Right vs right

Once a radio and TV guy, then a municipal politician, Adam Vaughan is now a federal Liberal MP from Toronto. During the last election campaign the Cons made a big deal of publicizing a proposal from Vaughan to start taxing residential real estate. The plan, as stated, was to charge people capital gains tax on the profit they made selling principal residences on a sliding scale based on length of ownership.

  Vaughan denied it. The Libs denied it. Even though documentation emerged showing the plan had been adopted by the party’s regional Ontario caucus. Voters yawned.

So here’s the sequel.

Vaughan emerged unscathed. He won his seat. He was appointed by the prime minister as a Parliamentary Secretary, which means he works closely with a cabinet minister on policy, legislative matters and implementation. The minister in question is in charge of CMHC, also recently mandated with making housing a basic human right in Canada.

Last June the Trudeau government’s Bill C-97 took effect. Here’s what it says about housing:

It is declared to be the housing policy of the Government of Canada to
(a) recognize that the right to adequate housing is a fundamental human right affirmed in international law;
(b) recognize that housing is essential to the inherent dignity and well-being of the person and to building sustainable and inclusive communities;
(c) support improved housing outcomes for the people of Canada; and
(d) further the progressive realization of the right to adequate housing as recognized in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

As a result of this, Vaughan’s minister, “must develop and maintain a national housing strategy to further the housing policy, taking into account key principles of a human rights-based approach to housing.”

What does this mean, exactly? We have no idea. But it bears watching, given recent moves by governments at all levels to record real estate transactions and heap on new levies. Since affordability is now being touted as a ‘housing crisis’ in Canada, taxing real estate profits would be the easiest, fastest way of squashing prices. And Adam is probably ready to help make that happen.

But this is pure speculation. And let’s contrast it with a drama now being played out in northern California, where this real-estate-as-a-human-right battle has come to a head. Remember Moms 4 Housing? Here’s an update on the mother-squatters who moved into a nice, vacant house and refused to leave.

Interestingly, real estate in that neck of the woods is similar to Toronto. Houses cost a million. Rents are two or three grand a month. The tech-heavy economy is booming and the population expanding. Average wage-earners cannot afford average-priced homes. It’s a story Canadians know well.

Last autumn six women who claim homelessness (but have jobs) broke into and occupied a house which a real estate investment firm had bought in foreclosure for $501,000, intending to reno and resell. They adopted a group name, a logo, embraced a media strategy and had a nice Christmas complete with a tree. Meanwhile the property owners went to court and on Friday a judgment was rendered.

Predictably, the squatters were told to get out, and given five days to do so. They refuse. The home’s owner (Wedgewood Properties) offered to pay the moms’ moving expenses plus their housing costs for two months and donate profits from the sale of the home to a charity. In return the moms declared this was an insult and they face systematic racism (they’re black). Said they: “We never thought we’d win in an unjust system. We’re up against corporations who are willing to put mothers out on the street.” And this: “Wedgewood… is desperate to avoid taking responsibility for how this company has contributed to the housing crisis that is causing families like mine to be homeless and for participating in an industry that has robbed Black and marginalized communities of land and wealth for generations.”

The Moms get support from Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf (left).
.

Well, you can see where this is going. The Moms argued housing is a basic human right, and eviction would be an injustice. But in America (unlike Canada) the right to own property is enshrined in law. The courts ruled for the owner, not the downtrodden. And sometime in the next few days there’ll be a big media circus as the moms are tossed.

So chew on that. In this nation property owners have no legislated right to own property. But people without houses now have the legal right to housing. And Mr. Vaughan has a title.

How would the squatter Moms fare here? I bet we’ll know before long.

 

132 comments ↓

#1 some dude on 01.12.20 at 1:42 pm

These “feel good” policies that pander to the majority are what turn responsible left-leaning people into conservatives.

#2 TurnerNation on 01.12.20 at 1:50 pm

T2’s beard? The sign, it’s over. IMO they are prepping Kanada to be an Unfree Land very soon. We are just a project for the Crown Bankers. Et tu, Blog Dog Carney?

(There’s never before in recent memory been a hirsute PM. Ask our fourm host :-( )

#3 Linda on 01.12.20 at 1:59 pm

I sure hope the lady in the dog picture of the day is the Alpha of that pack:)

Housing as a human right is one thing, but what kind of housing? These days a lot of people seem to think they ‘deserve’ a lot more than the affordable housing most likely to be on offer. For which there is generally a lengthy waiting list. There is also the problem of the cost of maintaining these properties. The dichotomy between the budget allocated for maintenance & the actual cost usually ends poorly for the long term life of said properties.

What is the goal for increased taxation upon housing here other than the obvious one of increasing tax revenues? If the goal if to offload the responsibility of providing affordable housing onto those who own secondary properties, don’t see how forcing someone to become a landlord will improve matters. If all the secondary properties end up being sold & becoming primary properties for someone, then some housing will have been provided but the price paid is still likely to be beyond the reach of those searching for affordable housing.

#4 Russ on 01.12.20 at 2:02 pm

Ah, the lady with the dogs is wearing a cat woman T-shirt.

You’re up Felix!

#5 Jimmy Zhao on 01.12.20 at 2:12 pm

I’m pro Motherhood.

#6 TurnerNation on 01.12.20 at 2:20 pm

Things will speed up SO fast in 2020-2021 to roll out the plans. Nobody will come to your door and take away your property no. They’ll just take 5-10% of its value away in Tax each year, and empty home tax, land transfer tax, capital gains on sales taxes (stay tuned!), carbon taxes. In a down market this would prove fatal.

They are actively flooding your neighborhoods with ‘homeless’ (drug addicts spent by the State) and “respite centers” and “Safe [sic] injection sites. Need I mention again the State is our drug dealer? Try it, they own the online Weed trade too.

Two weeks into 2020 and they have bombarded our minds with Iran, and this false alert:
https://www.cp24.com/news/mass-alert-about-pickering-nuclear-generating-station-sent-in-error-opg-1.4763685

T2 is on the way out, put out to pasture down south.
FAST it’s moving in 2020. Orwellian Minister of Middle Class [Extinction] will put it into order. Never forget they openly mock us now.

#7 Sail Away on 01.12.20 at 2:23 pm

I’m anti-procreation. People cause trouble.

#8 Brian Ripley on 01.12.20 at 2:27 pm

Toronto’s housing market… a counterpoint to Vancouver’s…

Based on total residential sales and total listing inventory, the Absorption Rates per month for December:

Vancouver: 23%
Toronto: 59%

http://www.chpc.biz/mar-moi.html

This is in the dead of winter!

#9 Bytor the Snow Dog on 01.12.20 at 2:31 pm

Throw the criminals in jail.

#10 Smartalox on 01.12.20 at 2:49 pm

The housing to which “The People” have a right, is not the housing that many think it ‘should’ be. Housing as ‘A Right’ covers the basic necessities to support life. Until recently, shelter didn’t even need to be stable, let alone permanent.

Those in the middle classes who expect governments to provide them with affordable three-bedroom homes in communities that orbit major urban centres will have to get in line behind those who already live in current, government-supplied housing, where minimum standards are NOT currently being met.

You are not the target demographic for this legislation.

#11 yvr_lurker on 01.12.20 at 2:52 pm

Of course it is unreasonable for these squatters to expect a positive outcome from their actions. This is not Zimbabwe around 2000 when most of the wealthy farmers were tossed (and often killed) from their lands in the bogus name of correcting previous racial injustices. In the early 1980s when I as backpacking from Europe I squatted for a week along with other backpackers as the long-term “tenant” (lol here) who “controlled” the building was rented out small rooms on the side. It was a 5 story rowhouse just off of Hyde park and there was a whole street of similar buildings all boarded up waiting for ???.

That being said, despite Garth’s denials, there is a housing affordability crisis in YVR and GTA where rents and house prices have zoomed far ahead of what the average person can pay (especially younger people starting out on careers who do not have family trust funds… which are really needed to make a start in our two major cities… if you don’t have this, you will spend 20 years scrimping and saving for a downpayment on an 800K 800sq foot place, all the while paying a rent triple what it was 20 years ago…good luck).

The runaway began when Canada allowed too many people (satellite families) to park their $$$ here, contributing very little, and turned a blind eye to all sorts of shadow-flippers, speculators, and other wild-west capitalists (local and foreign) to rapidly drive up prices all the while the CRA turning a blind eye to the principal residence clause thereby paying no taxes on these flips. Locals trying to compete with the lure of cheap money or be priced out forever providing more gas to the runaway. Some now, are priced out forever, as the ones who bought many places on the flip are now participating in the shared ecoonomy through short term AirBNB, which further erodes the rental pool. Once again the CRA has been super slow to go after those individuals who do not claim this income on their taxes (although they are now catching up, but the horse left the barn a long time ago).

