Let's Talk About Minimum Wage, Class Warfare, Wage Gaps, etc.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Roger

How is my kid's well funded RESP, my own RRSP, and my mortgage utterly screwed? Just because I'm not whining about how bad kids these days have it, I'm roughing it? Lol. Keep whining, nerd. It'll take you places.

Again, reading comprehension keyboard tough guy.

I live a fairly comfortable life. So yeah I have gotten places.

[Roger]

Well, I've been told.

Good luck struggling with your $120k. Tough titties. If you ever want to learn how not to waste your money, try some reading comprehension yourself.

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by troutman

Presenter: Well now we come on to our special gift section. The contestant is Karl Marx and the prize this week is a beautiful lounge suite. (curtains behind the presenter sweep open to reveal a beautiful lounge suite; terrific audience applause; Karl comes out and stands in front of this display) Now Karl has elected to answer questions on the workers control of factories so here we go with question number one. Are you nervous? (Karl nods his head; the presenter reads from a card) The development of the industrial proletariat is conditioned by what other development?

Karl: The development of the industrial bourgeoisie.
(applause)

Presenter: Yes, yes, it is indeed. You're on your way to the lounge suite, Karl. Question number two. The struggle of class against class is a what struggle? A what struggle?

Karl: A political struggle.
(Tumultuous applause.)

Presenter: Yes, yes! One final question Karl and the beautiful lounge suite will be yours... Are you going to have a go? (Karl nods) You're a brave man. Karl Marx, your final question, who won the Cup Final in 1949?

Karl: The workers' control of the means of production? The struggle of the urban proletariat?

Presenter: No. It was in fact, Wolverhampton Wanderers who beat Leicester 3-1.

I can't thank this enough...one of my favourite sketches.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Roger

Well, I've been told.

Good luck struggling with your $120k. Tough titties. If you ever want to learn how not to waste your money, try some reading comprehension yourself.

I think he was talking about household income, and what is required to not struggle. It's a different conversation than what is required to stay out of poverty.

At this point in time the minimum what for two parents of two children in Alberta is about $75,000.

$15 x 80hours x 50 weeks = $60,000
Child care benefit = $10,000 for parents at that income 2 young kids
GST & Carbon Tax Rebates = ~$1300 for this family.
I'm not a tax expert, but I am sure there are a few other things missing.

So when you see stats like 35% of families can't afford a surprise $500 expense, they are talking about families making between $75,000 and ~$120,000. It may be very possible to survive in that range, but it seems it is very difficult to avoid money struggles, and those struggles are generally a drag on the productivity of a society.

[Roger]

Originally Posted by #-3

I think he was talking about household income, and what is required to not struggle. It's a different conversation than what is required to stay out of poverty.

At this point in time the minimum what for two parents of two children in Alberta is about $75,000.

$15 x 80hours x 50 weeks = $60,000
Child care benefit = $10,000 for parents at that income 2 young kids
GST & Carbon Tax Rebates = ~$1300 for this family.
I'm not a tax expert, but I am sure there are a few other things missing.

So when you see stats like 35% of families can't afford a surprise $500 expense, they are talking about families making between $75,000 and ~$120,000. It may be very possible to survive in that range, but it seems it is very difficult to avoid money struggles, and those struggles are generally a drag on the productivity of a society.

Yeah, well, when a single parent manages to make it, because he or she chooses not to overspend on frivolous things, it dilutes the argument. That's my point. Stop whining that you can't afford a $500k detached house when it's not necessary. And STFU about 40k cars. Nothing wrong with either, but neither are necessities. Somehow, working people manage to get along without them. And somehow, people manage to go without, and then save something on top of it.

But, "ok, boomer".

Sorry I just make regular money, and manage to save.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I mean, you’re looking pretty stupid saying a family making 120k needs a 500k house and a 40k car. But you do you.

In bc your lucky to get a condo for $350,000 we are talking like basic 1 bedroom . 500,000 dosen't even get you in the most basic of houses in 85% of the province.. That's like entry point now.

[blender]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

In bc your lucky to get a condo for $350,000 . 500,000 dosen't even get you in the most basic of houses in 85% of the province.. That's like entry point now.

Indeed.
I had no idea values were so low in Calgary .

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Roger

Yeah, well, when a single parent manages to make it, because he or she chooses not to overspend on frivolous things, it dilutes the argument. That's my point. Stop whining that you can't afford a $500k detached house when it's not necessary. And STFU about 40k cars. Nothing wrong with either, but neither are necessities. Somehow, working people manage to get along without them. And somehow, people manage to go without, and then save something on top of it.

