Is this a “can of worms?”
Is it a “ticking time bomb?”
Would “powder keg” be more appropriate to describe the situation?
Or may we use “recipe for disaster?”
Are we simply waiting for a “boiling point?”
Or do we need the situation to “boil over?”
Is now the time to mention “Pandora’s Box?” or do we save that for another day?
I thought long and hard about the title of today’s post, the manner in which I wanted to get the point across, and then exactly what the thesis or hypothesis would be.
And the truth is: I’m still not sure.
This might be a case of, “I’ll lay it out for ya’ll to play it out,” but do any of us really know what caused the housing crisis, who is to blame, or how to fix it?
Last week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made a comment that he probably didn’t think was going to cause shockwaves, and yet it did. I’m the last defender of Mr. Trudeau, trust me on this, but I will say that his comment might have been too off-the-cuff or taken out of context, or the very least, it was cut from the overall theme of what he was saying.
What did he say?
This:
“I’ll be blunt as well — housing isn’t a primary federal responsibility. It’s not something that we have direct carriage of.”
This may very well prove to be Mr. Trudeau’s undoing, and while many spent last week focusing on Mr. Trudeau’s marriage and personal life, which I think is absolutely nobody’s business, I do think that we’re at a critical point in Mr. Trudeau’s tenure.
I applaud Mr. Trudeau for being truthful, which is something I wish politicians did more of. But we’ve grown so accustomed to politicians lying and telling us what we want to hear that the whole country seemed shocked by what he said.
“Not our job.”
That’s how most people took this.
“Not our problem.”
That’s the extension for those who want to play with words.
It’s worth noting that Mr. Trudeau continued, “”But it is something that we can and must help with,” but few chose to read past the headlines, I’m sure.
Last week was a bad one for the Prime Minister but I think this was a long time coming. I believe that based on the public opinion that increased immigration is putting a strain on housing prices, eventually, Mr. Trudeau was going to throw his arms up and say something.
I just didn’t expect him to say “It’s not our responsibility.”
Even before the media ran with his “not our responsibility” line, we started to see Mr. Trudeau try to heap the blame on others:
“Justin Trudeau Shifts Some Of The Blame For Eye-Popping Housing Costs”
Financial Post
July 31st, 2023
My good pal, John Pasalis, had some great quotes in the article:
The remarks show the government “is giving up on solving the housing crisis it created,” said John Pasalis, president of Toronto-based real estate brokerage company Realosophy Realty.
“Our federal government is supercharging the demand for housing by rapidly increasing Canada’s population growth rate without any regard for where people will live and is now blaming the provinces and cities for not doing the impossible — tripling the number of homes they build each year,” Pasalis said.
Opinion or fact?
John, I love this side of you. Please let us see more of it.
One day later, we started to see the headlines about “responsibility,” or rather lack thereof:
“As Housing Prices Spoke, Trudeau Now Says It’s Not A ‘Federal Responsibility'”
National Post
August 1st, 2023
The sub-heading read:
Trudeau made the comments while standing behind a lectern affixed with a sign reading ‘building more homes faster’
I mean, I know that different newspapers take different views of current events, but the Post wasn’t exactly out of line to point out the irony, right?
The article does point out that Mr. Trudeau came to office with promises of “affordable housing” and has now completely changed his tune.
The Liberals’ 2015 campaign platform promised “affordable housing for Canadians.” “We have a plan to make housing more affordable for those who need it most – seniors, persons with disabilities, lower-income families, and Canadians working hard to join the middle class,” Trudeau said at the time.
But home prices have soared since 2015:
In 2015, the average Canadian home price stood at $413,000. Now, according to the latest estimates from the Canadian Real Estate Association, average home prices have risen to $702,409 — an increase of about 70 per cent.
Shelter costs have been even worse for renters. In 2015, the median rent across Canada’s 35 largest urban centres stood at $966 per month. As of the latest figures from Rentals.ca, that figure has almost doubled to a median rent of $1,811 per month for a one-bedroom.