It is important to reflect on why we are in this situation. I am happy prices are coming down in YVR and if they want to tax the profits earned in flipping houses on a sliding scale of length of ownership, I am fine with that as well.

#12 whiplash on 01.12.20 at 2:54 pm

1) Housing is a right, not a commodity
2)Housing should be equitable
3) The government is the primary decision maker

Fidel Castro 1959

What a coincidence, T2’s new look!!

#13 Living in a Van down by the River on 01.12.20 at 3:00 pm

Adam, my HERO

#14 Steven Rowlandson on 01.12.20 at 3:05 pm

Nobody is trying to take away the right to own a home. Just the right to make it too expensive for others to own a home.

#15 Yukon Elvis on 01.12.20 at 3:28 pm

Squatting is very common in the “third world”. Many countries have laws to protect the squatters. They cannot be tossed out without the property owners providing a new place to go that they can afford. Often squatters must be paid in order to leave. What a mess we have made of our housing industry here.

#16 Sold Out on 01.12.20 at 3:28 pm

Welp, everyone and their dog is treating Canadian RE like an investment. Why shouldn’t the proceeds be treated like any other cap gains?

When people from half way around the world come to our cities expressly to reap tax free RE profits, we need to get our heads out of the sand.

Live in a home for 5+ years? No tax for you. Flip condo assignments for a living? CRA is coming for you.

#17 Dogman01 on 01.12.20 at 3:35 pm

Read this the other day thought it was on the mark:

“Conservatives, hoping to constrain the size of the welfare state, overstate how much control people have over their lives; liberals, hoping to expand it, overstate our powerlessness. But both positions are unconvincing”. – Monica Garwood

It is 24 below at noon here, it is pretty clear, housing = survival.

Are we affluent enough in Canada for housing to be a right? Is the right to unlimited housing – there are those that seem to destroy (or at least neglect) any housing they are given.

#18 Leftover on 01.12.20 at 3:36 pm

We should tax capital gains on principal residences, just like they do in Trump’s America. Let people expense their mortgage interest (to a max $500k mortgage) and get on with life.

This would indeed cause house prices in places like Vancouver and Toronto to drop (good), allow young buyers to expense interest costs (better) and make Canadians understand that we should invest in something other than sticks and drywall (fantastic).

It would also allow the Liberals to keep the capital gain inclusion rate competitive and would lead to an overall re-allocation of capital out of dead real estate assets.

No losers here, people will still make money when they sell.

#19 Debtslavecreator on 01.12.20 at 3:52 pm

If these radical left / moms had half a brain they’d take over the Fed Reserve building and claim it it the BofC building here
The governments and their CB orgs are the MAIN reason we cannot afford a home without crushing debt

It’s crazy how people think the govt is the answer

As most will find out in the next 5-10 years governments are the problem

Governments are run by and for the elites: FIRE executives, Public Sector Unions, construction and academics

You think it’s bad now just wait

The destruction of the middle class is almost complete

These squatters should be in jail

As should the top execs at many banks and hedge funds and Fannie/Freddie and politicians for 2008

But the harshest punishment needs to be reserved for the top central bankers

That’s 90% of the problem

#20 FreeBird on 01.12.20 at 3:57 pm

Rights vs entitlement. Should we all have right/be entitled to safe affordable housing? Should we all have the right and be entitled to home ownership? What’s your fair share of what someone else has earned or owns? Maybe most could agree on the first but then it gets contentious. Just an observation.

#21 Taxation on $$$ earned already is extortion. on 01.12.20 at 4:02 pm

Why should any home owner pay taxes on a home that’s been paid for with money already taxed? If that home had lost money who the loss be realized as a lose for tax purposes. Long term home owners can hardly be considered house flippers. Gain recently made in any real estate transaction shouldn’t be taxed because most homes need continual upgrades and other improvements. These costs aren’t tax deductible so I’m totally against any policy that panders to the stupidity of M.P’s like Collin Vaughn. Why didn’t he consider changing legislation to allow tiny homes on hydro service allotments or empty government buildings that could be converted into affordable housing. To go after dollars by taxing homes after monies spent on mortgage service debt to them pay off is corruption. …. I say string him up!

#22 Scott on 01.12.20 at 4:04 pm

I know this off topic for todays blog, but a friend of mine is telling me he has $600,000 in his TFSA. Does the CRA still go after taxes for over invested accounts? My friend say’s they don’t. I think they do.

#23 FreeBird on 01.12.20 at 4:12 pm

Off topic DYK. Just read and posting for Garth and other dog owners. All dogs descend from wolves but some are closer incl Bandit…earlier relatives were grey with less fluff.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/animals/2004/05/dog-dna-study-yields-clues-to-origins-of-breeds

#24 Ed on 01.12.20 at 4:12 pm

Sold our house 12 years ago for a sh_t ton & retired but I’m down for a free one as I’m old & unemployed etc.

#25 Izzy Bedibida on 01.12.20 at 4:57 pm

Mom and her friends in the “widows club” are in the same position and worried about the proposed changes capital gains changes. They are living in modest homes that have been paid off decades ago.
They have all read the “Liberal policy paper” that was circulated by Conservative candidates during the last election. Technically they are sitting on a gold mine.
They fear that CRA will pick on them because they are seniors with poor language skills who do not know how to to properly fight an assessment from CRA, fill out paperwork, obtain proper legal consul etc.

#26 MF on 01.12.20 at 5:10 pm

#79 BigAl (Original) on 01.12.20 at

After reading all that I came to the conclusion that you basically agreed with everyone (and fartz was wrong):

-Public sector pay and benefits is not exactly something to envy, at least not anymore.

-Private sector pay is better.

-If someone is in it for the money, and has the creativity and drive, private sector is where it’s at. But nothing is guaranteed.

-People blame all their failures on government.

MF

#27 MF on 01.12.20 at 5:14 pm

Great news if true.

The capital gains exemption should have gone the way of the do do bird a long time ago.

It’s created a monster and it needs to go.

MF

#28 Cici on 01.12.20 at 5:20 pm

My God, these women should have been charged. They illegally broke into, trespassed on and squatted property that didn’t belong to them, that someone else had invested in and was still paying fir, then claim they’re being marginalized when it’s given back to the rightful owner, all while gorging on expensive brand-name coffees.

While I am sensitive to the cause of trulymarginwlized people, I think five or six women with jobs can expect to have to pay for housing, not have someone else assume the expenses to provide it to them on a silver platterfree of charge.

Absolute bull. How can a capitalist society function if no money is being earned or made, and everything is being given away for free? The only foreseeable outcome would be poverty and bankruptcy for everyone. And I can’t believe the company bowed down and offered to kiss their boots. Way to go in perpetuating and encouraging such entitled and unlawful behaviour.

#29 Barb on 01.12.20 at 5:42 pm

Bill C-97…omitted:
(e) Red armbands handed out free.

As for California, Jerry Brown will hurt himself shaking his head.

#30 acdel on 01.12.20 at 5:48 pm

There is no reason for any of this. We are the second largest country on this planet. Plenty of space for housing without impact to this so called planet warm up; in the West forecast lows will be in the minus 30’s; spare us the rhetoric.

There is absolutely no reason why any Canadian that wishes to own a house; reasonably priced; cannot do so! There is so much land out there. U.S. Population of around 340 million; no problems if one wished to own a home they could, as well as Garth pointed out they actually own it; not rent it like here in Canada. In Europe; smaller size the Canada; around 500 million; sure in many countries renting is not frowned upon but housing is easily affordable outside the big cities. Still plenty of land to do so.

In Canada the problem is greed and very stupid politics. I just cannot understand as why we put up with this, Canadians are really, truly pathetic! No backbone whatsoever! Oh well, tax me more, i will feel sorry for myself; whine on blogs; (such as I am doing now).

I just had a visitors from Europe that spent six weeks in the country and as much as we think that we are superior to Europe or the U.S.; these people thought that I/we are idiots for living here. yeah I expect the usual responses from the one’s that think they know it all; but you have no idea.
The one’s that did; gave up and no longer posts; they no longer post because they realized that there is no point to it; always the same people saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over again. This is my last post!! All the best dawgs!!

Thank you Garth; dam; if only people listened to you and adopted your ideas when you were in politics. What a shame they did not!!

#31 Phylis on 01.12.20 at 5:49 pm

Awesome, no need to pay property tax anymore. You can not take my home. That’s my interpretation. What are you gunna do, kick me out? I have rights you know.

#32 joblo on 01.12.20 at 5:58 pm

Did Glowball warming miss Kanada?

#33 Shawn Allen on 01.12.20 at 6:10 pm

#21 Taxation on $$$ earned already is extortion. on 01.12.20 at 4:02 pm

Why should any home owner pay taxes on a home that’s been paid for with money already taxed?

