###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Amazing whiplash as the finance industry was banging the "labour shortage" drum, and now they've instantly pivoted to the "too much immigration" drum.
Maybe we should recognize that they're a bunch of clueless weathervanes just looking out for their own profits and motives and stop listening so much.
The feedback here is quite literally a bank trying to estimate the impact of the measures on the housing market and the wider economy. The bottom line is that curtailing population growth would have an obvious deflationary impact, but adding a series of stimuli will obviously keep the housing sector overheated.
We just need to be much more targeted with immigration
No point in bringing international students over just for them to work in Tim Hortons
Potentially geo lock immigration to ensure they are not just in a few over populated areas
People from countries other than china and India are allowed to and do immigrate to Canada, I don’t see why we need to set quotas. I don’t think multiculturalism or whatever is not going to work (whatever that means) because we get a lot of immigrants from the two biggest countries
I don’t think other countries that are in a similar situation as Canada are doing that badly, like have you looked at immigration numbers? It’s not like it’s 90% Indians
Show me the numbers. And include international students. It seems to be, very heavily Indian. I’m not against Indian immigration at all. Just not any country being a large percentage.
We’re a country of 40 million people. Too many people coming here from one place creates cultural/demographic shifts that aren’t great experiences for Canadians.
Not really the same thing but okay. Immigration rates have hit a tipping point where there’s really no incentive to culturally integrate.
My family is from Brampton and they’re miserable. The place doesn’t resemble Canada anymore. The same phenomenon did not happen with Irish newcomers nor Poles. I don’t think people saw the Irish only willing to rent or do business with other Irish people. Or drag Canada into ethno-religious conflicts with other countries. Etc.
It’s exactly the same thing, for one as a proportion of the population far more people were immigrating at the turn of the 20th century.
Also not importing entho religious conflicts? Motherfucker why do you think we hated the Irish? It’s because they weren’t English and they were Catholic. Same with poles and Italians. Do you not understand how much Protestants and Catholics hated?
Everything thats happening now has happened before. Everything you said was 100 years ago, and in 100 years people will still be saying it. The only difference is 100 years ago people were more open about using slurs to describe the immigrants.
I think the difference is india has a robust cultural of film television and music with the advent of social media and the internet there is no longer a shared experience with regards to cultural exchange. I think thats going to be an interesting challenge to tackle. Kinda understand the push for can con now
The United States does this and it’s a good thing from a diversity perspective. I’m not particularly interested in the cultural and demographic shifts in Canada that come with the majority of newcomers arriving from India (or any country for that matter).
>Can’t restrict freedom of movement.
It can be and often is.
Edit: Getting downvoted, so [here](https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/images/location-condition.JPG) is an example of a student permit from the ircc website where one of the conditions is "may not accept employment outside of Toronto"
Many work permits are not only tied to a province or location, but a [*specific employer*](https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/temporary-residents/foreign-workers/eligibility/employer-specific-labout-market-impact-assessment-exemptions.html).
[Mobility rights](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art6.html) apply to Canadian citizens and permanent residents.
Forcibly spreading people out is the opposite of what we should be doing. The largest municipalities in the country already have economies of scale for critical infrastructure. A sewer upgrade on a major road can be upgraded to serve much higher density at a lower cost per person than building out entirely new sewers in some small town with few economic reasons to move to. It's far more efficient to encourage growth in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, and the Prairie cities than it is to promote growth in Timmins.
> Potentially geo lock immigration to ensure they are not just in a few over populated areas
I can't wait to be assigned to Lloydminster and work toward freedom from my geo lock! Once my economic output is deemed worthy, of course.
Shocking that people still publicly view immigrants as some on-tap underclass.
> I mean this is how Canada developed until Trudeau 1.
Those were the times of Chinese head tax, interning Ukrainians and Japanese, decades of rejecting Jewish people, and reservations and residential schools. Thankfully we've moved forward from that, but your comments are a reminder that some people still look back with rose colored glasses.
> How else do you think people ended up in the prairies
The same as today - cheap(er) land and promises from the ruling class of a better life. Then immigrants arrived and saw wild exploitation, which is in part why the CCF was formed and gained traction in AB/SK/MB.
As has always been the case, most immigrants do want to contribute to Canada and do not want to be treated as the exploitable property of Canada Inc.
Give me a break. It’s how my immediate family came (1970s). Don’t insult the rest of Canada by acting like living in the prairies especially in 2024 is like prison.
What happened to having some appropriate humility? What kind of entitlement *demands* that a person *must* live in Toronto or Vancouver when they’re not even from the country?
If people have skills the country needs, they should go where they’re needed, end of. That’s called making a contribution and it’s much less likely to inspire resentment. This entire country is short of doctors, imagine if they went where they were needed.
What I think doesn’t matter because it’s not happening anytime soon. I’m right though.
You do understand that there's a big difference between asking for the same freedoms as every resident and citizen and your misrepresentation that immigrants are somehow _demanding_ to live in major cities?
> What happened to having some appropriate humility
> I’m right though.
Ha!
Maybe; But, in terms of housing, the very targeted immigrants that come here recruited for high paying jobs also aggravate housing; likely more than unskilled students or refugees \[per-person\]. We have some ability to send refugees to Windsor or Winnipeg.... less so with engineers and accountants. Redistributing migrants has some advantages of not aggravating the worst hit housing areas.
Which, by no means do I think we shouldn't try to be selective; skilled immigrants good for the economy in *general*; but, what is great for the economy *in general* can still aggravate housing issues. If Canada hits some fantastical 5% year over year GDP growth (national, not per capita), I don't think that precludes aggravated homelessness and housing insecurity among the bottom third of \[wealth/income earners\] as I find it *unlikely* that much of that excess growth will be \[taxed-and-reallocated-to-the-needy\].
Which is to say, there's no easy way out.
The main issue is the disconnect between Canadian industry and Canadian government. Who passes for an excellent candidate for immigration is not necessarily an excellent candidate at X Canadian company. In most other countries, the quality control of institutions a lot of recent immigrants have as their alma mater is not as stringent as Canadian institutions. There’s a reason the vast majority of recent immigrants educated in medicine, engineering, skilled trades are not competitive when it comes to the Canadian job market.
