Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 3 hours ago, 5forFighting said: I knew you would come back here and do this. 100% exactly who you are. Perfection. People are always entitled to their opinion but you're just spitting pure lies buddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 13 hours ago, Wiggums said: It's a small deal that was made huge by the liberal government. I was pointing out that it will be less of a deal if PP is elected and Canadians can focus on fixing problems that we all face which is what he is trying to do. I'm not complaining about shit There's people in here that think there are racists, bigots and Nazis just wandering around the streets. Gullible people are being brainwashed and it has created divisiveness in which we haven't seen in Canada before. Either that or some people literally don't go outside, don't know anybody and don't do anything. There aren't Nazis and open bigots wandering the streets and burning crosses. Smh Nobody caarreesss The last 3 leaders of the CPC were classified as such on these threads. There has always been politicians of every stripe who played the system to benefit themselves. From whatever side of the aisle I want to believe these people want the best for the country. That does not mean that when their ideas are not working that they are not held to account. It is not PP who has to defend his record has it is not of consequence. Trudeau on the otherhand has had 8 - 9 years of government and is not doing well. The proof is on the streets of the country. Look around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 2 hours ago, Boudrias said: The last 3 leaders of the CPC were classified as such on these threads. There has always been politicians of every stripe who played the system to benefit themselves. From whatever side of the aisle I want to believe these people want the best for the country. That does not mean that when their ideas are not working that they are not held to account. It is not PP who has to defend his record has it is not of consequence. Trudeau on the otherhand has had 8 - 9 years of government and is not doing well. The proof is on the streets of the country. Look around. PP has been in govt for over 20 years, 9 of that in ministry positions. He has a public record of what he's supported. Of course he has a record to defend. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5forFighting Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 12 hours ago, RupertKBD said: If it wasn't a suggestion of things to come in Canada, WTF was the point of posting it in the Canadian Politics thread? There wasnt a Venezuela politics thread and with all the know it alls in here, I thought someone would know. Satchmo did. Do you feel like it's something coming to Canada? Are there any comparables on that list to Canada? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5forFighting Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 9 hours ago, Miss Korea said: People are always entitled to their opinion but you're just spitting pure lies buddy. Which lies? Now remember, you made the statement, you MUST back it up with facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 24 minutes ago, 5forFighting said: There wasnt a Venezuela politics thread and with all the know it alls in here, I thought someone would know. Satchmo did. Do you feel like it's something coming to Canada? Are there any comparables on that list to Canada? No. And if you don't think it is, then there was no reason to post it. Ergo, I believe you were trying to claim it was coming to Canada and then backed off because you realized how dumb such an assertion looks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 31 minutes ago, 5forFighting said: There wasnt a Venezuela politics thread and with all the know it alls in here, I thought someone would know. Satchmo did. Do you feel like it's something coming to Canada? Are there any comparables on that list to Canada? I'm not a know it all. Some things I have to look up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Interesting little tidbit in the most recent polling I just read over coffee: Federal Voting Intentions: QC: 32% Lib, 26% Bloc, 18% Con, 16% NDP, 5% Green, 1.5% PPC ON: 39% Con, 31.5% Lib, 21.5% NDP, 5% Green, 2% PPC Canadians at large Nationally: 39% Con, 27% Lib, 20% NDP, 6.5% Bloc, 4.5% Green, 1.5% PPC among women nationally: 31% Lib, 30% Con, 24.5% NDP, 7% Bloc, 5% Green, 1% PPC among men nationally: 47.5% Con, 23.5% Lib, 16% NDP, 4% Green, 1.5% PPC IMO the race is a lot closer than the blanket poling suggests. It is undeniable that men are incredibly attracted to the Pierre Poilievre message and Conservative Party. Traditionally the womens intentions have been a very large win for the Liberals, and that is at its narrowest gap at this moment with 1% separation. Ontario is only a 7.5% gap or less than a 4 point swing. The next year will certainly be interesting. Of note for me is that with an incredible advantage in money, the Cons haven't really broken it wide open yet, despite all the ads, the new leader bump and liberal fumbles. I don't think a Con victory