*******************************
Any proposal would only tax GAINS not the original investment. And in fairness would adjust for capital spending on the house as well as interest costs.

In general people don’t have any other kind of money than money that was already taxed. Unless they in the illegal cash market.

#34 Alberta Ed on 01.12.20 at 6:20 pm

All Canadians should enjoy the right to own property, including aboriginal Canadians.

#35 BobC on 01.12.20 at 6:21 pm

What exactly is a “right”?
If it costs someone something such as time, money or labor, it’s not a Right.
Everything else is.

#36 Damifino on 01.12.20 at 6:24 pm

#27 MF

The capital gains exemption should have gone the way of the do do bird a long time ago.
——————————

Maybe I’d be okay with that if capital losses were fully deductible from future capital gains indefinitely. None of this ‘going back three’ years stuff. And any losses must, of course, be adjusted for inflation. That might ease the pain of lost opportunity on risked money and keep the investment motive alive. Maybe.

#37 the Jaguar on 01.12.20 at 6:43 pm

What’s it going to take for hard working, fair minded and otherwise sensible people on the north american continent to have a break out Peter Finch moment and yell out “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”!! (?) We need an Arab Spring of our own. Our own fruit seller to set themselves on fire. I might nominate someone from BC or Saskatchewan for the task.
Somewhere between the chattering classes whose wealth conveniently keeps ugly reality at bay and the romantic poor underclass there must exist a silent majority who possess the vision and olfactory senses to recognize the wild house of horrors roller coaster ride we are currently on and call bullsh_t! The ‘Entitled & Indignant Movement’ is overdue for a hard slap up the side of the head IMHO. Maybe with a chain saw. Crime, drugs, tent cities and other blights on the landscape, your fifteen minutes of fame is up!
Pretty sure the dogs in the blog photo would be able to round up the usual suspects.
Sooner or later there will be serious ‘blowback’.

#38 oh bouy on 01.12.20 at 6:46 pm

@#30 acdel on 01.12.20 at 5:48 pm

This is my last post!! All the best dawgs!!
____________________________________

Finally!

#39 WUL on 01.12.20 at 6:47 pm

Hilarity in Alberta ensues.

Wexiteers plumb the depths of stupidity. And there is no floor to arrest the descent of their ignorance.

Notley and the NDP will be licking their chops as their funding and support grows.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/trudeau-peter-downing-alberta-fights-back-signpatico-1.5424267

WUL

#40 oh bouy on 01.12.20 at 6:48 pm

@#26 MF on 01.12.20 at 5:10 pm
#79 BigAl (Original) on 01.12.20 at

-People blame all their failures on government.

MF

_____________________________________

The biggest losers at life are the folks that constantly blame others for their problems.

#41 Last of the Boomers on 01.12.20 at 6:50 pm

Given that none of us YVR working class can afford to purchase adequate housing for a family in the areas where we work, we turn to investing any savings. Yet we are taxed 50 percent on capital gains on these investments.

Taxing capital gains on housing is an effective way to level the playing field after the damage of allowing for the commodification of housing to have gone on for so long without adequate balancing measures.

All capital gains based on foreign ownership and foreign ownership through proxy, (I.e. real estate trusts & numbered companies) should be 100% taxable.

Bring housing back to the people.

#42 Nonplused on 01.12.20 at 6:57 pm

Squatters are interesting. I have one in my basement. Oh well at least there is a blood relationship. Or so I was told.

How people come to think they can just move in to a house and not pay any rent is a mystery to me. What’s next? Just taking unoccupied cars? That used to be considered a felony but I bet pretty soon it’ll be covered by some sort of right to transportation legislation. After that I suppose shoplifting will be legalized since no one was wearing those jeans anyway, they were just sitting on the shelf.

Everyone likes to talk about the good in humanity but I think you can explain most things by taking the viewpoint we are all a bunch of self-centered thieves and murderers and only fear keeps us in line. And how this “Moms 4 Housing” squad turned what was clearly a violation of property rights into a race issue was extremely disingenuous. So we can add that humans are a bunch of liars to the list as well. I bet Dog regrets having promised no more floods. Oh well we have nuclear bombs now so maybe this time he can find a more thorough solution.

—————–

Capital gains on primary residences are a terrible idea. The fact is that houses are not money, and the price they fetch is merely a measure of what they are worth compared to other things. So if you have to sell your house say because your job moved to a different city, you’ll probably end up buying another one. There is likely no net gain, you still only have one house. And in cities like Vancouver where there are punitive land transfer taxes, it’s already expensive enough. Heck it was already expensive enough before the land transfer taxes.

So if they keep going with all these taxes, eventually they will create a situation where pretty much everyone who owns a house is “locked-in” for life. People won’t be able to afford to sell for any reason. Unless of course they raise the asking price to a point where it will cover the land transfer tax and the capital gain.

The big winners will be the corporations and individual investors who buy properties specifically to rent them out. Since they tend to hold the properties indefinitely, they won’t be subject to these taxes.

So once again we see that almost any government proposal that is touted as designed to improve market conditions over what the “invisible hand” would have given us has the exact opposite effect as intended. I personally believe that they were lying all the way along and they couldn’t care less if the whole population was sleeping under a tarp. The real intent was just to raise taxes. But it must be remembered that politicians are also human so if you assume they are also a bunch of lying thieves and murderers it makes more sense in understanding their motives and actions.

But since we are already at “peak tax” due to the fact that most people are broke, net revenues will not go up. Every extra dollar they take in new taxes just means economic activity somewhere else along with whatever taxes it generates must decline. But politicians do not understand economics, they assume that the tax pool is indeed infinite. It’s not. They are delusional. So we can add that to the list too.

Humans are a bunch of self-centered, lying, delusional thieves and murderers. It might be a good idea to start building an ark. Or maybe a bomb shelter, since I guess flooding is off the table. Dog still has lots of options though; meteor strikes, nuclear war, global warming, global cooling, pandemics, killer bees, insect extinction, alien invasion, opioids, Greta, Justin Beiber, and peak oil, to name a few.

“He who the dogs would destroy, they first make mad.”

#43 Grunt on 01.12.20 at 6:59 pm

Reminds me of the Dr Zhivago film. Where a pair of commissar arrive at a seized aristocrat’s house to declare it has enough room for several more peasant families. And they have to share.

#44 Entrepreneur on 01.12.20 at 7:04 pm

Legal or not those women are making a statement and government leaders are hopefully paying attention and start doing something about it. I say more people should do the same. And this is just the tip of all of Canada’s housing problem but all hushed.

I have to agree with #11 yvr-lurker on lack of action on protecting Canadians on housing.

Passport Babies on Fifth Estate is an example of lack of action. Ministry of ? saying it is legal except the not paying back the medical bill. I say if the bills are not payed then at least take back the passports.

#45 YouKnowWho on 01.12.20 at 7:10 pm

Will the Pickering Nuclear Power Plant false alert hit Real Estate values in Pickering/Oshawa/Ajax, even up to Scarborough?

I mean, the alert did just remind everyone in the province there is is a 50 year old Nuclear Power facility there – aging old nuclear power plant. Chernobyl was a super popular 5 episode mini-series in 2019. Most know how serious the situation can get.

Just imagine, what if something did really go down over there? …Toronto is not that far away either.

#46 Parksville Prankster on 01.12.20 at 7:23 pm

… squatting illegally in a property and then turning it around into a media circus when threatened with eviction? Sounds like something the character Frank would try on an episode of that show Shameless. Wait, what? There was an actual episode where he did that?

#47 yvr_lurker on 01.12.20 at 7:27 pm

#44
Exactly… I am not at all happy with a Gov’t who sees no problem with the issue of passport babies; skirting the rules, leaving medical bills unpaid and displacing local citizens from a healthcare system that they pay for with their taxes. Need to shut that down.

The type of immigrants who we need are those who will come here now, have some specialized skills, and will contribute to this country now (not satellite families, not money-parkers etc..). The many Iranian-Canadians whose contributions have been showcased in the past few days are exactly what we need to build the country. I have worked closely with several dozens of them over the years in my job and have been very impressed by their dedication, work ethic, and their desire to integrate into the Canadian fabric. We do not need people from overseas, earning their $$$ away from the eyes of the CRA, making a 1-time purchase on a place that they have bidded well beyond the means of locals, and then claiming all the benefits for their kids, grandma etc… all the while the main breadwinner lives overseas and pays essentially zero canadian tax…. no, no, and triple no… A great number of those in YVR and GTA

Passport Babies on Fifth Estate is an example of lack of action. Ministry of ? saying it is legal except the not paying back the medical bill. I say if the bills are not payed then at least take back the passports.

#48 BlogDog123 on 01.12.20 at 7:28 pm

What comes next?

People squatting in Forest Hill because that’s the most convenient location to their friends or their jobs?