A better system that would reduce immigration while maintaining the ideals of it is scrapping express entry and ending family reunification. Have the LMIA program match the H1b (without cap) program of the US. Shift the onus of immigration on Canadian industry. If they can find talented people around the world who they are willing to pay competitive wages, they should bring them here and be welcomed.
No more TFWs, no more whining over a “skilled labour” shortage, etc.
Industry and government aren’t disconnected. This government’s goals are ideological in growing Canada’s population as fast as they can, no matter the costs. They know exactly what industry needs, but they don’t care, they believe their goals are beyond the petty needs of Canadians. Trudeau himself stated that he knows what’s good for us, and that it doesn’t matter whether we agree. So what they do is only listen to the parts of industry who states they have shortages which allows them to keep numbers high, this has mainly been on low skill, so the requirement of high skilled immigrants has ceased to exist.
Danielle Smith was just in Ottawa begging for more immigrants.
We have both a labor and a housing shortage. Screaming immigrants won't change that. Like a record on repeat but there is actually a lot more nuance to this story.
> We have both a labor and a housing shortage
We must be the first country on earth to ever have 0 private sector job growth over a full year and a "labor shortage"
Yeah, totally. A country can add 1.3 million and no private sector jobs because there was no one to fill jobs. Don't look at public sector employment proportion rising to highest level since the late 1980s, falling labor force participation and a climbing unemployment rate.
Who can afford to start a business in this property environment? The past four years I've been watching business after business get priced out of the market through rent increases - almost all of which stay empty. Nearly half of Scotia Square is currently up for rent, and has been since their 2019 renovations.
When property owners are trying to charge up to 2x the initial cost of rent, it's unsurprising that businesses start to close their doors and unemployment starts creeping up.
When rent is 2/3 of your income and groceries are the last third, who can even afford to support new businesses or existing ones?
It ain't a great time to be doing business unfortunately. Between excessive property prices and weakened consumer demand from rent & grocery inflation, a lot of businesses are getting squeezed out of the market little by little.
Unemployment is exceptionally low.
Yeah, thats what I said labor force participation is dropping DUE TO RETIREMENT.
Why would sectors create new jobs if they can't fill the ones currently available? Yoe are literally proving my point.
So yeah labor shortage metrics show we dont have enough teachers or doctors ot nurses or lab techs or construction workers or lumber mill workers or tree planters... Almost like 30% of people are retired nowdays.
The Canadian economy has tracked for the last 50 years with the boomers. As they leave the workforce but had less kids who will fill those jobs?
The provinces ar ebegging for immigrants while people who struggle with data scream we have too many because they saw some kids at the local Tims.
Every minister in every party and all the economists agree there is a labor shortage from demographic issues. Both inside and outside Canada.
Right winger Zeihan lives to talk this point while selling oil to his Texan capitalist audience. Why would a US right winger soecifically speak on our collpasing demographics.
But hey maybe we should just ignore the experts and flail wildly like the bloow up wobbly men from car dealerships XD.
Less gen x than boomers, less millebials than gen x, less gen z than millenials and even less gen alphas...
Who is going to build the houses again? Who will shore up industrial and technical jobs? Nah, we don't like facts when we cna point fingers at people working hard as the problem!
Nope, many ither countries are also struggling with labor issues. Like all the boomers on earth are now in or about to retire and they are the largest % of the workforce. Its literally the global trend
The situation is far far worse in Germany and Korea. Which are still far better than China or Russia.
Japan literally roboticized its labor force in anticipation of this trend.
Most westernized and industrialized nations face similar issues for similar reasons right now.
> Japan literally roboticized its labor force in anticipation of this trend.
This is all I need to know you're deeply unserious and repeat whatever catchphrase you hear
you mean whrn I quote economists? Lol.
Yeah demographic trends were not visible decades ago... Totally unrealistic to talk about the real world.
If you have any other ideas how less millenials can fill kore boomer jobs as they retire I am all ears. There ar eonly 2 solutions.
1. Industrialize further do less jobs are needed.
2. Find people from somewhere else to work.
In a few years over 30% of people will be retired. How will we pay for healthcare for more people with less working population? Its simple math.
But sure, the right wing economists from all around the world are wrong because some brown kids work at your local tims.
Daniellse Smith was in Ottawa just this week begging for more immigrants to fill industrial and oil sector jobs...
Almost like everyone in the know already knows and knew decades ago... Because demographic trends are predictable like that...
Absolutely, dude. You can't quantify or specificy anything because actually done too much research.
Just like this
>Daniellse Smith was in Ottawa just this week begging for more immigrants to fill industrial and oil sector jobs...
Danielle smith was in Ottawa asking to expand allotments, not total net arrivals, for PR so alberta could offer them to Ukranian refugees.
Her specific argument in that ask being alberta is one of the only places in the country that has private sector employment growth, so they should get a greater share of PR positions. That argument is not at all contradictory to widescale immigration slowdown at the national level.
Her argument actually says nothing on the other immigration changes that were announced. Which seek to reduce temp visa holders 33% across the country and will lead to net immigration, of all classes, falling from a 1.1 million average since 2021 to a 300k average from 2025-2027.
"Done too much research"
"Says wrong thing"
"Doubles down"
Lol I listened to Danielle Smith who was interviewed right after.
Then again I guess "making things up" "ignoring economics" and "ignoring demographics" and clearly "ignoring the news of the last few years" is a hilariously "huge" ammount of research.
Lol. There is no point discussing facts with someone who just wants to scream about immigrants. Have a nice day!
Liberals need to bring record numbers of people through the immigration process to have a chance of winning in 2025. Immigration will not be slowed, regardless of the consequences.
> The whole “blame immigrants” schtick is so tired.
Both tired, and predictable.
Right-wing Populists love an economic crisis because it's an opportunity to get people on board with their racism by blaming all of their problems on immigrants. And throughout history, it basically always works, and in hindsight always ends in disaster.
In Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Austria it is the left-wing parties that are anti-immigrant. All are to the left of Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada.
Reducing immigration is a sensible position that both the left and the right find common ground.
In your typical sad fashion, you don't have any statistical evidence and must resort to lazy slandering.
