Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Yoho

PP has lots of charisma, that’s another reason why he’s burying JT in the the polls.
He’s genuine and believable.

Freeland is half rehearsed plastic that gives off the vibe of looking at people like plants.

None of JT’s inner circle have a prayer once he’s finally gone and the lights come on to how they have actually been running the country. They will all scurry away and blame each other.

The only chance the Liberals have after JT is gone is someone completely distant from the stain of being in his inner circle.

Boy are you in for a surprise next year! Keep pumping up those right wing ads Cory!!

[Firebot]

In regards to Trudeau further politicizing wildfires doubling down on St-Onge's comments a few days ago and denouncing Meta for abiding by the newly created Liberal-NDP law.

Michael Geist, speaks out on the recent government and media outcry against Meta, and how recent political rhetoric is depending on misinformed Canadians to garner emotional support. This was written before Trudeau's denouncing earlier today.

https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2023/08/...aking-process/

The government and supporters of Bill C-18 talking points now emphasize two things in relation to Meta blocking news links: the law has yet to take effect and there is room to address their concerns in the regulation-making process. Both of these claims are incredibly deceptive, relying on the assumption that most won’t bother to read the actual legislation. If they did, they would see that (1) the law has received royal assent and can take effect anytime and (2) the regulation making process addresses only a small subset of Bill C-18 issues with most of the core issues finalized. In other words, the time to shape the law and address many of the key concerns was before the government repeatedly cut off debate in order to ensure it that received royal assent before the summer break.


When News Media Canada says “what we’re saying to Meta is, ‛The regulations aren’t drafted yet. Pick up a pen. Put down your saber and let’s try to work through this together” it’s a fake out designed to deceive. There are no regulations to be discussed that change the core elements of the law. It’s been decided, has received royal assent, and kicks in anytime within the next 120 days. News Media Canada and the associated lobby groups won the battle for Bill C-18. It’s the resulting consequences they don’t like.

Also notable is the extreme negative impact it has had on small media who depend on social media for reach, and aren't as well known as the big media conglomerates.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/met...news-1.6941615

"What this bill has done is we've put a halt on any new market expansions and hiring more journalists in those markets," Elgie said.

Elgie and MacNeill, though both operating in the local news industry, expressed widely different positions on C-18, which is meant to force Meta and Google to enter into agreements to compensate news agencies for content that appears on their platforms.

"I hate it," Elgie said.

"I don't object to the notion that Google and Facebook should support journalism," Elgie said. "But the premise of C-18, what we said, which is basically, 'They steal our content, they're immoral, they don't do anything for the publishing industry,' is all false."

Unfortunately C-18 was never about saving media, it was never about protecting Canadians or Canadian interests, it was done solely to be a cash grab to the benefit of big media who lobbied to the government. It's clear though that both the Liberals and the media conglomerates grossly miscalculated the fallout and now have egg on their face.

It should be noted that it's extremely hard to get unbiased news and commentary specifically on C-18 and its consequences as all major media groups in Canada including Quebecor and Postmedia are also staunch supporters of it. We should be thankful to have impartial non-partisan critics like Michael Geist (once championed for his stance against Harper's "anti-consumer" copyright law) who makes arguments based on the law and its justifications.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Smith's UCP fully deserve all the flack they are getting with Dynalife which was an abject failure (one of many) and a definite credibility hit on attempting to privatize elements of healthcare.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

I don't think that the recent Dynalife fiasco is a definite credibility hit to privatization because it had actually run a very effective lab service in Edmonton for about 25 years prior to 2021 so that shows the model actually works. What didn't work was giving a much larger contract to a company that couldn't handle the expansion and workload. One can potentially also argue that the decision in 2016 by the NDP to purchase Dynalife and roll them into the public health realm may have created some sort of business uncertainty which was exasperated by the UCP's subsequent decisions to continue on with Dynalife.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well no, that's just how people think it goes, but in practice it doesn't have to be.

Yes, that's called a norm.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by driveway

Considering the way Canadians treat their real-estate (as their primary retirement investment) does anyone seriously think that a Conservative government would do anything to reduce the value of the homes and properties that Baby Boomers are so dependent on for their sense of economic well-being?

We're kind of at an inflection point where all this stuff won't matter for much longer.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Wormius

There is an empty house tax and foreign buyers tax in BC.

Also there are cheaper options called condos and townhouses. People don’t need a fully detached home.

