Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Sert]

Originally Posted by troutman

He’s long had a radio show on CITR:

https://www.citr.ca/radio/nardwuar-t...ette-presents/

Also, a member of the Evaporators:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evaporators

I met him at Sled Island.

A Canadian treasure

[jg13]

Hello, I'm not going to go through the entire thread and I know the majority of CalgaryPuck posters are 45+ in age but 80% of the people I talk to and are within 5 years of my age (33) are all voting conservative without a second thought, myself included.

My question is:

I would like to know why those of you that are above 45 in age or older that own their own homes, think that Mark Carney will benefit us in our 30s over Pierre Polieivere. Pierre has stated he will cut immigration to the point where we're building more homes faster than we allow people into Canada and will allow first time home buyers to purchase their first homes without the 5% GST included in those homes.

The reason for the above question is because of 80% of the people I talk to in my age range (millenial) is because we're concerned about never being able to afford a home and if we're never able to afford a home, it affects many things specifically, like starting a family. From my understanding, Mark Carney wants to increase the Canadian population to 100 million by 2100 which is 800,000 a year when Canada has been known to build 200,000 places of living a year. He has publicly stated this.

If I currently owned a home this would be great for myself as my home would sky rocket in value. Please let me know on this particular issue, why as a millennial this is good for me.

Thank you in advance. Not looking to fight anyone. I want clarity.

[Hockeyguy15]

"voting without a second thought" is literally the problem with politics.

You should always have a second thought, every election.

Search out each party/leaders policies on your own, from their party website. Stop asking people to tell you what they think the party/leader stands for, get the info first hand so people can't spin it how they see fit.

[Fuzz]

The short answer is Pierre's policies aren't going to do what you expect them to do. Make life more affordable. He's no different than Trump, in that he will sell you the stars, and after being elected dismantle many of the things that make Canada what it is. And you will see as he slashes through government that you, or people you know and love rely on those services to survive. As a young person, that's tougher to understand, and it's easy to shrug off as unimportant. That will change for you.

Carney, too, has plans for housing affordability. I'll be honest, I heard about the century plan probably 10 years ago, and I hated it then and I hate it now. I don't at all understand why no one has looked at arranging our economic system and population around a stable steady state. Growth causes expenses, complications, and pain all over society. Calgary was a better city at 700k than it is now, as far as being an enjoyable place to live. But I also see these long term plans are not written in stone, and a PM is not permanent. And the reality of our current system requires immigrants.

I also trust Carney, given his experience, how he communicates, and how relatable as a human being he is. Pierre comes across as smarmy and untrustworthy. I don't believe his policy will follow facts as much as it will follow what he decides is correct. That's not someone who I think has the qualities needed to be a good leader.

The reality is, and I'm sorry to your generation for bearing the brunt of it, that the global economy is re-balancing. Billions of poor are getting their own wealth now. Not what we imagine wealth, but it's enough to have money to increase their own consumption, and and the developing world rises, it will not be so for all boats. They now compete for the limited resources on this planet, and competition increases costs. That, and billionaires consolidating wealth means far less for the rest of us(many have doubled their wealth since the pandemic, have you?). The hard cold truth is for the average person, things will continue to get more expensive and no politician can get around that. Our quality of life is bound to decrease, and already has. Simple slogans are not going to help.

Ultimately, the best thing for your generation is to elect politicians who focus more on equality and public services, because unless you have rich relatives, you will only be able to look on the people with generational wealth with jealousy as they will be the only ones who can afford homes. And you can be OK with that, or look to see them taxed in ways that can help people like you, because there is only so much money to go around. I believe Mark is far closer to this that Pierre.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by jg13

Hello, I'm not going to go through the entire thread and I know the majority of CalgaryPuck posters are 45+ in age but 80% of the people I talk to and are within 5 years of my age (33) are all voting conservative without a second thought, myself included.

My question is:

I would like to know why those of you that are above 45 in age or older that own their own homes, think that Mark Carney will benefit us in our 30s over Pierre Polieivere. Pierre has stated he will cut immigration to the point where we're building more homes faster than we allow people into Canada and will allow first time home buyers to purchase their first homes without the 5% GST included in those homes.

The reason for the above question is because of 80% of the people I talk to in my age range (millenial) is because we're concerned about never being able to afford a home and if we're never able to afford a home, it affects many things specifically, like starting a family. From my understanding, Mark Carney wants to increase the Canadian population to 100 million by 2100 which is 800,000 a year when Canada has been known to build 200,000 places of living a year. He has publicly stated this.

If I currently owned a home this would be great for myself as my home would sky rocket in value. Please let me know on this particular issue, why as a millennial this is good for me.

