Ricky Ravioli Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 4 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said: Idk Rick, were you the one who said he didn't know who he was? Your opinions are invalid if you don't have the facts to back them up. How tf are you going to lecture us on there not being any similarity between the Canadian and US right if you don't have any clue of what's happening down south? I'm still calling bullshit. He's been all over the news for 9 fucking years and we are constantly inundated with US media and politics up here. It only makes sense that you wouldn't have "heard" of him because somehow you think it strengthens your argument to feign ignorance. Narrator: "it doesn't". Unless of course you've been living under a roger. What are you even talking about? I never even brought that dude up or spoke about him so what the hell facts are invalid? Also never said that? Have you even been following the conversation? I was told I was using "us talking points" and when asked to provide which talking points those were they couldn't. Then got into another conversation about what could even be considered "us talking points" What I did say is there is obviously going to be an overlap in the beliefs between American and Canadian conservatives. I never once lectured anyone about anything. Get your facts straight before making accusations like that. You just sound ignorant. I don't spend every waking hour reading political news like clearly some people in this thread do. I don't consider myself any sort of political expert. You making assumptions about people you don't even know on the internet says alot more about you than it does me. Like I guarantee I say that name to anybody I see on a daily basis, nobody gonna know who the fuck that dude is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? “Housing needs to retain its value,” Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast last week. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.” However, some experts argue that may not be easy to do. “His comments are extremely problematic,” John Pasalis, Realtor and broker at Realosophy Realty told Global News on Wednesday. He added, “Very clearly, the government’s position is that it (housing) is an investment that needs to be protected. This is obviously the top priority in Canada. You can’t really have affordability when housing is viewed as an asset. Not only is it an asset for growing wealth, but an asset where that growth needs to be protected actively by the government.” He added that Trudeau’s comments will likely rub younger Canadians the wrong way. “The younger generation has been feeling that the system’s a little bit rigged against them. He confirmed it is, when you have them arguing that they’re going to try to keep home prices elevated.” https://globalnews.ca/news/10531736/trudeau-housing-prices-affordability/ I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 1 minute ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? “Housing needs to retain its value,” Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast last week. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.” However, some experts argue that may not be easy to do. “His comments are extremely problematic,” John Pasalis, Realtor and broker at Realosophy Realty told Global News on Wednesday. He added, “Very clearly, the government’s position is that it (housing) is an investment that needs to be protected. This is obviously the top priority in Canada. You can’t really have affordability when housing is viewed as an asset. Not only is it an asset for growing wealth, but an asset where that growth needs to be protected actively by the government.” He added that Trudeau’s comments will likely rub younger Canadians the wrong way. “The younger generation has been feeling that the system’s a little bit rigged against them. He confirmed it is, when you have them arguing that they’re going to try to keep home prices elevated.” https://globalnews.ca/news/10531736/trudeau-housing-prices-affordability/ I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit For families forever it was considered an investment. That's inarguable. The fact the government has allowed corporations and REIT stocks to use them as a line item for profit margins is the major issue. What's the bigger issue is how Pierre and Trudeau are trying to convince people they can in fact solve the housing crisis. It's not in their power to do so without direct government intervention and major changes to legislation and law at the provincial and federal levels 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? “Housing needs to retain its value,” Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast last week. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.” However, some experts argue that may not be easy to do. “His comments are extremely problematic,” John Pasalis, Realtor and broker at Realosophy Realty told Global News on Wednesday. He added, “Very clearly, the government’s position is that it (housing) is an investment that needs to be protected. This is obviously the top priority in Canada. You can’t really have affordability when housing is viewed as an asset. Not only is it an asset for growing wealth, but an asset where that growth needs to be protected actively by the government.” He added that Trudeau’s comments will likely rub younger Canadians the wrong way. “The younger generation has been feeling that the system’s a little bit rigged against them. He confirmed it is, when you have them arguing that they’re going to try to keep home prices elevated.” https://globalnews.ca/news/10531736/trudeau-housing-prices-affordability/ I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit What's the Con stance on tanking the real estate market back to ~20 years ago prices? FWIW there's no serious politician, of ANY party who's going to suggest tanking real estate as a political strategy. He's right, we have too much of our economy, too much of people's retirement savings, too many jobs etc, etc, etc tied to housing to tank it. The best we can do is to build as much housing and housing options as possible, while trying to push people's wages and Canadian productivity up. SLOWLY start to reduce the inflation of housing prices over time by increasing supply/reducing demand. That said, particularly in major cities and desirable parts of Canada, housing, particularly of the "white picket fence" variety, is never going to be "affordable". And if it is, you won't be able to afford it anyway as you'll be in a bread line. Edited May 30 by aGENT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4petesake Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 19 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit So PP can go fuck himself too? $10.3M invested in 4 homes according to Hippy’s post on page 454. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 (edited) Gave this old 'where are you politically' questioner a try https://votecompass.cbc.ca/canada/results had to remember how I felt about a few things, at the time this was created, and not use hindsight. However it's rough idea. Liberal Party (LPC) 59% Green Party (GPC) 59% New Democratic Party (NDP) 58% Conservative Party (CPC) 41% People's Party (PPC) 30% ^ That's me on the 'social line' Edited May 30 by Gurn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 22 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? “Housing needs to retain its value,” Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast last week. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.” However, some experts argue that may not be easy to do. “His comments are extremely problematic,” John Pasalis, Realtor and broker at Realosophy Realty told Global News on Wednesday. He added, “Very clearly, the government’s position is that it (housing) is an investment that needs to be protected. This is obviously the top priority in Canada. You can’t really have affordability when housing is viewed as an asset. Not only is it an asset for growing wealth, but an asset where that growth needs to be protected actively by the government.” He added that Trudeau’s comments will likely rub younger Canadians the wrong way. “The younger generation has been feeling that the system’s a little bit rigged against them. He confirmed it is, when you have them arguing that they’re going to try to keep home prices elevated.” https://globalnews.ca/news/10531736/trudeau-housing-prices-affordability/ I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit 19 minutes ago, Warhippy said: For families forever it was considered an investment. That's inarguable. The fact the government has allowed corporations and REIT stocks to use them as a line item for profit margins is the major issue. What's the bigger issue is how Pierre and Trudeau are trying to convince people they can in fact solve the housing crisis. It's not in their power to do so without direct government intervention and major changes to legislation and law at the provincial and federal levels The single best thing the feds can do is open up more leasehold land opportunities. It's costs government nothing and doesn't erode equity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Bob Long said: The single best thing the feds can do is open up more leasehold land opportunities. It's costs government nothing and doesn't erode equity. I'd argue the single best thing they can do is restrict home ownership to private citizens not companies and corporations. Restrict strata councils who refuse to allow rentals and rule with iron fists and restrict REIT stocks towards commercial and industrial holdings only while also limiting the amount of homes a private citizen can in fact own or hold That alone would free up tens if not hundreds of thousands of units over night Edited May 30 by Warhippy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 1 hour ago, Gurn said: Gave this old 'where are you politically' questioner a try https://votecompass.cbc.ca/canada/results had to remember how I felt about a few things, at the time this was created, and not use hindsight. However it's rough idea. Liberal Party (LPC) 59% Green Party (GPC) 59% New Democratic Party (NDP) 58% Conservative Party (CPC) 41% People's Party (PPC) 30% ^ That's me on the 'social line' About right where I thought I'd be 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 23 minutes ago, Warhippy said: About right where I thought I'd be I'm about the same really. Smack in the middle. No party even close to my ideals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 59 minutes ago, Warhippy said: I'd argue the single best thing they can do is restrict home ownership to private citizens not companies and corporations. Restrict strata councils who refuse to allow rentals and rule with iron fists and restrict REIT stocks towards commercial and industrial holdings only while also limiting the amount of homes a private citizen can in fact own or hold That alone would free up tens if not hundreds of thousands of units over night But you would have to seize property, no? I agree going forward it's a good idea, but not much you can do about current ownership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 So seniors who use the built up equity in their homes to help fund their retirement should just f themselves. No selling their home so they can buy a condo and have some cash left over. Lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 Cabinet minister in camouflage with gun nearly caused security alert at legislature REGINA — A leaked letter says Saskatchewan Trade Minister Jeremy Harrison nearly triggered a security incident when he walked into the legislature in camouflage gear toting a long gun in a case. https://www.timescolonist.com/national-news/cabinet-minister-in-camouflage-with-gun-nearly-caused-security-alert-at-legislature-8896267 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 2 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Cabinet minister in camouflage with gun nearly caused security alert at legislature REGINA — A leaked letter says Saskatchewan Trade Minister Jeremy Harrison nearly triggered a security incident when he walked into the legislature in camouflage gear toting a long gun in a case. https://www.timescolonist.com/national-news/cabinet-minister-in-camouflage-with-gun-nearly-caused-security-alert-at-legislature-8896267 Have much of a moran does a person have to be to do this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 3 hours ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Trudeau wants to maintain home prices while pushing affordability. Is it possible? “Housing needs to retain its value,” Trudeau told The Globe and Mail’s City Space podcast last week. “It’s a huge part of people’s potential for retirement and future nest egg.” However, some experts argue that may not be easy to do. “His comments are extremely problematic,” John Pasalis, Realtor and broker at Realosophy Realty told Global News on Wednesday. He added, “Very clearly, the government’s position is that it (housing) is an investment that needs to be protected. This is obviously the top priority in Canada. You can’t really have affordability when housing is viewed as an asset. Not only is it an asset for growing wealth, but an asset where that growth needs to be protected actively by the government.” He added that Trudeau’s comments will likely rub younger Canadians the wrong way. “The younger generation has been feeling that the system’s a little bit rigged against them. He confirmed it is, when you have them arguing that they’re going to try to keep home prices elevated.” https://globalnews.ca/news/10531736/trudeau-housing-prices-affordability/ I'm very curious to hear peoples opinions on this. Housing should NOT be an investment. He can go fuck himself with that bullshit Housing certainly is an investment. If it wasn't, then what's the point of purchasing? Might as well just have everyone lease their properties through the government. For most people, their principal residence is their single biggest investment of their lives, if you take that away alot of people would have nothing for their retirement. The problem with Trudeau's statement is that he is basically telling the young people that