is secured yet. They will need a clear majority, as even the Bloc Head (hehehe) yesterday was sabre rattling at P.P. Talking about how Stornoway must have a lot of mirrors in every room because Pierre REALLY really likes himself a lot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5forFighting Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 47 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: No. And if you don't think it is, then there was no reason to post it. Ergo, I believe you were trying to claim it was coming to Canada and then backed off because you realized how dumb such an assertion looks. I don't know what's coming to Canada. I was stunned by how quickly a country goes from the #3 of the richest countries to where it is today. I have been to Venezuela a few times, although not recently. There are some similarities on that list, maybe not to the extreme but the move to have free higher education is there, banning of guns (slowly but surely), food and healthcare shortages. To think it couldn't happen in Canada, I would say is dumb. I bet none of the citizens there thought it could happen either, especially those on a Venezuelan Hockey forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 14 hours ago, 5forFighting said: It's interesting that you made that connection because I never said it and no one else inferred it. One thing I would note about those Scandinavian countries, not a lot of diversity, not a lot of population and not a lot of guns on the restricted list. Quote Legal firearms in Finland must be registered and licensed on a per-gun basis. There are approximately 1.5 million registered small firearms in the country. Out of those, 226,000 are short firearms (pistols, revolvers) with the rest being long firearms (rifles, shotguns).[6] There are approximately 650,000 people with at least one permit, which means 12% of Finns own a firearm.[7] Overall, legal gun ownership rate is similar to countries such as Sweden, France, Canada and Germany. Similar to Sweden, Canada, France and Germany.. and Norway restricts automatic weapons heavily and about 10% of the population owns a gun. just an FYI, those Scandinavian Countries have very similar gun laws to Canada and get by just fine with a large rural population where guns are legit tools. Not a lot of inner city FInns would ever consider needing a gun. just sayin. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Also of note: #3 in the hemisphere, that is of all the countries below the equator... I am gonna guess Australia and New Zealand top the list and briefly being number three would mean beating Brazil and South Africa for a moment in time. A numbered rank is kind of meaningless without context. Venezuela, Still not as bad off as Gambia! what a slogan...lol OR if they mean out of the Americas: US, Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela being the top five: they briefly crested Mexico, but I find that one hard to swallow. The odds are that #3 simply isn't true, but who am i to contest the contents of a mimeographed flyer. EDIT: with a quick google and map search It seems Venezuela is north of the Equator, I was not aware of that without looking, lol so they must be talking about the western hemisphere: US, Canada obviously occupying the top two permanently as G7 nations. That means they somehow beat out Brazil's almost 2 trillion economy and Mexico's 1.5 trillion economy in 1992? I find that incredibly hard to believe, but maybe. So lets skip to the GDP statements for 1992..as Howie Mandell would say "lets find out!" United States [+] 1992 $6,520,300M Canada [+] 1992 $594,376M Mexico [+] 1992 $427,661M Brazil [+] 1992 $382,465M Argentina [+] 1992 $255,787M Colombia [+] 1992 $68,579M Venezuela [+] 1992 $60,400M So if by #3, that flyer meant to say the 7th best economy, then you are right. Maybe we can stop arguing over a picture of a flyer that activists hand out in banana republics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 26 minutes ago, 5forFighting said: I don't know what's coming to Canada. I was stunned by how quickly a country goes from the #3 of the richest countries to where it is today. I have been to Venezuela a few times, although not recently. There are some similarities on that list, maybe not to the extreme but the move to have free higher education is there, banning of guns (slowly but surely), food and healthcare shortages. To think it couldn't happen in Canada, I would say is dumb. I bet none of the citizens there thought it could happen either, especially those on a Venezuelan Hockey forum. We'll have to disagree on that. I think the opposite is the case.... As I pointed out already, several countries in western Europe are doing just fine, despite being much further left than Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) 50 minutes ago, 5forFighting said: I don't know what's coming to Canada. I was stunned by how quickly a country goes from the #3 of the richest countries to where it is today. I have been to Venezuela a few times, although not recently. There are some similarities on that list, maybe not to the extreme but the move to have free higher education is there, banning of guns (slowly but surely), food and healthcare shortages. To think it couldn't happen in Canada, I would say is dumb. I bet none of the citizens there thought it could happen either, especially those on a Venezuelan Hockey forum. 