Thank you in advance. Not looking to fight anyone. I want clarity.

I have been trying very hard to find some source for your claim here that he wants to have immigration levels at what you state. In fact, all I can find is that he will maintain caps on immigration until Canada has the capacity to increase them.

So you may have been fed something fake, I don’t know, would love to see the source and context of any comments because right now I’m not sure the underlying premise of your concern is even true.

Also food for thought, last September Danielle Smith called for the doubling of the Alberta population by 2050….

[btimbit]

On top of that, the Liberals have said many of the same things as the Conservatives when it comes to housing. In their platform they have similiar GST relief for first time buyers, to use your example jg13

[GioforPM]

Linking immigration levels and housing prices has always seems like an excuse to me, and a racially tinged one at that. Immigration doesn't affect housing prices in a big way in fact.

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca...ownload/1/1/92

https://www.kelownarealestate.com/bl...20and%20demand.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Others are answering the question just as we as I could.

I do want to add this:

I have voted for every major party, and I have spoiled my ballot.

My vote is ALWAYS up for grabs.

Always, always, always, analyze what is being said. Never vote with emotion.

Prime example is down south.

Grocery prices will be cheaper day 1.
Must vote Republican or the markets WILL crash.

Actual policies: who cares about eggs? Markets are tanking.

The "vote without a second thought" crowd is the crowd that's gonna FAFO.

I mean that on all fronts. Never vote without a second thought.

It matters.

You can vote for the candidate
You can vote for the party
You can vote on local issues
You can vote on National issues

At the end of the day, when there's a negative consequence (regardless who you vote for there will be) can you still justify that vote?

[bizaro86]

Liberals announce they're bringing back the MURB tax credits. Basically allowed large losses to be deducted the year you build a parge rental property (right now those expenses are deducted over the life of the property). I'd expect that to significantly expand construction of rental properties, although all the ones that would be built anyway also get the tax break.

[GGG]

100 million people is really just the historical Canadian population growth rate.

It’s about 1.25% for 75 years. This equated 500k population growth. With 2.4 persons per household that’s 208,000 new houses required which is roughly what we build now. Which makes sense given how supply and demand work.

None of PPa housing policies will work because he is focusing on the cost side of the equation. With fixed inelastic demand Cost will always rise back up.

So no GST means 5% more expensive homes, tax breaks for cities who give tax breaks for developers means developers make more money at the same sale price. In theory you might have developers invest more if they can make more profit but that won’t actually happen because profit will be fixed because underlying land value will go up in value so the alternative of just selling the land increases in value.

So if you walk back all of the these cost reduction initiatives all they do is hold prices steady while bare land increases in value.

Now if you target initiatives at the first time buyer only (which Carney is and PP isn’t) now you create differential buying power so not all of the costs just rolled into the land costs. This has potential to help the first time buyer marginally but not really at the scale required.

So there are really only 2 possible ways to avoid this trap. The government builds or underwrites the profits of developers to rapidly increase supply. Carney has talked about this

Or

Tax undeveloped and underdeveloped land to make it more expensive to hold this lower cost of bare land land and encouraging development. In other words take a real close look at each of the platforms policies and evaluate if price just goes up to eat the benefit.

Also in Calgary the housing price has just tracked inflation since the last peak so many of us here bought post 2007 and paid current market pricing for housing. Outside of Toronto and Vancouver affordability is similar to the last peak.

Edit: I should add that I do like pp tying Transit funding to Transit Oriented developement. I also like PPs anti NIMBY policies but they are so antithetical to his base of supporters I don’t believe we would ever see the anti NIMBY stuff applied to change zoning laws forcing boomers to allow basement suites.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by jg13

but 80% of the people I talk to and are within 5 years of my age (33) are all voting conservative

This surprised me quite a bit, as the usual idea is that older people are more conservative. But apparently polling bears this out - Liberals are by far the strongest among seniors, while Conservatives are strongedt among 35-49 year olds. https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.p...d-stable-lead/

The National Post has an interview with a young BC conservative MLA (she owns a tattoo shop in Kitimat, so not the stereotypical conservative style of appearance, but rural business owners probably vote CPC in droves). Interestingly (to me anyway) she's a former drug addict from the lower mainland who went through a treatment program.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...nal-fault-line

The line that jumped out at me was this one: "We can’t afford the things our parents or grandparents could afford, and so we want to see people that are passionate, that are speaking up."

Not hard to see how hopelessness about your future drives an interest in changing policies and/or populism.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by jg13

Hello, I'm not going to go through the entire thread and I know the majority of CalgaryPuck posters are 45+ in age but 80% of the people I talk to and are within 5 years of my age (33) are all voting conservative without a second thought, myself included.

