Quote:
Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois
The house price shouldn't matter.
They took (I think) the overall revenues/households. Not caring how those revenues were derived was kinda the point. I have seen similar graphs in the past.
|
And I wasn't talking about house prices. In the last thread I compared a $450K house in Acadia, Calgary to a $220K house in Westwood, Winnipeg. Both were 1000 sq ft 30 year old bungalows.
What I was trying to say is that even with house prices being equal in both cities, Calgary has a lot more of the bigger houses; bringing the average up. If you or I moved to Winnipeg (shudder), we would likely buy a similar house to what we have now. We wouldn't be buying a mansion, and we wouldn't be buying a place beside the $5 hookers either.
Do I think we should keep spending under control? Yes. But I also see so many places where the city has cut corners that we should spend the money on upgrading while we can. Classic example again is the GE5 interchange; paid in full with "boom time" money. Get us caught up so if we end up in a ressecion, we have can afford (from an infastructure standpoint) to cut back on spending.