Election: Temper your expectations
We’re one day into the campaign, and just like the provincial election last fall, both parties have immediately forgotten their previous concern about budgets and deficits and switched to handing out goodies to the electorate. Both the Conservatives and Liberals released plans for income tax cuts to go on top of the carbon tax cut (which, while revenue neutral at the federal level, will blow something of a hole into our provincial budget).
Because of our friendly ruler to the south, the election landscape has changed drastically. Polls have swung from an assured routing of the Liberals just a couple months ago to a real fight where majorities by either the Conservatives or Liberals are in play.
However, while the orange elephant in the room has sucked up all the oxygen, none of the reasons that the Liberals were polling so low have gone away. Housing affordability and the cost of living pressures remain just as prominent as before and will remain serious long after the trade war loses salience.
The problem is, the public has a very distorted picture of which level of government has the most influence on housing. Ask people who’s to blame for high house prices, and most will say the federal government, followed by the provincial government, with municipalities being far and away the least influential. That’s exactly backwards from reality, with municipalities having the most control over housing availability and cost via zoning and permitting restrictions. Provinces are also important, given they legally have the responsibility for land use and hold substantial permitting and standards power including the building code. If you doubt that cities have the most power, just look at how many homes were built in Victoria in the last 10 years (7384) vs a stone’s throw away in Oak Bay (370) under the same federal and provincial policies.
However most people don’t believe that, and they are likely to hope that a new federal government is a chance to tackle high house prices and high rents. They – unfortunately – will be disappointed.
There’s no doubt that the federal government holds some levers to influence both supply and demand. It’s also fair to blame the feds for destabilizing an immigration system that for decades had pretty slow-changing intake numbers. This certainly added to demand, if mostly on the rental side. That problem is mostly in the rear-view mirror now though, with lots of evidence that the rental market is weakening drastically as growth slows. As of the latest population data for the first quarter of 2025, quarter over quarter growth in BC has collapsed to just 0.05%, down from 0.61% (3.2% year over year) a year ago. This could even go negative, though don’t expect Victoria’s population to drop.
To be fair, the federal government also played a large hand in helping along the supply of rental housing to absorb some of that demand. Rental starts have exploded in recent years, and the primary reason is low cost financing from the CMHC. Many of these units would have likely been built anyway (as either condos or rentals) with private financing, but especially in recent years the lower cost financing has been a lifeline to keep developers building when they otherwise would have pulled back.
Speaking of building, promises related to that have been all the rage since the Conservatives launched a strong housing message two years ago focused on resolving the shortage. Since then the parties have been falling over themselves to promise bigger and bigger numbers. CMHC estimated that nationally there is a shortage of 3.1 to 4 million homes above what would normally be expected to be built by 2030 (though that estimate is now two years old). Politicians jumped on that number as if it were an achievable target rather than an estimate of how much housing would be necessary to get affordability back to 2004 levels. It’s a useful reference number, but it was never physically possible to build that many extra homes by 2030.
That doesn’t stop politicians from promising though, with Mark Carney saying he would double the rate of housing construction in 10 years. That may not be strictly impossible, but it’s certainly an extremely ambitious stretch goal in the face of declining growth and affordability challenges. I think if we manage to stay on the positive trend from the last 15 years in the face of our economic challenges we could call it a success.
Meanwhile the Conservative plan to force cities to increase starts by 15% per year is even less realistic, with that rate implying a doubling of starts in just 5 years. I’m glad to see the ambitious targets, but feel free to ignore any talk about how many millions of units they hope to will into existence.
Federal governments also fund housing directly, and that’s a big deal for people who can get into the below market housing. There’s actually been a bit of a resurgence in below market housing construction in recent years, but the reality is only about 5% of Canadians live in non-market housing. Unless those funds expand by an order of magnitude or we find out how to use them much more efficiently, it’s not going to be direct impact on the average frustrated house-hunter.
More likely is a continued shift back towards incentivizing ownership housing. Both major parties have already promised to end GST on new home purchases under a million, and I expect some more policies in that direction. The resurgence of purpose built rentals is great after decades of underbuilding and we need to keep up a solid level of rental construction, but people will always dream of ownership more than renting. 80-90% of starts for ownership is too high, but 40% is also too low in the long term. I think governments will need to grapple with how to shift some of the split back in the ownership direction, without relying exclusively on presale investors to fund condos.
What do you think the parties should be promising on housing?
Also the weekly numbers…
| March 2025 |
Mar
2025
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | ||
| Sales | 153 | 286 | 431 | 588 | |
| New Listings | 429 | 794 | 1134 | 1310 | |
| Active Listings | 2747 | 2871 | 2975 | 2647 | |
| Sales to New Listings | 36% | 36% | 38% | 45% | |
| Sales YoY Change | +13% | +5% | +3% | 0% | |
| New Lists YoY Change | +21% | +11% | +12% | +17% | |
| Inventory YoY Change | +11% | +11% | +12% | +34% | |
| Months of Inventory | 4.5 | ||||
The convergence with last years’ sales numbers continues, now only up 3% year over year while new lists remain healthy. That’s driving up inventory, and we’ll cross 3000 again in a couple days, one month earlier than last year. That’s more inventory than we’ve seen in March for nearly a decade, though still substantially under the 4333 we had in March 2013.
The sales rate is lower than average, but there’s still buyers out there and I don’t see a lot of sellers pricing with particular urgency. There’s a lot of relists at similar prices that were tried in the past two years, and the market simply hasn’t moved that much in most segments to make that work. It’s not a market shock like COVID or the financial crisis: the buyers are still there they just have a lot more choice right now.
But sellers would rather fire three realtors than lower the price.
Can you name one country in the west that is not readying counter tariffs as a form of economic pressure.
That isn’t very clever being as Canada needs the American market more than America needs Canadian imports.
New post: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2025/04/01/march-uncertainty-continues-to-drag-on-market/
Patriots, I’ll take that as an April fools comment.
A trade war doesn’t make sense as it will take the Americans years to build the plants, equipment, find and train employees to produce the products that they can no longer buy at cheap prices.
America can not just flip a switch and everything will be the same.
Then there is the increased cost of their products to Americans and their exports. The more expensive exports will cause some countries to seek out less expensive goods. The states will have domestic inflation and less demand for their exports.
Trump would like to see the return of high paying manufacturing jobs. But those days are gone as they can not compete with lower labor costs and exchange rates in other countries. Manufacturing is not the high paying jobs that they were. Better for the Americans to continue to do what they do best – make porn movies and wage war.
Reciprocal tariffs make no sense. They just increase prices for Canadians. I would stop shipping all products that have tariffs and wait out the economic fallout that occurs in the U.S. Industries would collapse, massive unemployment would create civil unrest and markets would tank. Brilliant move Mr. Trump.
That is a fine slogan, but do you really think Canada will be able to change its investment & production climate without government involvement?
By your theory of “free” market, money doesn’t care about borders…should our governments keep their hands out of this new tariff / trade situation?
When it comes to housing, it’s the people who haven’t who give to the people who have. You know, HOG, principal residence exemption, stuff like that.
There’s a spoon’s worth of plastic in our brains. I’ve been thinking a lot about this article since reading it:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/what-are-microplastics-harmful-to-humans-how-to-avoid.html
If there’s a paywall: https://archive.ph/nPa7i
Peter, “if people ok just taking things from folks that have them” Seems a pretty routine attitude over housing these days.
But it doesn’t have any provinces, so all resource royalties go to the central government and there’s no constant fighting over resource policy like in Canada. Not well known that originally when the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were created the federal government retained control of the resources. In the 1930’s the feds gave resources to those provinces for free.
Regarding another post, our resources are government owned, with a few exceptions such as in lands granted to the CPR. It’s the industries that extract them which are private sector.
And it’s easy to make choices like that if people ok just taking things from folks that have them. Of course, many elements of society are perfectly ok with just that concept. It’s not something I would support.
I just don’t think we should go there – not at one of those rare moments in Canadian history when we seem to have some sort of consensus in terms of having to work together productively.
If it’s a disaster for the producer, it’s a disaster.
2025 Cedar Hill Cross Road, back to mid 2021 prices.
It was a disaster for Alberta. The rest of Canada got abundant oil products at well below world market price (instead of a national wealth fund but either way it was a choice between benefiting Canada as a whole or Alberta.)
Norway is only partially nationalized. Regarding full nationalization, look to Venezuala to see how it’s worked out for them. Saudi Arabia did better.
We did nationalize our oil resources, it was a disaster. The fewer things the government has their hands on, the better.
That’s what Norway has done. Wonder how folks would react if Canada proposed nationalizing our oil resources and capturing the profits to build a multi-trillion dollar wealth fund like they did.
March sales: 613 (+4% from last March)
New lists: 1487 (+13.5%)
Inventory: 3023 (+14%)
This is exactly what I am getting at. The world isn’t going away from fossil fuels whether we provide them or not to market so might as well provide them to market and then use that to a) stay alive b) work on green tech.
Now that easy trade with our southern neighbour is in chaos, the calculus has changed and some of those big projects might be feasible.
For a long time now people have been talking about adding value to BC’s natural resource products before export, and if we are wanting to stand on our own two feet, we could be extracting the ethane, butane, propane, and other liquids, off the natural gas before we export it around the world. We could develop downstream manufacturing opportunities to produce poly-carbon products for export, and a thriving petrochemical industry would ensure B.C. becomes a major fertilizer producer for Canada’s agriculture sector.
If our export market is now further away, shipping higher value products makes even more sense.
I am not any sort of expert on this but I will not be even remotely surprised if we find natural gas is not the panacea it is being marketed as. It is a MUCH stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 and much more prone to leaks and spills. There are lots of studies that come up with numbers indicating that it is not a lot better than coal from a warming planet perspective.
I believe the issue with building refining capacity is coming up with uses for all the spin off products you are left with after you remove the gas and diesel. Most successful refineries have a large plastic industry pretty much co-located to the refinery. Canada does not have a market for any more plastic than we currently produce. When they proposed a refinery in Kitamaat at the port end of the pipeline instead of at the source of the oil (northern gateway proposal by David Black) that was the reasoning even though it meant the complexity of pumping tar sands thick oil.
This option looks good to me!
I heard on the radio this morning that one of the people running to be PM wants Canada to be energy independent from the USA…lots of east-west pipeline corridors mentioned, but no refineries. We’d have an easier time using heavy Alberta oil ourselves (and finding new customers for it) if it was refined, even a little bit.
“get big projects done,” indeed.
i/ We pump the oil and sell it to the global market and then use those funds to supply Canadians with EV F150s.
ii/ We don’t pump the oil, Putin pumps the oil, sells it to the global market and uses the funds to finance wars and ballistic missle development.
And maybe also we have iii/We focus more on natural gas rather than oil (esp. oilsands), sell the NG to China to displace coal, win-win, and sell it to Europe to further weaken Russia, win-win, and then we use those funds to stay alive as a country and to develop everything including green technologies
Listen, I’m all for reducing the use of fossil fuels. Its going to be a long time coming. The tires on your bicycle, the roofing shingles on your roof, the pex water supply lines, the Styrofoam/ spray foam insulation, the natural gas heating, the hot tub, your scott’s lawn fertilizer, her lululemon tights, her shoes, the shipping/trucking.
It is the future…Just not yet.
BYD stopped building gas cars 3 years ago. Every single vehicle they make is either fully electric or a plug in hybrid. They know it’s the future
BYD.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/26/cars/china-byd-profile-tesla-rival-intl-hnk/index.html
Even Warren Buffet holds shares in this massive upstart.
I think it’s odd to assume that the Chinese don’t understand that a deteriorated environment is not good for them.
But I do agree that the world will decarbonize not because of some concern about future environmental issues, but because the low carbon options are simply better. We are there for some technologies, nearly there for others
That’s more about supply chain and industry dominance than any environmental or climate goal.
Gen X will be fine, most of us bought real estate young, we could clearly see the writing on the wall. The run up from Y2K to 2025 has been a treat, even more so when the first house you bought became your forever house and have never had to move. Snow birds are being destroyed down south. I disagree with your Crypto analogy.
Yes, plan to dump most of it (have to live somewhere).
Frank , have you yourself been dumping real estate out of curiosity
We are living in a world of pyramid schemes. Crypto is the largest scam ever conceived. The stock markets have ridiculous evaluations, real estate is out of control. The first ones in (boomers) benefit, the late comers take the hit.
My friend just came back from Palm Springs. Canadians are selling their condos. Condo fees are going through the roof (not to mention the dreaded special assessment), property taxes, utilities, and finally, the big one, insurance, all up. Property owners are viewed as ATM machines that can be tapped at will. There is no bottomless pit of cash, unless you’re a money printing government, which is the real problem.
Frank’s right. Sooner rather than later…The shit is going to hit the fan.
The shit should have hit the fan in 2008.
Thursty- Trees don’t grow to the moon.
Frank , I think you’re falling for trumps b.s . But your not alone a lot of dimwitted Canadians are running around saying the sky is falling lol
Westerly, https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/liberals-pick-former-alberta-minister-as-esquimalt-saanich-sooke-candidate-10455717
The best course of action is to pile all of your cash into concrete dog crate condos over in Surrey.
That was a joke Frank don’t take it personally.
It’s not just Tesla that is hated, it’s Trump and America that are hated. He’s going to set off the Greatest Depression in history with these tariffs. It happened in the 1930’s, dump your equities now before it’s too late.
Leo, good stuff nice to hear sfd medium is pitching up. With prices climbing steadily, it should motivate people . April could very well see another interest rate cut . Go Canada go
Not a very strong market, but single family median looks like it will actually come it at the highest level since Sep 2023 at $1,195,750 (final numbers tomorrow might change slightly)
This is my ride these days.