My question is:

I would like to know why those of you that are above 45 in age or older that own their own homes, think that Mark Carney will benefit us in our 30s over Pierre Polieivere. Pierre has stated he will cut immigration to the point where we're building more homes faster than we allow people into Canada and will allow first time home buyers to purchase their first homes without the 5% GST included in those homes.

That's actually Carney's promise.
PP's is the cut GST for all buyers, not just first time buyers.
This will actually increase investors purchasing new homes/condos and increase your competition and pricing.
You will see a lot of property flippers re enter the markets.

The reason for the above question is because of 80% of the people I talk to in my age range (millenial) is because we're concerned about never being able to afford a home and if we're never able to afford a home, it affects many things specifically, like starting a family. From my understanding, Mark Carney wants to increase the Canadian population to 100 million by 2100 which is 800,000 a year when Canada has been known to build 200,000 places of living a year. He has publicly stated this.

You need a source for that.
A lot of the information being fed to people in your age range, is simply false or very misconstrued.
I see a lot of it too based on people I know sharing things on social media, and they just don't have the ability to decipher what's legit or not.

If I currently owned a home this would be great for myself as my home would sky rocket in value. Please let me know on this particular issue, why as a millennial this is good for me.

Thank you in advance. Not looking to fight anyone. I want clarity.

I have worked in Vancouver real estate for 18 years and most of the fellow agents I know are conservatives.
We currently have a slow market that is oversupplied and buyers scared to act.

These conservative agents all anticipate a conservative government will take guardrails of housing purchases and let the market light up on fire.
Pricing will go up, good for our investors.
Buyers will have to act due to FOMO as pricing rise.
Anti flipping taxes will be removed, enabling investors flipping to resume and buying up presales since GST is removed from those.

If the BC conservatives had won the last provincial election, they would have also eliminated the BC speculation tax, Air-Bnb restrictions and BC Flipping Tax.

I mean this with sympathy, but these conservatives aren't thinking about you, I'm sorry to break the truth to you.
All of their housing policies are to unshackle the market and let speculation return.

My earning would go way up under conservative governments, you would get screwed.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by jg13

My question is:

I would like to know why those of you that are above 45 in age or older that own their own homes, think that Mark Carney will benefit us in our 30s over Pierre Polieivere. Pierre has stated he will cut immigration to the point where we're building more homes faster than we allow people into Canada and will allow first time home buyers to purchase their first homes without the 5% GST included in those homes.

The reason for the above question is because of 80% of the people I talk to in my age range (millenial) is because we're concerned about never being able to afford a home and if we're never able to afford a home, it affects many things specifically, like starting a family. From my understanding, Mark Carney wants to increase the Canadian population to 100 million by 2100 which is 800,000 a year when Canada has been known to build 200,000 places of living a year. He has publicly stated this.

If I currently owned a home this would be great for myself as my home would sky rocket in value. Please let me know on this particular issue, why as a millennial this is good for me.

Thank you in advance. Not looking to fight anyone. I want clarity.

Regarding home ownership, the Liberals have announced a similar policy, so you don't need the Conservatives for that. Also, I don't want a country where I can afford a home, but no one else can. The overall unrest that comes when a few people are rich and everyone else struggles, is not a good thing.

Other reasons I'm voting Liberal:
1) In 2008, there was a global recession. Canada fared better than a lot of countries. Part of that was due to Mark Carney (Governor of the Bank of Canada) and part of that was due to Canada's banking laws.

1a) While I don't love our banks and their fees, etc, I never worry that my bank is going to shut down and take my money with it, something that is not the case in many other countries. When Pollievre talks about Canada being broken, I worry that he's going to dismantle things like this that actually help Canadians a lot.

2) We're in difficult economic times. I trust MC's background in economics and banking to help us manage that more than I trust PP and the Conservatives' plan which seems to be based on ideology more than practicality. Things have changed a lot since Trump took office and PP is saying a lot of the things he did before and bragging that his views haven't changed in 20 years. As PM, you need to be able to change as circumstances change.

3) I'm not saying MC wants to help Canada simply out of the goodness of his heart, because I've never met him. But I do believe he wants Canada to succeed. Even if it's only because he wants to win (at being PM, not simply the election), I think his background and skills position him to do a better job than PP's.

4) I live in Alberta and things have NOT got more affordable since Danielle Smith took over. The UCP puts on ads claiming life got cheaper by lowering income tax. But they don't mention that they are running a bigger deficit to allow for this or that they have increased costs, taxes, and fees everywhere else.