that they are fucked and they won't be able to afford a home ever. So this probably won't sit well with the gen Z generation. He was already losing their votes to begin with, so this statement will only make things worse for him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: I'd argue the single best thing they can do is restrict home ownership to private citizens not companies and corporations. Restrict strata councils who refuse to allow rentals and rule with iron fists and restrict REIT stocks towards commercial and industrial holdings only while also limiting the amount of homes a private citizen can in fact own or hold That alone would free up tens if not hundreds of thousands of units over night Strata Councils do not have any authority over rentals, it is the owners who vote as a collective in order to enact bylaws. Strata Councils are normally no more than 7 people. Also, there are no longer any rental restrictions allowed other than 55+. This was changed starting January 1, 2024. In terms of REITs, most of them are comprised of commercial and retail properties, not residential. And the residential properties are mostly apartment buildings, not individual units that can be purchased by buyers... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 1 hour ago, the destroyer of worlds said: So seniors who use the built up equity in their homes to help fund their retirement should just f themselves. No selling their home so they can buy a condo and have some cash left over. Lol I think it's actually incredible that I have to point out that I don't consider a family of 4 or a senior couple trying to fund retirement part of the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 3 hours ago, Warhippy said: For families forever it was considered an investment. That's inarguable. The fact the government has allowed corporations and REIT stocks to use them as a line item for profit margins is the major issue. What's the bigger issue is how Pierre and Trudeau are trying to convince people they can in fact solve the housing crisis. It's not in their power to do so without direct government intervention and major changes to legislation and law at the provincial and federal levels A family trying to put a roof over their head is not my issue. Everything else I pretty well agree with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/conservative-leader-pierre-poilievre-s-housing-plan-defeated-in-house-of-commons/ar-BB1nhKVn?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=761a346877314860b27d32eee8434518&ei=51 " OTTAWA — Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's housing bill has been defeated in the House of Commons with the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois voting against the legislation. Poilievre introduced the bill in September and touted it as the Conservative plan to tackle the country's housing crisis. Poilievre's focus on housing affordability has helped grow his party's support in public opinion polls, earning the Conservatives a sizeable lead over the Liberals. The bill's central proposal was to require cities to increase home building by 15 per cent each year to receive their usual infrastructure spending. Cities that failed to meet that target would have sees a decrease in the federal dollars they received, while those that exceeded it would have gotten additional money. The bill was defeated 203 to 117 in a second-reading vote. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 29, 2024. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/human-smugglers-bc-freight-trains-move-people-across-border-us-says What a sad state Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 6 hours ago, Warhippy said: For families forever it was considered an investment. That's inarguable. The fact the government has allowed corporations and REIT stocks to use them as a line item for profit margins is the major issue. What's the bigger issue is how Pierre and Trudeau are trying to convince people they can in fact solve the housing crisis. It's not in their power to do so without direct government intervention and major changes to legislation and law at the provincial and federal levels Honestly, I think you're right. There's a whole lot that politicians can't (or more accurately won't) do. Celebrities are producing far more carbon from their private planes than many of us combined (!). Maybe this isn't the best source, but it's still good enough to start a discussion of some kind. https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/celebrities-highest-private-jet-emissions And I know you were talking about housing here, but it's the same thing; there are things that politicians WON'T do to fix it. PP won't be the saviour either, so it's foolish for anyone to think that PP will save the day. He's just running because he wants his paycheque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 1 hour ago, Gurn said: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/conservative-leader-pierre-poilievre-s-housing-plan-defeated-in-house-of-commons/ar-BB1nhKVn?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=761a346877314860b27d32eee8434518&ei=51 " OTTAWA — Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's housing bill has been defeated in the House of Commons with the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois voting against the legislation. Poilievre introduced the bill in September and touted it as the Conservative plan to tackle the country's housing crisis. Poilievre's focus on housing affordability has helped grow his party's support in public opinion polls, earning the Conservatives a sizeable lead over the Liberals. The bill's central proposal was to require cities to increase home building by 15 per cent each year to receive their usual infrastructure spending. Cities that failed to meet that target would have sees a decrease in the federal dollars they received, while those that exceeded it would have gotten additional money. The bill was defeated 203 to 117 in a second-reading vote. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 29, 2024. I'm far from a PP supporter, but it's clear that none of the parties are ACTUALLY interested in fixing the housing issue, similar to homelessness and drug problems. Yet this just looks bad from the NDP/Liberals point of view. We SHOULD be encouraging cities to build better infrastructure, including housing. I'd just like to know the reasons for why the bill was defeated besides the voting. It would be nice to hear the rationale behind it, even if it's clouded by propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 (edited) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadians-moving-to-the-us-hits-10-year-high-1.7218479 70% more. Is it because of the higher crime rate, out of control housing costs, higher taxes or something else? Edited May 30 by bolt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 1 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 18 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Poo Poo is total craperolla. His nose grows longer with every word spoken. 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.