PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

[Towered]

Agreed, they need to be more creative/novel; and have higher standards for some of their HMR stuff as well (Home meal replacement, industry jargon for the hot / cold counter grab 'n go etc.)

Agreed - every time I go there I do a quick walk-around of the hot counter, and everything looks dried out, like it's been sitting there for many hours without any attention given to it. Not appetizing. They need to do better. I find the hot counters at Loblaws a bit better.

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

'Worst-ever' affordability levels: Only 22 per cent of Ont. households can afford a single-family home​

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/worst-ev...lds-can-afford-a-single-family-home-1.6697313

Fewer than one-quarter of Ontario households actually have the income required to own a single-family home and affordability levels are now at or near “worst-ever” levels, a new report from RBC suggests.

The report, authored by RBC Economist Robert Hogue, shows that fewer than 50 per cent of Ontario households have “sufficient income” to own a condominium in the province amid “sky-high” prices and borrowing costs.

There’s a very long way to go before affordability is meaningfully restored,” Hogue writes. “Buyers in many of Canada’s large markets will contend with extremely difficult conditions for some time. We expect home resale activity to stay especially quiet in Ontario and British Columbia until interest rates fall materially. And then, the recovery that will follow is likely to be gradual at first.”

The report notes that in Toronto about 84 per cent of the average household income would have went to home ownership costs in the third quarter, based on current real estate values.

That is less than in Vancouver where the number rises to 102.6 per cent.

Still, the report says that ownership costs in Toronto have reached “crushing levels” with an index RBC uses to track affordability levels surpassing the previous all-time low set at the end of 2022.

The good news is that Hogue believes “the latest bout of housing affordability deterioration has likely run its course” and the situation will improve in 2024 “as home prices drift lower or stabilize” and incomes rise.

But he says that housing affordability is unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels anytime soon, even with the Bank of Canada likely to cut interest rates in the second half of 2024.

“The significant loss of affordability during the pandemic has shrunk the pool of homebuyers in Canada,” the report notes. “Close to 60 per cent of all households could afford to own at least a regular condo apartment in 2019 based on their income. That share has plummeted to 45 per cent in 2023.”

The average price of a home across all property types in the GTA peaked at $1,334,062 in February 2022, prior to the Bank of Canada’s first interest hike.

It eventually dropped to a low of $1,037,542 but prices have rebounded since then, with the latest data from the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board pegging the average cost of a home in the GTA at $1,125,928.

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

This is an old article but it rings absolutely true:

Douglas Todd: Eight reasons politicians don’t really want house prices to fall​

Opinion: Most politicians believe, apparently mistakenly, voters will punish them if house prices fell. Their financial self-interests might also be getting in the way, at both party and personal levels.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/co...wcm/5b925cf0-031f-41eb-a842-2c4d2b3bdb33/amp/

His comments, although painfully obvious, amount to an abrupt change in Liberal communications strategy — since, earlier this year, Trudeau’s housing minister refused to acknowledge the country is in a “housing crisis”.



House prices have virtually doubled during the Liberals’ time in charge, and unaffordability, the ratio of house prices to average wages, is now among the worst in the world, especially in Metro Vancouver and Toronto.


The Liberals’ former parliamentary secretary on housing, Toronto MP Adam Vaughn, has been more revealing about what the Liberals have really been thinking all along.


Even though Vaughn recognized prospective owners want prices to decline, he has explained his party doesn’t want them to fall — even by one-tenth.


“Hands up if you’d like to see 10 per cent of the equity in your home suddenly disappear overnight,” Vaughn said. “We know Canadians rely on home ownership to secure their place in the economy now and also as they retire. We have to be very careful whatever steps we take to protect Canadians’ investment in their homes.”


Here are eight reasons why most politicians don’t really want prices to decrease:

1. Politicians, and the Canadian public, have a false belief house prices must rise and rise​

“Politicians seem stuck believing that Canadians want home prices to rise forever,” says UBC professor Paul Kershaw, founder of Generation Squeeze. “We have long believed there is a cultural addiction to high and rising home prices in Canada, and politicians are leery to disrupt it.”


Ron Butler, a mortgage broker, says, “No politician alive wants to be associated with the concept that a voter would buy a home and the politician would want it to be worth less than what the voter paid for it. That would be political suicide.”



Canadians love real estate because “they love the wealth, mainly tax free, it has created for the last 20 years,” said Butler, even while he firmly believes price reductions are necessary to restore “housing fairness”.

2. Politicians fear homeowners at election time​

3. Politicians also fret about the wrath of those who bought in a panic​

Younger people who stretched to buy a home, often from fear of missing out, “could go underwater if prices dropped significantly,” says Wright, who has lamented how Ottawa’s policies are accelerating prices.


The value of their mortgage would exceed the value of their dwelling. “One would presume a number of them will punish the politicians they feel are responsible for that. While I believe strongly that housing prices relative to average incomes needs to fall significantly if we are to provide younger Canadians with a pathway to home ownership, it is understandable why politicians fear falling house prices.””