I was very surprised to see CBC News, which has recently become a government mouthpiece, pen this piece:
“Trudeau Says Feds Aren’t Primarily Responsible For Housing, But How Responsible Are They?”
CBC News
August 2nd, 2023
This article sought opinions from experts on what the federal government’s role should or even could be:
The Constitution or legislation sometimes explicitly states which level of government is responsible for a particular issue, but this is not the case with housing.
“If you read the Constitution, the word housing doesn’t appear in there,” said Steve Pomeroy, an industry professor and executive advisor at the Canadian Housing Evidence Collaborative at McMaster University.
“However, jurisprudence has generally interpreted the Constitution that matters of local things are seen as being provincial jurisdiction. So the legal interpretation of the Constitution in a very strict review would allocate responsibility for housing to the provinces.”
But the federal government controls many institutions and areas of policy which affect the price and availability of housing in Canada, Pomeroy said, such as federal fiscal policy and bank regulation.
The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), which is responsible for implementing Canada’s National Housing Act, is a federal crown corporation. CMHC says it “exists for a single reason: to make housing affordable for everyone in Canada,” according to its website. The organization provides mortgage insurance, sets rules for who can qualify for mortgage insurance, collects data about housing in Canada, and more.
Later in the article, we received a sharper critique of the federal government’s initiatives:
The government values the National Housing Strategy at more than $82 billion, though some of that money is loans rather than new spending.
But Pomeroy said the federal government needs to be held responsible for flaws in its approach to housing.
“To be perfectly frank, I think they haven’t done a very good job, even though they’ve started spending a lot of money,” he said.
“The way they’ve designed initiatives, they’ve been very cumbersome.”
Another scathing headline appeared on the very same day:
“Soaring Housing Costs Could Spell ‘Disastrous’ Political Consequences For Trudeau”
Financial Post
August 2nd, 2023
But again, I would ask: is it the “fault” of the federal government? Or are we just suggesting that people are frustrated with housing prices and will clamour for a change in government, regardless?
From the article:
Trudeau has played defence on the issue this summer, appointing a new housing minister last week and shifting some of the blame to other levels of government on Monday. But with his party already sinking in recent polls, housing has become a serious vulnerability for Trudeau.
“Failure to be seen as doing enough on housing could be politically disastrous for the Liberals,” said David Coletto, chief executive of polling firm Abacus Data.
Again, as much as I dislike this government, it seems unfair to simply suggest that perception is enough to cast blame.
Causation?
No.
Perception.
But before Mr. Trudeau gave us that damning quote last week and before the media ran with it, I read a great column in the Globe & Mail by John Ibbitson, with a very fair and very important headline:
“The Liberals Must Fix The Housing Crisis Before It Undermines Support For Immigration”
The Globe & Mail
July 31st, 2023
Exactly.
None of us really know if immigration is a cause of higher home prices. It might seem that way, and I personally would conclude, “It doesn’t help,” but I fear that the more house prices rise, and the more immigration spirals, a large percentage of the population will cast “blame” on new Canadians.
Here’s another opinion piece in the Globe:
“Canada’s Economy Is Stuck In A Rut. High Immigration Isn’t The Cause – Or The Answer”
The Globe & Mail
July 24th, 2023
The article surmises that plans to use the various immigration streams to raise GDP per capita are being undermined by too heavy a focus on filling low-wage, low-skill jobs.
The author, Tony Keller, followed up with this piece the following week:
“It’s Time For Canada To Take Its Foot Off The Immigration Gas Pedal”
The Globe & Mail
July 27th, 2023
From the article:
The Liberals have a habit of crafting marketing strategies before policies, and then having policies become hostage to the talking points. Immigration is such a case. We’re about to find out whether the Liberals can make a course correction, or whether they’ll double down on the polarizing talking points, attacking suggestions for reform as so much xenophobia.
The Liberals have raised Canada’s immigration targets, year after year, while also making it ever easier for businesses to recruit low-wage, not-so-temporary temporary foreign workers, and schools to enroll hundreds of thousands of overseas students – many of whom seek student visas in part for the chance to become low-wage, not-so-temporary temporary foreign workers.
