*Updated* Ongoing Bank of Canada Benchmark Rate Announcements

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by nik-

Not when you're adding another 500k a year. There's always more meat for the grinder.

I think the reality is that Canadians look down their nose at these jobs and level of pay and then deem employment in these jobs and having foreigners fill them as morally repugnant whereas if it was actually that morally repugnant these people would not come here and fill these jobs.

Your view is the kind of view that is in a sense detached from how bad it is in developing places. So we are already vastly improving these people's lives by bringing them here and they can do these jobs, and are happy to do it seemingly (or they wouldn't do it). It is actually arguably the opposite, we are being moral by having open borders, a safe, clean, nice country to live for these people to escape to and raise their families with plenty of food, water, good quality health care and education levels, and giving these people free access to many of these services and opportunities. Do you realize how many people escape to Canada to get things like cancer treatment for family members, for example, where they couldn't get access to it at home? Anecdotally but my wife as a nurse on a cancer ward constantly is nursing many of these newcomers and providing treatment. Have they paid taxes into our system to offset such health care costs or education costs? Not a chance. Some of them literally come here to just get treatment and then leave, in fact.

I'm not really sure where you're going with this, other than an argument that low skilled jobs should be paid more which, sure, I guess, but that is sort of driven by market demand ultimately.

These people are filling a need for Canada, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that Canada is filling a need for them too. Many needs.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

No I 100% agree, but that is kind of my point. Isn't it then incumbent on national strategy at federal and provincial government level to try and figure out how to spread out people to other areas to better manage population growth and infrastructure?

Further, aren't you thinking about what places are like now and not what I'm saying- the future or what they could be? My point is you build out these other centres and make them larger, nicer, more things to do, nicer places to live, better infrastructure, etc. Then people will move with their feet.

I think it is more a question of jobs. Let's pretend the federal government added enough to dwellings to both Regina and Saskatoon to support an additional 100-150k people each. What are they going to do?

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

People aren't going to build housing/condos/apartments for some possible future population. They need people here so they build them. If you pause bringing in people so the market catching up - its going to stop building at the same rate.

The main demand for housing is from the immigrants, and young people that are already here. If you slow down or temporarily halt the flow of immigrants, you should in time be able to stabilize the demand and escalation of prices. Then there would be less need for all the condos/apartments/duplexes/townhouses/2, 4, 6 plexes etc. that end up ruining our neighborhoods and degrading our environment.

[stampsx2]

Probably has a lot more to do with skilled labor jobs not paying well enough to make it worth it. Who wants to frame a house outdoors or run electrical through a new build or put up siding when the builder wants to increase profits and pay their labor as little as possible.

If there’s not enough workers in a field then there’s a wage issue that makes other easier jobs more appealing.

I know i wouldn’t do it for peanuts.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

The main demand for housing is from the immigrants, and young people that are already here. If you slow down or temporarily halt the flow of immigrants, you should in time be able to stabilize the demand and escalation of prices. Then there would be less need for all the condos/apartments/duplexes/townhouses/2, 4, 6 plexes etc. that end up ruining our neighborhoods and degrading our environment.

And then you start it up again.. and bam are in the exact same spot. Because no one is building houses for people who aren't here.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Then there would be less need for all the condos/apartments/duplexes/townhouses/2, 4, 6 plexes etc. that end up ruining our neighborhoods and degrading our environment.

This is the attitude that is really stalling the push towards affordable housing. NIMBY-ism towards denser multi-unit dwellings. There is no argument you can make that multi-family homes degrade the environment more than single family homes. You can just admit you don't like the demographics of the people living in them though.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I think it is more a question of jobs. Let's pretend the federal government added enough to dwellings to both Regina and Saskatoon to support an additional 100-150k people each. What are they going to do?

Well, I mean I have to tell you, I am literally situated and live in that exact situation lol.

I live in a new build community in Saskatoon and I'd be willing to bet the average nationality of this place is not "white Caucasian" Canadian but immigrant Canadians. It's a large, nice, new community and there seems to be two or three other nice new communities growing pretty quick out here too. Plenty of jobs and opportunity here. So to a degree it is happening, I'm just saying they could speed 'er up and help cities like Saskatoon cope. What are these people doing? Lots. There are lots of jobs out here. Mining, agriculture, business, tons of #### going on actually. Saskatchewan is now the I think one of if not the worlds largest supplier of uranium / potash, for example.

And yes, many people are moving here, but you could make it even more attractive to do so to try and level the playing field so to speak with the other large Canadian cities.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

And then you start it up again.. and bam are in the exact same spot. Because no one is building houses for people who aren't here.

Loads of 26-35 year olds already here (including immigrants and the children of immigrants) would love to buy a house if they could afford it.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I'm not really sure where you're going with this, other than an argument that low skilled jobs should be paid more which, sure, I guess, but that is sort of driven by market demand ultimately.

These people are filling a need for Canada, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that Canada is filling a need for them too. Many needs.