“My friend doesn’t like leaving his Cybertruck unattended for long periods downtown”
I saw one of those a few weeks ago, if I owned one of those I would leave it unlocked with the window down and fob on the seat. Dumbest looking vehicle ever, it looks like something a 5 year old would draw or the car Homer Simpson designed.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JsU0vNHXun0&pp=ygUSQ3liZXIgdHJ1Y2sgcmV2aWV3
There’s no sales people lol, it’s easy to book a test drive all you gotta do is book a timeslot on line and then show up and off you go for half an hour by yourself.
People hate Teslas right now…how would that be a good marketing strategy? My friend doesn’t like leaving his Cybertruck unattended for long periods downtown. I can see Elon trying to lie about delivery numbers but not sure if strategy noted above makes any sense. Model Y also didn’t change much from the previous generation…no one is going to look at it and say I want that.
How many of those overpriced Teslas you saw were salespeople taking them for a spin to increase exposure to the public? Sounds like a good marketing strategy to me.
Agreed. I’d be happy with a majority government of the Liberals or Conservatives. A worse scenario would be a minority where the NDP again had the balance of power. I think that’s what drove Trudeau and the Libs to the left. I’m counting on Carney to be pro-business and a centrist.
I don’t think climate change is very important in the world today . If we don’t ramp up oil and gas exports and can’t get big projects done then we are best to be the 51 st state . The U.S will do what we can’t , it’s only business
It does. However, at this point the decision is going to be made by many on who will have a better response to the US. My thought is that the Liberal party has to move to a much more centrist position with a business-like approach to have a chance of responding effectively and Carney is pragmatic enough to adopt this and the rest of the party will support a more conservative approach under an effective leader because it is ride or die time.
My bad – those figures were for 1988. 1992 was a weird one with a strong third candidate taking 20% of the vote
Could you please sound that out for me. It sounds like drill the oil fast and get it to market fast.
I take it you weren’t in these parts in Ronald Reagan’s time. Whom I’d gladly have back by the way.
I’m torn.
On the one hand I completely agree Carney has superior qualifications. Also Poilievre has turned me off by flirting with the convoy kooks and every other group of conspiracists worth a few votes.
On the other hand, rewarding the Liberals with four more years also seems crazy.
You mean a separate stream to give Americans priority for immigration? Not going to happen for obvious reasons. Surrey, 905, etc.
Only three simple solutions to a complex international issue! Seems reasonable.
And pretty much the same analysis with travel:
1) some Canadians love Trump and are more likely than ever to travel to the US now
2) lots of Canadians just want a fun cheap vacation and don’t really care politics one way or another
3) also lot of Canadians are put off by Trump’s weirdly aggressive attitude to Canada and will make some effort to avoid US travel
4) and also some Canadians are going to say full stop NO to American travel
With travel there is a fifth category
5) Have to travel to the US because of work or family
My prediction – travel will fall further. Especially for air travel we are still very much in the phase where people made and paid for bookings before Trump declared economic war on Canada.
Also – for the record – Marko’s five flights a day to Vegas is a lousy indicator (shockingly). There are two flights from YVR to Vegas tomorrow. Does that mean travel has fallen by 60%? More likely they just schedule less flights on Tuesday.
seems to be the most sensible given human nature.
In Max’s defense you did use several multisyllabic words
Okay, I’ll add a third one. I guess we could try to surpress economic growth around the world so people can’t afford cars/consumer goods while we drive F150s in Canada and live in 2,000 sq.ft. houses.
We have only two options? Makes the decision easier I guess.
It is a global balance thought (beyond the plastic on Willows beach).
Daily consumption of oil is global, no? We have two options
i/ We pump the oil and sell it to the global market and then use those funds to supply Canadians with EV F150s.
ii/ We don’t pump the oil, Putin pumps the oil, sells it to the global market and uses the funds to finance wars and ballistic missle development.
They are very similar yes. Both are forms of pollution that cause problems. Both are global issues with garbage travelling around the world on currents. In both cases it would be barely a rounding error what Canadians do.
If you want a closer analogy where the pollution is a gas, then take the Montreal accord. Why did Canada not simply keep pumping ozone-depleting gasses into the atmosphere? After all, we’re a rounding error next to China and India and the US.
Anyway, in the long run tackling climate change is far cheaper than not tackling it. Does that mean we should kill ourselves to reduce emissions? Nope. It’s a balance like with everything. We should try to reduce emissions like like China is also pushing quite hard to reduce emissions by rapidly expanding renewable energy and transportation electrification. As totoro pointed out, black and white thinking is boring and doesn’t get us anywhere.
It’s almost as though you did not understand the content of my posts.
The ability to care for future needs is predicated on the ability to meet current physiological, safety and security needs. It is not that nothing can be done, but to focus on non-immediate threats you have to not be in constant survival mode. This is the human condition. Expecting people living in poverty to not use their resources to survive is like expecting Canada not to develop oil and gas when it is the resource they have a tariff and trade war where sovereignty and quality of life is at stake.
This doesn’t mean we give up on climate change mitigation or helping internationally with this, I have hope that AI used by researchers and industry is going to bring a cascade of new tech/solutions, but we have to deal with safety/security threats now using the resources we have. And continue to work on climate change from a secure position.
It seems logical to me that wealthier nations should be carrying the R&D for greener tech which will benefit everyone.
Or go buy some of those sugar free flavored sodas to give out. Go buy couple of cases, expense them and keep the rest for personal use.
Why should we listen to you…NIMBY.
Says the one who is almost end of life. Why should we listen to you?
So is it India’s reponsibility to keep their standard of living low so they don’t increase their footprint?
Once again this is all lovely in theory but we can’t even buy the smaller cars offered around the world as there is no market for them in Canada. Honda doesn’t sell the Fit, Toyota doesn’t sell the Yaris. In Croatia Toyota offers cars smaller than the Yaris such as the Aygo.
We can engage in theory all day but reality is the F150 will continue to be the best selling vechile in Canada for a long time, but if we talk about our responsibility it makes things better.
Because oil production and you throwing your ice cream wrapper into the ocean are the same thing.
I’m 51. I think climate action should take the back seat!
Most plastic pollution comes from Asia which is why every time I go to Willows I throw my garbage in the water. Not like it makes a difference if I don’t. I’m a smart critical thinker pushing back against leftist ideology
China and India have way more people, I agree their total pollution adds up fast, even if it’s less per person. And yes, our high standard of living means we pollute more per person. Our relative wealth and environmental footprint is exactly why we’ve got a bigger responsibility to do more rather than sit back and point out how those that have less are not doing what we are so we shouldn’t either.
I believe we are pretty close in age. I have four young kids who are potentially going to have children one day. I’m pretty concerned about climate change, I’m just recognizing that if Canada is not safe and secure economically and as a country we won’t be doing much but focusing on survival. And right now our economy and sovereignty are at risk. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and all.
I am certainly having trust issues with the news lately 🙂
I been posting this for 15 years….letters should legally be banned in my opinion.
Just pointing out that oil and gas have been growing quickly the last decade. Should they have been growing even more quickly? Maybe. Is that due to the federal government or due to market pricing for oil? Bit of both but certainly mostly the latter. I mean the government literally bailed out a failing pipeline to the tune of billions of dollars to get it built. You could argue that it should have never cost that much, but fact is both the feds and the province have actually supported the oil industry quite a bit.
I’m on a flight to California now and the flight is absolutely packed. Zero issues at customs either. Don’t believe everything you see on the news.
It’s funny we sold a spec house to a doctor a few years ago, they had a lovely letter saying he was going to be opening a G.P practice in town.
I ran into him the other day, still flying out of province to make more money.
Says the one that’s almost end of life. We still have an economy to run here.
and we’ve had GDP growth for the last 10 years straight as well so everything must be okay 🙂
I don’t understand how you can ignore the size of their population? Secondly, we are polluting more because we have a high standard of living – aka people are driving F150s not Honda Fits. Does this mean we should try to suppress economic growth in India to keep their standard of living low? My guess is people in India would disagree.
Last 10 years crude oil exports are up 51% in Canada based on CER data. I get why Liberals aren’t advertising this fact, but it’s certainly not the case that oil industry has been strangled. BC Natural Gas production is up 68% in the past decade, and the big export plants are just coming online now (LNG Canada this year + 2 others approved).
For the last 10 years, Canada and much of the western world focused on climate change because it is a real thing and life was stable and good. Now, our stable way of life is at risk. Climate change matters—but we’ve polluted a lot to get where we are and still pollute more per person than ex. China—but right now, Canada’s safety and economy are in danger. That’s a bigger, more urgent need, like having a secure home before worrying about long-term goals.
The U.S. threatening to take over isn’t just trade talk—it could end Canada. We can’t fight their military, so we use energy and new trade deals to push back. We need partners outside the U.S. and more trade between provinces.
Tariffs could shrink our economy by 3% in a year. Oil and gas—13% of our economy and 300,000 jobs—have to keep going. We can sell to Asia and Europe since the U.S. is no longer a reliable trade partner.
Our Paris climate goals (cutting emissions 40-45% by 2030) aren’t dead, just on hold. We can still grow hydropower and nuclear with oil money. We can’t fix the climate without cash and stability first.
Blaming Russia, China, and India for polluting is weak – and black and white thinking which is annoying. We’ve polluted more per person historically and built our good life on it. We shouldn’t quit climate action because of them—we have to own our part and keep going, but we need safety and security right now first and foremost.
Its the CBC.
Carney’s CV may be a case of leaders and organizations navigating the next conflict based on the lessons and experiences of the previous one (growth of globalization), rather than adapting to the evolving nature of trade.
Mind you, it will be hard to adapt to the evolving nature of trade conflicts when the rules are being rewritten daily.
In my opinion anyone with critical thinking skills would have seen this as a priority in the last 10 years. At worst how was no one questioning our choices when Russia invaded Ukraine while continuing to sell oil to finance a war? Yes the environment is important but you can’t live in a buble and ignore the fact that there are bad and evil actors out there such as Putin and Trump that simply don’t care about Carney’s green economy.
The situation with the federal EV grants is certainly suspect. Looks like they put in thousands of incentive requests likely for orders they had on the books but hadn’t actually delivered. But with the grants cancelled, did those customers proceed with the order? Missing details here.
I can’t imagine they could get away with fudging sales numbers much though. Most of that is easy to check with national registration databases and I’m sure the shorts will be reviewing those carefully.
I wouldn’t put it past Elon to fudge the numbers so who knows if what we see is the truth.
A full on 100% boycott doesn’t exist and never has. It’s not a useful measure. In actual physical wars, there are always people in the country being attacked that support the attackers. And this is a trade war, not a real one. People are not a monolith.
Looks like groups 3 and 4 are having significant impact on worldwide Tesla sales, but we’ll soon know the extent on that
I agree his background is more on the left and he is very concerned about climate change, however, I disagree that he is not a rational actor who will respond pragmatically to the current situation. I think his critical thinking skills are superior and making choices that benefit Canada, such as expanding oil and gas and international and cross-border trade in these times is the goal. I’d much rather have someone who understands math and business as a leader right now than a career politician with little relevant experience.
100% there are CNDs not visiting the US because of Trump; however, the numbers presented in the media I question. Reality is five planes per day continue to take off from Vancouver to Las Vegas even with the weak dollar.
Same with Tesla…if I saw three Jupinters in one day obviously people are buying. In lower numbers sure, but this is by no means a full on boycott or anything close to that.
That is exactly what I am trying to say, polls kept showing a toss up, but it wasn’t really a toss up in the end.
Both democratic candidates. For a republican Trump did well.
312-226 is not a landslide, and the polling showed it was a toss up the day before election day. Given that the polls had underestimated Mr. Trump in 2016 and 2020, seemed reasonable to expect that might happen again.
5.5% down over a year ago, with most of the fall happening in October and November. I doubt that is the only or primary cause.
No. A landslide looks like the 1992 election. 8% popular vote margin and 426-111 Electoral college. Obama2008 is the only recent election that comes close.
But the CND dollar is a lot weaker than it was last year which in itself could account for a required cut even if it wasn’t for Trump.
For all intents purposes this is a landslide in American politics. He wasn’t even close to the popular vote in the 2016 election.
and predictions in US politics are made on the basis of the electoral map projects, not the popular vote projections.
“Air Canada announced on a quarterly financial call in February it would cut flights to Florida, Las Vegas and Arizona by 10 per cent — which the airline confirmed on Friday, adding it was using smaller aircraft for these trips as well.”
The reports of 70% reduction are likely overblown, but Air Canada’s actions suggest they are already feeling a substantial decline.
the only landslide was in Trump’s head
popular vote – Trump 49.8 Harris 48.3
electoral college – 312 226
Not that different than Biden 2020 except Biden had bigger popular vote.
The last election even approaching a landslide was Obama 2008
Bobby , nope every generation has had it hard nothing special about younger folks , if left alone they will do just fine
I guess my point is if you read certain sources, such as reddit, you would be lead to believe no one in their right mind would buy a Tesla right now but obviously they are still selling. On the FB EV Vancouver Island group some guy posted how he was 100k out the door on a Jupinter so obviously people are still buying even thought it is incredibly overpriced.
To see three in a day means they’ve delivered at least 30+ in Victoria thus far and that is 30+ horribly overpriced Model Ys.
Yeah I wouldn’t read to much into either reddit posts or Tesla forums, or car sightings. The Q1 data should be out today, so they will tell the tale on Tesla. Q2 even better because that will be a full quarter after Juniper ramps production so a more accurate measure of demand.