What do we tell people who move up to Barrie and commute to the GTA because of affordable vs. income house prices? Squat closer to your workplace because prices are “not fair” within a “reasonable” commute?

How about these people squat for faster rail service and live out of the city where prices are too high.

#49 Real estate on 01.12.20 at 7:32 pm

THE true king . Can’t make land , none of it left in the GTA

They r driving for Barrie to Toronto for work ,lol

#50 just snootin' on 01.12.20 at 7:51 pm

I can use a printout of this little edict to live in an RV on MY OWN LAND deep in the sticks. Something BC frowns upon currently.

#51 Was down in the ... on 01.12.20 at 8:13 pm

new “Brewery district” the other day in east Van. Just a few blocks from Oppenheimer park. Hard to find a parking spot for all the junk motorhomes parked there. I guess it’s a little more upscale from the “kiddie stroll” it used to be but sure is sad to see. Desperate people …

#52 Felix on 01.12.20 at 8:34 pm

Look carefully at the photo today.

Cats are in charge.

As they should be.

(And kudos to you, Russ, for being such an obviously, intelligently observant cat man)

#53 Jack Dandy on 01.12.20 at 8:44 pm

DELETED

#54 Join em on 01.12.20 at 8:48 pm

These are challenging times. I feel bad for my generation (Millennial). Most of us are disillusioned. We make jokes about saving up for a bunker in the north — pretty sad. I am a physician in my last year of training. Once finished, most of us are looking for situations where we can work 3-4 days per week. I never thought that would be the case. But, after all this time, energy, and sacrifice, we aren’t going to kill ourselves to give it all away. We don’t understand what they did to the small business corporations, but earning a bunch of money to stash in them doesn’t seem worthwhile. The government has sufficiently suppressed the aspirations and working potential of a highly-trained generation. And everyone is writing the American boards…

#55 Paully on 01.12.20 at 8:50 pm

Close up CMHC and see how quickly housing becomes affordable. CMHC is distorting the housing market and it needs to go. Now.

#56 Another Deckchair on 01.12.20 at 8:52 pm

Houses.

Supply and demand. Like Darryl Sittler hockey cards – everybody wants one, so prices go up.

Eventually though, they’ll go out of fashion, and prices will stagnate or drop, then something else grab the money and will go up.

MF’s just jealous – been watching too much Home and Garden TV; real house ownership is wet-n-dry shop-vacuuming the basement when snow-melt or rainwater comes in, re-roofing every 15-20 years, painting, fixing appliances, snow shoveling, etc, etc.

Unless you pay for all the chores, *then* houses become REALLY expensive.

Be smart – if you are not going to do the work yourself, and you can’t afford to pay someone 4x what you make; don’t buy.

#57 nuf_said on 01.12.20 at 8:53 pm

Lots of outrage about the idea of taxing housing-related capital gains… and the idea of housing as a human right. But what do you suggest instead? How do we avoid turning into a (colder) Oakland? Reading the (always engaging) commentary from my fellow 3rd class passengers, I’m picking up on a lot of angry froth but few policy planks…

#58 ww1 on 01.12.20 at 9:04 pm

#18 Leftover on 01.12.20 at 3:36 pm
We should tax capital gains on principal residences, just like they do in Trump’s America. Let people expense their mortgage interest (to a max $500k mortgage) and get on with life.

In America (Trump’s or otherwise) the first $250,000 per person of capital gains on your principal residence is tax free. So $500,000 on a home jointly owned by a couple.

And your tax deductible mortgage’s interest rate can locked in for 20 to 30 year guaranteed to never increase! While you are free to renegotiate a lower rate at any time (albeit subject to fees of about $2K each time).

Compare that to mortgages in Canada.

#59 WUL on 01.12.20 at 9:04 pm

Off topic as usual but tire fires warrant comment.

Here in – 34 degree weather (wind chill factored in) Fort Mac, I’m watching the PVR recording of Leafs and Panthers.

Nobody in the stands at the rink.

At least real estate in Hogtown is putting up a fight.

A tip o’ the cap to 50 YEARS OF MAPLE LEAF INCONTINENCE.

WUL

#60 Steven Rowlandson on 01.12.20 at 9:07 pm

#26 “Private sector pay is better.”

That turns out not to be the case as a rule. Yes there are exceptions but most employers are not in the business of paying union pay rates or 6 figure incomes to their workers. I’ve worked in the private sector as a tradesman at market wage rates since 1978 and I am still not financially fit to live in Canada. Markets, wages and social programs are a joke and it isn’t funny either.

#61 mrnick on 01.12.20 at 9:11 pm

All those complaining about high prices and rents in GTA and GVA, here’s a little secret.
Canada is the second largest country in the world.
We have a number of wonderful cities such as Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Montreal, Halifax, Kamloops, Kelowna, Regina, Saskatoon….
each with their pluses and minuses. And none of them have high real estate prices as their minus column entry. They have other issues- cold weather, higher unemployment etc., but on the whole life is better.
If you move to Alberta, you’ll pay less taxes, get $15/hour minimum wage, buy a detached home for less than 300k…and enjoy world’s best natural beauty.

#62 Reality is stark on 01.12.20 at 9:15 pm

You need tax revenue.
You need to suck it out of the only arena left. The arena you artificially created.
Next you create a diversion to make your plan more palatable. “People have no access to housing so they are freezing to death in the streets”.
Now you can suck the people dry and tax whatever capital they have left in the name of being equitable.
You don’t need to get your own house in order and run things more efficiently. You just suck ordinary prudent people dry and reward impulsive reckless people.
More idiotic Canadian government policy taking advantage of the financial illiteracy of the average citizen.

#63 Steven Rowlandson on 01.12.20 at 9:17 pm

With all due respect to the African -Canadian community they do not have a monopoly on hard times and homelessness. There are plenty of white European Canadians who are priced out of Canada and they out number Blacks and Natives. Racism is not the issue.
Genocidal greed is the issue and it is more real than the country.

#64 akashic record on 01.12.20 at 9:18 pm

Watch academia and the democrats in the US if you want to know where this is heading.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/ucla-prof-we-need-seriously-question-ideal-private-home-ownership

The Moms – like teenagers suing (exclusively relatively democratic Western) governments – and many similar cases, are legally engineered activist guerilla attacks, trying to provoke legal precedents connecting various issue together, in order to influence society-shaping legislation down the road. Usually financed by old, filthy rich people, for whatever motivation they may have, maybe as a frustration that spoils it all, that nothing from here can be transferred over to the other side.

Some years ago a guy in Toronto petitioned the city, to be recognized as a dog, instead of a human. He had a point: the city had a legal obligation to provide shelter and food, as a basic canine right. The Moms are just catching up, hoping to get away with the burden of walking on four. That would account for human cruelty.

#65 Cottingham a bargain on 01.12.20 at 9:29 pm

These women needed to have been arrested for break and enter . The owner should also sue for damages .

Black lives matter should come out and condemn them for the gratuitous use of the race card . Shameful.

#66 Paul on 01.12.20 at 9:35 pm

How would the squatters far here? Phone Montreal squatter removal “R” us.

#67 Al on 01.12.20 at 9:43 pm

So nothing actually happened or is planned for Canada? Slow day I guess . Anyways I got my money’s worth. Carry on.

#68 Paul on 01.12.20 at 9:57 pm

This won’t be popular but we need 100,000 homes to house more than 300,000 new comers a year. The Government won’t build them so they will stick the private sector/people with the tab.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsZPWsVNTqo

#69 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.12.20 at 10:00 pm

To those who own empty houses I say:
Use it or lose it.

#70 AACI Homedog on 01.12.20 at 10:07 pm

Perfect. Is this their solution to the homeless problem ? Good luck.

#71 MF on 01.12.20 at 10:43 pm

#54 Join em on 01.12.20 at 8:48

Bbbbbbut I thought you told the selection board you were in it “to help people”?

And lol at working 3-4 days. Even doing that you’d make more than most people working 7days a week.

Please go. We don’t need this type of doctor here anyways.

MF

#72 MF on 01.12.20 at 10:46 pm

60 Steven Rowlandson on 01.12.20 a

Then start your own business. “Most” government workers make 40-50k/year and are contract.

The private sector is about free enterprise. You want to make money you start your own business. If you aren’t making it in the private sector it’s your fault, no one else’s.

MF

#73 Josh Hillman on 01.12.20 at 10:50 pm

Steven Rowlandson, you need to wake up, Canadians too, so why did they pump up the housing market for the last 25 years with drastically lower interest rates 10%+ mortgage rates down to 3% to as low as 2.4% today and add so many government tax breaks and CHMC insurance coverage to make so many people buy houses, condos.

They wanted to make housing not affordable because they know that housing prices, utility bills, property taxes etc. would be the effect of 75% drop in mortgage, interest rates and coming with that higher and higher, relentless speculation of much higher real estate prices, housing costs.