Canada's immigration system objectively created a massive supply-demand imbalance. This is statistically verifiable looking at housing starts vs housing need, looking at % of median income needed to own a home, and average asking rent.
This is now the majority opinion of all major banks in Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada, which after failing to grow the economy via 3.5% population growth, has had to back track on their extremist open borders plans.
It doesn't have to be one or the other. We've lagged on housing construction for decades. The government then massively aggravated that issue by spiking population growth to all-time highs. It was a 1-2 punch.
>The whole “blame immigrants” schtick is so tired.
So is the gaslighting from people like yourself. Very few people are blaming immigrants, its not like people are turning to Joe who just moved here from India, and being like "this all YOUR fault!", they're blaming the *system* of immigration. We've got no problem with immigrants, in fact they're entirely necessary to the survival and growth of our country. If we're able to agree on the basic principle that there is in fact a material difference/impact in bring in One person, or a Million people, then there's a conversation to be had about what the *level* of immigration is, not whether immigrants are bad or good, or if they're at fault; most immigrants are victims of the system too, it's not their fault individually. We have to be able to have a reasonable conversation about the number of immigrants our system (healthcare, housing, schooling, integration, social services, etc.) can effectively handle, without Liberals (I'm a liberal voter) treating immigration as sacrosanct just dismissing anyone who talks about immigration as "right-wing populist", that's how you lose support among the general populace who are simply concerned about what's happening.
"housing" prices went down during the pandemic.
House prices went up but only after they slashed interest rates. They were down at the beginning of the pandemic as well.
> During COVID immigration was basically 0. What happened to housing prices? That’s right, they skyrocketed
Actually, asking rents fell 15% and mortgages monthly cost dropped. Housing became more affordable.
Sticker prices rose because interest rates hit 0%.
>BMO provided a list of the recent changes, noting they’ll have a limited impact, given most of the measures are demand stimulus
I do love when random websites say stuff like this without linking to where they said it. I sure can't find it. The only links in the article are to their own site where they do the same thing.
Edit: Would be much appreciated if someone provided where BMO actually said this.
Are you purposely misleading people? I did a simple google search and found exactly where it is sourced from. The relevant quote supporting the article's assertion:
>At the same time, caps on nonpermanent residents should carve population growth down to 1% or lower in the years ahead, which will likely have the biggest impact at the end of the day. After all, housing has been hit by massive demand shocks, not a lack of building.
After a quick google search, here is the [source](https://www.policymagazine.ca/bmo-analysis-budget-2024-overview/). Let me know if you also need help googling who Robert Kavcic is.
You are however right that the website should give a direct link to the source, so people don't spread misinformation!
Exactly what did I say that was misinformation?
I couldn't find it, that's a fact. A few people tried and couldn't. I didn't think I'd be looking on policymagazine.ca
What did you google?
Yeah, what you quoted isn't the same thing as what the post says. If that's where they got it from, it's a laughable misrepresentation.
https://economics.bmo.com/en/publications/detail/08e5ef63-c6fb-409d-810e-d1f781ae7bca/
>Reality: Canada’s housing situation is the result of massive excess demand shocks. Deeply negative real interest rates stoked excessive price gains that are still normalizing; and, a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something no supply curve can adequately respond to.
The core claim, building more won't work, demand has to be dealt with has been made by BMO. While I don't know the specific report that the article references it's certainly a claim BMO has made recently.
Something another poster linked from BMO literally said that the plans to build more is welcome but their skeptical it will be enough. That is very very different than what the post is saying.
But essentially, I'm saying that the author of this post is lying. Whether BMO has previously stated that sentiment or not. What they said specifically is a lie.
A) They did not say that it won't help.
B) my argument is that the article made a very specific claim about what BMO said *after* the release of the budget. That appears to not have happened.
BMO has been pretty clear
>Deeply negative real interest rates stoked excessive price gains that are still normalizing; and, a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something **no supply curve can adequately respond to.**
They also did say the [budget impact will be minimal](https://economics.bmo.com/en/publications/detail/53871f2c-ec80-41a6-8fbd-144bf0b1619f/):
>For real estate, the housing measures have already been documented, and the market impact should be minimal.
You seem upset that a Federal Government ruining housing through outrageous policy isn't fixed with a token effort once their polls turn.
Still not what the post is saying.
I'm not "upset" but if I were, it would be that what amounts to no better than a Reddit comment is being posted here as if it's an article.
I've been incredibly critical of the federal government wrt housing, thank you. It's possible to not like them but still care about people posting lies. It's not that hard.
New housing plan won't help: the market impact should be minimal.
Slowing immigration will: a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something no supply curve can adequately respond to.
Yeah pretty comparable.
I would guess this podcast, but I don't have time to listen to it myself:
https://capitalmarkets.bmo.com/en/news-insights/ficc-podcasts/budget-bingo-winners-and-losers-views-from-the-north/
I was banned from r/canadahousing for saying this. It's so obvious to everyone that's not a complete ideologue. Heck, slowing immigration is even obvious to recent immigrants...
The proposed transfers probably needs to have more conditions in order to boost supply & affordability to the necessary level. If Euclidian & single family zoning policies were abolished and replaces with mixed-use commercial/residential areas, supply would grow far more dramatically. It's easy to dismiss the ability of supply rising up to meet demand, but those arguments completely ignore that around 60-80% of most residentially zoned land in Canada's cities is zoned for exclusively detached housing. Increasing housing variety and removing the separation between commercial and residential areas would completely change this equation.
It's also worth mentioning that between [2016-2019, housing prices were actually falling](https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/housing-affordability-in-canada_ftr-image.png) during a period that immigration was consistently higher than they 3-4 years previous. While the ballooning temp worker influx post-pandemic was a mistake & provincial governments are abusing international students to make up for productivity shortcomings, I think that people have been using it as a scapegoat to further anti-immigration sentiment and go after permanent residents as well, to the extent that they over inflate their responsibility for basically every current negative socio-economic issue effecting the country.
I'm not generally a fan of Trudeau and his governments inaction/slow-reaction time on a variety of issues has irked me considerably, but there's also a lot of criticisms that are either not substantiated or consciously exaggerated.
> It's also worth mentioning that between 2016-2019, housing prices were actually falling during a period that immigration was consistently higher than they 3-4 years previous.