I certainly wouldn’t be shorting a stock where the owner of the company has direct access to the US treasury, no matter how bad car sales get. Similar to how I wouldn’t invest in the various Chinese car companies where much of their fortunes depend on government support.
Honestly I am not sure what to believe anymore. News story yesterday that flight bookings down to the US down 70%….yes 5 flights to Las Vegas out of Vancouver yesterday, 5 flights to Las Vegas today -> https://www.yvr.ca/en/passengers/flights/departing-flights
I doubt they are flying half empty planes.
Then yesterday I had a busy day with a lot of showings. Saw a silver Jupinter Model Y in Gordon Head, then saw a red one in Broadmean and another silver one on Langford so I am like wtf, this does not meet the narrative on Reddit so I went to Canadian Tesla Forums
“I thought “nobody wants a Tesla now” and that “no one is buying the cybertruck”. I’m glad I went at 11, when I left around 11:30 it was already getting busy! And even at that time they were delivering 3-4 cybertrucks!
Let us know when you get out!!”
next person
“Yeah dude. I was thinking the exact same thing. Thought no one wants a Tesla now and used car lots are full of them. But nope. Freaking line. I shoulda came at 11am. Got here for 4:30pm. It’s 7:46pm. I m still here!!!! Got my keycards tho. And I can literally see my car outside!!!”
Make no mistake, I am shorting Tesla and I think sales will be a disaster but there seems to be a real disconnect between what we read online and real ife sometimes.
Same with US election…Kamal looking good, Trump wins by a landslide.
That does sound like something I would have posted, but can’t remember where. The data for this is available from the CMHC: https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en#Profile/2440/3/Victoria%20CMA
This article is similar: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2024/07/08/some-housing-targets-are-not-like-the-others/
“Bobby, shite no, the younger generations have had too good and are too entitled. It’s about time they step it up and stop complaining”
Says the boomer , I hope you’re joking
Marko, human nature is the same everywhere.
I think an income tested tax deferral is the solution to this. Forcing old people off their property is a political non-starter no doubt. Granted eventually the tax will eat up all the value and you’ll be forced to sell anyway. But then again, the problem to solve there is being too poor to pay property taxes.
I’m not so sure about that. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/trump-threats-open-floodgate-of-inquiries-from-u-s-physicians-about-moving-north-1.7496257
I think the parties should take maximum advantage of this by pitching a dedicated economic immigration stream to attract high-productivity immigrants from the US.
I’ve been pushing property taxes in Croatia as I too agree that property taxes are the way to go. One counter argument I get from a lot of people in Croatia is “you do realize if property taxes are introduced I’ll have to sell the property I inherited from my grandparents that has been in the family for 100 years and an investor or a foreign buyer will buy – is that really the way to go?”
I guess they are trying to argue somehow the wealthy will benefit yet again as the poor won’t be able to pay the property taxes.
Marko, no one wants to work anymore, my theory is covid interrupted people’s routine treadmill of work and they don’t want to go back and realize time is more valuable than money something I always preached to my clients.
Then you have the FIRE movement and bitcoin and robin trading explosion
Bobby, shite no, the younger generations have had too good and are too entitled. It’s about time they step it up and stop complaining
On the flipside I had a client out here from Alberta looking for a place for his daugther and he had to cut his visit short as his boss called him back as they are flying down to the US to find a warehouse to move some of their operations down to the US due to everything going on.
The problem is the Americans moving here are not productive Americans. I don’t have Americans moving up here to work or start a business. Same problem I keep explaining to people in Croatia – we don’t want foreign buyers buying real estate, we want foreigner buyers starting businesses and employing people.
Instead of senior discounts I think stores could really capitalize on giving discounts to people under 40 and especially those with children.
Patrick, once I become a senior I will look at declining all senior discounts, there a small sacrifice Patrick.
Marko, any “productive” prospects like doctors looking to move to Victoria, lol
I don’t really know what we need, but I will note the dichotomy between this quote and your previous comment saying you have Americans trying to move here. Think what you will about the US, but hard to argue it’s not an example of “real change”. I think you’re right that pressure builds until there’s a radical shift, but I have zero confidence that radical shift will be in a good direction.
Ugh, last thing we need is more transfers to seniors.
I think we need another 4 years of a liberal majority government under Carney to really hit rock bottom before people come to the realization that we need real change. I don’t think one can fundamentally change their DNA so while Carney is saying all the right things I don’t think it will actually come to substantially fruition. Our GDP performance will continue to deteriorate in relation to other countries and eventually people will have had enough, but we are not there yet.
If PP gets in not much will change either in the next 4 years and then they will blame the conservatives and just go back to liberals.
I would bet a substantially amount of money irrelevant of whether Carney or PP get in we aren’t hitting 275,000 housing starts in four years from now, let alone solving any other problems. We need a substantial overhaul at all levels.
I haven’t look at the numbers but the realtors I follow on YouTube in different markets across BC such as Surrey are saying sales are a disaster at multi decade lows.
One thing I’ve noticed in my personal business recently is an uptake in US buyers contacting me to buy property in Victoria. Three just in the last week. One retired couple has a son in Victoria that has PR so they will gift him the money for a purchase. Another couple, also retired, she has a CND passport/he doesn’t but moving to Victoria.
Spoke to another agent and he had buyers last week from the US buy a condo, also retired with one CND passport.
Great show on CBC The Current right now talking about seniors and younger generations and how younger people struggling and turning to voting conservative and older generation not wanting to lose or sacrifice any financial benefits including OAS which pays out over 80 billion and they “can”t afford to see the value of their home go down”.
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-63-the-current
As mentioned the conservative now desperately targeting seniors
“Proposal would allow older Canadians to earn up to $34,000 a year without paying income tax, up from around $25,000”
This election is getting pathetic and trying to buy votes like never before.
Marko, those aren’t some bad numbers considering everyone is in a funk because of trump .
Vicre , went to 2 opens near estavin not a lot of house for the money needing updating . I guess just a sign of times , I asked but there was no treats . How hard is it for a realtor to bake cookies before having a open , sheesh
Bobby’s, ya tough to beat O. B for quality of life
“Man in Oak Bay U don’t get much for under 2 mil these days”
What you get is house in a safe, quiet neighbourhood close to the ocean within a walk or short ride to everything you need which is the ultimate quality of life.
I’ll have to check but feels like Victoria is holding up better than BC sales as a whole. That last BCREA sales chart showed a very sharp drop in seasonally adjusted sales in February.
That is true, and now there are people lobbying to incentivize/maybe force (?) pension plans to invest a % in Canada, just as our economic prospects dim. Hopefully that comes to naught.
I’d rather have Poilievre’s voluntary increased TFSA investment into Canada than see any kind of re-imposition of a forced pension plan investment in Canada. I prefer carrot over stick, personally.
Seeing a few properties in O.B. go to builders/developers for fourplexes. This will set a floor on prices for larger lots in O.B., imo.
which ones did u goto and any treats available at any of them?
Despite interest rates continuing to come down sales not improving and inventory increasing. Three years now of a very flat market.
Decent week of sales so back to a 5% increase for the month, set against a 13% increase in new listings and about 14% higher inventory than this month last year.
Month March March
Year 2025 2024
New Unconditional Sales 590 587
New Listings 1,437 1,309
Active Listings 3,013 2,647
Around 30 +/- sales today so we are looking at 620 for the month. Last few years for context
2025 – 620 estimated
2024 – 588
2023 – 590
2022 – 833
2021 – 1,173
2020 – 608
2019 – 640
2018 – 688
As for inventory I think we will hit a peak of between 3,800 to 3,900 come June/July. The highest we’ve seen in 10 years but still well off the 5,000+ we saw 2011-2014.
Any idea who will run for Liberals in the Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke riding? No one? Or maybe not announced yet? Seems pretty unlikely that they wouldn’t have someone.
Open houses in O.B were busy this weekend, Man U don’t get much for under 2 mil these days . Have a real sense that prices are starting to move
Wow. Libs currently polling at a massive majority, with NDP wipeout (2 seats) below official party threshold (12 seats).
This is with libs getting 42% of vote and Cons 38%, and could obviously change.
https://338canada.com/federal.htm
That may be your opinion that it accomplished nothing. The Canadian government thought otherwise, as they kept it and tweaked it over 34 years. They got rid of it because our economy and CAD was doing better in 2005 and didn’t need it.
Like everything in economics, it’s hard to say what has an effect. But the Canadian content requirement for rsp has been a tool for a long time, and I has been used in bad economic times, to prop up the cad and lower interest rates.
And I expect it will be used again if things get bad.
There’s been a foreign content limit in rsp and some pension accounts from 1971 to 2005. It has been tweaked along the way, from 10 to 30%. Notably, it was raised in the 1990’s when Canada had serious economic problems – huge deficits, falling CAD, and a debt crisis that led the Wall Street Journal to name Canada “an honorary member of the third world”.
The point being, Canada did many things to encourage investment in Canada, and one of them was to increase the Canadian content requirement for rrsp.
If our CAD falls below 0.65, I could see the federal government re-introducing a similar idea to encourage Canadians to invest in Canada.
————=====
https://financialpost.com/opinion/dont-limit-canadian-investors-access-foreign-assets
“We have a precedent: the foreign property rule that existed from 1971 until 2005. It imposed a punitive tax — one per cent per month — on foreign property that exceeded a given proportion of a plan’s assets. The limit for pension plans and RRSPs was just 10 per cent from 1971 to 1990. It then rose in equal steps to 20 per cent in 1994. In 2000-2001, it rose in equal steps to 30 per cent and in 2005 it disappeared altogether.”
Another 4 years of a Liberal government might drive me out of the country. Too soft on crime and drugs, my major complaint of this country. Why tackle a severe problem when we can hyper focus on climate change? Drug dealers murder over 7000 Canadians by overdose a year, compared to 800 murders by violence. Most receive a slap on the wrist when caught. At worst they get a couple years in jail, in the U.S. it’s minimum 10 years.
“Yesterday I was informed here that Poilievre wrapping tax cuts in the flag is a bit of a sham, and maybe it is; I still think that it is worth the effort/vote.”
Gimmicks like this just open the doors for financial engineering to get the tax break without increasing any actual investment, while increasing the bureaucratic overhead for brokers and CRA. I mentioned before there used to be a Canadian content requirement for RRSP’s which was finally abandoned because it accomplished nothing.
Want to encourage real business investment, improve the regulatory environment. Or perhaps, make housing cheaper.
“My cousin, an oncologist in Toronto, moved back to Croatia. For him it was more due to better quality of life in Croatia, but I’ve had specialist clients sell and move to US for higher standard of living (higher wages/lower taxes).”
–
OK so your cousin moved back I guess that’s counts as a stampede. The fact is Crotia’s population is expected to fall by 20% in the next 20 years and it ranks 57th in the world index on the coruption index vs Canada at 12th. Looks like people are voting with their feet to move out of Crotia because of lack of opportunities which impacts their quality of life.
Looks like more doctors moving to Canada from the US. “More recently, the number of physicians leaving Canada has decreased significantly, resulting in net gains of between 30 to 60 per year.”
It must be the qulity of life in the US where every day, 125 people in the US are killed with guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded. Nearly one in five American adults say they have had a family member who was killed by a gun
“When I worked at the Jubilee/General there were 5 or 6 South African anesthesiologist…its not like these people can’t move around looking for a better combination of standard of living + quality of life.
–
I lost track of how many South African doctors i met with who moved to Canada for it’s improved quality of life.
“Yes, doctors are pouring into Canada. Must be no trouble finding one.”
–
This is a world wide problem with the US short 60,000 doctors. Maybe this is less of an issue in Crotia as so many people are leaving?
I guess the question is when does a person have enough money, is it 5MM, 10MM 20MM?
“If financial incentive isn’t that important why you posting every day about how well you are doing in the markets? You are doing nothing productive in the markets for society but take issue with a surgeon working 60 hrs a week getting a break on taxes even thought they pay more than 99% of the population already.”
–
Marko, I am raising a family (unlike yourself) and looking after a parent, most people would argue that real estate agents are one of the most useless and overpaid jobs.
Marko, I posted on 2 maybe 3 days this week and never made any mention of doing well in the market, one time i said it was a good day for traders, the other mention was a grilling started from Patrick.
“When I worked ICU we had multiple intensivist that worked absolutely insane hours. There was one guy he was an anesthesiologist in the OR, ran the pain clinic and then would come work 7 straight days in ICU as a intensivist sleeping at the hospital every night (when I was there there was no night coverage for the intensivist). If this individual gets to contribute another 5k/year to their TSFA to fund their retirement apparently they are a taker, makes sense.”
–
Marko my comment on takers was directed at people such as yourself who are constantly complaining about everything and looking for more tax breaks when they already have it better than most and when you said you would vote for Justin Trudeau if he gave you more TFSA room.
–
You just never seem to be very greatful for everything you have and always want more when so many other people especially the younger generations trying to buy a home and start a family are struggling to the point of lowering our birth rate to 1.3.
I’m not sure why you still live in Victoria and Canada given how much you complain about it, you sound like that old guy who used to post who moved to Victoria and never stopped complaining about it. Life’s too short to be miserable, maybe you should move back to Crotia for it’s quality of life you rave about?
Lmao
My cousin, an oncologist in Toronto, moved back to Croatia. For him it was more due to better quality of life in Croatia, but I’ve had specialist clients sell and move to US for higher standard of living (higher wages/lower taxes).