4. Housing dominates Canada’s economy​

“Rising home prices have fuelled Canada’s economic growth. It has allowed Canadians to borrow against their own homes to spend, and invest in more real estate,” says housing analyst John Pasalis, head of Realosophy.


It’s also led to Canada’s housing industry, especially in B.C. and Ontario, making up a much higher bulk of the economy than in most nations.

5. Civic politicians are especially reactive to property prices and taxes​

6. Politicians prefer leaving the dirty work to the ‘non-political’ Bank of Canada​

“Politicians keep repeating slogans about tackling affordability by densifying and creating more housing supply, but it doesn’t make housing more affordable for locals or immigrants with moderate incomes,” says former developer and planner Arny Wise.


“The dirty work, to make home prices fall, is left to the ‘non-political’ Bank of Canada’s relentless mission to tame inflation … particularly in the super-inflated housing market. Higher interest rates are having the desired effect of lowering home prices slowly, by curbing excessive demand and increasing the financing costs of investors.”

7. Developers are massive political donors​

Developers like prices to go up during the several years it takes to build new homes, says D’Eathe. If prices or rents go down during the risk-filled construction process, their profit margins can be shot.


And developers, along with affluent homeowners, are the biggest donors to political parties

8. Politicians’ personal self-interest might muddy their housing goals​

We can never really know what motivates a politician. But it is of genuine concern that thousands of Canadian politicians, at all levels, are in a potential conflict of interest on housing prices because they belong to the landlord class.

 

[kEiThZ]

No doubt that politicians fear falling home prices. But propping up prices at any cost has other effects too. And those effects usually aren't helpful to incumbent governments.

Canada's population is now growing by 400k per quarter. That's an Oshawa every 3 months. The consequences of this kind of growth aren't going to go unnoticed come the next election.

 

[Richard White]

No doubt that politicians fear falling home prices. But propping up prices at any cost has other effects too. And those effects usually aren't helpful to incumbent governments.

Canada's population is now growing by 400k per quarter. That's an Oshawa every 3 months. The consequences of this kind of growth aren't going to go unnoticed come the next election.

The way I see it they have 4 options.

1. Burst the bubble
2. Curtail immigration
3. Invest in lesser known cities like Kenora, Saskatoon, Yellowknife and Truro to accommodate new immigrants.
4. Restrict home purchases to Canadian Citizens who actively reside in Canada and only to their primary residence

If we curtailed immigration and put restrictions on speculation watch how fast prices would drop. Prices would sink faster than the Titanic.

 

[kEiThZ]

Apparently they incompetently assumed growth would automagically level off:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1737769223508660374

 

[afransen]

Odd that the 'high' scenario showed the number of non-permanent residents rising more slowly than the pre-2016 historic trend.

Can you blame the politicians here? This is produced by Statistics Canada.

 

[DSC]

A few weeks ago, the Federal Government made an "Intervention" re genocide to the International Court of Justice about the situation in Myanmar. (along with UK, France, Germany, Netherlands & Denmark.). See https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/178/178-20231115-wri-01-00-en.pdf

It will be 'interesting' to see if they do same with South Africa's claim of genocide against Israel.

 

[ShonTron]

A few weeks ago, the Federal Government made an "Intervention" re genocide to the International Court of Justice about the situation in Myanmar. (along with UK, France, Germany, Netherlands & Denmark.). See https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/178/178-20231115-wri-01-00-en.pdf

It will be 'interesting' to see if they do same with South Africa's claim of genocide against Israel.

With Bob Rae being the international go-to guy for the Liberals? Are you kidding?

 

[DSC]

With Bob Rae being the international go-to guy for the Liberals? Are you kidding?

That is what I expect but .......

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

Government was warned two years ago high immigration could affect housing costs​

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/gov...igration-could-affect-housing-costs-1.6720963

The deputy minister, among others, was warned in 2022 that housing construction had not kept up with the pace of population growth.


"In Canada, population growth has exceeded the growth in available housing units," one slide deck reads.

“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."

Immigration accounts for nearly all population growth in Canada, given the country's aging demographics.

The federal government ultimately decided to increase the number of permanent residents Canada welcomes each year to 500,000 in 2025, a decision that drew considerable attention and scrutiny. It means in 2025, Canada will welcome nearly twice as many permanent residents as it did in 2015.

The document reveals federal public servants were well aware of the pressures high population growth would have on housing and services.

"Rapid increases put pressure on health care and affordable housing," public servants warned. "Settlement and resettlement service providers are expressing short-term strain due to labour market conditions, increased levels and the Afghanistan and Ukraine initiatives."

Housing affordability has now become a political liability for the Liberal government. The Conservatives have gained considerable momentum over the last year as the party pounces on affordability issues, while avoiding the issue of immigration in particular. These pressures have forced the Liberal government to refocus its efforts on housing policy and begin to address the spike in international students with new rules.

Public opinion polls also show Canadians are increasingly concerned about the pressure immigration is putting on services, infrastructure and housing, leading to waning support for high immigration.