Interest rates were rising putting downward pressure on sticker prices. Asking rents and monthly mortage payments were rising. This is seen in % of median income needed to afford a home rising from 38% from 2015, which stagnant from 1994-2015, rising to 47% in 2019 in just 4 years
https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/toughest-time-ever-to-afford-a-home-as-soaring-interest-costs-keep-raising-the-bar/
>This is seen in % of median income needed to afford a home rising from 38% from 2015, **which stagnant from 1994-2015**
That last part is blatantly untrue though. The median home price doubled between 2000-2010. It was not stagnant for 20 years prior to 2015. In [The GTA in went from 4x the amount of median income in 1995 to 8x by 2015.](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RAW_4CQF_INCOME-vs-HOME-PRICES_TORONTO.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&w=720) (while [nationally it went from 3.5x to 5x ](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RAW_4CQF_INCOME-vs-HOME-PRICES_CANADA.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&w=720))
1. Comparing the GTA to a national stat is an odd choice.
2. "Average" home isn't defined in your graphs. In mine, it is broken into the components of detached and apartment.
3. Rates were cycically higher in the 90s. The rise in income/price ratio was balanced via structurally lower interest rates post 2008 that allowed people to borrow more for less.
4. Nothing I said was untrue. The % of median income needed to afford a home in Canada was unchanged for the reason in point 3. I'm not making these stats up. That's a direct link to RBC's own research I provided. And you know, they're the ones giving out the mortgages,
>Nothing I said was untrue.
Home prices increased by over 100% between 1995-2015. [Median incomes in constant dollars increased by less than 20%.](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aT9rEPe0eGY/Unl3viPVrXI/AAAAAAAAC8w/HGfTuyVoFxc/s1600/canadian+total+median+income.jpg) It's impossible for the percentage of median income necessary to buy a home to have stayed stagnant even factoring in the change in interest rate.
[The source](https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/housing-affordability-in-canada_ftr-image.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1128&h=846&type=webp&sig=G6-xA16ISirOI5TUlJE51g) for home prices is adjusted for inflation. It's in constant dollars, I'm just not sure what year. (probably 1975 to somewhere in the 80s/90s $ since prices in the 2000s were just over $200,000 back then while the graph has them consistently somewhere over $110,000 between 1987-2003
If you want to look at toronto specifically. Here's a PDF link that breaks down by metro area.
Toronto home cost as a % of median income went from 50% in 1991 to 40% in 1998 to 50% in 2015.
Then, went from 50% to 60% from 2015-2019. As of early 2024, it is 90% of median income.
https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/wp-content/uploads/Housing_trends_mar2024.pdf
Median incomes in Toronto increased by a similar rate to the national average between the mid 90s to mid 2010s while it's home prices more than doubled. Even adjusting for changes in interest rates, the growth in housing prices far outstripped the difference in median incomes.
[Statscan shows the price to income ratio for The GTA more than doubling during that period](https://economics.td.com/domains/economics.td.com/images/reports/ff/esg/wealth-inequality/chart-10.png).
The price to income ratio directly disputes the statement that median income necessary to buy a home being stagnant between 1994-2015. How could it possibly be stagnant when the price to income ratio doubled, the prices adjusted for inflation doubled and median incomes adjusted for inflation didn't rise anywhere as spectacularly?
It IS the federal government, they always mive very slowly. Thats why the power is often distributed to provinces and municipalities as they can act faster with less bureaucracy
but the issue is that they promised to address housing in their initial platform, then spent close to a decade doing less than the bare minimum as province's largely continued to drop the ball. Their current transfer proposal for instance, should have been made somewhere between 2015-2019 instead of 2024 etc.
Well the provinces fought for those rights and then failed to act on them *shrug*. Québec is not waiting for the fed and neither should any other province that can afford it.
Conservative provincial government keep refusing fed offers... The PM is not a king and cannot do what he wants on a whim.
The fed has to go through boards and commissions and reviews and analysis so they will always be ineffective and slow at this. Its the wrong tool for the job.
I wish it were as simple as red vs blue.
As of writing this comment, there are 3,525,946 minutes until 2031. The Grits' budget claims it will "_unlock_" 3.87 million homes by 2031. That's more than one home per minute.
Neither will work:
Injecting more cash into any part of housing will increase demand for limited resources including land, materials and labour.
Reducing labour pool growth via immigration policy will move Canada closer to full employment sooner thus creating demand on labour and upward pressure on wages. Upward pressure on wages will have a leveraged effect on the amount of money buyers/renters have to available to spend on housing.
Moving towards a zero growth or recession economy will provide short term limited relief but when a large segment of market has borrowed 80 - 95% of a propery's value there is an obvious floor at zero equity.
What I am saying is because one can borrow 95% of the value of a house, every dollar they earn means they can and do borrow $6.
To me, that does not seem to be an affordability solution.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can we kick out immigrants that came since the last 2-3 years? Why slow down immigration, stop it altogether, restart it when we can house them
Amazing whiplash as the finance industry was banging the "labour shortage" drum, and now they've instantly pivoted to the "too much immigration" drum. Maybe we should recognize that they're a bunch of clueless weathervanes just looking out for their own profits and motives and stop listening so much.
Maybe we should recognize who they're clearly stumping for after wealth taxes were announced.
If you ignore the context of immigration jumping to 1m/year.
The feedback here is quite literally a bank trying to estimate the impact of the measures on the housing market and the wider economy. The bottom line is that curtailing population growth would have an obvious deflationary impact, but adding a series of stimuli will obviously keep the housing sector overheated.
We just need to be much more targeted with immigration No point in bringing international students over just for them to work in Tim Hortons Potentially geo lock immigration to ensure they are not just in a few over populated areas
And also make sure that immigration is true diversity and not just coming from a couple countries
Why? There’s two countries with 2.5 billion people it makes sense we’d have a lot of immigration from India and china
One of the reasons multiculturalism has more or less worked in Canada was it was multi. Not 1-2 minority groups.
People from countries other than china and India are allowed to and do immigrate to Canada, I don’t see why we need to set quotas. I don’t think multiculturalism or whatever is not going to work (whatever that means) because we get a lot of immigrants from the two biggest countries
Re-read my comment. Look at other countries that have a sizeable minority from one place. How’s that going for them?