When I worked at the Jubilee/General there were 5 or 6 South African anesthesiologist…its not like these people can’t move around looking for a better combination of standard of living + quality of life.
Yes, doctors are pouring into Canada. Must be no trouble finding one.
If financial incentive isn’t that important why you posting every day about how well you are doing in the markets? You are doing nothing productive in the markets for society but take issue with a surgeon working 60 hrs a week getting a break on taxes even thought they pay more than 99% of the population already.
When I worked ICU we had multiple intensivist that worked absolutely insane hours. There was one guy he was an anesthesiologist in the OR, ran the pain clinic and then would come work 7 straight days in ICU as a intensivist sleeping at the hospital every night (when I was there there was no night coverage for the intensivist). If this individual gets to contribute another 5k/year to their TSFA to fund their retirement apparently they are a taker, makes sense.
Yesterday I was informed here that Poilievre wrapping tax cuts in the flag is a bit of a sham, and maybe it is; I still think that it is worth the effort/vote. Even before the change of US government, this Casandra argued that if we were going to stand on our own two feet, government incentives to encourage investment in productive Canadian enterprises would be needed.
I’m not convinced that RE investments help increase Canada’s productivity much, and suspect manufacturing investments would help Canada’s economy more. Edison Truck is an example of that sort of BC entrepreneurial spirit.
https://www.merrittherald.com/merritt-loses-edison-motors-as-truck-company-finds-new-home-in-golden/
“So far, Edison Motors have raised over $5.9 million to build a manufacturing plant in Golden, B.C., and ramp up production of Class 8 hybrid electric-diesel trucks….the investment is open until April 21 and they hope to continue to raise money until then. The money raised will go towards building the shop where the trucks will be manufactured.”
“Do you want your doctor specalist to move to another country where they will have better financial benefits? People paying a ton of taxes that “need it the least” are also often very productive members of society.”
Marko, please tell me which english speaking countries our specialist doctors can move to that have substantially lower tax rates? Last time I checked we have more doctors moving to Canada than leaving Canada each year.
I guess the question is when does a person have enough money, is it 5MM, 10MM 20MM?
And yes, meant un-enrolled and not opted out: https://evidencenetwork.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ENinfographic.Nov22.16.pdf
There is a benefit to unenrolling and charging all your patients ex. 300-500/month to have you as their doctor. You get unlimited visits with multiple issues and often same or next day appointments. A full patient load for a family doctor in BC is 1250 patients. Even if an unenrolled doctor has a fraction of the number of patients an enrolled one has, they are making more money and have way more time to spend with each patient – provided they attract enough patients to make the practice viable and that is probably somewhere around 100-300 patients. They can’t bill MSP for your visits with them – but they don’t need to.
If I could sell my condos and defer the capital gain somehow into a new 6-plex build I would do that, but I can’t so I just keep the condos and I am looking to build one 6-plex instead of two.
Do you want your doctor specalist to move to another country where they will have better financial benefits? People paying a ton of taxes that “need it the least” are also often very productive members of society.
It sounds like it would apply to any capital gains (selling stocks, RE, a business etc.), and there’d be a 18 month window starting July 2025. https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/conservatives-promise-to-defer-tax-on-capital-gains-to-domestic-boost-investment/
fwiw, Libs are polling 15 polling ahead in Ontario.
The 6 months would have been the problem. We have a large capital gain coming and could defer the tax by developing another property. You can’t get a DP in 6 months in many municipalities and that time-line would kill any opportunity.
The conservatives under Harper proposed a similar capital gains exemption if the money was reinvested within 6 months. It was inevitably shelved.
And, I’m not one to talk, but what is this: “its and anonymous fourm?’… just poking fun.
“Poilievre proposes capital gains tax deferral on profit reinvested in Canada..” Not a fan personally, but pretty hard to call this “panicking.” Pee-wee’s been pretty clear about his stance on capital gains tax, (and carbon taxes). I’ll participate in the benefit should it arise – hopefully he doesn’t restrict the type of capital gain.
Patrick, its and anonymous fourm, who cares?
I’ve already stated that much of my wealth was based on luck and saying the right thing to the right person at the right time and for that I am greatful. And I am sure I am no where near among the wealthiest Canadian’s. If I had half of what i have today it wouldn’t change my lifestyle one bit.
My point was that we keep giving more financial benefits to those who need it the least.
Another day… another boast by BobbyK that he is among the wealthiest Canadians. 🙂
“Poilievre proposes capital gains tax deferral on profit reinvested in Canada”
–
Another day another benefit to the wealthiest Canadians, I guess I should be happy with this policy as it may greatly benefit me.
The conservatives are panicking as the usually reliable conservative vote by seniors is going to the liberals.
Perhaps totoro meant “unenroled” instead of “opted-out”. Unenroled physicians can charge patients what they want.
Yes. As long as the services are not provided in a government facility (hospital etc), an un-enrolled physician can charge what they want. And if the physician is un-enrolled , the patient doesn’t get reimbursed by MSP- so it’s a private transaction not costing the government anything
Perhaps totoro meant “unenroled” instead of “opted-out”. Unenroled physicians can charge patients what they want.
.> However, physicians and NPs in BC must opt out of provincially insured services to charge for them privately ie. to be a private family physician.
No, they don’t need to opt-out. Opting out doesn’t change what they can bill for insured services. As stated plainly by the govt.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/health-drug-coverage/msp/bc-residents/benefits/additional-fees-and-charges
“Opted-out physicians bill patients directly for their services, then the patients may claim reimbursement from MSP. By law, an opted-out physician may not charge a patient more for an insured benefit than the prescribed MSP amount.”
Here’s an example. A patient is seen by a BC family doctor , for a visit that MSP fee schedule allows $100.
Physician A is opted in and charges MSP $100 (patient pays nothing)
Physician B is opted-out and charges the patient a maximum of $100. (Patient bills MSP and is reimbursed by MSP for what they paid (up to $100) at a later date)
If either physician or his clinic is performing additional services not covered by msp, they can charge extra to the patient. So if physician B charged the patient $175, that’s $75 higher than legally allowed to charge, so the doc would have to document the $75 non-insured services on his invoice to the patient,
As you can see, there’s no financial benefit to opting out. Either way, they can only charge extra (privately) for non-insured services. There are various reasons that doctors opt out (more freedom, less paperwork), but being legally able to charge patients more for insured services isn’t one of them
Yes. This is why Mds in the system can charge for things like driver exam medicals.
However, physicians and NPs in BC must opt out of provincially insured services to charge for them privately ie. to be a private family physician. See, for example, this clinic staffed by MDs operating outside of the provincial system and offering comprehensive services which would normally be covered by MSP, but are not as a result of this rule. https://perpetualhealthcentre.com/services/family-practice/ They can still make referrals for services that are covered like lab work and specialists.
MDs and NPs that opt out make their money on monthly or annual fees paid privately by patients.
Just ran into someone I hadn’t seen in a few years. He was suffering from severe internal pains that were not localized. It took several visits and examinations to determine he was suffering from lymphoma. Once an accurate diagnosis was made, he said the service and treatment has been amazing. The problem is all the visits he had to go through to find out what was wrong. Too many doctors have the attitude that patients are just looking for pain killers. They aren’t that far off. I even have friends that had a doctor dismiss their symptoms even when they were having a heart attack. Misdiagnosis is part of the inefficiencies of our healthcare system.
…..>.. Not sure about Ontario, but in BC the only way doctors and nurses can accept private pay is if they opt out of the provincial payment system. The private pay executive care clinics in Ottawa have same day MD access
No, BC Physicians opted-in cannot accept private pay for INSURED SERVICES, but can accept pay for non-insured services or services for other health professionals. There are lots of uninsured services for physicians.
There’s a big loophole where they (the team) offer comprehensive care, which includes nutritionist, kinesthiologist, physiotherapy, NP etc.
The MD physician insured-services aren’t included in the fee, and those are billed through MSP as normal. So the services you pay for are uninsured services provided by the team. That’s why you see the description about the holistic and preventive services provided – because those are also not covered by msp, and a physician can charge for those privately.
For example, many people don’t realize that routine annual checkups for healthy patients are not covered by BC MSP. Therefore those can be charged by your doctor as a private fee.
https://bayswatermd.ca/services/regular-check-ups-and-annual-physicals/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “ MSP does not cover routine physicals for healthy patients.”
The lawsuits arrive when the BC gov’t alleges that the patients are being forced to sign up for the non-covered services, which is a difficult case to make.
Here’s a page where the bc govt confirms that uninsured services can be billed privately by the physician “ The charges for these uninsured services are the responsibility of the patient. .. Some physicians elect to charge their patients an annual, enrolment, or registration fee. Patients cannot be denied service for choosing not to pay these fees.“
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/health-drug-coverage/msp/bc-residents/benefits/additional-fees-and-charges
Not sure about Ontario, but in BC the only way doctors and nurses can accept private pay is if they opt out of the provincial payment system. The private pay executive care clinics in Ottawa have same day MD access. https://exechealth.ca/corporate-health/
There is a loophole in Ontario law in that NP services are not mandated under OHIP. This is well known.
I pay privately for access to a clinic with a number of nurse practitioners who are excellent. Well worth the peace of mind knowing that I have continuity of care and can get in to see someone next day. I pay for another family member with some health conditions to attend as well, even though they have a primary physician. The primary care physician they use provides a much lower standard of care. Still, this doesn’t help with referral wait times.
Ontario definitely has private pay clinics. My friend who lives in Ottawa pays privately for executive health care and there is NP Ottawa Health clinic.
I live in Ontario and I’m unaware of any private clinics offering mandated services outside of OHIP. Doug Ford took a lot of heat for first suggesting that “all options are on the table” and backpedaled on allowing private health care.
https://www.cma.ca/our-focus/public-and-private-health-care/opting-and-out-public-medical-practice-across-canada
>>> Based on last names all of them of Croatian heritage but people with money are moving it aboard. I know I’ve done it personally. You can keep a vacant condo in Croatia for less than $1,000/year including utilities and strata fees.
Sure, but that doesn’t avoid paying Canadian taxes on the Croatia condo. Canadians pay tax on worldwide income, must declare these foreign properties annually, and pay capital gains tax in Canada if the Croatian property is sold. What’s worse is that sometimes tax treaties don’t prevent double taxation, because the types of taxes applied are different.
And if they move out of Canada to become a non-resident of Canada, they pay taxes to Canada on a deemed disposition of all assets , including a deemed disposition of the Croatia condo.
So if asset tax comes to Canada, it would almost certainly apply to worldwide assets, including foreign RE like a Croatia condo.
EU forced Croatia into FINTRAC and Croatia pretty much copied Canada’s FINTRAC so I have a side hustle in Croatia doing FINTRAC compliance for developers and this is already happening. There is project I was involved in where >30% of the sales were to Canadians and Australians. Based on last names all of them of Croatian heritage but people with money are moving it aboard. I know I’ve done it personally. You can keep a vacant condo in Croatia for less than $1,000/year including utilities and strata fees.
The main problem there is that people want to continue with the Canadian medical system for other services besides family doctor. Which is reasonable since they pay taxes for that. But if they need a hip replacement, referral from a port Angeles doctor isn’t going to help, as you need referrals and follow up from a Canadian doctor.
I would probably consider it if I didn’t have my EU passport, but why should I have to go to Port Angeles.
Yep pay 3 grand and u can get a full body mri, do that every 6 months and u will sleep well at nite
I’ve been going to a great private medical clinic in Vancouver (Copeman Clinic, now part of Telus). They got sued by the government, with the BC government trying to shut them down. Ultimately was settled out-of-court, grandfathering existing patients. Just a reminder to all that our NDP government doesn’t seem to like private medical clinics, unlike many other provinces like Alberta or Ontario.
I just noticed that there are a bunch of private for-pay medical clinics popping up in Victoria. If so, that’s great.
I don’t have any experience with these clinics, maybe someone who does can comment.
But they look good, and anyone looking for a doctor should consider them.
https://www.elevationmd.ca
https://invest-med.ca
https://perpetualhealthcentre.com
https://www.woodlandsclinic.ca/about
https://www.care2talk.io
https://betahealth.ca/
Well anyone could just go to Port Angeles couldn’t they? Is there a booming medical sector there catering to Victorians? If not, why not?
It isn’t just the taxes, some people also put a lot of time and discipline into preventitive health care via diet (I’ve personally changed my diet completely to keep my cholestoral in check without meds) and exericise and then when you do need health care the rare time you can’t get it. Not even bitter about the government not being able to provide a family doctor, but why can’t I go private?
I recently had an annual check-up in Croatia for 199 euros in Croatia. Includes a bunch of stuff including an abdominal ultrasound by a radiologist. I got my report (put together by an internist) and I wanted to get a second opinion on something by a specialist. Called a private clinic and booked an appointment at 8:30 pm on a Thursday with a specialist. When I got chatting with him he works in a public hospital Monday-Friday 9 to 5 and then he works in the private clinic Monday, Tuesday, Thursday 6pm to 9pm. He says he use to work Saturdays too in the private clinic but both his daugthers got married in the last few years and he was able to buy both of them condos so he doesn’t need to work Saturdays anymore. He was a great thorough doctor. I don’t see the issue in terms of incentivizing health care professionals with $. This guy is/was motivated to work more in order to buy his daugther’s places and I got to see specialist on short notice. Win-win imo.
Re TSFA discussion yes a large portion to lack of contribution is financial inability, but lack of financial common sense and discipline is also a huge factor in my opinion. Just look at the average sale price of a new car in Canada. It is literally doube some very good brand new cars (Honda Civic, Mazda3, etc.) Personally, I am driving a 10k car if my TSFA is not maxed out every year. Simple common sense. If you put in $7,000 into your TSFA at 25 yrs old at 8% per year self-managed you’ll have $70k by the time you are 55k. If you put in $7,000/year starting at 25 every year you’ll be at a million by 55.