But, "ok, boomer".

Sorry I just make regular money, and manage to save.

I think your overall point would resonate more if you took it from like a 10 to a 5. I didn’t bother to go back and re-read but your initial reply to Q seemed hilariously over the top aggressive.

I don’t even necessarily disagree with your point. Canadian expectations of standard of living is something that is 110% going to decrease in the future, that’s something you can bank on without doubt. And it’ll be good for society I think, weirdly.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by you&me

I'm still not convinced that UBI won't exasperate the labour supply problems we're seemingly seeing as a result of CERB.

Oh it would affect the market for sure. But not in the same way as CERB, because with CERB you could lose your benefit through employment. With a UBI, anything you earn on top is gravy. Still, undesirable jobs would have to make themselves more desirable, either through increased pay, or improving the job itself. And the goods and services that rely on people filling those undesirable jobs would go up in price. Even so, making a job have to be a fair trade with the employee, rather than something they need to survive, is more of a feature than a bug.

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

It could also further stagnate wages.

But a person's income would be more than their wages.

[combustiblefuel]

Tho boomers really are the arcitecture of the current economy plight its really the Gen xers' that should bear most the brunt . There's the ok Boomer and entitled millennials battle always going on but how does the gen xers' seem to never share the responsibility?

While they were "fighting for there right to party " there actions allowed the governments to let corporations to pay less and less taxes, let wages become stagnate ,let benifiets be cut, so.e 9f the lowest voters turnouts and the list goes on. They are the ones that fed the machine into what it is today under the guise of being "rebeling against the system' . The simpsons episode " homerpaloza " kinda hits the nail on the head.The 41 to 56 crowd are the ones that fuelled the last couple economy crashes that each one is bigger than the last and worst that the great depression( probably following advice from their Boomer parents) .

[combustiblefuel]

Nvm

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Roger

Yeah, well, when a single parent manages to make it, because he or she chooses not to overspend on frivolous things, it dilutes the argument. That's my point. Stop whining that you can't afford a $500k detached house when it's not necessary. And STFU about 40k cars. Nothing wrong with either, but neither are necessities. Somehow, working people manage to get along without them. And somehow, people manage to go without, and then save something on top of it.

But, "ok, boomer".

Sorry I just make regular money, and manage to save.

Your right it's not " ok Boomer" BUT gen xers were able to take advantage of the Boomer governments and parents being in a postion to help out . Gen exers fuelled by indifference and apathy were able to help multiple historic economy crashes , fuel government spending cuts, all time low voter turnouts, stagnate wages etc.

Then have the brass balls to shun millennials basically pull a bill Cosby "pull your pants up" routine of un self awareness . Your generation and the one before you basically are responsible for creating not a few but a whole generation of latchkey kids because there was no forethought just 2 generations that needed gratification now. When oomers and gen exers accuse millenials of needing self gratification right away it's easy to see that's
Juat classic projection. Boomers and gen exers historically never need to wait for perks they could afford to get it because you could at the time. No self awareness that wages were more inline with inflation not by much but the buying power you had was more proportional than today. Over spending in the last 2 generations fuelled the rising cost cooperation put us today.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by _Q_

So making an average salary means you have to rough it? It means you won't be able to purchase an average home or average vehicle? Making less than that means you're utterly screwed? How does that make sense at any point in history other than in this decade?

The median individual salary in Alberta is $44k.

I think a lot of Albertans haven’t come to grips with the fact that the economy here from 2000-2015 was an historic anomaly. Due to the incredible energy boom, salaries and standards of living here were among the highest in the world. The transition to the new normal will be traumatic.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Your right it's not " ok Boomer" BUT gen xers were able to take advantage of the Boomer governments and parents being in a postion to help out . Gen exers fuelled by indifference and apathy were able to help multiple historic economy crashes , fuel government spending cuts, all time low voter turnouts, stagnate wages etc.

Then have the brass balls to shun millennials basically pull a bill Cosby "pull your pants up" routine of un self awareness . Your generation and the one before you basically are responsible for creating not a few but a whole generation of latchkey kids because there was no forethought just 2 generations that needed gratification now. When oomers and gen exers accuse millenials of needing self gratification right away it's easy to see that's
Juat classic projection. Boomers and gen exers historically never need to wait for perks they could afford to get it because you could at the time. No self awareness that wages were more inline with inflation not by much but the buying power you had was more proportional than today. Over spending in the last 2 generations fuelled the rising cost cooperation put us today.