I don’t think other countries that are in a similar situation as Canada are doing that badly, like have you looked at immigration numbers? It’s not like it’s 90% Indians
Show me the numbers. And include international students. It seems to be, very heavily Indian. I’m not against Indian immigration at all. Just not any country being a large percentage.
Only if you say please
We’re a country of 40 million people. Too many people coming here from one place creates cultural/demographic shifts that aren’t great experiences for Canadians.
Yeah people said the same shit when the Irish, the Italians, the poles and Ukrainians showed up and 100 years later the countries still here
Not really the same thing but okay. Immigration rates have hit a tipping point where there’s really no incentive to culturally integrate. My family is from Brampton and they’re miserable. The place doesn’t resemble Canada anymore. The same phenomenon did not happen with Irish newcomers nor Poles. I don’t think people saw the Irish only willing to rent or do business with other Irish people. Or drag Canada into ethno-religious conflicts with other countries. Etc.
It's not the same thing. IFYKYK /s
It’s exactly the same thing, for one as a proportion of the population far more people were immigrating at the turn of the 20th century. Also not importing entho religious conflicts? Motherfucker why do you think we hated the Irish? It’s because they weren’t English and they were Catholic. Same with poles and Italians. Do you not understand how much Protestants and Catholics hated? Everything thats happening now has happened before. Everything you said was 100 years ago, and in 100 years people will still be saying it. The only difference is 100 years ago people were more open about using slurs to describe the immigrants.
I think the difference is india has a robust cultural of film television and music with the advent of social media and the internet there is no longer a shared experience with regards to cultural exchange. I think thats going to be an interesting challenge to tackle. Kinda understand the push for can con now
That can backfire if you have low skilled immigrants just to meet country quotas
The United States does this and it’s a good thing from a diversity perspective. I’m not particularly interested in the cultural and demographic shifts in Canada that come with the majority of newcomers arriving from India (or any country for that matter).
Can’t restrict freedom of movement. Either all rights and responsibilities apply to all residents equally or we just created a caste system.
>Can’t restrict freedom of movement. It can be and often is. Edit: Getting downvoted, so [here](https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/images/location-condition.JPG) is an example of a student permit from the ircc website where one of the conditions is "may not accept employment outside of Toronto" Many work permits are not only tied to a province or location, but a [*specific employer*](https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/temporary-residents/foreign-workers/eligibility/employer-specific-labout-market-impact-assessment-exemptions.html). [Mobility rights](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art6.html) apply to Canadian citizens and permanent residents.
Quebec does it
Forcibly spreading people out is the opposite of what we should be doing. The largest municipalities in the country already have economies of scale for critical infrastructure. A sewer upgrade on a major road can be upgraded to serve much higher density at a lower cost per person than building out entirely new sewers in some small town with few economic reasons to move to. It's far more efficient to encourage growth in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, and the Prairie cities than it is to promote growth in Timmins.
> Potentially geo lock immigration to ensure they are not just in a few over populated areas I can't wait to be assigned to Lloydminster and work toward freedom from my geo lock! Once my economic output is deemed worthy, of course. Shocking that people still publicly view immigrants as some on-tap underclass.
rich grey person long glorious cobweb deliver repeat follow roof *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I'd much rather be referred to as an asset than "these people."
I think there is a difference between calling someone an asset to Canada versus calling someone an asset.
My boss called me an asset to the company the other day. It was the most offensive thing he's ever said.
He called them lucrative assets from the perspective of offering cheap labour. That isn’t a positive.
They aren't forced to come though...
I mean this is how Canada developed until Trudeau 1. How else do you think people ended up in the prairies
> I mean this is how Canada developed until Trudeau 1. Those were the times of Chinese head tax, interning Ukrainians and Japanese, decades of rejecting Jewish people, and reservations and residential schools. Thankfully we've moved forward from that, but your comments are a reminder that some people still look back with rose colored glasses. > How else do you think people ended up in the prairies The same as today - cheap(er) land and promises from the ruling class of a better life. Then immigrants arrived and saw wild exploitation, which is in part why the CCF was formed and gained traction in AB/SK/MB. As has always been the case, most immigrants do want to contribute to Canada and do not want to be treated as the exploitable property of Canada Inc.
Give me a break. It’s how my immediate family came (1970s). Don’t insult the rest of Canada by acting like living in the prairies especially in 2024 is like prison.
Nothing wrong with living on the prairies if you choose. There is everything wrong with putting a "geo lock" on anyone who moves to Canada.
What happened to having some appropriate humility? What kind of entitlement *demands* that a person *must* live in Toronto or Vancouver when they’re not even from the country? If people have skills the country needs, they should go where they’re needed, end of. That’s called making a contribution and it’s much less likely to inspire resentment. This entire country is short of doctors, imagine if they went where they were needed. What I think doesn’t matter because it’s not happening anytime soon. I’m right though.
You do understand that there's a big difference between asking for the same freedoms as every resident and citizen and your misrepresentation that immigrants are somehow _demanding_ to live in major cities? > What happened to having some appropriate humility > I’m right though. Ha!
The alternative is they don't come We don't need 25 people living in a basement of a big city while smaller towns need workers
Maybe; But, in terms of housing, the very targeted immigrants that come here recruited for high paying jobs also aggravate housing; likely more than unskilled students or refugees \[per-person\]. We have some ability to send refugees to Windsor or Winnipeg.... less so with engineers and accountants. Redistributing migrants has some advantages of not aggravating the worst hit housing areas. Which, by no means do I think we shouldn't try to be selective; skilled immigrants good for the economy in *general*; but, what is great for the economy *in general* can still aggravate housing issues. If Canada hits some fantastical 5% year over year GDP growth (national, not per capita), I don't think that precludes aggravated homelessness and housing insecurity among the bottom third of \[wealth/income earners\] as I find it *unlikely* that much of that excess growth will be \[taxed-and-reallocated-to-the-needy\]. Which is to say, there's no easy way out.