The Liberal government has defended its immigration policy decisions, arguing that immigrants help bring about economic prosperity and help with the country's demographics as the population ages.

However, amid the heightened scrutiny of the Liberal government's immigration policy, Immigration Minister Marc Miller levelled out the annual target at 500,000 permanent residents for 2026.

The documents from 2022 note that Canada's immigration targets have exceeded the recommendations of some experts, including the Century Initiative, an organization that advocates for growing the country's population to 100 million by the end of the century.

That trend is raising alarms about the increase in businesses' reliance on low-wage migrant workers and the luring of international student by shady post-secondary institutions.

Mikal Skuterud, an economics professor at the University of Waterloo who specializes in immigration policy, says the federal government appears to have "lost control" of temporary migration flows.

Unlike the annual targets for permanent residents, the number of temporary residents is dictated by demand for migrant workers and international students.

He also notes there is a link between the targets for permanent residents and the flow of temporary residents.

"To the extent that you increase permanent numbers, and migrants realize the way you get a PR is to come here as a temporary resident ... then migrants are incentivized to kind of come and try their luck," he said.

Skuterud, who has been a vocal critic of the federal government's immigration policy, says the benefits of high immigration have been exaggerated by the Liberals.

He said that starting around 2015, when the Liberal government was first elected, a narrative developed in Canada that "immigration was kind of a solution to Canada's economic growth problems."

And while the professor says that narrative is one that people like to believe, he notes higher immigration does little when it comes to increasing living standards, as measured by real GDP per capita.

Public servants at IRCC are in agreement, the released documents suggest.

"Increasing the working age population can have a positive impact on gross domestic product, but little effect on GDP per capita," public servants noted.

 

[Admiral Beez]

This is an old article but it rings absolutely true:

Douglas Todd: Eight reasons politicians don’t really want house prices to fall​

Opinion: Most politicians believe, apparently mistakenly, voters will punish them if house prices fell. Their financial self-interests might also be getting in the way, at both party and personal levels.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/co...wcm/5b925cf0-031f-41eb-a842-2c4d2b3bdb33/amp/

Borrowing against my home’s value terrifies me. I remember when we paid off the mortgage the bank was right there with the, “we can offer you a half million $ line of credit against your home’s value, it’s a great way to access cheap credit, pay for renos, vacations, consolidate debts, etc.” My wife, bless her shared a knowing look and we both scoffed and walked out. We never carry credit card debt and we save for vacations, planned renos and unplanned repairs. You don’t pay off debt to go into more debt, jeez.

What I want for my adult children is what I had in the 1990s, and that’s affordable home ownership, where in my newly graduated and married late-20s on our household income of about $70k we could buy a house for under $300k. That’s the Canadian dream that I expect our governments to facilitate. If in ten years, when I retired, my house has two educated and employed mid-30 year olds who’ve nonetheless failed to launch because of housing prices I will vote accordingly.

 

[lenaitch]

Borrowing against my home’s value terrifies me. I remember when we paid off the mortgage the bank was right there with the, “we can offer you a half million $ line of credit against your home’s value, it’s a great way to access cheap credit, pay for renos, vacations, consolidate debts, etc.” My wife, bless her shared a knowing look and we both scoffed and walked out. We never carry credit card debt and we save for vacations, planned renos and unplanned repairs. You don’t pay off debt to go into more debt, jeez.

What I want for my adult children is what I had in the 1990s, and that’s affordable home ownership, where in my newly graduated and married late-20s on our household income of about $70k we could buy a house for under $300k. That’s the Canadian dream that I expect our governments to facilitate. If in ten years, when I retired, my house has two educated and employed mid-30 year olds who’ve nonetheless failed to launch because of housing prices I will vote accordingly.

Pros and cons, but they can be too tempting for some. The amount of a LoC isn't necessarily debt; you only owe how much of it you have borrowed. We've had a secured Line of Credit on our last four houses. For a while it was used for investing. On most you are only required to pay the interest and the interest was tax deductible.

If you use them to feed a lifestyle, like vehicles, vacations, etc. then they are just another debt burden. I think our first one was prime+0 but those days are gone. I like them as ready cash in case something happens that you cannot plan for and would otherwise have to get a loan or dig into savings. They can also be a bit of a hedge against mortgage fraud, even if the balance owing is zero.

The one thing I found weird was when we were looking for insurance for our current house, Several companies our agent canvassed returned higher rates because had a mortgage (they treat LoCs and first mortgages the same). I inquired about the risk connection and really didn't get a straight answer. It must be something new. In the past when we paid off a mortgage or car loan, the premium certainly didn't go down.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The amount of a LoC isn't necessarily debt; you only owe how much of it you have borrowed.

Is that not obvious? The limit on your credit card is not your credit card debt.

 

[lenaitch]

Is that not obvious? The limit on your credit card is not your credit card debt.

Perhaps not to everyone. There's a difference between debt load and credit load and different agencies look at them differently. In my mentioned home insurance quest, it was mentioned that we had a LoC of $X, notwithstanding almost non of it was being utilized.