1st of all, you're given a picture of a piece of paper that's obviously worded in a way to created emotion. If I were you, I'd at least try and look for more context in all of this. For example, Venezuela is largely driven by oil. It's why it became rich. Then the government started to tax that oil and not by an insignificant amount. This is a government that would have had corruption even before all of this began and one could only imagine what that tax on oil would have done to that corruption (ie. it would increase due to greed). You also have to keep in mind Venezuela does not have the checks in place that we have in order to prevent corruption. There are literally anti-corruption agencies in Canada that Venezuela never had. If you would like to see a more detailed explanation, the government itself has a website: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2023-r010/index-en.aspx So you have to weigh the likelihood of this happening in Canada. If you look at the details, I'm pretty sure that even you would come to the conclusion that the likelihood of it happening is far less than the likelihood of it not happening. If you're really that paranoid though and think this could happen, you probably won't like the solution to it either. The solution would be to prevent Alberta oil from being the sole form of income towards the government. That's where Venezuela was in the 90's. That being said, that's unlikely to happen anyway since we have a more diverse economy than that. Edited January 30 by The Lock 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 For comparison between the 1992 numbers for the western Hemisphere and the latest data: United States [+] 2023 $27,356,400M Canada [+] 2022 $2,137,940M Brazil [+] 2022 $1,920,020M Mexico [+] 2022 $1,465,850M Colombia [+] 2022 $343,622M Chile [+] 2022 $300,729M Peru [+] 2022 $244,594M Ecuador [+] 2022 $115,049M Dominican Republic [+] 2022 $113,873M Cuba [+] 2020 $107,352M Venezuela [+] 2018 $102,021M Guatemala [+] 2022 $95,004M So They fell from 7th to 11th from 1992 to the latest collated data in 2018. I can sum that up in sentence fragment: don't have a civil war/dictator seize control or your economy will suffer. THey were never number 3 in any hemisphere so I think we can dismiss that photocopy flyer as pure drivel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 46 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: Interesting little tidbit in the most recent polling I just read over coffee: Federal Voting Intentions: QC: 32% Lib, 26% Bloc, 18% Con, 16% NDP, 5% Green, 1.5% PPC ON: 39% Con, 31.5% Lib, 21.5% NDP, 5% Green, 2% PPC Canadians at large Nationally: 39% Con, 27% Lib, 20% NDP, 6.5% Bloc, 4.5% Green, 1.5% PPC among women nationally: 31% Lib, 30% Con, 24.5% NDP, 7% Bloc, 5% Green, 1% PPC among men nationally: 47.5% Con, 23.5% Lib, 16% NDP, 4% Green, 1.5% PPC IMO the race is a lot closer than the blanket poling suggests. It is undeniable that men are incredibly attracted to the Pierre Poilievre message and Conservative Party. Traditionally the womens intentions have been a very large win for the Liberals, and that is at its narrowest gap at this moment with 1% separation. Ontario is only a 7.5% gap or less than a 4 point swing. The next year will certainly be interesting. Of note for me is that with an incredible advantage in money, the Cons haven't really broken it wide open yet, despite all the ads, the new leader bump and liberal fumbles. I don't think a Con victory is secured yet. They will need a clear majority, as even the Bloc Head (hehehe) yesterday was sabre rattling at P.P. Talking about how Stornoway must have a lot of mirrors in every room because Pierre REALLY really likes himself a lot. Some men like Poilievre. I find that his message plays on some men's insecurity, which is where the Jordan Peterson crowd an PP align. But I guess that makes me a soy boy or something. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Canada [+] 1992 $594,376M Canada [+] 2022 $2,137,940M This jumped out at me too, on a side note about Canadian Politics: from 92 till 22 we had a year of CON governance, then 13 years of LIB government, 9 years of Harper Government, lol, and then 8 more years of Liberal governance. 