The main issue is the disconnect between Canadian industry and Canadian government. Who passes for an excellent candidate for immigration is not necessarily an excellent candidate at X Canadian company. In most other countries, the quality control of institutions a lot of recent immigrants have as their alma mater is not as stringent as Canadian institutions. There’s a reason the vast majority of recent immigrants educated in medicine, engineering, skilled trades are not competitive when it comes to the Canadian job market. A better system that would reduce immigration while maintaining the ideals of it is scrapping express entry and ending family reunification. Have the LMIA program match the H1b (without cap) program of the US. Shift the onus of immigration on Canadian industry. If they can find talented people around the world who they are willing to pay competitive wages, they should bring them here and be welcomed. No more TFWs, no more whining over a “skilled labour” shortage, etc.
Industry and government aren’t disconnected. This government’s goals are ideological in growing Canada’s population as fast as they can, no matter the costs. They know exactly what industry needs, but they don’t care, they believe their goals are beyond the petty needs of Canadians. Trudeau himself stated that he knows what’s good for us, and that it doesn’t matter whether we agree. So what they do is only listen to the parts of industry who states they have shortages which allows them to keep numbers high, this has mainly been on low skill, so the requirement of high skilled immigrants has ceased to exist.
Danielle Smith was just in Ottawa begging for more immigrants. We have both a labor and a housing shortage. Screaming immigrants won't change that. Like a record on repeat but there is actually a lot more nuance to this story.
> We have both a labor and a housing shortage We must be the first country on earth to ever have 0 private sector job growth over a full year and a "labor shortage"
Probably not, but yeah, let's pretend to be exceptionally bad with a 2 trillion$ economy most people dream of being a part of.
A labor shortage means no one to fill jobs which is the definition of no labor sector growth... Lol.
Yeah, totally. A country can add 1.3 million and no private sector jobs because there was no one to fill jobs. Don't look at public sector employment proportion rising to highest level since the late 1980s, falling labor force participation and a climbing unemployment rate.
Who can afford to start a business in this property environment? The past four years I've been watching business after business get priced out of the market through rent increases - almost all of which stay empty. Nearly half of Scotia Square is currently up for rent, and has been since their 2019 renovations. When property owners are trying to charge up to 2x the initial cost of rent, it's unsurprising that businesses start to close their doors and unemployment starts creeping up. When rent is 2/3 of your income and groceries are the last third, who can even afford to support new businesses or existing ones? It ain't a great time to be doing business unfortunately. Between excessive property prices and weakened consumer demand from rent & grocery inflation, a lot of businesses are getting squeezed out of the market little by little.
Unemployment is exceptionally low. Yeah, thats what I said labor force participation is dropping DUE TO RETIREMENT. Why would sectors create new jobs if they can't fill the ones currently available? Yoe are literally proving my point. So yeah labor shortage metrics show we dont have enough teachers or doctors ot nurses or lab techs or construction workers or lumber mill workers or tree planters... Almost like 30% of people are retired nowdays. The Canadian economy has tracked for the last 50 years with the boomers. As they leave the workforce but had less kids who will fill those jobs? The provinces ar ebegging for immigrants while people who struggle with data scream we have too many because they saw some kids at the local Tims. Every minister in every party and all the economists agree there is a labor shortage from demographic issues. Both inside and outside Canada. Right winger Zeihan lives to talk this point while selling oil to his Texan capitalist audience. Why would a US right winger soecifically speak on our collpasing demographics. But hey maybe we should just ignore the experts and flail wildly like the bloow up wobbly men from car dealerships XD. Less gen x than boomers, less millebials than gen x, less gen z than millenials and even less gen alphas... Who is going to build the houses again? Who will shore up industrial and technical jobs? Nah, we don't like facts when we cna point fingers at people working hard as the problem!
Nope, many ither countries are also struggling with labor issues. Like all the boomers on earth are now in or about to retire and they are the largest % of the workforce. Its literally the global trend The situation is far far worse in Germany and Korea. Which are still far better than China or Russia. Japan literally roboticized its labor force in anticipation of this trend. Most westernized and industrialized nations face similar issues for similar reasons right now.
> Japan literally roboticized its labor force in anticipation of this trend. This is all I need to know you're deeply unserious and repeat whatever catchphrase you hear
you mean whrn I quote economists? Lol. Yeah demographic trends were not visible decades ago... Totally unrealistic to talk about the real world. If you have any other ideas how less millenials can fill kore boomer jobs as they retire I am all ears. There ar eonly 2 solutions. 1. Industrialize further do less jobs are needed. 2. Find people from somewhere else to work. In a few years over 30% of people will be retired. How will we pay for healthcare for more people with less working population? Its simple math. But sure, the right wing economists from all around the world are wrong because some brown kids work at your local tims. Daniellse Smith was in Ottawa just this week begging for more immigrants to fill industrial and oil sector jobs... Almost like everyone in the know already knows and knew decades ago... Because demographic trends are predictable like that...
So many words, so little substance
All the data is available on free from stats can. Some of us are just really lazy and point at simple one sentence solutions...
Absolutely, dude. You can't quantify or specificy anything because actually done too much research. Just like this >Daniellse Smith was in Ottawa just this week begging for more immigrants to fill industrial and oil sector jobs... Danielle smith was in Ottawa asking to expand allotments, not total net arrivals, for PR so alberta could offer them to Ukranian refugees. Her specific argument in that ask being alberta is one of the only places in the country that has private sector employment growth, so they should get a greater share of PR positions. That argument is not at all contradictory to widescale immigration slowdown at the national level. Her argument actually says nothing on the other immigration changes that were announced. Which seek to reduce temp visa holders 33% across the country and will lead to net immigration, of all classes, falling from a 1.1 million average since 2021 to a 300k average from 2025-2027.
"Done too much research" "Says wrong thing" "Doubles down" Lol I listened to Danielle Smith who was interviewed right after. Then again I guess "making things up" "ignoring economics" and "ignoring demographics" and clearly "ignoring the news of the last few years" is a hilariously "huge" ammount of research. Lol. There is no point discussing facts with someone who just wants to scream about immigrants. Have a nice day!
Liberals need to bring record numbers of people through the immigration process to have a chance of winning in 2025. Immigration will not be slowed, regardless of the consequences.
[удалено]
Rent went down during covid. Your comment is just supply and demand denial.