>>> There is a limit to what people will put up with.
The government will have to be careful not to kill the golden goose.
I agree.
One of the issues about ”a limit to what people will put up with”, is the “family doctor” issue.
It doesn’t matter how much tax you pay, you may still not have a family doctor.
And what’s worse, the federal government makes it illegal (or difficult) for hiring a private doctor with your own money. If the government can’t provide the services, they should “get out of the way” and allow private medical clinics, run by private doctors and nurse practitioners.
Provinces like Ontario have lots of private clinics because the provincial government welcomes them. Unlike our BC government, that hassles and sues private clinics to shut them down.
Having said that, it’s nice to see some medical private clinics showing up on Vancouver island. Like this one https://betahealth.ca/
I’ve been bringing this up for many years.
COV paid $10.5 million for a site on Pandora developer had purchased a couple of years earlier for $3.3 million.
BC Housing paid $26 million for a site on Douglas and then Chard Development bought the adjacent site for $7 million AFTER in a rising market. Now BC Housing and Chard have combined their sites for a project.
Happy to see I am not the only one questioning this non-sense -> https://www.vicnews.com/opinion/letter-secrecy-surrounds-pricey-saanich-property-purchase-7906448
If there is a serious asset tax one day …would people not just sell their assets and move them to a more friendly country?
I know I would.
The government get’s it’s fair share of taxes on the income from those assets and should be happy enough with that.
If a small time person like me is thinking of that, then what would people with much more wealth do?
There is a limit to what people will put up with.
The government will have to be careful not to kill the golden goose.
People with wealth have a number of choices .
I’ve long thought income tax was an outdated and insufficient means to determine benefits and eligibility for things. Some of the richest people I know have received all sorts of benefits that we didn’t qualify for because our annual income was higher, while they enjoyed the cottages, financial aid of family, and expensive homes that were largely the benefit of intergenerational wealth. We paid a lot of taxes with a nice income and are o.k. with that on the one hand. Just seemed really skewed and a bit unfair to see people with so much wealth get things like the child tax benefit, for example, when, effectively, they had more to spend than we did after you account for the house savings, education savings, retirement savings (no inheritance coming our way), childcare, etc, etc, that we had to cover on our own – all things that came to them through family help. One family I know even qualified for private education grant because their income was below a threshold but they had millions in assets. This isn’t a complaint, just an observation, that our way of determining ‘need’ across all sectors is very very outdated and ridiculous, really.
Yes, this idea was summed up nicely by Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw…
“A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul”
Thanks Patrick, “But I expect it would be popular with many people, especially those with net worth below the threshold that don’t need to pay it.”
I’m not sure there is much else that needs to be said.
>>. >GIS and OAS should be income tested AND asset tested.
Asset testing GIS/OAS is “small potatoes” compared to what may be coming…
The day is coming where taxes will be “asset tested”. And it won’t be limited to GIS/OAS.
It will be a wealth tax where taxes are paid on net wealth each year, above a threshold.
This is already present in many countries, Norway (1%), Spain (1-3%), Switzerland (0.5%). This applies to net worth (above a threshold) from most any assets held. France has a rate of 1%( but only applies to RE).
So, for example, if wealth tax was 1%, someone with $5m net worth would pay $50,000 wealth tax per year, regardless of income (on top of other taxes)
To be clear, I’m not advocating for this wealth tax. But I expect it would be popular with many people, especially those with net worth below the threshold that don’t need to pay it.
It would provide an opportunity for the wealthy HHV “givers” here to actually “give”.
Well we are in a federal election you know. Who’s talking about limiting benefits to well-off seniors? Oh, right.
Does your definition of everyone include people whose family didn’t own land?
Hi Leo, I am thinking you posted information or a table or graph on the number of units/houses that each municipality built over the last decade. Am I remembering correctly, and if so could you point me to it?
Do you mean families or individuals? Way less than half of those over 65 have this as individuals and around half of economic families where the main earner is over 65 have a net worth of less than 1,000,000.
Did not have to do something terribly wrong. Maybe you lived in a small town where home values never appreciated that much. Or you were a single parent. Or you never had a partner. Or you got divorced. Or got sick or became disabled.
If you want retire comfortably it takes a hell of a lot more than 1 million in very easy to covert to liquid cash assets. This does not include your principle residence.
I’m a boomer and I have a lot of friends who have worked all their lives, raised a couple kids, and I am fairly certain most of them, in my group, have a net worth well over a million dollars. Some did get substantial inheritances, many didn’t. If you’re 65+ today and not worth at least a mil, you did something terribly wrong, given the opportunities that were available to everyone.
Yay, Moms dying…Now we can finally afford to buy a house in Victoria.
Okay, so what non-anecdotal evidence do you have that wealth was “far more concentrated” in the 60s than it is today?
The past I’m referring to is when one income could support a family of 6 or more people. My point of reference would be my grandparents who passed in the 1960s, had 6 children, no money, a house and a cottage. The properties created a lot of family friction. The 1980s were yesterday.
There’s always been wealthy people and poor people , big deal , Canada is a capitalist country. If someone wants a house or a new car I would say go out there and make some money
By “in the past” do you mean 1980 or 1880?
In the past, wealth was far more concentrated. I would say that today, more people are benefiting from productive parents who saved, spent their money wisely, owned a home, and possibly a recreational property, leaving significant assets to pass on. Also in the past, families were much larger, causing assets to be split into smaller amounts.
Vicre, if u want a doctor your going to have to be financially pro active
Nice back door brag. I can see how making $600,000 and having no family doctor would be frustrating, and you have a valid reason to feel bitter and complain unlike other people on here. I am grateful we have had the same family doctor since we moved here in early 2000.
Paying in excess of 250k in taxes but not have a family doctor while seeing drug addicts get treatment ahead of you in th ER will make people bitter.
Frank, you’re right, I take that back, that was the wrong word, although I would be embarrassed to be interviewed in their situation in a national newspaper trying to qualify for GIS. Although perhaps this was another fictitious scenario drawing attention to a situation or loop hole that needs to be closed, it wouldn’t be the first time this has happened.
What I resent are people constantly complaining about taxes and looking for “more” when they have much more than enough while other generations are suffering and voting only for what’s in their best interest regardless of how it will help other generations or people. I was listenning to a podcast while I cut the lawn yesterday and they talked about how in the distant past the wealthy used to leave much greater legacies for future generations than what happens now even though we are a much wealthier society.
The “taker” are the ones not contributing to our productivity, chronically unemployed, drug addicts, criminals, uneducated, etc. They are the ones draining our economy, clogging the healthcare system, causing businesses to close, and always wanting more handouts .To say that hard working, decent people are “takers” is nonsense.
Another example of “ takers” in today’s globe featuring a couple with over 1.5MM in assets with an income goal of 7OK trying to game their income to qualify for GIS payments.
GIS and OAS should be income tested AND asset tested.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/personal-finance/financial-facelift/article-with-health-issues-looming-how-can-steffen-60-and-jennie-57-optimize/
I agree. We are facing a national economic threat with these tariffs and we need a sensible national response that uses whatever strengths we have as a nation. And notwithstanding Trudeau’s recent musings to Trump to the effect that we’d be a “failed nation” with tariffs (exit the drama teacher, thanks for nothing), the fact is we have significant strengths that could be harnessed, if we’d only do it. Yes, I’m talking about our resource industries. Natural gas, in particular, makes a lot of sense to me, as a transitional fuel that can help reduce use of coal internationally & so serve as a transitional fuel. And what country in the world is better-positioned to deliver responsible, geopolitically safe & conflict-free resources than Canada? We just need the national will to proceed. Doing so would also have the “incidental” benefits of helping western democracies in Europe like Germany that were basically begging for us to help them wean off Russian gas, and diversifying away from the US – with the added leverage that may bring.
And I know many people, and both main parties, are now pretty much saying this, but given how much I think we actually need real results here, not just electioneering, my vote would not be for Carney, as his past statements and actions have made it crystal-clear this would be a complete 180 from his DNA. I just would not trust him with this important task.
>>>> savings enable investment, and investment drives productivity gains by providing the tools and knowledge needed to produce more with less.
Encouraging long-term savings in TFSA and RSP drive productivity gains. Unlike RSP that have a up-front loss of tax revenue, the TFSA cost is minimal, as only the opportunity to tax future realized gains are lost.
Savings enable investment, and investment drives productivity gains by providing the tools and knowledge needed to produce more with less. Canada needs more savings and investment, leading to higher capital investment, especially needed in research and development.
Getting away from the federal side, what programs and rebates are expected to be cancelled with the roll back of the provincial carbon tax?
That is beyond creepy dude!
Agreed the TFSA thing is a gimmick. If there are going to be tax cuts should be laser focused on the most productivity and job killing taxes, not on creating more tax free passive savings vehicles.
That doesn’t make any sense. Because it’s not being used to it’s maximum potential it’s only a benefit for the top 5%? That doesn’t track at all.
Being able to save 12k a year doesn’t put you in the top 5%. It just allows, encourages and provides a small avenue for the productive people in our society to keep some of their own money for later in life. Not everyone wants to be dependent on the monthly loser cheques from government in their old age. I will always trust a person to do better with their money than government taking it, wasting it, and handing pennies back to them in an ineffective and inefficient way.
Thanks for that Pat,
After reading some of the finer points of that pre-election promise, it now looks as though I was played a sucker by another hollow campaign plank.
Recently Poilievre’s bumper-sticker was boots not suits, but in this case it might become suits not boots
It’s stupid. First of all, only about 10% of TSFA holders fully contribute, and only about half of adults have one. So it’s a benefit only for the top 5%.
Second, the qualification is putting $5K into Canadian stocks. But most people with fully contributed TFSA’s (which will be over $100K by now) will have that much already, so they can just do a shuffle to buy “new” stocks and qualify for that extra $5K.
Third, there will be an extra burden on brokerages and CRA to enforce the rules. You might recall there used to be a Canadian content rule for RRSP’s and it was scrapped.
The NDP’s promise to renters
https://youtube.com/shorts/OOZtDDUC834?si=2Knw_uteFzVSDA8M
I think we should shift more tax burden from income to land but getting rid of PRE isn’t the way to do it. I’d rather see higher annual property taxes than high taxes on transactions
Patrick, I was refering to takers as those who are looking for additional tax shelters, as you and Marko are interested in and may vote for, and those who oppose new tax measures which might impact them directly. Bye for now.
So why do you accuse others (like Marko) of being takers” who really only care about what’s in it for them.”
When it comes to paying taxes and “giving” vs “taking”, I don’t see how you’re any different from the rest of us.
Thanks for the discussion.
Patrick so you’re asking me and everyone else to pay taxes on unrealized gains annually, that would of course never happen, as it would destroy Canada’s economy, but if that is the case I may look for investments that avoided this tax such as buying real estate for my children as soon as they reach 18, everyone is free to minimize taxes. Thanks for the discussion, lets steer it away from me and back to how we can solve the crisis that is facing the under 40 generation especially pertaining to real estate (i know you feel it’s not a problem) and get our child birthrate back up.
Concerning the “why” of the 2024 election:
https://musaalgharbi.substack.com/p/a-graveyard-of-bad-election-narratives
.>>>>>I have many times more money invested outside my home in a taxable environment and don’t complain. Why don’t you make a suggestion for a way for tax changes to impact me right now and I will tell you if I agree with it.
—-====-
One reason you don’t complain is that you don’t pay ANY taxes on unrealized gains on your “ many times more money invested”. So let’s see how much of a “giver” you really are , who wants to help out with “Rome burning”.
How about you pay taxes now and each year on your unrealized gains? You know, to help the “crisis” and all.
You told me to make a suggestion that would impact you right now, and you’d tell me if you agree with it.. There it is and so simply tell me if you agree with it.
And remember, you’re the one that unfairly accused Marko and others of being ““takers” who really only care about what’s in it for them.”
Patrick as I answered if I had known about the tax I may have timed my decision to a time when I was in a lower tax bracket to minimize taxes as everyone else is free to do so. I assume elimination of the PRE would not be retroactive and based on current values.
For some reason I can’t find the post I made using AI so can’t answer question on the post.
>> Patrick so you’re asking ONLY ME to retroactively pay CG taxes on the sale of my house? That’s just dumb.
Nope, I’m not asking you to retroactively pay it. I’m asking you if the PRE had been removed back then prior to you selling fo the $1.2m gain , would you “AGREE” with that and paid the $300k gain like anyone else would have to in the same position
Patrick so you’re asking ONLY ME to retroactively pay CG taxes on the sale of my house? That’s just dumb.
If everyone had lost the PRE at the same time I would’t have complained but it may have altered my house move to when I was in a lower tax bracket which is perfectly legal and again i would’t complain. I have many times more money invested outside my home in a taxable environment and don’t complain. I am greatful for everything I have and at the same time I am happy to pay my fair share of taxes.
Why don’t you make a suggestion for a way for tax canges to impact me and I will tell you if I agree with it. (“ but we have moved from our original house we bought in 2001 having sold for an increase of around 1.2MM)
Well let’s start off with the one you suggested.
Let’s use the actual example you just told us about. Where you sold your PRE for a $1.2 million gain, and then bought another place.