#74 SunShowers on 01.12.20 at 10:56 pm

Well Garth, it’s like you always say. Houses are places to live, not places to invest.

Seems to me like people who want to live in a house have a stronger claim to it than someone who just wants to use it as an investment.

#75 Robert Ash on 01.12.20 at 11:09 pm

The Invisible Hand of Capitalism!
While many posting here believe in this concept, and have followed an Independent Mindset, Self Accountability, the Majority of the Canadian and American Electorate are turning against the Invisible hand, and market Economics… This is the result of the GFC of 2008. The younger sector of the Electorate in 2008 was let’s say 22- 28 years old, when they had to face the hard reality that the System was rigged, seemingly, for Bankers, Financial Management folks, Real Estate Management, Rating agencies, The SEC… etc.. So those old enough to understand, and be impressed on an I won’t forget that chapter, of a significant Financial shock are now… 40-46 years old, and this shock, similar to the Great Depression, has resulted in the now Majority Voting Block, wanting more Government, Print that money again, Make our Decisions, for us… Sharing sentiment… a complete reality today… So as much as this significant change, in mindset is alien to many posters, here… Myself included, there is a slow and inevitable change on the horizon… and it will be legislated, that the various forms of Inequality in our Society will be nomalized. I am a free capitalist, that likes to help charities, etc.. But I won’t have a choice much longer… to not observe this somewhat abrupt change is unrealistic… Some of the top Socialologists, that are Contracted to major corporations, like McDonalds, Nike, Apple, etc..to predict trends, have written some pretty convincing thesises… I think denial is a mistake, and if you are a Homeowner, in an expensive market… consider selling, now,… but the Liberal March Budget will likely increase the CG’s inclusion rate to 66% then 75%, in the next few years… And then a sliding scale of CG’s for private residences, based on years of residency… I have taken this trend as a given… within 5 years… In a low interest rate model… Like another poster said, sadly even after tax financial investments, dividends, CG, Commodities, etc… will become more taxed… Not a trend I would have wanted when I first started to work… In retrospect, the 2008 FC, should have involved some punative results, for the offenders, and for what sure looked like Fraudulent activities… It was a mistake, not to levy consequences for bad behavior, and it certainly has affected the Millenials.. read the comments, here… The Irony is how self destructive, it will be to the same Electorate voting this way, as time or a serious Correction ensues… just a matter of time.

#76 baloney Sandwitch on 01.12.20 at 11:19 pm

If I was the landlord I would go in there with a baseball bat and throw their stuff out. What do you pay the police for?

#77 Henry Froese on 01.12.20 at 11:21 pm

If the bank and government would stop lying about inflation , making our dollar worth less continually ,
there would be very little captital gains to tax. look
at the price of gold apox. $400 in 2002 now over $2000
gold is not worth more dollars are worth less.

#78 crowdedelevatorfartz on 01.12.20 at 11:29 pm

@#55 Paully
“Close up CMHC and see how quickly housing becomes affordable. CMHC is distorting the housing market and it needs to go. Now.”
++++

Total agreement.

It will be interesting to see if the banks will “loosen” their lending policy’s.

The govt can make it easier for 1st time buyers but the banks hold the money….. and if Mom and Dad’s house has been assessed lower this year…..wonder how much they will have to lend……

Blizzard of snow in the Lower Brainland tonight….crazy.

#79 yorkville renter on 01.12.20 at 11:39 pm

If the government actually wanted to do something to lower the cost of housing they would build high-speed rail from Windsor to Quebec City.

People can live 200-250km from the business centres and take the train into town in about an hour.

#80 Mid on 01.12.20 at 11:41 pm

I think the Liberal policy of ‘housing as a right’ has more to do with the financialization of real estate as a commodity that is traded like a stock. And does not mean that everyone is suppose to own a house and the government has to provide you with one.

There is growing concern globally about speculative money changing the nature of our cities. This affects everybody. It is not something that the Liberals just dreamt up yesterday. The UN is looking into this.

Leilani Farha, of Ottawa, Canada was appointed as the UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, with the right to hold governments accountable if they don’t meet the human rights obligations. What she discovered was a global pattern, a business model repeated over and over again. A new kind of landlord, a hedge fund whose customers are not the tenants but the investors.

There is an excellent documentary made about her investigations called Push, The Film. Not sure if it is available on-line. I saw it in the theatre and it stills scares me. A must see in light of Garth’s viewpoints on renting—soon there won’t be anything to rent.

Here a piece from the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2019/sep/10/push-film-review-leilani-farha-global-housing-crisis

“The transformation of cities into playgrounds for the rich, while homelessness continues to rise, is not an inevitability. It is the result of structural economic policies, which can be changed – if the will exists.”

#81 Fortune500 on 01.12.20 at 11:59 pm

The Moms were in the wrong, and while I sympathize, the idea of allowing squatters to take over random real estate is not good for any society.

On the other hand, taxing capital gains on principal residences does not sound like some outlandish or radical idea to me at all, and I think many Canadians (even homeowners) would agree.

We pay tax on investments, and since everyone’s house has become the preferred ‘investment’ in Canada, the fact that it does not get taxed at all is part of the reason things have become misaligned.

I really don’t see the problem with Vaughan’s plan. And I am not a big supporter of the Liberals in Canada.

#82 Thedood on 01.13.20 at 12:26 am

#61 mrnick on 01.12.20 at 9:11 pm
All those complaining about high prices and rents in GTA and GVA, here’s a little secret.
Canada is the second largest country in the world.
We have a number of wonderful cities such as Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Montreal, Halifax, Kamloops, Kelowna, Regina, Saskatoon….
each with their pluses and minuses. And none of them have high real estate prices as their minus column entry. They have other issues- cold weather, higher unemployment etc., but on the whole life is better.
If you move to Alberta, you’ll pay less taxes, get $15/hour minimum wage, buy a detached home for less than 300k…and enjoy world’s best natural beauty.
__________________________________

…………and you’ll freeze for 6 months / year.

Majority of Canadians live as close to the US Border as possible for a reason.

** I’m from Alberta originally. I couldn’t resist. If you’re OK with winter it’s a great place to live.

#83 Wexit on 01.13.20 at 1:07 am

DELETED

#84 Shirl Clarts on 01.13.20 at 1:32 am

#50 just snootin’ on 01.12.20 at 7:51 pm
I can use a printout of this little edict to live in an RV on MY OWN LAND deep in the sticks. Something BC frowns upon currently.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I talked about this before. No need to go to the sticks. You can park your RV/Camper/Trailer/Tent/Tarp on any land owned by MOTI (Ministry of Transportation Infrastructure), like for example, under any bridge or along side a highway. MOTI can’t touch you, even though they don’t want you there.

If you straddle land between MOTI and a pipeline like Kinder Morgan or Trans Mountain, even better! Both sides will bicker with each other over who should remove you. Stale mate! You have a free place to stay for a very long time.

If you drive the #1 through the upper fraser valley, you will see the odd setup – fires burning, dogs off leash, tarps draped all over. It will get worse.

#85 Banana Joe on 01.13.20 at 2:13 am

#15 Yukon. You’ve got it on backwards mate. Only in a few G7 countries have enacted legislation that support squatting. In the “third world” the land owner simply pays an army or police unit and any squatters are unceremoniously shot. Please prove me wrong, but having spent my working life in that ” third world” paradise you speak of, well dude, you couldn’t be more wrong.

#86 PetertheSeparatistfromCalgary on 01.13.20 at 3:19 am

This crazy progressive nonsense in Trudeau-land is one more reason Alberta needs to become independent.

The climate hysteric Mark Carney possibly becoming Prime Minister is another reason.

#87 Dr Talc on 01.13.20 at 4:54 am

It can’t happen here-

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-20/transacting-$10,000-or-more-in-cash-could-make-you-a-criminal/11429230

#88 Compatriot on 01.13.20 at 8:06 am

MMT is but one dog whistle away from policy

#89 Compatriot on 01.13.20 at 8:10 am

50 billion a day pumped into the repo market by the Fed and there can’t be a negative outcome.

What is surprising is the amount mortgage backed securities.
Only the insiders know what this means.

#90 crowdedelevatorfartz on 01.13.20 at 8:12 am

@#69 Ponzie Plot
“To those who own empty houses I say:
Use it or lose it.”
++++

Ponzie’s 5 second solutions to all the world’s problems.
Are you sure your not from a former communist country?
Obviously you have never owned Rental property or a house you bought, fixed up and re sold, hopefully for a profit…..

I have been watching brand new homes in my neighbourhood sit empty after construction was completed almost 2 years ago……
Contractors that took a risk with THEIR money, not the govts, not yours, theirs.
If they are too stupid to lower their price so the house will sell….thats their right.
If the bank repos the property for non payment of debt and sells it.
C’est la vie.
What if YOU become hospitalized for a year or more?
Does the govt have the right to take YOUR home if no one is living in it?
Dont be so glib.