20+ years Liberal PM and 10ish years of CON PM, two to one Liberal Leadership in Canada: and our economy has FLOURISHED. from just over half a trillion in 1992 to over 2 trillion in 2022. That is cold hard facts. I am voting Liberal in the next Federal Election for many reasons, but now this is one of them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 2 hours ago, 5forFighting said: Which lies? Now remember, you made the statement, you MUST back it up with facts. Who is in charge of health care and education in this country? A child can answer this question, but you can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5forFighting Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Just now, Miss Korea said: Who is in charge of health care and education in this country? A child can answer this question, but you can't. Strawman. Point to my lies. You said I lie, back it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Just now, 5forFighting said: Strawman. Point to my lies. You said I lie, back it up. You blamed Trudeau for health care. You blamed him for education. And now I see you've blamed him multiple times for groceries. Do you deny any of these things? You are nothing more than a liar. Plain and simple. Just straight up lies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 @5forFighting this guy can't even google basic shit like this and needs someone to do it for him like a baby 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 7 minutes ago, Miss Korea said: @5forFighting this guy can't even google basic shit like this and needs someone to do it for him like a baby This is why Poilievre plays the anger game. Facts no longer matter if you can whip up the hoopleheads. But the real benefit to Poilievre is if he wins, he hasn't promised anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Popular Post Share Posted January 30 Now i got Curious about the Harper years, our most recent experiment with a right wing government. Note that under Liberal governance preHarper we were 9th and 8th best in the worlds economies. Under Harper we were flipping between 11th and 10th best and now under Trudeau we are levelled out at 10th and recently moved up to 9th best for three years running, most notably under the covid years. Wild stuff. But to hear the opposition supporters: Cons are better with money? How? 9th best economy in the world 2004 Canada [+] 2004 $1,026,470M 8th best economy in the world 2005! Canada [+] 2005 $1,173,510M 8th best economy in the world 2006 (HARPER ELECTED FEB 2006) Canada [+] 2006 $1,319,360M 9th best economy in the world 2007 Canada [+] 2007 $1,468,900M 11th best economy in the world 2008 Canada [+] 2008 $1,552,860M 10th best economy in the world 2009 Canada [+] 2009 $1,376,510M 11th best economy for the next two years Canada [+] 2010 $1,617,350M Canada [+] 2011 $1,793,330M 10th best economy in the world 2012 Canada [+] 2012 $1,828,360M these two harper years we were 11th best economy in the world Canada [+] 2013 $1,846,600M Canada [+] 2014 $1,805,750M from here down 10th best economy in the world, (TRUDEAU ELECTED NOV 2015) Canada [+] 2015 $1,556,510M Canada [+] 2016 $1,528,000M Canada [+] 2017 $1,649,270M Canada [+] 2018 $1,725,300M Canada [+] 2019 $1,743,730M from here down: 9th best ecomony in the world Liberals still in charge. Canada [+] 2020 $1,647,600M Canada [+] 2021 $2,001,490M Canada [+] 2022 $2,137,940M 1 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6of1_halfdozenofother Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 18 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: But to hear the opposition supporters: Cons are better with money? How? Not just that, don't forget how "good" they are at foreign affairs and deal making. Quote Canada-China investment treaty to come into force Oct. 1 Conservatives ratify foreign investment treaty more than 2 years after signing deal Susan Lunn · CBC News · Posted: Sep 12, 2014 1:57 AM PDT | Last Updated: September 12, 2014 Prime Minister Stephen Harper, seen speaking to a business group in Beijing in 2012, will be back in China in November. (Canadian Press) Ottawa confirms it has ratified a foreign investment treaty with China, more than two years after the controversial agreement was signed, as CBC News first reported Friday. The controversial Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) will come into force on Oct. 1, said International Trade Minister Ed Fast in a news release Friday afternoon. “Investment agreements provide the protection and the confidence Canadian investors need to expand, grow and succeed abroad. "We remain committed to opening new markets around the world for Canadian companies, including in the fast-growing Asia-Pacific region. This FIPA will create jobs and economic opportunities for Canadians in every region of the country," said Fast. The agreement with China, signed in 2012, provides a framework of legal obligations and rights that would enhance foreign investment. During a February 2012 visit to China, Harper said he "absolutely" expected that it will make a "practical difference." China ratified the deal quickly, but the Harper government did not. The deal has also faced opposition from the NDP, as well as a First Nations group who challenged the agreement in court. The NDP issued a statement saying "the agreement will give China’s state-controlled companies the same protection under the law as private Canadian companies. "In effect, it will give China access to, and control over, some of Canada’s natural resources for the next 31 years." NDP trade critic Don Davies put forward a motion in the House of Commons in April 22, 2013, calling on the government not to ratify the agreement. The motion was defeated. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May in a statement on Wednesday said the FIPA with China was a "sell out." Deputy Green Party Leader Bruce Hyer added cabinet is, "signing of this deal behind closed doors, instead of giving Parliament a say, is not just undemocratic in itself … it is also a profound attack of Canada's sovereignty as a nation, and an erosion of the rights of all Canadians to make democratic decisions about our economy, environment, and energy." Canada's trade relationship has cooled given the Harper government's delay in ratifying the deal and rules restricting state-owned enterprises from buying up companies in the oil patch. There was also a growing divide around the cabinet table, between those suspicious of allegations of China's cyberspying, and those who want to increase trade with the Asian country. The decision to ratify the long-delayed agreement comes just a few months before the prime minister leaves for his third visit to China. The prime minister will be back in Beijing in November for the APEC summit. China has been urging Canada to ratify FIPA, and this would likely have been a contentious issue during that trip if the Harper government still had not acted. Canada has similar agreements with dozens of other countries. It clarifies rules for companies investing in either country. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-china-investment-treaty-to-come-into-force-oct-1-1.2764075 Quote 5 things to know about the Canada-China investment treaty CBC News · Posted: Oct 27, 2012 5:47 PM PDT | Last Updated: October 27, 2012 Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks with Chinese President Hu Jintao at the APEC Summit in Vladivostok, Russia, on Sunday, September 9, 2012. ((Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)) The federal government has come under heavy scrutiny from opposition parties and critics alike after Prime Minister Stephen Harper signed an investment treaty with China, formally known as a Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA), while at the APEC Summit in Vladivostok, Russia, on Sept.9, 2012. While details of the agreement were kept secret until the deal was tabled in Parliament on Sept. 26., now that the details have been revealed, the deal itself does not have to be debated in Parliament. That's because treaty making is a royal prerogative and can become law through a cabinet order in council after sitting in Parliament for no less than 21 days after being tabled. Currently, Canada has 24 FIPAs in force with countries like Russia, Argentina and the Czech Republic. FIPA negotiations have been concluded with eight countries, including China, while ongoing negotiations continue with another 12 countries. A FIPA is not a free trade agreement but rather a bilateral agreement intended to "protect and promote" foreign investment through legally-binding rights and obligations. Here are five things to know about Canada's investment treaty with China which is expected to be ratified next week: Growing investment from China This FIPA is different from other FIPAs due to the sheer amount of investment China already has in Canada, said Gus Van Harten, an international investment law expert and associate professor at the Osgoode Hall Law School at York University, in an interview with CBC Radio's The House. Van Harten explained, the FIPAs Canada has in force are typically with countries who don't own major assets in Canada. However, under this treaty, Van Harten said Canadian taxpayers will assume "more of the risks and more of the constraints" than their Chinese counterparts to the degree that Chinese investments in Canada outpace Canadian investments the other way. Reciprocity According to Van Harten, the deal doesn't deliver on market access and investor protection. "We come out on the losing side on both," said Van Harten. "We should insist on reciprocity. The treaty does not allow for market access except under the exisiting legal framework of each country." The problem with that, Van Harten said, is Canada's legal framework is "more open and less opaque" than China's existing legal framework which will benefit China more than it will benefit Canada. Impact on the provinces Under this treaty, the investor-state mechanism is such that China could sue for decisions made by any level of government in Canada, if Chinese companies thought they were not being treated the same as Canadian ones. In other words, this deal could undermine the provinces "bargaining power," said Van Harten because "this very powerful arbitration process operates outside of the Canadian legal system and Canadian courts." Arbitration would happen behind closed doors, said Van Harten and if the arbitrators found Canada at fault, Canadian taxpayers could be left footing the bill. Several countries have already faced stiff punishment under such treaties. This, according to Van Harten, also calls into question whether the treaty is unconstitutional or not. Opposition parties The Opposition New Democrats, Liberals and Greens are all calling on the federal government to study and debate the agreement instead of ratifying it and locking it in for the next 31 years without public consultation – as they can do. In