One of the negative consequences is that the national housing squeeze has been made worse, with a big jump in postpandemic arrivals pushing high prices higher and low vacancy rates lower. It’s not political. It’s just arithmetic.
The Liberals could fix things – not by stopping immigration but by scaling it back, and making it more targeted to highly skilled economic immigrants. The latter is supposed to be the core mission of our immigration system. Returning to that common-sense approach would benefit Canadians and the economy.
But is immigration the number-one cause of the increase in housing prices?
Or is it simply a case of “it’s not going to make it any better?”
Because there’s a big difference between being the cause of the housing crisis and being something that exacerbates an existing issue.
Here’s a report from the good folks at TD Economics which explains that continued levels of record immigration could actually DOUBLE the gap in Canada’s housing supply:
“Balancing Canada’s Pop In Population”
TD Economics
July 26th, 2023
This chart speaks volumes:
I would suggest that unless we overlay a second line that represents “housing completions,” and that line traces the green line exactly, then we’re going to have a problem moving forward.
Meanwhile, we’re seeing headlines like this:
“More Newcomers Needed To Stem Construction Labour Shortage And Build More Housing, RBC Says”
Toronto Star
August 2nd, 2023
Does this contradict everything being said about lowering immigration targets?
No. Not at all.
And this is exactly the point.
I don’t know that there’s anybody in the country that believes we need a 0.00% immigration target, but rather it’s the process of accepting immigrants and non-permanent residents that’s important, as well as who they are, and the skills they possess.
Circling back to Tony Keller’s article, consider just how many low-wage, low-skill, “not-so-temporary” temporary foreign workers the country brings in, not to mention all the foreign students who schools drool over because foreign students pay multiples of what domestic students would pay.
The country desperately needs newcomers who are skilled in trades and can work in construction, not to mention doctors…
So while a headline like the one above, suggesting “more newcomers needed” might seem to contradict a headline that reads, “Canada needs to take its foot off the immigration gas pedal,” it doesn’t. Not if you understand the immigration process and how it works, or more importantly, how it’s supposed to work.
I fear that “immigration” is going to be the new housing boogeyman.
Once upon a time, real estate agents were to blame for the housing crisis. This new form of misrepresentation called “staging” was called out, as well as “offer nights” and “bully offers,” not to mention blind bidding.
Remember when foreign buyers were the culprit? How much time did we spend on that? How much time are we still spending on that, considering this became the boogeyman somewhere around 2015, and then in 2022, we rolled out a two-year ban on foreign buyers.
What about investors? Aren’t they to blame for buying up all our houses and condos and having the audacity to commoditize something that has been a commodity for a century?
And now, it’s immigrants.
I can’t imagine how much fuel this will give to the extremists.
Immigration is likely exacerbating the housing crisis or is most certainly going to in the next few years, but it’s not the cause of the housing crisis, and I hope people recognize this.
There are many, many causes, and this isn’t something that happened overnight. I’ve been talking about supply issues on TRB for a decade, and my issues with the absurdly negative effect that municipalities have on housing supply go back even further.
I also don’t think, and I don’t like defending the man, that Justin Trudeau isn’t personally responsible for the current housing crisis.
His policies have made it worse but he didn’t start this. He didn’t cause it.
To blame Justin Trudeau simply gives us an enemy for today, but it does nothing to solve the problem tomorrow.
Mr. Trudeau will be gone by the next election, either as his party is defeated, or he is replaced within his own party. But without focusing on the real causes of the housing crisis and real solutions, it’s simply going to be “next man up” and the country will fall further and further behind…
Epilogue:
I wrote this post last week, trying to get ahead for the next couple of weeks of summer.
Wouldn’t you know it, this article appeared over the long weekend:
“Canada Has No Plans To Decrease Immigration Amid Housing Criticism, New Minister Says”
Financial Post
August 4th, 2023
Oh, now this one too:
“Amid Canada’s Housing Crisis, Immigration Needs To Be Slower, More Focused”
The Globe & Mail
August 9th, 2023
And don’t forget Mr. Rosenberg:
“Immigration Could Be Good For Housing Affordability In The Long Run”
The Financial Post
August 9th, 2023
I’m really starting to wish I had posted this blog last week so I could have looked like I got out ahead of all this! 🙂
Appraiser
at 6:47 am
Let me be brief. Yes – immigration is the new housing affordability boogeyman.