They’re filling a want for businesses not a need. Immigration is a necessity for many reasons however it’s very easy to see how the current system is exploitative.

New Canadians often do not have a good understanding of their rights here and even in cases where they do understand their rights those who are on temporary work permits or working towards permanent residency are usually too afraid to speak out or try to address the problem in cases of exploitation or abuse because if they lose their job they could lose their ability to stay here.

[flamesfever]

Of course there is another way of slowing the demand for housing...just keep raising interest rates, and restricting the ability to lend money. Eventually people learn that owning a house has its pros and cons, and is not the only road to happiness.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Loads of 26-35 year olds already here (including immigrants and the children of immigrants) would love to buy a house if they could afford it.

Sure, but developers aren't going to willingly cut their margins just to make houses more affordable, nor are they going to build speculatively on the hope that a market will materialize. Either the government would have to get into building social housing (unlikely given that both major parties are neoliberal), or we'll have to wait for a correction in the housing market.

And the latter is probably going to happen at some point. Look at the chart below comparing median mortgage payments to median income over the last 40 or so years. It certainly wasn't a housing construction boom that significantly increased affordability in the early '80s, early '90s, and late '00s. Those were the low points of housing starts in fact.

Spoiler!

[Mr.Coffee]

Vancouver at near 100%!! lol

Eating's overrated.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Well, I mean I have to tell you, I am literally situated and live in that exact situation lol.


Plenty of jobs and opportunity here. So to a degree it is happening, I'm just saying they could speed 'er up and help cities like Saskatoon cope. What are these people doing? Lots. There are lots of jobs out here. Mining, agriculture, business, tons of #### going on actually. Saskatchewan is now the I think one of if not the worlds largest supplier of uranium / potash, for example.

And yes, many people are moving here, but you could make it even more attractive to do so to try and level the playing field so to speak with the other large Canadian cities.

Saskatchewan is a still a net loser on interprovincial immigration because of economic prospects and quality of life reasons. If it wasn't for international immigration then it's population would be falling.


https://leaderpost.com/news/saskatch...ther-provinces


I work in agriculture and I've actually lived in Regina myself. I am back in Alberta and I am outnumbered by people from Saskatchewan in my office. It is a pretty common cycle for immigrants to stay for the minimum time required and then move on.
Maybe if everywhere else becomes too expensive then interprovincial migration starts to swing in the favour of Saskatchewan but it will be hard to pull against the overall trend of urbanization and the only way I can see it happening is if the Feds subsidize companies heavily to move headquarters into Saskatchewan.

[Mr.Coffee]

That's interesting, thanks. I wonder why there's thousands of houses being built out here then in gigantic new communities.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Bonded

This is the attitude that is really stalling the push towards affordable housing. NIMBY-ism towards denser multi-unit dwellings. There is no argument you can make that multi-family homes degrade the environment more than single family homes. You can just admit you don't like the demographics of the people living in them though.

It's the added cars, tree and green space removal (backyards), lowering air quality, increased need for water, upgrading of sewers and water mains, insufferable parking and traffic problems, etc, that ruins the environment. Your old arguments of NIMBY-ism and racism is misleading and getting tiresome.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Loads of 26-35 year olds already here (including immigrants and the children of immigrants) would love to buy a house if they could afford it.

Of course they would - but developers build for profit not to fill a market. Every new build is either a large double garage house, townhouse or condo building. They could build little bungalows and sell them in milliseconds but they don't because they make more money on other builds.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

It's the added cars, tree and green space removal (backyards), lowering air quality, increased need for water, upgrading of sewers and water mains, insufferable parking and traffic problems, etc, that ruins the environment. Your old arguments of NIMBY-ism and racism is misleading and getting tiresome.

Have you seen newly built neighbourhoods? The houses are built like a meter apart and barely any yard (super rich guy neighbourhoods excluded). Those houses are sold out before they are even close to being finished.

The old spaced out neighbourhood is a thing of the past.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Canmore says hi. So does Ricardo Ranch.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1561524095778377729

Not all farmland. And besides, why does it matter if it is already touched? Altering land use from farmland to residential or industrial has drastic consequences and is a loss for nature.

LOL, bruh...maybe 10% of the "area in orange" looks anything like the photos this clown is posting - and if you actually read the ASP instead of relying on buffoons from twitter you can see that those lands are dedicated for park space or environmental / municipal reserve. The vast majority of the land slated for development is unremarkable farmland that we certainly do not have a shortage of!

[CroFlames]

Yeah, new suburbs are glorified townhouses. They are jam packed in there and they call them 'detached' homes. You could touch the home next to you lol.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Have you seen newly built neighbourhoods? The houses are built like a meter apart and barely any yard (super rich guy neighbourhoods excluded). Those houses are sold out before they are even close to being finished.

The old spaced out neighbourhood is a thing of the past.

That's for the people to decide, not City Hall or the developers.