Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[FLAMESRULE]

Wow Calgary Confed is starting to look like it might actually go to Hogan/LPC. Nixon is such a god awful pick to replace Webber for the PC's. I do see alot of NDP signs in W Hillhurst.

https://338canada.com/48005e.htm

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

Wow Calgary Confed is starting to look like it might actually go to Hogan/LPC. Nixon is such a god awful pick to replace Webber for the PC's. I do see alot of NDP signs in W Hillhurst.

https://338canada.com/48005e.htm

That;s amazing!

I'd like to give a shout out to all the rightwingers in here like the Fevers and the Geologist who support the career yapdog deplorable politician for uniting the left! 5% for the NDP. lol

[Torture]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

Wow Calgary Confed is starting to look like it might actually go to Hogan/LPC. Nixon is such a god awful pick to replace Webber for the PC's. I do see alot of NDP signs in W Hillhurst.

https://338canada.com/48005e.htm

Not a lot of Hogan signs here in Mt Pleasant, I'd call it roughly even. But not a lot of signs, period. Fingers crossed that there's a lot of shy liberals.

[woob]

Heard lots of good things about Corey. Hope he pulls out the win.

[Fuzzy14]

Not a lot of Hogan signs here in Mt Pleasant, I'd call it roughly even. But not a lot of signs, period. Fingers crossed that there's a lot of shy liberals.

I was just thinking the other day that I haven't seen that many lawn signs this election cycle... am I alone in this observation?

[woob]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy14

I was just thinking the other day that I haven't seen that many lawn signs this election cycle... am I alone in this observation?

Yeah I was noticing as well. Not many signs out in the usual routes into our neighbourhood, and only a handful around our house.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by woob

Heard lots of good things about Corey. Hope he pulls out the win.

He has put a lot of entertaining political commentary out there on podcast feeds, so not hard to build up a strong impression of him.

I'd agree, sounds like they type of guy with the type of intent you'd want to be in government.

*if you are at all engaged in politics from an Alberta perspective, then you should listen to The Strategists,

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy14

I was just thinking the other day that I haven't seen that many lawn signs this election cycle... am I alone in this observation?

Originally Posted by woob

Yeah I was noticing as well. Not many signs out in the usual routes into our neighbourhood, and only a handful around our house.

It definitely seems like there are far fewer signs this year. Driving around my riding you would barely know there was an election. I've always felt that the signs are a huge waste of resources and I don't know if that corrugated plastic can be recycled or not.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s clearly part of the issue. If over the next decade Canada had A) 200k immigrants a year B) 500k immigrants a years, or C) 1 million immigrants a year, you wouldn’t expect to see different home prices in Canada in 2035 depending on which scenario we went with?

It’s no surprise that the regions of the country that have seen the most immigration have the highest housing costs. We simply don’t have the capacity to build housing at the rate of population growth under today’s regulatory and material environment.

1 million would be beyond Canada's ability to produce housing for the growth, but I don't think 500K vs. 200K would change much at all, unless there was some kind of government intervention to induce supply. Developers and investors are generally going to build at a rate where they can make the most money; if demand dries up and kills their margins, they'll just build less to compensate. It has happened a bunch of times in history where housing starts have dropped by 30 to 40 to 50% in the face of dropping demand.

Which is why over the last 25 years, there has been basically no correlation between varying rates of population growth and real housing price growth. In fact, the fastest growth in housing prices has been in periods with lower than normal population growth, while periods with high population growth have actually had very modest prices increases.

For instance, from 2000-2016, the population only increased by about 19% (1.03% a year), but real housing prices went up by 146% (5.5% a year)

Conversely, from 2017 to now, the population growth has been about 14% (1.73% a year) and real housing prices have only increased by 6.1% (0.8% a year). So population growth has been about 70% higher, while real housing prices have barely budged.

Financial demand is what drives housing prices. Population growth can create that, but it doesn't necessarily follow. The fastest price growth was during low population growth periods that coincided with interest rates dropping in the early '00s and then when the federal government loosened lending standards and started allowing stuff like 40 year and 0% down mortgages pre-financial crisis.

Conversely, the slowest growth/biggest declines were during generally high population growth periods after the stress test was introduced and then when rates started going up in 2022.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s clearly part of the issue. If over the next decade Canada had A) 200k immigrants a year B) 500k immigrants a years, or C) 1 million immigrants a year, you wouldn’t expect to see different home prices in Canada in 2035 depending on which scenario we went with?

It’s no surprise that the regions of the country that have seen the most immigration have the highest housing costs. We simply don’t have the capacity to build housing at the rate of population growth under today’s regulatory and material environment.

I think you are making a false causality. While immigration may have a slight impact on demand, the reality is more close to:

- Boomers not willing to sell their property at a fair value, and preferring to keep it empty outside of the empty-nesters living in 3000 sq ft homes and only using the kitchen and master suite
- Gen X who inherited their deceased parents' property being even more greedy by keeping it empty or renting at a premium
- The natural limit of distance-to-city-center being maxed out in places like lower mainland, GTA, even the Calgary area without the public transit infrastructure to mitigate it.
- The lack of career opportunities outside of urban centers as Canada has shifted from a resource extraction economy to a service economy, and blue-collar work being undesirable by local residents (who migrate to urban centers as they enter their working years) while immigrants lack the overall foundation to move to a place like Peace River or North Battleford
- Our neighbors down south being a consumption economy that has filled the wallets of foreign investors, and when the American west coast hit capacity, the Canadian west coast became attractive for similar reasons plus a favourable exchange rate. This in turn drove west coasters east, either to the center of the universe or here


The last one was probably the one that really caught the government off guard. This wasn't immigration... this was people who never intended to live here buying up homes and driving up prices. Now that the government put in some measures, the first and second ones are the larger issue.