Now, assume your idea of ending the PRE had been enacted back then. And so you’d have to pay $300,000 in capital gains, even though you’re buying another house,
Ending the PRE…. That’s the idea you suggested. Do you agree with that? I
Patrick, I have never claimed to have made millions on my house (i’m sure you will look for a quote from me :), but we have moved from our original house we bought in 2001 having sold for an increase of around 1.2MM (that isn’t millions). Why don’t you make a suggestion for a way for tax changes to impact me right now and I will tell you if I agree with it.
Huh? I thought you told us you were happy where you are with no plans to sell. If so, this wouldn’t impact you until “the future” , like your other suggestions.
Did I get this wrong, and you’re planning to sell your PRE soon, and wouldn’t mind paying capital gains on the million(s) you’ve made on your house that you’ve told us about?
Sorry, this is the stat you need a source for “of those who could almost half regret not having children”. FYI, your AI summary is not enough to make a reasonable verifiable claim such as this.
However, about 20% of American adults choose to not have children:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-15728-z
Patrick, I would be impacted by eliminating the PRE, I am on record of being in favor of the carbon tax and have said I would be happy if my property taxes doubled if we actually invested into things like arenas ( which my children may be to old to use by the time they are built) and pools etc… I was also in the highest tax bracket for most of my career and never complained. I prepared for the future and dont expect to receive govt handouts like OAS. So try again.
>> BobbyK: But instead we get comments like Markos from people like him who are “takers” and really only care about what’s in it for them.”What I would do: Many of these item would impact me personally in the future.“
So we get lectured by BobbyK how we are “takers”, and so I suppose BobbyK is a “giver”.
And so he lists a bunch of suggestions.
And then qualifies that by saying “Many of these item would impact me personally *** in the future. ***.
Wait.. In the future they would impact you? What about now?
You’ve told us that “Rome is burning “now”. Yet you can’t come up with even a single suggestion that stops you also “taking” until some point in the future? For example, you’ve boasted about your profits today from market trading. How about some ideas from “BobbyK the great giver” that has you paying more of those profits over to stop “Rome burning”.
I think a major focus on trans women in male sports at the end of the campaign had a huge impact on swaying voters
Don’t conflate your own opinions with some kind of general truth. That’s fantastic that you find fulfillment in being a parent. Don’t pity or judge those that don’t have kids. The only folks to feel sorry for are (1) the people that really wanted kids but couldn’t, (2) kids born to parents who don’t give an f.
AI Overview
About 20% of adults aged 50 and older in the United States have never had children.
Here’s a more detailed breakdown:
Overall:
One in five U.S. adults aged 50 and older have never had children, according to Pew Research Center analysis of government data.
Vance made it explicit when he said – the Democrats were “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too”
Where are you getting this stat?
Conversely, studies show 5-14% of people with children regretted having them.
Here is a nationalistic/sovereignty reason why government efforts should have been (and should be) made to increase the birth rate in Canada.
As this is ostensibly a RE site, I’ll quote Dan Scarrow (the president of Macdonald Realty Group):
“Much has been said about inter-provincial trade barriers, but the truth is simpler: Canada’s population is too small and too dispersed to sustain an internal market.”
https://www.biv.com/news/commentary/opinion-to-secure-a-strong-economic-future-canada-must-choose-growth-10412198
(full disclosure: For years I have wished that Canada’s economy was less dependent on our closest neighbour’s good will, but by choosing to have no offspring I did not help Canada be less dependent on export trade.)
What thought process is that? I’m not even sure where to start with the trump family values comment.
That type of thought process likely cost Kamala a bunch of votes. Why would you vote for a woman with no kids and no purpose in life versus a family man with family values like Trump.
Marko, yes as mentioned it is my opinion that not having children is sad, especially if you would like to have them which historically 90% have wanted to have children. I am not judging others. Given this stat and the dramatic reduction in the birth rate and % of couples who can’t or won’t have children should be a national emergency for both economic and mental health reasons.
The average age of first-time homebuyers in the US has reached an all-time high of 38, a significant shift from the late 20s typical in the 1980s.
What would I do:
tax incentives for couples to have children
tax deductable mortgage interest for first time home buyers under 40 for say 10 years.
remove principal residence exemption
take away capital gain treatment for single family homes owed by investors
phase out OAS for individuals with income over 50K
Many of these item would impact me personally in the future.
That’s just a start, of course I would never be elected with this approach.
But sure let’s keep talking about what we can do to help, boomers like Patrick by increasing TFSA room and OAS payments while “Rome burns”.
re: TFSA
As mentioned earlier on HHV, here’s some more info on PP’s idea to increase contribution room in TFSA by $5,000, which would nearly double it from the current $7,000 limit. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/poilievre-carney-offshore-haven-tfsa
I like that idea, and wouldn’t mind to see the Libs copying it.
RRSP’s used to be restricted to only Canadian investments, and foreign investments were then allowed for only part of the portfolio.
I can see the government returning RSP and TFSA to a 100% Canada-investment-only policy, which would force people to sell their foreign stocks and buy Canadian. Only bonafide Canadian companies would qualify, so not a Canadian etf holding us stocks for example. Doing that would help the Canadian dollar as well as spurring investment in Canada.
and that is your opinion. Not everyone shares this opinion and personally I don’t look down on or judge people who opt not to have kids.
Yes, in the background of my YT videos I have photos of kids of random clients.
Trump and Putin are perfect examples of why we need efficient common-sense governments. While Putin is perfecting ballistic missiles and Trump doing whatever he is doing we are putting in bureaucracy to decrease our productivity putting us in a very vulnerable position.
If we were pumping oil and not putting a stop to everything because not all 101 stakeholders agree Putin wouldn’t be filling his coffers as much as he is right now.
Speaking of what’s in it for me, it’s another great day for trading on the markets.
Marko, about 50% of childless couples say they would like to have children but for various reasons like affordability, fertility etc.. they can’t and that’s sad. Having children is one of the most wonderful experiences in life and actually really our main purpose on living. I also feel being an only child is also sad. I have 2 boys and when one is away you can tell the one at home misses them and when the other comes home they hang out together as soon as they can and the oldest is 17.
“I am going to look out for the best interests of my own family.”
–
I thought you were single with no children? That’s great but you have come back to full circle with “what’s in it for me”. Trump is the perfect example of this attitude. With this attitude were all doomed.
You do realize some people simply don’t want to have children and in my opinion that is okay. It isn’t completely correlated to lack of affordability.
Just because something doesn’t align with your personal values does not make it sad.
Every day people from across BC email due to hardship they are suffering as a result of government policy. I posted these stories regularly on here…just last week I posted the story of the lady who’s husband died in a car accident and BC Housing put a stop work order on their half finished house and they won’t waive a 110% useless exam for her so she can finish the house. A rural house at that.
Not to mention people who can’t rebuild after wildfires due to this idiotic government non-sense. This is the stupidity the voters are voting in. After a while you just give up. I help people as much as I can with the non-sense, but beyond that of course I am going to look out for the best interests of my own family. What should I do, support higher taxes so government can open more non-sense departments at various ministries to put people into further hardship with even more bureaucracy?
I’ve sent out over 5000 owner builder study gudies in the last year 9 years to people looking to owner-build a home…just curious as to what you have done to help with housing affordability?
Simple solution, significant income tax credits for those having kids specifically targeted at middle to upper middle income couples. Don’t need any more incentives for dead beats having a bunch of kids and not raising them properly.
“As I commented a few days ago I would vote Trudeau back in for double TSFA contribution room”
–
And this is why we end up with the governments that we get, everyone is only interested in what the government will “give them”, not many people care about the future or future generations.
We have a crisis with a birth rate of only 1.33 in 2022 with 2.1 being the replacement rate. Around 30% of couples say they don’t intend to have children and 45% who do have children opt for only 1 child ( both of these situations are very sad).
Politicians need to stop trying to buy votes and courting the boomer and senior vote and start planning for the future and instead make policies that look out for future generation with incentives for the young to have children and free up large homes from aging boomers through incentives.
But instead we get comments like Markos from people like him who are “takers” and really only care about what’s in it for them.
I believe that the current annual TFSA contribution limit is still $7000 (and can be used to shelter capital gains earned on investments in the USA).
Probably not that many (4.5%?), but being as pre-election promises of tax cuts are tossed around like confetti, it is refreshing to see one vote buying promise come with obligations for the recipient to give something back to society.
You could say the same things for investing -> https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/few-canadian-managed-funds-beat-the-market-in-2024-is-the-active-vs-passive-debate-over-162931241.html
Yet people still invest in mutual funds. How difficult is it to buy ETFs?
I’ve done a lot of these unconditional offers over the last two years, and it is mostly what I would personally consider savvier people. One client last year went unconditional on a house that was a very long time on market and got $175,000 off asking after the seller lowered $100,000 a week before. Then turned around and said I need you to sell my house now, I’ll pay you upfront what kind of deal can you give me and we agreed on 50% off and he e-transfer my brokerage $8,000 before we listed his house. House sold right away so he saved 8k there too.
He has the savviness to understand my business, and he knew paying upfront would equate to a very large discount, he didn’t pull that question randomly out of thin air. Average person is not going to pay upfront even if there is a 50% discount in play (even if the have the funds available).
Not sure why you would have to be certain? The rescission fee is very small in relation to the upside of an unconditonal offer.
Inspection report on the property from a previous transaction? What? Odds of that are zero. Maybe the seller has done a pre-inspection; however, I usually don’t approve of the inspector that did the pre-inspection.
Not sure if it needs to be a savvy buyer, it will more depend on the product and risk tolerance. If the buyer and their agent is fairly certain that the inspection will come out clean (maybe the agent already seen an inspection report on this property from a previous transaction) and the financing is pretty much a sure thing (e.g. borrowing only <80% of the max pre approval amount with clean T4 jobs) then it could be applicable to anyone.
Not for everyone. As I noted in my videos definitely not for first time buyers, for example.
This is a strategy for type of people that run their own RRSPs/TSFA/non-registered accounts, not someone that has their money in a mutual fund with a MER. It has to be a savvier buyer.
I was going Carney until this announcement. I know most people go growth stocks in their TSFA but my entire TSFA is Cnd dividend companies and given I am getting hammered on taxes on every single front this would be very useful over the next 20-30 years.
Reality is this won’t get PP many votes. How many people actually max out their TSFA at current levels?
On everything else it will be the same crap. Whether Carney or PP are elected in 10 years we will have 275,000 housing starts if we are lucky.
As I commented a few days ago I would vote Trudeau back in for double TSFA contribution room. All the government gives us is principal residence tax exemption and TSFA and I can’t really maximize the principal residence one as I prefer to live in condo that is worth less than an average SFH.
Westerly, many US stocks pay little to no dividends especially growth stocks. Given the withholding tax is 15% of perhaps 2% or none, its really not worth worrying to much about.
“Poilievre finally has a platform plank that is more than just a bumper sticker slogan: an extra $5000 TFSA contribution room if invested in Canadian companies.” I believe this is already here. We can hold US stock in RRSPs without paying US dividends. TFSA is not recognized as tax exempt by the IRS and we pay a non-recoverable 15% tax on US dividends. Same with a margin account. All other things being equal, it’s preferable to hold all US investments inside an RRSP.
Realistically you would have to have a fairly high household income and / or net worth before this will make a difference to the average investor.
How about, who can give the best tax cut?
Poilievre finally has a platform plank that is more than just a bumper sticker slogan: an extra $5000 TFSA contribution room if invested in Canadian companies.
Cutting tax AND boosting investment in Canadian companies sounds like a better idea than just cutting taxes.
You’ve got good eyes.
I’m pretty good with apostrophes, but not so good with spelling (maybe I was trying too hard not to use an American spelling).
Thanks for the video Marko. Food for thought.
Yes, the only that was left was an appraisal for what we offered on. The amount of the mortgage and the rate were locked in because everything else was verified: down payment, incomes, credit, employment and etc… They bank provided us a certificate verifying it. If we went over the amount of the appraisal came in too low, we would just need to make up the difference with cash. Then after the AO we had the time to shop for something better before close.
Is that the Victoria edition of the Georgia Straight?
Maybe I misunderstood what Umm really was saying.
Not sure what you are getting at?
Ya but that assumes there is an accepted offer first though no?
Mike Grace (mortgage broker) and I quite frequently work with savvy clients using the rescission period either to obtain a better price in a non-competing situation or to beat out other conditional offers in a competing (multiple offer) situation.
We did a podcast on this topic three months ago where Mike explains how he manages the situation in terms of securing financing during the rescission period, super boring topic but might interest someone -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LNaryjF7w
There is a difference between subject to inspection and an unconditional offer with an inspection access clause. If you collapse on the subject you don’t pay the rescission fee, with the unconditional offer approach if the inspection is a disaster you have to pay the rescission fee if you back out.
As for the strata documents a good agent that has experience being on strata councils as president/treasurer, etc., can give do a basic review in under 30 minutes ahead of an offer and then you can have a detailed looked during the rescission period. Personally, takes me less than 10 minutes to break down a depreciation report.
Umm isn’t that in itself a condition? Access to the property? Marko, I do get how to work it, I just don’t know if I’d want to pay the fee if there’s something concerning in the strata docs.
So you had a firm commitment without an accepted offer?
While I hate the rescission period as policy itself…more idiotic government non-sense it really elevated my business to the next level the last couple of years. I’ve been using it a lot with savvy buyers. I still can’t believe how many real estate agents delay offers to a Wednesday/Thursday/Friday as then the buyer gets to extra days to back out. I had a couple of situations last year where listing agents delayed across a long weekend so my buyers got a 6 calendar day rescission period.
I’ve made quite a few YT videos on the topic of the rescission period.
