Another $250 million is allocated to help communities end encampments and transition people into housing. The federal government is asking provinces and territories to match that amount. The Liberals are also pledging a “historic shift” in how the government uses public lands to build housing, which will involve making more land available for home construction and leasing land as opposed to selling it off. And they want to restrict large corporate investors from purchasing existing single-family homes. Other planks of the plan include training more skilled trades workers, easing foreign credential recognition and boosting productivity in the construction industry, measures that would presumably speed up the process of homebuilding. The implementation of the Liberals' housing plan will be in part contingent on co-operation from provinces and territories, some of which have already pushed back on the federal government over what they argue is jurisdictional overreach. Quebec, Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick were unhappy with Ottawa's decision to make access to new infrastructure money contingent on a set of conditions, including legalizing fourplexes. But Fraser pushed back on those critiques, arguing that Canadians just want their problems solved. some of this is encouraging, but they need to slow down immigration as well if they're trying to alleviate the housing crisis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 22 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Liberals release plan to 'solve the housing crisis,' branding it as a call to act The Liberals are also pledging a “historic shift” in how the government uses public lands to build housing, which will involve making more land available for home construction and leasing land as opposed to selling it off. OK this one ^ makes me so happy. Leasehold properties are Gen Z's way into the market. No its not ideal, but its actual equity in an actual home, that many should be able to afford. I referred to the homes around Granville Island above, which is a perfect example of how this can be done successfully. Its the only idea big enough to create the 10's of thousands of units needed in a timely way. Love the CCA idea as well, that should spur more construction. 22 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: But Fraser pushed back on those critiques, arguing that Canadians just want their problems solved. its no time for nimby craperolla 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 2 minutes ago, 112 said: some of this is encouraging, but they need to slow down immigration as well if they're trying to alleviate the housing crisis its a tough one, we can't continue to raise our GDP without it, but can't afford to overdo it either. Not sure there is a perfect number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 I don't think it needs to be slowed down . I think we need to do more work matching arriving new immigrants with jobs and available housing We still have the need and our economy depends on it. The problem is adding too many new people in certain locations that have no vacant housing Yet in many smaller cities across Canada there is still more affordable housing and employers with under staffed businesses Someone in the federal.goverment needs to play match maker You can't force someone to live forever in a specific place but maybe the first 2 years .... Let's them get settled in a place that housing is available and fills an employment need for the employer and then..... Alot will move on but many will also probably stay once they have put roots down 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.