#91 unbalanced on 01.13.20 at 8:49 am

The free loaders should be evicted. They are trespassing on private property. Cut off power and water or get the Hells Angels mamas to pay them a visit. The Angels need a new club house. HeeHee! Gaurnteed to work!!!

#92 Dharma Bum on 01.13.20 at 9:09 am

#76 Baloney Sandwich

What do you pay the police for?
——————————————————————–

To do it with guns, every day, right out in the street, in the good old U.S. of A.

https://psmag.com/social-justice/why-black-america-fears-the-police

#93 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 9:13 am

#37 Sold Out on 01.11.20 at 7:29 pm

I would only admit this on an anonymous site, for reasons of preserving my own sanity, but I’m pretty good at mudding/sanding. Don’t get me wrong, I loathe doing it, and I’m not fast, but can do a creditable job if required. Boarded, taped,mudded, sanded and painted my own house. Never again, though. Patching is all I can bring myself to do. Finishing a closet would probably make me cry, now. Vile job.
___

I’ve got the job done too, but it took waay too long. Trowel on 20lbs of mud – sand off 19.9 lbs of mud. On/off, on/off… I suck at it.

#94 RE_Investor on 01.13.20 at 9:32 am

Hello,

Try and watch Season 1, Episode 5 of “Nightmare Tenants / Slum Landlords”; (@16:45 minute) on Netflix, where squatters take over a commercial building that was going to be used by a charity supporting vulnerable children (great cause). The owners are so decent that you will surely feel their desperation and pain as they try to follow the slow legal process of eviction. Their building is totally ruined by squatters. Heart-breaking to see the lack of humanity.

#95 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 9:39 am

#15 Yukon Elvis on 01.12.20 at 3:28 pm
Squatting is very common in the “third world”. Many countries have laws to protect the squatters. They cannot be tossed out without the property owners providing a new place to go that they can afford. Often squatters must be paid in order to leave. What a mess we have made of our housing industry here.
___

I think we had and maybe still have similar laws. I know if you encroach upon, and maintain your neighbours land for 10 years – you can claim ownership of it – provided the neighbour had not formally advised you that s/he owned the land, and that you had permission to maintain it.

If I owned the home these squatters moved into – I can think of several creative ways to get them out which would cost a lot less and be 10X quicker than the “right” way.

#96 n1tro on 01.13.20 at 9:47 am

I’m jealous I’m not the property owner. It would be nice to leave the court house with a favorable/just judgement and announce I would counter sue for damages just to put the criminals (breaking and entering is against the law last I remember) out of pocket or in jail. That would make my year having been screwed out of xmas.

#97 Just Saying on 01.13.20 at 10:07 am

Anyone else notice the starbucks cup in the picture? So they can’t afford basic housing but can afford to spend $5.00 on an overpriced latte?

#98 Linda on 01.13.20 at 10:19 am

a#33 ‘Shawn’ – what gains? The one where the original purchase price is compared to the eventual selling price? Let’s just examine that ‘gain’ for a minute. Let us say one purchased a home in the 80’s for $100K & sold it for $1 million today. A ‘gain’ of $900K! So unfair! Tax it! Before one gets too excited, let us look at the costs of those years of home ownership. If the house were purchased in 1980 & sold in 2020 we are talking of a 40 year old structure. During those 40 years, the property has very likely had maintenance such as roof replacement, new furnace, electrical upgrades, new windows & doors etc. The homeowner has also paid property taxes, interest on the cost of the mortgage, utilities & very likely home insurance to boot. All these costs specifically used to operate & maintain the asset should be deducted from the gain. Because unless you remove the improvements prior to the sale, the sale includes all the improvements. I’d add that home improvements plus the higher assessed value of the property ensured that property taxes paid in 2020 will be a LOT higher than those paid when the property was purchased in 1980.

So to sum up: Purchased @ $100K. Sold @ $1 million. Gain of $900K. Less $75K mortgage interest (assume $5K per year; home paid off in 15 years); $120K property taxes ($3K per annum over 40 years average); $120K utilities ditto; $20K in house insurance & let’s just say $150K in house improvements. Likely the cost of maintenance & repair was a lot higher over the 40 years, but let’s just be very conservative to appease the masses. So figure $485K at the very least to be deducted off that $900K ‘profit’ – & we haven’t even tried to do any adjustment for inflation, since dollars paid out in say 1990 would be a higher figure in 2020. I’d add that if the property owner had to pay land transfer taxes etc. then those costs too should be deducted from the ‘gain’. And shouldn’t the base cost of accommodation (think rent) also be deducted to ‘level the playing field’ between owner & renter taxation? Just saying.

#99 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.13.20 at 10:21 am

#95
I think we had and maybe still have similar laws. I know if you encroach upon, and maintain your neighbours land for 10 years – you can claim ownership of it – provided the neighbour had not formally advised you that s/he owned the land, and that you had permission to maintain it.
——————————
Large portions of land were settled that way.
And I think we’ve become a better country that way.
Better than the Queen owing all.

#100 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.13.20 at 10:33 am

In other news:
Canned Boing CEO gets 62 million in compensation.
Don’t seem fair to me.

#101 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 10:39 am

#54 Join em on 01.12.20 at 8:48 pm
These are challenging times. I feel bad for my generation (Millennial). Most of us are disillusioned. We make jokes about saving up for a bunker in the north — pretty sad. I am a physician in my last year of training. Once finished, most of us are looking for situations where we can work 3-4 days per week. I never thought that would be the case. But, after all this time, energy, and sacrifice, we aren’t going to kill ourselves to give it all away. We don’t understand what they did to the small business corporations, but earning a bunch of money to stash in them doesn’t seem worthwhile. The government has sufficiently suppressed the aspirations and working potential of a highly-trained generation. And everyone is writing the American boards…
____

I’ll bet once you’re out and working you will see that it is even worse than you think.

Our family Doc did work part time, and he just quit the Doc biz altogether. Guy wasn’t even 40. Looks like he is going to go with Landscaping, a business he had started on the side (maybe an exit plan?).

How much BS is required for a Doc to up and quit? Should be quite the pile you’d think, after all the schooling – things must be quite bad. Another Doc working for the same team while publicly defending her decision to work part time got published by the CBC. I guess it must be a big deal for Doc’s to work part time?

It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…

#102 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 11:00 am

#75 Robert Ash… well said Fred. The shift towards more social policy is well underway all over the world. Nationalist fools are having their last kicks at the can, but overwhelmingly, the young ones are marching towards a better tomorrow. “Money printing” as you refer to it, was not incurred by the young ones, but by the older old boys central banking criminals FIRE network cartel who have utterly and totally failed us all. That’s a fact.

It was the socialists who saved the world during the 1930s after capitalism had failed spectacularly, and it is the socialists who again will save us this time around as we witness the vestiges of failed capitalist ideology all around us.

#103 fancy_pants on 01.13.20 at 11:03 am

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not expressly protect property rights, the pendulum between private rights and public welfare is precarious at best.

#104 Keith on 01.13.20 at 11:05 am

Income and wealth inequality leads to acts of desperation like this. A revolution in a different way. The current trend is not sustainable.

#105 Ronaldo on 01.13.20 at 11:11 am

#98 Linda

That is a very good argument regarding the gain on the property over the 40 years. What portion of the gain is on the home? What is on the land? A house depreciates over time and requires maintenance and upgrades. We’ve had our home for 32 years now and until the last 5 years or so, it had only doubled in price in that time. More so in the last five years. Given all the the expense that has gone into it over those years in maintenance and upgrades, the return has not even kept up to inflation. It would be easy for us to compile this as we have all the records over all those years. Maybe a good idea to do up a report and get back to you’se on it. For those areas like the lower mainland and Toronto, it would likely be a different story. For places like St. Albert and Edmonton, I would say that real estate has not been a great investment over that time period. I would argue that it may have been a lot better to rent over that entire period over investing in a balanced and diversified portfolio. Timing is a huge part in either investment as I have learned. Get that wrong and you could be hooped as some are going to discover who have invested in real estate in the past few years. But, given that a house was meant to be a place to live and not something to trade as with stocks, I personally prefer ownership over renting.

#106 Century on 01.13.20 at 11:24 am

#98 Linda

Well someone who bought a house in 1980 and sold recently, as in your example,—used their house to actually live in, raise their family and contribute to community.

I don’t think this is the problem and those cases shouldn’t be ‘punished’.

When housing becomes financialized, and viewed as a quick investment scheme, house prices become de-coupled from income, as we see today. And driven by people with access to loads of capital.