The art of the “fake” unconditional offer (aka rescission period) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssPqw7K-o0M
What is the true monetary value of an unconditional offer in BC? – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-UrdB3S8P0
I had a buyer backout last year after a 6 calendar day rescission period due to long weekend (we beat out four other offers in multiple offers). House went back to market and sold for substantially more than our accepted offer price which means the seller had taken a lot less for our “unconditional offer.”
Still struggle to spell the word thought.
Day 21 of waiting for BC Gov Short Term Rental registry approval….wonder how many people were employed to run this program.
I made use of the rescission period for my unconditional offers. I was able to get my inspection and appraisal done before the period ended. In the sale contract, we made sure that the buyer has access to the property on 24 notice 2 times before close. As well, having AO on a Friday extends the rescission period by two days (extends by 3 days on a long weekend). We also had a pre-approved mortgage in place, (not to be confused with pre-approval) so we just needed the appraisal because all other documentation was done. The other big thing that helped was that we could close in just weeks because we had all the financing lined up and went with a 10% deposit on the offer.
Still people out there putting in unconditional offers. I bid on a high end townhouse yesterday and there was another offer with conditions (not subject to sale but others). They removed all their conditions this morning and sealed the deal before the seller reviewed them both. One day on the market. Estate sale. It’s not like I had a bunch, but do need a mortgage so it has to appraise and strata documents. That’s it! Frustrating.
Yah i’m not a fan of overspending. One metric I find interesting that the Province measures is Interest Bite. Basically for every dollar of revenue that the Province brings in, how much of it goes to paying debt (interest) payments. Back in 2023 we reached a low of 2.4 cents (https://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2023/pdf/2023_budget_and_fiscal_plan.pdf):
[img
[/img]
When they dropped the last budget the forecast for the end of their term (27/28) its going to be 6.9 cents:
(https://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2025/pdf/2025_budget_and_fiscal_plan.pdf)
[img
[/img]
So when you think ‘gee my taxes are high, at least they are going to pay for services in the Province’ – in reality, at the end of the NDPs term, 7 cents of every dollar you pay to the Province is just going to interest carrying costs.
You will note in the first graph it took 24 years to pay down from 7.4 cents to 2.4 cents. And now its basically only 5 years to get it back to 7 cents.
Yeah, it’s depressing, isn’t it? We’re entering a period that’s probably going to require massive defence spending, infrastructure spending to keep people employed and to get our resources to new markets, and a level of sacrifice not seen since World War II, and the politicians are talking about handing out money. But it’s not their fault. They’re only reflecting back at us what we’ve become as a society. We’re only a couple notches away from being as spoiled and oblivious as the Americans who elected the criminal circus freak who’s causing all the damage.
Most people only care about monthly payments, not many think about their job prospects. I think many prospective buyers realize they missed the boat in 2020 and early 2021 and not keen to let another opportunity slip by again.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canadas-existential-election-has-very-quickly-become-unserious/
How to respond to an unprecedented national crisis? Compete to see who can give the biggest tax cut!
Trumpcession is almost certainly coming to Canada and likely to US as well. That’s going to be increasingly affecting the job market.
This may be less salient to the average HHV poster, but a lot of folks might not simply be waiting but may instead have genuine fears for their financial security and whether they would be able to continue to make payments on such a house.
How many will put their life on hold for another year to gamble on a cheaper SFH?
4000+ is more than a possibility by spring of 2026 when the trade war fully set in.
I can see the appeal of a smaller lot coming from that! I am currently on roughly .35 acre in core and can’t really see going below 0.25 for SFH living. Might be open to something smaller or a detached townhouse later in life.
We moved from a very private two acre rural property; reduced lot size is only a small part of the changes required to live here…what was I thinking
Ya if that is what you are looking for then great, we wanted a big lot with privacy, curb appeal, etc. as for us that is the whole essence of having a SFH.
Danielle Smith handed Poilievre a huge opportunity, which he totally fumbled. All he needed to do was a moderately forceful denunciation of Smith’s silly shenanigans and he would have come out looking great. The fact that he couldn’t say ANYTHING about Smith made him look weak.
He could have denounced Smith’s actions and he’d still win Alberta by huge margins.
Yes indeed, and egress will be even worse with the new Douglas Street Transit Hub. As it is, Warf & Quadra are the routes I use, such as they are.
We looked to buy on the east side of the park, but only saw SFHs that were too big for the two of us. As property cost more than buildings in the city, I was glad to find a small lot. (I wanted to move to Princeton, but my wife wasn’t amused by that idea)
You can say similar things about many places in the core. IMO, the shopping centre is pretty limited, many old run down apartments, narrow streets full of parked cars and mostly very old houses that don’t look well kept on small lots. Location is good for downtown access but not really anywhere else.
I think cook st. village is a much better alternative, the homes on the east side of cook street while still old are much more well kept with wider streets and overall much superior curb appeal.
It’s been fun watching Poilievre’s campaign evolve over the last couple of weeks. He’s got Ford throwing him under the bus, and Danielle Smith torpedoing him with blind stupidity, and meanwhile in terms of policy, he’s transforming himself from the Neidermeyer character in “Animal House” into a Trudeau Liberal. By election day, he’ll be singing “L’Internationale” in a baritone voice and urging the workers to rise up and seize the means of production.
Rather than houses, condos, and retail buildings stretching for miles into the distance, I’ve got of the Straight of Juan de Fuca, the harbour entrance, and Beacon Hill Park.
It might not sound like much, but for a relocated country boy, it helps.
There is no reason for that age based discrimination to exist either, though I’d agree it is lees egregious than the restriction on kids.
As for your other examples they don’t really compare.
I still don’t agree that reducing the grounds on which strata corporations can discriminate = reduction of freedom
On the radio- March 2024 air travel bookings (for April) to the U.S. 1.2 million, March 2025- less than 300,00. A decline of 75%. Talking to someone last week and he had a good idea, Canada should join the EU. Probably wouldn’t go over big in Europe.
I don’t follow, what natural environment on 3 sides?
An iPhone mis-spell corrects “stratas” to “strata’s” so it easily slips by. Thanks for participating in the discussion.
>> That’s a super bizarre take on freedom. Would we really be a freer society if stratas could discriminate more. Should we give stratas the freedom to discriminate based on skin colour, religion, ethnic origin? Because freedom!
I assume you’re aware that stratas can continue, with the government’s blessing, to have “age 55+ only” discrimination in strata rentals. Are you going to stay on your “high horse” and state your opposition to that too, and pretend that this is also akin to discrimination based on “ skin colour, religion, ethnic origin?”.
Or will you use common sense and realize that if restricting to age 55+ is OK, other age restrictions are not the same category as race /ethnicity discrimination.
You must be aware that lots of activities are age restricted – the driving age is 16+, drinking age and age of majority is 19+, voting age is 18+, old age pension is 65+ etc. …. And none of those are remotely like race discrimination.
Not the James Bay Beacon, it is another front for the JBNA NIMBY “leaders.”
Why I bought a SFH in JB is because one can walk to downtown (my wife’s prerequisite for moving) and still have a natural environment on 3 sides (to give me a little escape from the maddening crowds.
What’s so amazing about james bay?
I also compared it to COV overall, which isn’t cherry picking.
I only provided this data to counter your statements about how you want density added to James Bay and you say it isn’t happening. Which isn’t true.
I have family living in James Bay and i visit it a lot. It’s an amazing neighbourhood, and I hope it stays that way.
Thanks for the discussion.
> So you’re pro urban sprawl?
Absolutely. And SFH zoning, so families get “picket fence” houses with front/back yards, garages etc.
It’s not just me who wants that, 70% of househunters in Canada, and probably more than that here on HHV want a traditional SFH.
You like fetching stats. How many buildings over 4 stories have been completed in JB per year since the 1960s?
Comparing a residential neighbourhood that’s close to downtown to swaths of land that include huge golf courses and regional parks is one of your more absurd cherry pickings.
====
Your statement that the James bay density was added years ago, but that’s stopped in recent years isn’t correct. In fact in recent years (2016-21) James Bay density has risen almost 10x faster than Greater Victoria, and 28% faster than COV.
This is easily seen on the statCan pop. Chart I posted earlier. https://househuntvictoria.ca/2025/03/24/election-temper-your-expectations/#comment-126929
From 2016 to 2021,
—— for Greater Victoria overall, density increased by 42 people per sq. Km.
——-For city of Victoria, density increased by 312 people per sq km
——- For James Bay, density increased by 399 people per sq. Km, (from 6184 to 6583) almost 10X the density increase of Greater Victoria.
So from 2016 to 2021, although there were reportedly nimbys doing a “block,block,block”, James Bay still managed to add 10x the density increase that Greater Victoria did.
I’m apparently blind. The NIMBY propaganda I got says to check out the JBNA to stay informed. It is them, they just chose to not use their name on this petition. The “James Bay Coalition” isn’t any actual organization.
I think it should be legal to discriminate against people who don’t know what apostrophes are for.
I think the old argument that there’s a short supply of homes is crap. If someone wanted a place right now there is more than enough to choose from . Van and Toronto has more than enough condo’s but somehow we need a whole bunch more lol
That’s a super bizarre take on freedom. Would we really be a freer society if stratas could discriminate more. Should we give stratas the freedom to discriminate based on skin colour, religion, ethnic origin? Because freedom!
So you’re pro urban sprawl?
Being pro-density in JB doesn’t mean I’m against building in lower density neighborhoods. I’m just generally pro building stuff when the issue is constrained supply.
It’s important to me because I want Victoria to be affordable. I’m not trying to add on to my house. It’s not a SFH so I couldn’t do that if I wanted to.
I consider existing high density to be a great argument against further density. Especially when there is little available vacant land in James Bay, and the surrounding neighbourhoods in Victoria have only 1/10 of the density. As the city population grows, new density should occur on vacant land as the city expands, not just pile on more density in the center. That means building in Saanich or westshore, not James Bay.
Josh, as an aside, I recall you bought already in James Bay a few years back. If so, why is adding density important to you? Are you trying to add on to your house or ?
You have omitted when James Bay achieved this “incredible” level of density. The Charter House Apartments on Michigan were constructed in the early 60’s. Bickerton Court was 1962. Beckly Manor on Dallas was 1964, as were The Goodacre Towers. Roberts House on Toronto was 1973. James Bay Square was 1975. Basically anything that changed the silhouette of James Bay is at least 50 years old.
Comparing JB to lower density neighborhoods is not a sound argument against further density. The population of Victoria in 1970 was 182k. Now it’s 405k.
The stress for the family with young children is because there are very few family sized units available anywhere in Victoria. It’s unlikely that your colleagues would have stayed in the small units in most age-restricted condos even if allowed to, as they need a family-sized unit. And when they try to move somewhere else, they will discover that the government policies reccomended by ”density advocates” have removed SFH zoning which has led to a collapse in SFH starts.
>>> [james bay] It’s anything to just block, block, block.
Well the “elephant in the room” is that there has also been “build, build, build” in James Bay, not “block,block,block”. Fact is James Bay has an incredibly high density, 6583 people/sq. Km.
That’s 11X higher than Greater Victoria (571), 5X Saanich (1136) or Oak Bay (710), and 40% higher than COV.
So, despite the “NIMBY’s are blocking development” claims made here on HHV, an incredible amount of housing has been built in James Bay.
As you can see on the 2021 statscan density chart below.
If all of Greater Victoria had the high density of James Bay, the population would be 4.6 million.
Well good riddance to that “freedom”. I remember well how limited we were looking for a condo without age restrictions, and how stressful it was for friends/colleagues that had to suddenly look for a new place to live once starting a family.
Well if “big deal. You have one kid in your building”, that actually shows how useless the government law was. Remember, the government removed the freedom that strata’s had to restrict based on age, which is one more freedom gone. Which is a big deal, when added to other freedoms that have been taken away (or heavily taxed) in a misguided attempt to help the housing crisis. And for what, a useless law that promised to help the housing crisis, but has done nothing.
Remember the government promised that this (bill 44) would help the housing crisis. So “big deal, you have one kid in your building” sounds like that new bill has been a big flop, except for the freedom that has been taken away from strata’s which is gone for good… for nothing.
Could you do me a favour and count of the number of development proposals in James Bay on green space? Thanks.
I’ve pointed this out before but take a closer look at all these SFHs in James Bay. Count the electrical meters and mail boxes. There are very few actual SFHs anymore. So many of them are just apartments shaped like SFHs which are making poor use of space and awkward cut up interiors with poor sound isolation. Well designed town homes would be an improvement. Also developers aren’t going to buy a nice character home and tear it down. There’s plenty of dumpy places to get a bigger lift on. I like the quirkiness and diversity of of JB. Higher density isn’t going to make that vanish.
I believe the people behind this “coalition” are at least some of the board members of the JBNA. They’re using the exact same playbook, saying the same old tired crap about the city plan and delivered the paper in the same place on my property (not the mailbox).
Pretty sure you’ve pulled this out of your butt. New builds don’t mean exclusively rentals and I don’t know why you’re pushing that idea. That said, I don’t think raising the number of renters in JB would be a bad thing.
Yep, that was well done. I was disappointed that the Red Barn wasn’t a real grocery store that would bring real competition to Thrifties but it was still a huge improvement. Two other major developments increasing density on existing affordable housing lots have also been well done. I don’t think there’s been a development proposal that the JBNA approved of. They are simply anti change.
Are you kidding. The new building is like the Dark Tower of Mordor looming over the neighbourhood and blotting out light, hope, and happiness.
I recall they were very against the development behind the legislature, which I find very tastefully done. (Also it mostly replaced really crappy buildings, not nice SFHs.