Which has been mostly unsuccessful. We need to densify our top 5 cities like crazy. Think Singapore level crazy. Toronto all the way out to the Junction should look like Manhattan.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by peter12

Which has been mostly unsuccessful. We need to densify our top 5 cities like crazy. Think Singapore level crazy. Toronto all the way out to the Junction should look like Manhattan.

Housing density sounds like real commie talk, who the hell would want to live closer to the city Centre and shorten their commute to work and arts/events, when they could live in a seemingly endless suburb with carefully calculated distances gas stations, grocery stores and Boston pizzas?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Housing density sounds like real commie talk, who the hell would want to live closer to the city Centre and shorten their commute to work and arts/events, when they could live in a seemingly endless suburb with carefully calculated distances gas stations, grocery stores and Boston pizzas?

I am a commie now, I guess. Also, I have been drafted into the 15 Minute City SS Prison Guard Militia.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

it should be prohibitively expensive for people to own a home thats empty and simply an "investment property". The government should also be using the power of the purse to force cities to make building homes faster, cheaper, and make a lot more low cost housing available.

While I agree with you in principle. The FEDERAL government cannot do that. It HAS to be the provincial government.

Municipalities are not recognized under the constitution, they are a creature of the province. The jurisdiction falls to the province.

My hometown went to the Supreme Court of Canada over equalization payments and how a portion should be going to municipalities.

[peter12]

I do not care if people own a vacation home that is empty 9 months of the year. I do not care if people try to arbitrage housing shortages for personal gain. What I do care about is sclerotic and slow city regulation and insane old NIMBYs standing in the way of market-driven housing.

We need to build more. We have two generations plus of housing shortage to correct.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

While I agree with you in principle. The FEDERAL government cannot do that. It HAS to be the provincial government.

Municipalities are not recognized under the constitution, they are a creature of the province. The jurisdiction falls to the province.

My hometown went to the Supreme Court of Canada over equalization payments and how a portion should be going to municipalities.

Federal governments can - and have for years - used their enormous spending power to influence cities.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by peter12

Which has been mostly unsuccessful. We need to densify our top 5 cities like crazy. Think Singapore level crazy. Toronto all the way out to the Junction should look like Manhattan.

Both remain extremely expensive places to live, and Manhattan has replaced dense (but miserable quality) housing with office buildings and less dense luxury condos over the last 100 years.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Both remain extremely expensive places to live, and Manhattan has replaced dense (but miserable quality) housing with office buildings and less dense luxury condos over the last 100 years.

Guess why?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by peter12

I do not care if people own a vacation home that is empty 9 months of the year. I do not care if people try to arbitrage housing shortages for personal gain. What I do care about is sclerotic and slow city regulation and insane old NIMBYs standing in the way of market-driven housing.

We need to build more. We have two generations plus of housing shortage to correct.

Canada already builds more units than almost anywhere in the world. We're building at a per capita rate that's about 40% faster than the US and UK, and about twice as fast as Germany. And we have essentially the lowest housing overcrowding in the world based on OECD data (meaning that existing stock likely isn't being used to its potential).

And if you're waiting for developers to eat into their own profits by driving down housing costs through over-building, you're going to be waiting a while. Every single time the housing market softens, housing starts drop to compensate. And the idea that there's this unused capacity to build faster (i.e. tradespeople, investment dollars, etc.) isn't based in reality. Even maintaining the current level of tradespeople will be tough enough given the average age of them.

If you want more affordable housing, a recession is really the only answer. Basically every time the mortgage payment to income ratio has gotten this high (and it has several times in the past), an economic downturn followed shortly after and sorted things out.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Canada already builds more units than almost anywhere in the world. We're building at a per capita rate that's about 40% faster than the US and UK, and about twice as fast as Germany. And we have essentially the lowest housing overcrowding in the world based on OECD data (meaning that existing stock likely isn't being used to its potential).

And if you're waiting for developers to eat into their own profits by driving down housing costs through over-building, you're going to be waiting a while. Every single time the housing market softens, housing starts drop to compensate. And the idea that there's this unused capacity to build faster (i.e. tradespeople, investment dollars, etc.) isn't based in reality. Even maintaining the current level of tradespeople will be tough enough given the average age of them.

If you want more affordable housing, a recession is really the only answer. Basically every time the mortgage payment to income ratio has gotten this high (and it has several times in the past), an economic downturn followed shortly after and sorted things out.