How do you convince retired boomers, or children of deceased homeowners, to just suck up not maximizing their profit and sell?

Well, you can probably start by taking away capital gains taxes on housing sold in the next two years. In particular, aim to drive down the price of houses older than 30, 40, 50, 70 years with tax incentives to downsize into newer builds.

As far as immigration goes... yes, it makes sense to incentivize immigrants to live in rural areas that are bleeding workers and have affordable housing. That's not to keep the immigrants out of urban centers, it's to maintain rural populations. But those immigrants have to make serious sacrifices in terms of culture and community. As a PoC myself, every time work sends me out to a place like Swift Current or Sundre, I have to deal with a lot of microaggression that doesn't happen much in Calgary.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You can afford a home, you just can’t start with a detached house in suburbia. Or at least, that’s really hard.

You have to start with a condo - whatever you can afford. There are many reasons to do this. One, you’re not paying someone else’s mortgage. You have controlled your housing costs for the next 5 years.

Owning your own home also opens up access different credit products at lower rates than a credit card, making it easier for you to absorb unexpected expenses.

When it’s time to sell that place in 3-10 years, you have the down payment for your next place. That could be a townhome, it could be a house, it doesn’t matter - point is, you have to level up.

Whatever advantages our parents had when they bought, the house they started with is not likely to be the house they’re in today.

My parents moved through five houses before they settled where they are - they couldn’t have bought each house without having bought the previous one.

So if you’re thinking you won’t be able to buy because you can’t afford a down payment on an $800 grand house, you’re right. You won’t. But most people can’t, so don’t get yourself down.

You can, however, buy a condo with 5% down for between $2-300k.

A lot of people seem to want the fancy luxury house right away. Nothing wrong with an 1100 sq ft starter home with formica countertops and work your way up from there.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

Wow Calgary Confed is starting to look like it might actually go to Hogan/LPC. Nixon is such a god awful pick to replace Webber for the PC's. I do see alot of NDP signs in W Hillhurst.

https://338canada.com/48005e.htm

Can I get a hell yeah for Calgary-Centre? Luhnau looking pretty good.

https://338canada.com/48004e.htm


Greg McLean is one of the more tolerable and moderate members of the CPC, but CPC needs to lose seats period.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I think you are making a false causality. While immigration may have a slight impact on demand, the reality is more close to:

I was challenging GGG’s assertion that immigration has had no impact on housing costs. I didn’t say it was the main factor, but it’s a factor. Experts in Canada’s bureaucracy agree.

Federal public servants warned the government two years ago that large increases to immigration could affect housing affordability and services, internal documents showl..

"As the federal authority charged with managing immigration, IRCC policy-makers must understand the misalignment between population growth and housing supply, and how permanent and temporary immigration shapes population growth.”

… Experts spanning from Bay Street to academic institutions have warned that Canada's strong population growth is eroding housing affordability, as demand outpaces supply.

The Bank of Canada has offered similar analysis. Deputy governor Toni Gravelle delivered a speech in December warning that strong population growth is pushing rents and home prices upward.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/irc...nada-1.7080376

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

- Gen X who inherited their deceased parents' property being even more greedy by keeping it empty.

Is Gen Xers inheriting homes and then leaving them vacant really happening in this country at a statistically relevant scale? I’m confident most inherited homes are sold off immediately. And of those that aren’t, why wouldn’t they be rented out for income?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

A lot of people seem to want the fancy luxury house right away. Nothing wrong with an 1100 sq ft starter home with formica countertops and work your way up from there.

Wait, I was supposed to work my way up?

[getbak]

338 is projecting 7 Liberal seats in Alberta and 1 NDP. I believe the all-time high is 5 Liberals.

[puffnstuff]

Definitely fewer signs up in my hood, when compared to the Prov election, Id guess at 1/3 to 1/2 as many.
If I was a cynical person I would be inclined to believe my neighbor about why. The Con candidate isnt white this time, they will still vote for him because of the team but having his name on their lawn is a step too far for the racistier ones.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Wait, I was supposed to work my way up?

I thought you lived in your garage...

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

I thought you lived in your garage...

Well now, ya! But before I had that sweet 1000 sq ft formica counter top dream. Now it's plywood and pissin' in thew alley.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by getbak

338 is projecting 7 Liberal seats in Alberta and 1 NDP. I believe the all-time high is 5 Liberals.

Honestly, I think the liberals are the frontrunners here, and if alberta stupidly has no MPs at all for Carney to draw from for his cabinet, this province is going to have a rough ride.

The only way to own the libs, is to elect a pocket lib.

[rubecube]

Fascists gonna fascist.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liv...vals-9.6722644

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has promised to use the notwithstanding clause to introduce consecutive sentences for offenders convicted of multiple murders.

It would make him the first prime minister to ever use the clause.

Both Liberal Leader Mark Carney and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said such a move would be a dangerous step toward undermining Canadians’ Charter rights.

Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet said a person who wants to be prime minister should focus more on improving laws “than removing yourself from their application.”