>> Also you should hear the things the JBNA board members have said
To be clear, you are complaining about two different organizations. One is the “James Bay Coalition”, and the other is “James Bay Neighbourhood Association”. How do you know that any of your comments above about JBNA were even said by members of the other group?
What’s the problem with delaying development and preserving green space, trees and expanding heritage designations in “the oldest residential neighbourhood on the west coast of North America that is north of San Francisco”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bay,_Greater_Victoria
In about 25 years, James Bay will likely be transformed into something very different from today. Most of the SFH homes will be gone, as well as much of the green space.
Josh, Im curious. You have been a James Bay lover on HHV for at least 6 years. Isn’t a big part of why you love it all the SFH and the quirky narrow streets etc. if so, why are you so bugged about people who want to delay developers who want to tear down as many SFH as they can get their hands on?
90% of James Bay residents live in apartments already. What’s the rush to turn that number into 100% ?
I’ll maybe write a more elaborate comment about my experiences with the JBNA at some point but here’s a quick reply.
Sounds good, right? It’s not. This is a bureaucratic delay tactic. If the city of Victoria implemented this overnight, they would find some other delay tactic.
The argument here so so flawed it’s hard to know where to start poking holes in it. It’s as if the city has announced they have a plan to make affordability 5% better and their response is “Build nothing until you have a plan to make it 20% better!”. Also you should hear the things the JBNA board members have said about shelters and homeless people. Trust me, they don’t care about affordability.
Heritage buildings are already protected. The plan does not violate that.
The city of Victoria has strong tree protections. The JBNA will mention anything as a way to block change. First it’s “oh but the trees!” even if a proposal has no protected trees being cut and actually increases the tree count. If that argument runs out of steam, it’s “oh but the parking! Oh but the affordability! Oh but the character of the neighborhood! Oh but the residents have no where to garden!” It’s anything to just block, block, block.
Also this plan is to avoid having the province override the city if it falls short of it’s target. Successfully opposing it will only have less choice imposed upon us but they probably think they can fight the province too.
+1, and if these groups are so concerned about non-heritage designated properties why don’t they all pool their funds together, buy them, fix them up and rent them at an affordable rate 50% below market.
No, but the local businesses got a larger customer base. It’s part of the tyranny of densification and walkable neighbourhoods.
Yes I did. Did you read my two observations?
As for the petition’s four items:
Heritage Designated buildings are already protected;
Tree & green space is currently highly regulated & protected;
Make affordability a higher priority is a meaningless slogan;
I don’t know about the Burnaby rental protections, but I understand that the current BC RTB favours tenants.
I never said the demands were unacceptable…I just see the JBNA as providing a common belief for a few people to rally around, and a way for its leaders to, well, lead.
The fact of the matter is that the JBNA has an axe to grind about new developments to house new people, and that fits my theory about current residents trying to pull up the drawbridge (so to speak) to stop others from moving in to their Shangri-La.
Did you read their petition? This is their bullet list of issues:
– Strengthen renter protections like the City of Burnaby has done
– Make affordability a higher priority
– Protect James Bay’s heritage buildings
– Strengthen protections for existing trees and greenspace
Which of those items do you find unacceptable and “pulling up the drawbridge”?
+1, my building is full of these. We live in the newest building in the Songhees and everyone is against the Roundhouse. People in my building have left fliers on my car with anti-Roundhouse propagana. How boring must your life be to have time to do such? Let alone care…ohhh I am so upset a new development and amenities are coming close by in the next 30 years. I’ll be an old man by the time the Roundhouse is built out. Not sure where the 70 year olds complaining about it will be.
As I’ve noted before people with nothing to do also spent years campainging in their respective stratas to restrict and ban rentals, enforce age restrictions (the age restriction thing end up in court a number of times when couples became pregnant in 19+ buildings and the strata corp took them to court, etc). Just imagine all the time and stress invested and then the government comes along and bans all rental and age (other than 55+) restrictions. Did the world end? Nope, have you heard one thing about this since the government banned it as life just goes on. Big deal, now you have one kid in your building.
Same with the anti-development folks. The same people the were very anti-marina in the Songhees I regularly see them having coffee in the caffee at Boom & Batten on my walks, like wtf.
Did cook street village end when the new rental building was built?
Since 67% of BC households are homeowners, I don’t accept the calculations done on the link that state that 63% of eligible voters are renters. As far as I know, there is no direct measurement of renters vs owner eligible voters done by statsCan or anyone else.
Maybe, maybe not.
The big JBNA push lately seems to be about an empty parking lot surrounded on three sides by 12 – 15 story buildings; “No Luxury Condos” was the rallying cry.
As for Heritage houses being torn down, if even possible, not easily done. The next houses on the chopping block (next to a commercial hub on Menzies St) are old & dilapidated but not Heritage Designated, and sure look as thought they should be torn down before they fall down.
Everywhere I’ve lived there is always a group trying to pull up the drawbridge to stop others from moving there, and JB is no exception…just more old folks with nothing better to do here.
>>> Got some NIMBY BS in the mail today from something called the “James Bay Coalition”
Nothing stood out as “bs” on the petition to me.
What’s your vision for James Bay, and how does it differ from this group?
James Bay already has 90%+ of residents living in apartments. Is that not high enough for you, and you’d like to see James Bay houses easily torn down to build more apartments blocks and missing middle multi-units?
If anyone knows anything about the direction of Canadian mortgage interest rates its Ron Butler. I follow Canadian Mortgage Trends daily.
https://www.canadianmortgagetrends.com/
“Uninsured fixed mortgage rates have also been dropping, in some cases just as aggressively. With more borrowers betting on further rate cuts, banks are adjusting their fixed-rate pricing to ensure they don’t become overly exposed to floating-rate loans. If too many clients pile into variable rates, banks may have to hedge their books—an expensive process that they’d prefer to avoid.”
“Butler said the latest round of rate cuts is “horrible news for 95% of brokers,” noting that only a handful of deep-discount brokers can compete head-to-head with the banks on price.”
https://www.canadianmortgagetrends.com/2025/03/big-banks-keep-slashing-mortgage-rates-the-spring-market-starts-now/
Leo, are you reconsidering your support for Missing Middle and densification in general?
See also this report from the City of Vancouver, which shows SFD housing to be at essentially zero risk for death or serious injury in an earthquake:
https://council.vancouver.ca/20241112/documents/r1.pdf
A few years old, but 63% of eligible voters in BC are renters: https://betterdwelling.com/canadas-election-will-see-renters-outnumber-homeowners-in-bc-and-ontario/
The mental gymnastics people do to avoid facing responsibility is amazing.
Got some NIMBY BS in the mail today from something called the “James Bay Coalition” – https://www.change.org/p/urge-victoria-city-council-to-save-what-we-love-about-james-bay
This is the change.org page for this coalition: https://www.change.org/u/1368562043. Very helpful. As far as I know this is the James Bay Neighborhood association which has historically been a bunch of anti-homeless and anti-any-kind-of-change group of old folks with nothing better to do. Interesting that they aren’t using their JBNA name.
If there was a support petition, I would sign that.
I would not want to be an amateur landlord in Canada. From Victoria to Halifax.
Mar 25, 2025. Canada’s HARSH Reality:
“Julian Schoenfeld – the Chief Investment Officer of CAPREIT, Canada’s largest multifamily REIT with $15 billion in assets. Julian covers the harsh realities of the rental market, why condos aren’t the solution to housing affordability, and how government policies are making things worse. He also breaks down the differences between professional landlords and small investors, explaining why the rental market is shifting in favour of large-scale management.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYHH5mTSRho
Its well worth the watch.
That failed abortion of a flip at 824 Monterey has cut its price down from 1.6 to under 1.3. All the way down to a price it failed to sell at before the kitchen, vanities and anything else the flipper could rip out and put on marketplace before tossing it back to bank.
Or maybe they do, since average voters already own, and money that is ultimately extracted from new buyers is money that isn’t extracted from them.
Affordable new single family detached houses out here in the dogpatch…
https://victoria.citified.ca/news/35-year-mortgages-no-gst-new-houses-langfords-westview-subdivision-near-bearmountain/
It seems to me there are a hell of a lot more tents going up in and around the core than affordable single family detached houses.
You act as though we live on the moon. Young families looking for affordable home ownership…
“90% sold-out: first-time buyer-focused Langford Lake condo taps 30-year mortgage program.
Trailside’s remaining collection of suites span from 654 square feet in one-bedroom, one bath configurations to 921 square feet in two-bedroom, two-bath layouts. Pricing starts at $490,000, plus GST, with parking included.”
https://victoria.citified.ca/news/90-sold-out-first-time-buyer-focused-langford-lake-condo-taps-30-year-mortgage-program
Expect to see more and more affordable first-time buyer home ownership developments out here in the dogpatch. After all everyone is whining about affordability… Come and get it.
I am more interested in the story behind it. I’ve never seen an attempted flip that turned into ripping out and re-selling the already installed renovations…
I’d like our future federal government to improve the cost of living crisis by:
A) Reducing the federal deficit and cut taxes to reduce the tax burden on workers.
B) Invest in Canadian productivity though infrastructure development and reducing red tape to improve the wages taken
home by Canadian workers.
C) Manage economic and population growth in a responsible manner with a focus on attraction workers in sectors
delivering key services (Healthcare).
Regardless of what housing prices are doing, making rent or mortgage payments isn’t a crisis so long as you have the money in the bank to pay it and still buy what you need to live. Leo is absolutely correct in his assessment of what the federal government can achieve on housing, in my opinion they have a lot more influence on the Canadian macro-economy. Unfortunately it seems we are on track to elect an economist, and no one is better at screwing up a country’s economy than an economist.
You mean rents haven’t gone down or been stable since the NDP got back in 8 years ago?
I don’t have an issue with piling on the costs – it is what it is. However, what annoys me is the government non-stop talking about “affordable housing” but in the background putting in policies that make housing less affordable and then average voters having so little common sense can’t see what’s actually going on.
Wow. Changes the economics a lot. Adds a new layer of valuation to lots of the future and those currently being held for development.
This is a big deal. Our young adult children have very few of their cohort choosing to stay in Victoria after post-secondary training. The only ones who stay are those with family help because why would you stay here if you can’t afford a decent place to live on, example, a teacher’s salary. The subsidized/coops are the only affordable option and they have years-long wait lists and no equity potential. There is a huge swath of lower-middle and middle income earners that would probably choose to stay if coops were more affordable/prevalent. I hope a new coop model gets funded.
Court ordered sale so who knows what this actually sells for on the court date.
Leo, I don’t know man , where is the affordability in all this. Like marko says they just keep piling it on.
Additional costs from new seismic requirements coming into effect. $2-$6M extra for sites with worse soil conditions. Also losing sellable floor area at the same time.
Economics is already very challenging, this could kill a lot of projects
“For example, this morning at The Wild Westhills a framing crew was ambushed by a road-rager…4 fists, 1 knife, 6 cop cars, & an ambulance…all before 7:00 am”
Just another morning in the dogpatch.
LMAO, 824 Monterey is back on the market. But now they’ve ripped out a lot of the new renos which I can only assume got sold separately to cover payments. WTF is going on there….
…In home construction as well as home sales.
For example, this morning at The Wild Westhills a framing crew was ambushed by a road-rager…4 fists, 1 knife, 6 cop cars, & an ambulance…all before 7:00 am
And hard economic times haven’t even got really hard yet.
I don’t understand the logic that renters vote left and home owners vote right. Purchasing a home shouldn’t be a cause of someone changing their ideology. For example , most people on Vancouver Island are home owners and vote NDP.
Nope, renters typically vote for leftist governments and are thus responsible for their predicament.
Looks like PP just announced he would eliminate GST up to $1.3……will Carney follow suite later today? Carney’s strategy seems to be offer same ideas as PP (no GST for first time buyers, axe carbon tax, axe capital gains increase, lower personal tax, etc.) and run on being more likable than the other guy? Seems to be working well.
100%, currently the witch hunt is on greedy landlord Karen that owns two 240 sq.ft. junits in the Janion, but in 10 years people will be complaining why Starlight Investments owns half the buildings in Victoria and Just Jack will further add fuel to the fire that Starlight is colluding on rental prices.
IMO, lots of better options than removing the GST. For example, take the GST on new builds and give it 100% straight back to the muncipality but municipality needs to waive/lower permit fees and DCC or similar. I think this would help more projects get off the ground; therefore, improving supply.
Increased supply won’t help most HHVers looking for SFH. People want “steak” (SFH) and developers are building “hotdogs” (condos). Total SFH stock in core Victoria is falling relative to population. That tends to make SFH prices higher, and condos relatively cheaper.
SFH in core Victoria will never be “affordable” to average incomes. Condos/multi-units are affordable now to most and their affordability should improve with increased supply.
But in response to your original post, no I don’t agree that the majority of voters “may even view declining affordability as benefiting themselves”. Homeowners want their house price to rise, but they’re hoping that’s because the economy is good and incomes are rising. That’s not the same thing as hoping that homes become less affordable.
In other words, though higher demand? In the absence of increased supply, that just results in higher prices. Not just theory but fact.
> and may even view declining affordability as benefiting themselves.
Most people (including myself) want affordability to improve. But they would like to see that happen through higher incomes and lower mortgage interest costs. And that can happen along with rising house prices.
A typical house hunter wants house prices to fall so they can buy cheap, but few of them would want prices to keep falling after they buy.
Yes. More precisely the majority of voters who already own, since they have no direct interest in improving affordability, and may even view declining affordability as benefiting themselves.
It’s the voters who are to blame, this being a democracy and all.