The US and the UK both have housing shortages and their population isn't growing nearly as fast. That's the variable you are intentionally leaving out.

If you liberalize zoning, you will create many new different types of "developers." Currently, the only developers who can afford to build are also the ones with the cash and land to weather the lengthy regulatory/permitting process.

Streamlining the Red Seal process is an often recommended way of increasing the number of tradespeople

[peter12]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Canada already builds more units than almost anywhere in the world. We're building at a per capita rate that's about 40% faster than the US and UK, and about twice as fast as Germany. And we have essentially the lowest housing overcrowding in the world based on OECD data (meaning that existing stock likely isn't being used to its potential).

And if you're waiting for developers to eat into their own profits by driving down housing costs through over-building, you're going to be waiting a while. Every single time the housing market softens, housing starts drop to compensate. And the idea that there's this unused capacity to build faster (i.e. tradespeople, investment dollars, etc.) isn't based in reality. Even maintaining the current level of tradespeople will be tough enough given the average age of them.

If you want more affordable housing, a recession is really the only answer. Basically every time the mortgage payment to income ratio has gotten this high (and it has several times in the past), an economic downturn followed shortly after and sorted things out.

I got to say, this is the most wildly out of touch response I have seen on the housing subject. The income to payment ratio is one thing, but the income to down payment ratio is completely out of control. There is now an entire generation of Canadians used to housing insecurity.

We have a shortfall of 3.5M units. We have an economy built on a shaky foundation of property changing hands. We could not afford a recession. For one thing, it would destroy the economy.

But also, what kind of recession? The Canadian property market has weathered Covid and high interest rates. The market is already bouncing back in Vancouver and Toronto, but starts continue to decrease.

The entire model is broken and will require the same type of fix that Japan faced in the late 90s. We have to change the way our cities are governed and built.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1693703498532073570

https://twitter.com/user/status/1693747853372309936

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by peter12

I got to say, this is the most wildly out of touch response I have seen on the housing subject. The income to payment ratio is one thing, but the income to down payment ratio is completely out of control. There is now an entire generation of Canadians used to housing insecurity.

The down payment requirements aren't all that different when comparing to the early '80s of early '90s peaks. Yes, lower interest rates will mean a higher down payment at a given mortgage payment, but you can also get away with a 5% down payment now, whereas the minimum was 10+% in the past.

And as you can see here, it has been more or less this crazy before, and it wasn't construction that fixed it, as housing starts dropped through the floor during all of the down periods:

Spoiler!

We have a shortfall of 3.5M units. We have an economy built on a shaky foundation of property changing hands. We could not afford a recession. For one thing, it would destroy the economy.

Based on what? Housing was very affordable in the late '90s and early '00s with similar ratios to now in terms of units per capita and total units per household.

And even now, Canada has more units per household than a place like Germany does for instance, even though the latter has significantly more units per capita. That's because we have more units not being used year-round (either left vacant, used as AirBnBs, or used as vacation properties) than a lot of other countries. So there isn't a lot of evidence that it's lack of built units that's driving the current ridiculousness. And obviously, bringing existing underutilized units into the market is significantly cheaper than building from scratch.

But also, what kind of recession? The Canadian property market has weathered Covid and high interest rates. The market is already bouncing back in Vancouver and Toronto, but starts continue to decrease.

The entire model is broken and will require the same type of fix that Japan faced in the late 90s. We have to change the way our cities are governed and built.

COVID wasn't really a recession, as savings rates skyrocketed while interest rates dropped to the floor, allowing people to put even more money into housing.

And the housing market isn't recovering all that much. We've just seen the largest 1-year decline in Real Residential Property prices in the last 50 years (possibly ever). And because interest rates take 1-1.5 years to really work their way through the economy, house price peaks often coincide with interest rate peaks, so I wouldn't jump the gun in saying the housing markets are coming out unscathed. Prices likely won't crash, but if it happens like previous analogous situations, we'll see a long period of price stagnation where lower interest rates, inflation, and wage increases improve affordability. Particularly as boomers die off.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1693760002014486625

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

While I agree with you in principle. The FEDERAL government cannot do that. It HAS to be the provincial government.

Municipalities are not recognized under the constitution, they are a creature of the province. The jurisdiction falls to the province.

My hometown went to the Supreme Court of Canada over equalization payments and how a portion should be going to municipalities.

And thats why I wrote the power of the purse. The feds can impose certain standards and requirements the provinces must meet to receive federal money.