It’s no longer an organic situation. It’s about moving money fast and maximizing investor share. This is dangerous because it affects everyone. And these are the people who need to be reined in. Maybe with CG taxes and other measures.

BTW I am a renter who pays my own heat, hydro, hot water and insurance, so you could remove those from your example. Just common necessities.

#107 OK, Doomer? on 01.13.20 at 11:32 am

Any proposal would only tax GAINS not the original investment. And in fairness would adjust for capital spending on the house as well as interest costs.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Do you honestly believe the government will go for that? I highly doubt it. On your tax for they’ll ask:

1. What was the original purchase price?

2. What did you sell it for?

And say:

Here’s your tax bill.

All the improvements interest etc will be on your dime. Remember, you now work for Trudeau. He doesn’t work for you.

Fairness is for idiots and for children. It’s a meaningless concept as it’s purely subjective. As soon as you head down the rabbit hole of “fairness” there literally is no end to it, just ever greater and crazier claims and demands.

Do yourself a favor; forget that fairness is a thing. JFK nailed it when he said “No one said life was fair”.

OK, Mills?

#108 Dr talc on 01.13.20 at 11:41 am

It’s never was, is not, and never will be considered ‘profit’ because CRA does not allow losses on RE. It’s a relief from taxing inflation, which is already taxed via all % based taxes like HST

#109 Yukon Elvis on 01.13.20 at 11:47 am

#85 Banana Joe on 01.13.20 at 2:13 am
#15 Yukon. You’ve got it on backwards mate. Only in a few G7 countries have enacted legislation that support squatting. In the “third world” the land owner simply pays an army or police unit and any squatters are unceremoniously shot. Please prove me wrong, but having spent my working life in that ” third world” paradise you speak of, well dude, you couldn’t be more wrong.
………………………………………………..

I’ve been there too, where did I say “third world paradise”?What you say is true, some frustrated land owners even hire arsonists to burn out the squatters if they cannot be removed peacefully. But not all, some are removed peacefully and are paid to leave.

#110 legal beagle on 01.13.20 at 11:56 am

#101 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 10:39 am

…It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…

Mrs. Beagle is also Dr. Beagle so I have first hand knowledge that this is already the case… in particular with 2 under two.

Currently, she works 3 days a week (weekends+1), pulls in a decent income but still low enough to take advantage of many the gov bennies.

With cost of child care what it is, plus taxes and lost benefits, even if she worked full time it’d be a wash at best. At worst, we’d be worse off.

#111 Shawn Allen on 01.13.20 at 12:09 pm

Linda on House Price Gains

#98 Linda on 01.13.20 at 10:19 am

So to sum up: Purchased @ $100K. Sold @ $1 million. Gain of $900K. Less $75K mortgage interest (assume $5K per year; home paid off in 15 years); $120K property taxes ($3K per annum over 40 years average); $120K utilities ditto; $20K in house insurance & let’s just say $150K in house improvements. Likely the cost of maintenance & repair was a lot higher over the 40 years, but let’s just be very conservative to appease the masses. So figure $485K at the very least to be deducted off that $900K ‘profit’ – & we haven’t even tried to do any adjustment for inflation, since dollars paid out in say 1990 would be a higher figure in 2020. I’d add that if the property owner had to pay land transfer taxes etc. then those costs too should be deducted from the ‘gain’. And shouldn’t the base cost of accommodation (think rent) also be deducted to ‘level the playing field’ between owner & renter taxation? Just saying.

********************************
Thank you for the response. Some of your points are quite valid.

Certainly land transfer tax paid as part of the cost to purchase are part of the cost and reduce the gain. And real estate fees to see should be deducted from proceeds. Major capital spending on renovations should be added to the cost lowering the gain.

But, interest, property tax, regular maintenance, insurance and utilities are all operating costs Those are all irrelevant unless we are going to tax each year the value of imputed rent saved (as income) minus all operating costs. No one is proposing that. That would treat all houses as rental property with the owner as implied tenant.

Your post actually clarified my thinking that interest should not be deducted.

In theory we should adjust for inflation. But we don’t do that on any other capital gains . But then we only tax half of the capital gains.

P.S. You did torture the numbers nicely to obtain the confession you wanted. Nice try.

#112 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 12:15 pm

“It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…”

I’ve been hearing this every year for the last 30 years from everyone including doctors themselves that I know. Yet, still lineups for med schools in Canada. If you want to be a doctor, be a doctor, if you want to be rich, then be rich. Don’t confuse the two life goals.

#113 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 12:26 pm

“The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not expressly protect property rights, the pendulum between private rights and public welfare is precarious at best.”

That’s an odd statement in a couple of ways. Why would you look to your federal government to protect your municipal property rights? Are you a communist? Secondly, why would public welfare be described as ‘precarious’ when it is the ONLY thing that protects property, including personal property. I think you need screw your head back on straight.

#114 Sail Away on 01.13.20 at 12:31 pm

#99 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.13.20 at 10:21 am
#95

I think we had and maybe still have similar laws. I know if you encroach upon, and maintain your neighbours land for 10 years – you can claim ownership of it – provided the neighbour had not formally advised you that s/he owned the land, and that you had permission to maintain it.
——————————
Large portions of land were settled that way.
And I think we’ve become a better country that way.
Better than the Queen owing all.

——————–

So, pretty much the way Europeans got Canada? Just move in and lay claim?

#115 Sail Away on 01.13.20 at 12:36 pm

#101 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 10:39 am
#54 Join em on 01.12.20 at 8:48 pm
These are challenging times. I feel bad for my generation (Millennial). Most of us are disillusioned. We make jokes about saving up for a bunker in the north — pretty sad. I am a physician in my last year of training. Once finished, most of us are looking for situations where we can work 3-4 days per week. I never thought that would be the case. But, after all this time, energy, and sacrifice, we aren’t going to kill ourselves to give it all away. We don’t understand what they did to the small business corporations, but earning a bunch of money to stash in them doesn’t seem worthwhile. The government has sufficiently suppressed the aspirations and working potential of a highly-trained generation. And everyone is writing the American boards…
____

I’ll bet once you’re out and working you will see that it is even worse than you think.

Our family Doc did work part time, and he just quit the Doc biz altogether. Guy wasn’t even 40. Looks like he is going to go with Landscaping, a business he had started on the side (maybe an exit plan?).

How much BS is required for a Doc to up and quit? Should be quite the pile you’d think, after all the schooling – things must be quite bad. Another Doc working for the same team while publicly defending her decision to work part time got published by the CBC. I guess it must be a big deal for Doc’s to work part time?

It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…

—————————-

Yes, go to the US. Very easy to do for a doc as a skilled worker to be sponsored by Mayo, John Hopkins, various hospitals, far better $, and far fewer taxes and rules on personal and corp.

I have many doc friends who’ve done exactly that and are now working in the States just banking it. It’s their home now, so they’ll probably never return.

Good for them, not good for Canada.

#116 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 12:44 pm

#106 Century on 01.13.20 at 11:24 am
#98 Linda

Well someone who bought a house in 1980 and sold recently, as in your example,—used their house to actually live in, raise their family and contribute to community.

I don’t think this is the problem and those cases shouldn’t be ‘punished’.
___

IIRC, the original pitch had CG’s on PR’s taxed up to 5 years max, and decreasing with each year of ownership.

So say 5% on 1 year, 4% after 2 years, 3% after 3 years etc…

This scheme would largely not affect the buy a house to live in crowd, while effectively targeting the flipper/spec’er folks.

Many folks will still get caught though – so many peeps moving around these days – especially younger folks.

If this plan is indeed what ends up coming – they’ll probably have to increase it to at least 10 years to stave off the spec’ers and flippers in places like the GVRD/GTA. I think many would gladly hold for 5 years to try and get a tax free gain – 10 years would guarantee only the biggest gorfs try to make money on the side with those rules. Too many costs involved to make money on the gain over that amount of time, and renting out in the meantime seems like a tough row to hoe also trying to end up in the black on a freshly bought overpriced GTA dumpster.

#117 NoName on 01.13.20 at 12:54 pm

interesting read

apparently 1.5’C wormier days make people more likely to die and aparently to be more violenet… Lucky for us we have winter 5 out 12 months.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-019-0721-y

#118 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 1:03 pm

#99 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.13.20 at 10:21 am
#95
I think we had and maybe still have similar laws. I know if you encroach upon, and maintain your neighbours land for 10 years – you can claim ownership of it – provided the neighbour had not formally advised you that s/he owned the land, and that you had permission to maintain it.
——————————

Large portions of land were settled that way.
And I think we’ve become a better country that way.
Better than the Queen owing all.
____

That was when **improving** the land got you the title, not maintaining it. IE. clear it, plow it, cultivate it, seed it, and harvest it. Homestead and Farm built from scratch with hand tools in a bug infested swampy hell hole.