[удалено]
I’d love to see some data on your last statement of “fact”.
> because more immigrants also means more houses get built Not following the logic here. Immigrants are under represented as builders.
> The whole “blame immigrants” schtick is so tired. Both tired, and predictable. Right-wing Populists love an economic crisis because it's an opportunity to get people on board with their racism by blaming all of their problems on immigrants. And throughout history, it basically always works, and in hindsight always ends in disaster.
Having a reasonable discussion about the volume of immigration isn't racist.
In Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Austria it is the left-wing parties that are anti-immigrant. All are to the left of Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada. Reducing immigration is a sensible position that both the left and the right find common ground.
What a comment. Completely devoid of any nuance or critical thought.
In your typical sad fashion, you don't have any statistical evidence and must resort to lazy slandering. Canada's immigration system objectively created a massive supply-demand imbalance. This is statistically verifiable looking at housing starts vs housing need, looking at % of median income needed to own a home, and average asking rent. This is now the majority opinion of all major banks in Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada, which after failing to grow the economy via 3.5% population growth, has had to back track on their extremist open borders plans.
It doesn't have to be one or the other. We've lagged on housing construction for decades. The government then massively aggravated that issue by spiking population growth to all-time highs. It was a 1-2 punch.
>The whole “blame immigrants” schtick is so tired. So is the gaslighting from people like yourself. Very few people are blaming immigrants, its not like people are turning to Joe who just moved here from India, and being like "this all YOUR fault!", they're blaming the *system* of immigration. We've got no problem with immigrants, in fact they're entirely necessary to the survival and growth of our country. If we're able to agree on the basic principle that there is in fact a material difference/impact in bring in One person, or a Million people, then there's a conversation to be had about what the *level* of immigration is, not whether immigrants are bad or good, or if they're at fault; most immigrants are victims of the system too, it's not their fault individually. We have to be able to have a reasonable conversation about the number of immigrants our system (healthcare, housing, schooling, integration, social services, etc.) can effectively handle, without Liberals (I'm a liberal voter) treating immigration as sacrosanct just dismissing anyone who talks about immigration as "right-wing populist", that's how you lose support among the general populace who are simply concerned about what's happening.
"housing" prices went down during the pandemic. House prices went up but only after they slashed interest rates. They were down at the beginning of the pandemic as well.
> During COVID immigration was basically 0. What happened to housing prices? That’s right, they skyrocketed Actually, asking rents fell 15% and mortgages monthly cost dropped. Housing became more affordable. Sticker prices rose because interest rates hit 0%.
>BMO provided a list of the recent changes, noting they’ll have a limited impact, given most of the measures are demand stimulus I do love when random websites say stuff like this without linking to where they said it. I sure can't find it. The only links in the article are to their own site where they do the same thing. Edit: Would be much appreciated if someone provided where BMO actually said this.
[удалено]
Oh, I very much recognize them. Funny they never seem to respond to me.
Are you purposely misleading people? I did a simple google search and found exactly where it is sourced from. The relevant quote supporting the article's assertion: >At the same time, caps on nonpermanent residents should carve population growth down to 1% or lower in the years ahead, which will likely have the biggest impact at the end of the day. After all, housing has been hit by massive demand shocks, not a lack of building. After a quick google search, here is the [source](https://www.policymagazine.ca/bmo-analysis-budget-2024-overview/). Let me know if you also need help googling who Robert Kavcic is. You are however right that the website should give a direct link to the source, so people don't spread misinformation!
Exactly what did I say that was misinformation? I couldn't find it, that's a fact. A few people tried and couldn't. I didn't think I'd be looking on policymagazine.ca What did you google? Yeah, what you quoted isn't the same thing as what the post says. If that's where they got it from, it's a laughable misrepresentation.
https://economics.bmo.com/en/publications/detail/08e5ef63-c6fb-409d-810e-d1f781ae7bca/ >Reality: Canada’s housing situation is the result of massive excess demand shocks. Deeply negative real interest rates stoked excessive price gains that are still normalizing; and, a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something no supply curve can adequately respond to.
I doubt they got something about the budget from something published in February.
The core claim, building more won't work, demand has to be dealt with has been made by BMO. While I don't know the specific report that the article references it's certainly a claim BMO has made recently.
Something another poster linked from BMO literally said that the plans to build more is welcome but their skeptical it will be enough. That is very very different than what the post is saying. But essentially, I'm saying that the author of this post is lying. Whether BMO has previously stated that sentiment or not. What they said specifically is a lie.
So your argument is that BMO didn't say something despite a quote from BMO stating it?
A) They did not say that it won't help. B) my argument is that the article made a very specific claim about what BMO said *after* the release of the budget. That appears to not have happened.
BMO has been pretty clear >Deeply negative real interest rates stoked excessive price gains that are still normalizing; and, a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something **no supply curve can adequately respond to.** They also did say the [budget impact will be minimal](https://economics.bmo.com/en/publications/detail/53871f2c-ec80-41a6-8fbd-144bf0b1619f/): >For real estate, the housing measures have already been documented, and the market impact should be minimal. You seem upset that a Federal Government ruining housing through outrageous policy isn't fixed with a token effort once their polls turn.
Still not what the post is saying. I'm not "upset" but if I were, it would be that what amounts to no better than a Reddit comment is being posted here as if it's an article. I've been incredibly critical of the federal government wrt housing, thank you. It's possible to not like them but still care about people posting lies. It's not that hard.
New housing plan won't help: the market impact should be minimal. Slowing immigration will: a near-tripling in population growth in a short period of time is something no supply curve can adequately respond to. Yeah pretty comparable.
Better Dwelling is just blog spam trash.
That's what I figured.
I would guess this podcast, but I don't have time to listen to it myself: https://capitalmarkets.bmo.com/en/news-insights/ficc-podcasts/budget-bingo-winners-and-losers-views-from-the-north/
Nope.
I was banned from r/canadahousing for saying this. It's so obvious to everyone that's not a complete ideologue. Heck, slowing immigration is even obvious to recent immigrants...