I didn’t earn over $30k until I was over 30 (and I moved out of my parents’ house when I was 19). Nobody I knew got into the housing ladder before they were 30. The economy in this province was pretty #### in the 90s.

The North American plost-war boom only lasted about 30 years, and was over by the late 70s. Having a good and secure job straight out of high school and buying a cheap house was a pretty shortlived thing.

[stone hands]

Reading comprehension bad, nevermind

[81MC]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

In bc your lucky to get a condo for $350,000 we are talking like basic 1 bedroom . 500,000 dosen't even get you in the most basic of houses in 85% of the province.. That's like entry point now.

You’re totally right, you literally can’t find a house for less than 350k in Kamloops for gods sake. 12 years ago, you could literally take your pick at that price point. That’s a reality that both X and boomers never had to grapple with, having the rug pulled out from under them. And not just home ownership, but the access to capital and the return on investment that is no longer available. The thought of being house poor just to live in a small apartment in an industrial town is foreign to anyone who was able to enter the market when I was graduating high school.

[GGG]

Why does housing cost what it does?

It seems like more supply should be able to eliminate any housing affordability problem. But a long with excess supply another thing that needs to be realized is that near city centres SFHs should eventually not exist.

How many new homes would it take to tank the housing market?

The other thing is with housing in Calgary is the median family income supports the purchase of the median SFH so that seems pretty balanced. If you wanted to reduce the market further you would have to increase qualifying standards for loans and down payments to make the affordability of housing drop. This might be offset by increased investment into rentals though.

Part of the problem is that so much money has been printed and instead of causing inflation it’s being hidden in stocks and houses and other assets. The only solution is to decrease money supply and there is a lot of resistance to that.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

In bc your lucky to get a condo for $350,000 we are talking like basic 1 bedroom . 500,000 dosen't even get you in the most basic of houses in 85% of the province.. That's like entry point now.

Have you looked at the condo market in the last year? Condos are fire sale at this point and for the foreseeable future.

edit: oh, in BC. Disregard, pre-coffee.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by RichieRich

I think you called me old? I'm not 50 yet but older than 40 but true enough I do have some older ideas, many of which were inherited from the parents. I was brought up without much (ie: yes I was that kid that had hand-me-down underwear), have travelled a lot and seen true true destitution where people might be "lucky" to live another day. So, to me, I see excess examples of consumerism, wastage, expectations and demands exceed potential to support them. I see far far too many failures where "the man" is to blame instead of personal accountability and self-awareness of immediate and long term decisions. For example, I have "poor" friends whose T4's are near $200k/annual who whine and moan about how they're only freedom-75 plan... yet they travel a lot, regular new cars, kids in many expensive sports that require travel, all kinds of toys, etc... and they actually feel they're hard done by. It's wrong, IMO, to expect the government to be your saviour. It's also wrong to expect any society to tax their way to prosperity, or to take from the richer and give to the poorer like we are headed towards. F that.



That said.. I support your concept of certain tax-exempt items, but lets also throw in consumption-based taxes. Even though I pay a fair bit of tax I do see some value in a graduated taxation too, however enough is enough at some point. Those that pay the least tax may be victims of their situation (earned or inherited or just crap luck) indeed, and that sucks, however it's not reasonable to expect those that scrimped and saved and worked their @$$e$ off to now be penalized.

You've obviously worked hard to accomplish what you have.

Now imagine that, while you were working hard, the cost of everything just increased from 20-300%, depending on the good, in relation to your income. You'd be pissed.

The other question is did you really earn that capital? Your house went up in value several times. Is that money you've earned or was it merely accumulated via manipulation of financial systems. If while saving for that first home, it just tripled in price before you could buy it, would that be fair?

In my line of work, I see a lot of people's financials. I see how many people aged 50+ have accumulated vast amounts of wealth through real estate, yet remain in constant debt. HELOCs taken against homes to buy Range Rovers.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by nik-

Have you looked at the condo market in the last year? Condos are fire sale at this point and for the foreseeable future.

edit: oh, in BC. Disregard, pre-coffee.

Using Calgary as an example for the real estate market is really misleading. Calgary has very high unemployment rates and went through a condo building boom during the last oil boom. So yes, there are a lot of cheap condos in Calgary, and there will be until the job market picks up. Yes, people from across Canada could move to Calgary, but would they be able to find a job?

Even with the suppressed labour market, the cost of housing is absurd in Calgary. Compare the cost of housing in Calgary to the cost of housing in historically economically depressed cities in the past.

Basically, everything related to the cost of living is just much more expensive than it used it be.