The Queen gave it away for free so that some poor schmuck and his family would cross the Ocean and go thru hell developing it at no real cost to her.

I guess it worked though…

#119 Sold Out on 01.13.20 at 1:10 pm

#112 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 12:15 pm
“It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…”

I’ve been hearing this every year for the last 30 years from everyone including doctors themselves that I know. Yet, still lineups for med schools in Canada. If you want to be a doctor, be a doctor, if you want to be rich, then be rich. Don’t confuse the two life goals.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Too many people think being a doctor is a way to be admired, make a ton of money and retire early.

Medicine is mentally, emotionally and physically gruelling; there are way easier and less stressful ways of making money. When a young doc is already thinking about going part time, or leaving Canada, they probably went into medicine for the wrong reasons.

#120 Century on 01.13.20 at 1:43 pm

#98 Linda (#105 Ronaldo, # 111 Shawn)

Some good comments which beg the question. How do we determine the natural increase in value of a house from an increase in markets that are highly inflated by speckers, flippers and inflows of capital over a distinct period of time. In other words some markets the are skewed. What’s the difference btw basic maintenance to maintain equity and extensive upgrades for profit?

My Dad owned a house for 26 years. Re-did the roof, replaced the furnace, resealed the driveway, new frig. Total cost btw 20-35 K. Not 485K worth. But house was clean, functional and operational. Basic maintenance.

Nobody has to have granite countertops, stainless steel, 2 living rooms + media room, 5 bathrooms, patio, deck and outdoor cabana, etc. If you are doing these kind of upgrades, you are doing it with an eye on goosing the value of your home to soak the next guy and gain profit. Therefore you are treating the house as a business investment, at your own volition. No one is forcing anyone to do extensive upgrades. And so maybe should be taxed. Just saying.

#121 Sail away on 01.13.20 at 1:44 pm

#112 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 12:15 pm

“It may have come to pass already – that being a full time Doc in Canada just ain’t worth it…”

I’ve been hearing this every year for the last 30 years from everyone including doctors themselves that I know. Yet, still lineups for med schools in Canada. If you want to be a doctor, be a doctor, if you want to be rich, then be rich. Don’t confuse the two life goals.

————————————-

That’s a silly viewpoint. Wouldn’t you rather be a rich doctor?

Have you read Cancer Ward by any chance? Solzhenitsyn paints a stark picture of doctoring under communism, where there wasn’t more pay or support for skilled professions.

Also, of course many doctors do their schooling in Canada. It’s cheaper. Then they are off to the US after finishing. So this is also a money decision.

#122 n1tro on 01.13.20 at 2:34 pm

#118 IHCTD9 on 01.13.20 at 1:03 pm
#99 Ponzius Pilatus on 01.13.20 at 10:21 am
#95
I think we had and maybe still have similar laws. I know if you encroach upon, and maintain your neighbours land for 10 years – you can claim ownership of it – provided the neighbour had not formally advised you that s/he owned the land, and that you had permission to maintain it.
——————————

Large portions of land were settled that way.
And I think we’ve become a better country that way.
Better than the Queen owing all.
____

That was when **improving** the land got you the title, not maintaining it. IE. clear it, plow it, cultivate it, seed it, and harvest it. Homestead and Farm built from scratch with hand tools in a bug infested swampy hell hole.

The Queen gave it away for free so that some poor schmuck and his family would cross the Ocean and go thru hell developing it at no real cost to her.

I guess it worked though…
————-
I think you need to add that the Queen still owns the land. Us plebs are just long term leasing it from her royal highness.

#123 OK, Doomer? on 01.13.20 at 3:06 pm

Nobody has to have granite countertops, stainless steel, 2 living rooms + media room, 5 bathrooms, patio, deck and outdoor cabana, etc. If you are doing these kind of upgrades, you are doing it with an eye on goosing the value of your home to soak the next guy and gain profit.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sure they should. If they’ve earned the $$$ and want to spend it then have at it.

Note what I said though, “IF THEY’VE EARNED THE $$$”

Most people are merely borrowing their way to a multi-millionaire’s lifestyle. They haven’t actually earned it.

If you can write a cheque, buy whatever you want. If you have to get the bank’s permission, then maybe set your sights a bit lower.

#124 Join em on 01.13.20 at 3:08 pm

#71 MF on 01.12.20 at 10:43 pm

Helping people and being fairly renumerated should not have to be mutually exclusive endeavours

#125 Ubul on 01.13.20 at 3:10 pm

#120 Century on 01.13.20 at 1:43 pm

Nobody has to have granite countertops, stainless steel, 2 living rooms + media room, 5 bathrooms, patio, deck and outdoor cabana, etc. If you are doing these kind of upgrades, you are doing it with an eye on goosing the value of your home to soak the next guy and gain profit.

Nobody has to have a multi million dollar investment account, just to…

#126 OK, Doomer? on 01.13.20 at 3:18 pm

Nobody has to have granite countertops, stainless steel, 2 living rooms + media room, 5 bathrooms, patio, deck and outdoor cabana, etc. If you are doing these kind of upgrades, you are doing it with an eye on goosing the value of your home to soak the next guy and gain profit.

+++++++++++++++

Back when I bought my first house, the discussion was what upgrade would return the largest % of your original investment. The implicit understanding was that you would LOSE MONEY with each upgrade, so you would pick the one which would LOSE the least.

It always amazes me that someone will spend $10-20k on granite and then think the house is worth an additional $150K. In every home I’ve purchased I’ve deliberately avoided houses with granite countertops. Why? Most home-owners pick ugly, gaudy granite and then want some one to reward their poor taste.

It also shows me that the owner is more concerned with superficial stuff. The houses I’ve enjoyed most were well thought out and designed, with a good traffic flow, good use of space and ease of use. Granite doesn’t make up for a crappy design.

#127 Remembrancer on 01.13.20 at 3:34 pm

#114 Sail Away on 01.13.20 at 12:31 pm
So, pretty much the way Europeans got Canada? Just move in and lay claim?
————————————–
Similar, except that, I don’t know about you, but my encroaching neighbor doesn’t have a 124 gun Man-of-War, a regiment of muskets or the occasional trader with glass beads and sketchy wool blankets kicking around to call upon…

#128 Linda on 01.13.20 at 3:46 pm

#105 ‘Ronaldo’ – whether buying is better than renting depends on circumstances. To the best of my ability to determine, we would have paid about the same in shelter costs whether we rented or purchased but we also do not live in one of the ‘hot’ zones for housing price increases.

#106 ‘Century’ – I agree long term owners shouldn’t be punished but I’m wondering about the slippery slope, as #107 ‘OK’ said, the government is likely to take the option of original purchase price vs. actual selling price since that is where they’d reap the most in tax. #111 ‘Shawn’ also mentions that things like utilities, property taxes & insurance are operating costs & thus should not be included. I’d argue that mortgage interest & property taxes should be included as they would not be expenses for renters, unless of course those costs are built into rental fees by the property owner. Which then makes me wonder about rental controls & whether areas where those hold sway would need to be treated differently.

In the end, I’ve always had the vague impression that the capital gains exemption on principal residences was Canada’s version of permitting the deduction of mortgage interest that is practiced in the USA. Because if one takes away the exemption then the point raised by #116 ‘IHCTD9’ about how investing in a purchase of a home would likely result in a financial loss is even more valid, especially in the short term.

#129 Sail Away on 01.13.20 at 4:31 pm

#127 Remembrancer on 01.13.20 at 3:34 pm
#114 Sail Away on 01.13.20 at 12:31 pm
So, pretty much the way Europeans got Canada? Just move in and lay claim?
————————————–
Similar, except that, I don’t know about you, but my encroaching neighbor doesn’t have a 124 gun Man-of-War, a regiment of muskets or the occasional trader with glass beads and sketchy wool blankets kicking around to call upon…

—————————

You must not live next to Ustabe….

#130 Mr Canada on 01.13.20 at 7:40 pm

Ah, housing as a right led by Adam Vaughan, former Councillor from the City of Toronto – the same city he served which happens to be the largest landlord of “affordable” housing in North America…and also the largest slum landlord in North America with several billion behind in capital expenditures with no plan to become a responsible landlord anytime soon…all is well here…

#131 Banana Joe on 01.13.20 at 10:35 pm

#109 Yukon. Please name one country where squatters are paid.

#132 fancy_pants on 01.14.20 at 7:36 am

#113 Eks dee Siple on 01.13.20 at 12:26 pm

why would public welfare be described as ‘precarious’ when it is the ONLY thing that protects property, including personal property. I think you need screw your head back on straight.

John Locke and Thomas Jefferson would be offended at your intelligence.

But hey, lemon head, since you have taken the stance of judge and jury in the comment section, please enlighten us all on how public welfare protects property owners. History says otherwise but we all yearn for another splash of yellow wisdom from the guru.