an interview with CBC Radio's The House on Saturday, NDP MP Don Davies, who serves as the international trade critic, told host Evan Solomon that if the federal government ratifies the agreement as it is now, it will have "frozen in time a very lopsided deal." Davies said they have "received 60,000 emails in the last two weeks from Canadians who are concerned about this deal." Ottawa The federal government insists "this agreement includes reciprocal obligations" and is good for Canada, said the Conservative MP who tabled the FIPA with China. Also in an interview airing on CBC Radio's The House, Deepak Obhrai, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, said this FIPA with China "levels the playing field" between the two countries. Obhrai told Solomon, this agreement "give assurances to Canadian businesses that their investment in China is protected and they can do business in China because this is a deal that is open and treats our companies in each other's country on equal terms." The question we should all be asking ourselves Van Harten said, is "has Canada conceded something now that we were not prepared to concede under previous governments?" And according to Van Harten, the answer is "it's quite possible." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/5-things-to-know-about-the-canada-china-investment-treaty-1.1183343 As long as it gets Canadian oil to tidewater, who cares if we become a financial serf to the prc, amirite? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Hey guys, guys. Remember when it was Trudeau's fault housing prices were so high and wages sucked? Ya so about that.....specifically key in to how fast income grew from 2015 on and what happened between say 2005-2014 regarding housing prices/income 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 9 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Hey guys, guys. Remember when it was Trudeau's fault housing prices were so high and wages sucked? Ya so about that.....specifically key in to how fast income grew from 2015 on and what happened between say 2005-2014 regarding housing prices/income Nice time chart! I think I just got lucky, but we had a Strata Land, but stand alone house in Sooke, a 'bedroom community' of Victoria when Covid hit. We have wanted for a long time to return home to Cowichan Station area where I lived in my high school years, and near family and friends et cetera. Covid had an incredible number of city folks trying desperately to spread out and 'socially distance' into the more rural areas. Our home on strata land pretty much doubled in value from Jan 2020 till we sold it in August 2022. We literally got more than double what we paid for it in 2010, and the vast majority of that value was upped during the covid rush to leave the cities. Our buyers were from inner city Victoria for instance. We had been looking up and down the island for over two years when the new property, an acre in Cowichan Station 2 blocks from where we were married with three beds and a bathroom and a barn and green house were about 75k more than what we sold our strata 3bedroom place for. We ditched 500 a month in strata fees, no more gas bill, and no more city water bill and only added 75k to our mortgage. I prepaid 70k of that down already in about 18 months at the new place. We have already put in over 50 k in renovations and the place we got for 750ish is now a market value of over 900k with the new windows, perimeter drain, heat pump and hot water on demand, full Paige wire fencing with thick pressure treated posts and an 8 foot gate to keep our corgi's safe while they enjoy their acre of land to romp on. Our total monthly billing for housing is DOWN vs the strata place. just my little anecdote to show that a simple middle class couple can find ways to do well in the housing market. Home Owners are generally thrilled with their housing values, it is first time home buyers who are suffering, and yet houses are selling every month all around us, so someone is buying them and the Liberal Government of Canada has stopped foreign buyers from snatching them up for a 'pause' in foreign home buyers, which will help our citizens looking to make that first home purchase. I am thrilled with how we made out and I have two nephews who either bought or built their own homes in the last two years as well as first time home buyers. I know I am fortunate, but I am curious, of those angry about home prices now: were they going to buy a house from 2020 to 2023 before Covid happened or were they going to be renters for the long term anyway but now have a vehicle to mad about it with the constant criticisms about house prices? I am not sure really. My immediate circle has not been affected with two of my sisters kids becoming first time home owners during the 'high price' period and with me making out like a bandit leaving strata for my own acre...it seems okay from where I am sitting. I suspect those with a less rosy view likely wouldn't have been buying a house from 2020 till now anyhow, even if prices were stagnant all these covid years. I just don't know. 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.