5) I see what's happening in the US. And while PP is now claiming he will stand up to Trump, I fail to believe that when so many of the things he says sound just like Trump.

The last two aren't topics you brought up, but I think they are an important consideration and definitely part of the reason for my vote.

6) The CPC pro-life agenda. You shouldn't need to be a woman to be concerned. This whole, "Trust them. Even though they feel that way, they won't govern that way," is NOT re-assuring. And it's not just about abortion. Women in the US are dying from miscarriages because doctors are afraid to intervene until it's too late. The CPC has way too many pro-life candidates to make me comfortable voting for them. Young people worry they can't afford a family? What about people who try to have a family only to have the mother die and leave behind other young children, because she couldn't get the medical care she needs?

7) Conservative governments focus on hurting the vulnerable (trans people, outing kids to their parents, immigrants, etc.) The CPC needs to strongly show me they're not like other governments who have attacked these groups (UCP, Trump) to make me trust they won't do the same.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

-snip-
Also in Calgary the housing price has just tracked inflation since the last peak so many of us here bought post 2007 and paid current market pricing for housing. Outside of Toronto and Vancouver affordability is similar to the last peak.

I'm not sure you can compare affordability without looking at wage growth. Has it also matched inflation? Other costs, too, like mortgage rates, taxes, insurance etc. But then there are more affordability programs to help out now. I honestly don't know the answer across all costs, but I suspect it is less affordable now.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

That's actually Carney's promise.
PP's is the cut GST for all buyers, not just first time buyers.

Isn’t PP’s policy to only cut GST for homes with or for rental properties?

For example:

“Remove GST on the building of any new homes with rental prices below market value. This will be funded using dollars from the failed Liberal Housing Accelerator fund.

https://www.conservative.ca/building...t-bureaucracy/

[vegasbound]

Originally Posted by jg13

Hello, I'm not going to go through the entire thread and I know the majority of CalgaryPuck posters are 45+ in age but 80% of the people I talk to and are within 5 years of my age (33) are all voting conservative without a second thought, myself included.

My question is:

I would like to know why those of you that are above 45 in age or older that own their own homes, think that Mark Carney will benefit us in our 30s over Pierre Polieivere. Pierre has stated he will cut immigration to the point where we're building more homes faster than we allow people into Canada and will allow first time home buyers to purchase their first homes without the 5% GST included in those homes.

The reason for the above question is because of 80% of the people I talk to in my age range (millenial) is because we're concerned about never being able to afford a home and if we're never able to afford a home, it affects many things specifically, like starting a family. From my understanding, Mark Carney wants to increase the Canadian population to 100 million by 2100 which is 800,000 a year when Canada has been known to build 200,000 places of living a year. He has publicly stated this.

If I currently owned a home this would be great for myself as my home would sky rocket in value. Please let me know on this particular issue, why as a millennial this is good for me.

Thank you in advance. Not looking to fight anyone. I want clarity.

FYI, I'm 31; do not own a home either. Have voted federally for the Conservatives every election - I'm voting Liberal this election. Two of my friends that I will talk politics with are the same.



One of the big reasons I can't vote for PP is the fact that he won't get his security clearance.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'm not sure you can compare affordability without looking at wage growth. Has it also matched inflation? Other costs, too, like mortgage rates, taxes, insurance etc. But then there are more affordability programs to help out now. I honestly don't know the answer across all costs, but I suspect it is less affordable now.

The last time we had this discussion median family income in Calgary was large enough to support the median family SFH within CMHC purchasing limits. Interest rates are down since that time. So my conclusion is housing is still affordable in Calgary.

People here think they are in the Crisis that Vancouver and Toronto had. It isn’t comparable.

[Salt Water Cowboy #10]

I can’t vote Liberal after the scandals and debt. Transparency was non existent. The bad far outweighs the good over the last 8 years. Time for change.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Isn’t PP’s policy to only cut GST for homes with or for rental properties?

For example:

“Remove GST on the building of any new homes with rental prices below market value. This will be funded using dollars from the failed Liberal Housing Accelerator fund.

https://www.conservative.ca/building...t-bureaucracy/

Here he is pledging it on new homes under one million but you are right it’s not found on the website.

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7365339

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Isn’t PP’s policy to only cut GST for homes with or for rental properties?

For example:

“Remove GST on the building of any new homes with rental prices below market value. This will be funded using dollars from the failed Liberal Housing Accelerator fund.

https://www.conservative.ca/building...t-bureaucracy/

That is GST builders pay.

We are talking about buyer paid GST which you or I pay whe purchasing a new home.