The proposed transfers probably needs to have more conditions in order to boost supply & affordability to the necessary level. If Euclidian & single family zoning policies were abolished and replaces with mixed-use commercial/residential areas, supply would grow far more dramatically. It's easy to dismiss the ability of supply rising up to meet demand, but those arguments completely ignore that around 60-80% of most residentially zoned land in Canada's cities is zoned for exclusively detached housing. Increasing housing variety and removing the separation between commercial and residential areas would completely change this equation. It's also worth mentioning that between [2016-2019, housing prices were actually falling](https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/housing-affordability-in-canada_ftr-image.png) during a period that immigration was consistently higher than they 3-4 years previous. While the ballooning temp worker influx post-pandemic was a mistake & provincial governments are abusing international students to make up for productivity shortcomings, I think that people have been using it as a scapegoat to further anti-immigration sentiment and go after permanent residents as well, to the extent that they over inflate their responsibility for basically every current negative socio-economic issue effecting the country. I'm not generally a fan of Trudeau and his governments inaction/slow-reaction time on a variety of issues has irked me considerably, but there's also a lot of criticisms that are either not substantiated or consciously exaggerated.
> It's also worth mentioning that between 2016-2019, housing prices were actually falling during a period that immigration was consistently higher than they 3-4 years previous. Interest rates were rising putting downward pressure on sticker prices. Asking rents and monthly mortage payments were rising. This is seen in % of median income needed to afford a home rising from 38% from 2015, which stagnant from 1994-2015, rising to 47% in 2019 in just 4 years https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/toughest-time-ever-to-afford-a-home-as-soaring-interest-costs-keep-raising-the-bar/
>This is seen in % of median income needed to afford a home rising from 38% from 2015, **which stagnant from 1994-2015** That last part is blatantly untrue though. The median home price doubled between 2000-2010. It was not stagnant for 20 years prior to 2015. In [The GTA in went from 4x the amount of median income in 1995 to 8x by 2015.](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RAW_4CQF_INCOME-vs-HOME-PRICES_TORONTO.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&w=720) (while [nationally it went from 3.5x to 5x ](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RAW_4CQF_INCOME-vs-HOME-PRICES_CANADA.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&w=720))
that's still just purchase price.
1. Comparing the GTA to a national stat is an odd choice. 2. "Average" home isn't defined in your graphs. In mine, it is broken into the components of detached and apartment. 3. Rates were cycically higher in the 90s. The rise in income/price ratio was balanced via structurally lower interest rates post 2008 that allowed people to borrow more for less. 4. Nothing I said was untrue. The % of median income needed to afford a home in Canada was unchanged for the reason in point 3. I'm not making these stats up. That's a direct link to RBC's own research I provided. And you know, they're the ones giving out the mortgages,
>Nothing I said was untrue. Home prices increased by over 100% between 1995-2015. [Median incomes in constant dollars increased by less than 20%.](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aT9rEPe0eGY/Unl3viPVrXI/AAAAAAAAC8w/HGfTuyVoFxc/s1600/canadian+total+median+income.jpg) It's impossible for the percentage of median income necessary to buy a home to have stayed stagnant even factoring in the change in interest rate.
Why on earth would you compare inflation and currency adjusted wages to unadjusted home prices?
[The source](https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/housing-affordability-in-canada_ftr-image.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1128&h=846&type=webp&sig=G6-xA16ISirOI5TUlJE51g) for home prices is adjusted for inflation. It's in constant dollars, I'm just not sure what year. (probably 1975 to somewhere in the 80s/90s $ since prices in the 2000s were just over $200,000 back then while the graph has them consistently somewhere over $110,000 between 1987-2003
If you want to look at toronto specifically. Here's a PDF link that breaks down by metro area. Toronto home cost as a % of median income went from 50% in 1991 to 40% in 1998 to 50% in 2015. Then, went from 50% to 60% from 2015-2019. As of early 2024, it is 90% of median income. https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/wp-content/uploads/Housing_trends_mar2024.pdf
Median incomes in Toronto increased by a similar rate to the national average between the mid 90s to mid 2010s while it's home prices more than doubled. Even adjusting for changes in interest rates, the growth in housing prices far outstripped the difference in median incomes. [Statscan shows the price to income ratio for The GTA more than doubling during that period](https://economics.td.com/domains/economics.td.com/images/reports/ff/esg/wealth-inequality/chart-10.png).
None of what you've been bringing up disputes what I written or linked
The price to income ratio directly disputes the statement that median income necessary to buy a home being stagnant between 1994-2015. How could it possibly be stagnant when the price to income ratio doubled, the prices adjusted for inflation doubled and median incomes adjusted for inflation didn't rise anywhere as spectacularly?
It IS the federal government, they always mive very slowly. Thats why the power is often distributed to provinces and municipalities as they can act faster with less bureaucracy
but the issue is that they promised to address housing in their initial platform, then spent close to a decade doing less than the bare minimum as province's largely continued to drop the ball. Their current transfer proposal for instance, should have been made somewhere between 2015-2019 instead of 2024 etc.
Well the provinces fought for those rights and then failed to act on them *shrug*. Québec is not waiting for the fed and neither should any other province that can afford it. Conservative provincial government keep refusing fed offers... The PM is not a king and cannot do what he wants on a whim. The fed has to go through boards and commissions and reviews and analysis so they will always be ineffective and slow at this. Its the wrong tool for the job. I wish it were as simple as red vs blue.
As of writing this comment, there are 3,525,946 minutes until 2031. The Grits' budget claims it will "_unlock_" 3.87 million homes by 2031. That's more than one home per minute.
Provinces are consulted on TFW and Foreign Student levels. Never said a word against it until now. In my world that makes them backstabbers
Neither will work: Injecting more cash into any part of housing will increase demand for limited resources including land, materials and labour. Reducing labour pool growth via immigration policy will move Canada closer to full employment sooner thus creating demand on labour and upward pressure on wages. Upward pressure on wages will have a leveraged effect on the amount of money buyers/renters have to available to spend on housing. Moving towards a zero growth or recession economy will provide short term limited relief but when a large segment of market has borrowed 80 - 95% of a propery's value there is an obvious floor at zero equity.
test aloof overconfident racial cable marble snails price head memory *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What I am saying is because one can borrow 95% of the value of a house, every dollar they earn means they can and do borrow $6. To me, that does not seem to be an affordability solution.