There are compelling reasons that “Canada Has No Plans To Decrease Immigration Amid Housing Criticism, New Minister Says”; which unfortunately the article does not delve in to.
To wit: “In the midst of high job vacancies and historically low unemployment, Canada faces record retirements from an aging labour force: number of seniors aged 65 and older grows six times faster than children 0-14.” https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220427/dq220427a-eng.htm
Also: Canada has an aging population and an increasing annual death rate (even prior to Covid-19). https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1310039201
Also: Current job vacancies in Canada are over 780,000. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410032501
nobody
at 8:55 am
A huge problem, noted by Ivey Professor Mike Moffat (one of the architects behind the Trudeau project and a member of their thinktank/activist group Canada2020), is that the Feds have a headline permanent immigration target and then all the “temporary” immigrants like students don’t get counted. Which is defensible if people on temporary visas actually leave. In general students don’t leave, especially those who are part of the massive new amount of international students at colleges.
These students are being exploited 3 or 4 times over. First treated as a cash cow by colleges, charging very high tuition for 4th tier programs. Colleges have opened satellite campuses in Toronto so you are seeing people enrolling at Northern College (what?) and Lambton College (pride of Sarnia) at campuses in Toronto, Scarborough, and Mississauga. Then many of these are actually run by private colleges (so even less credible than Northern College). Students are being thrown into crazy housing markets without student residences either in small markets like London or Sarnia or in the total disaster that is GTA rental market. Then the 4th exploitation is by the Feds who are seeing these kids as low cost workers rather than high value educated workforce they think they’re coming to be (and paying so very very much for, especially given where they’re coming from).
So end student visas for everything but the best universities in the country. Require student visas be attached to a guaranteed university residence place for the entire length of the program – and that such a residence be fully open from the date they land until the date they fly out, no malevolent games like closing over holidays or requiring students move out within 24h of their last exam.
Then count students against the headline immigration target. If target is 500k and there are 40k students, then target is 460k. If target is 200k and 20k students then there are only 180k other visas available.
Justin is A cause of the housing crisis. His smarmy virtue signalling while exacerbating the actual causes of problems mirrors the approach of so many other politicians, activists, and members of the public. See the “all are welcome” signs in front of houses of NIMBYs opposed to new development. He has a housing minister then says it’s not his problem – so er why have a minister? Budgets balance themselves. He doesn’t much care about interest rates… Etc etc
Marina
at 9:05 am
A few things.
1. Is there anyone who really thinks there is anything JT can do to get reelected at this point? Our federal elections are cyclical and we are due for Cons to take over. Don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty far left, but it’s starting to seem pretty inevitable at this point.
2. Looking to identify a single source for the housing crisis is a fool’s errand. It IS immigration, and it IS investors, AND how we run our real estate market AND our culture of ownership AND municipalities, and so many other things. You can’t just push one button and expect everything to resolve magically.
3. It absolutely is federal responsibility to provide affordable housing, in this case in two ways. First, you can’t just dump 500k people and say you have no responsibility for housing them. It’s like dumping refugees in Toronto and providing no funding to deal with them. That’s how people end up sleeping on the street. Second, it is your responsibility if that’s the platform you ran on. It is certainly not the government’s job to provide free coffee every day, but if someone is elected on that platform, it suddenly becomes their job.
4. 100% agree we need to get better at targeted immigration, and that includes foreign students.
Nick
at 10:47 am
Just wanted to applaud your point #2. Everyone is talking like there is some single thing that is going to make this all go away. Maybe 10 years ago we could have been ahead of it but now we are completely behind and only falling further and unless we take all of those things into consideration we will never even tread water.
JL
at 2:03 pm
Agree as well. I remember a few years back the dynamic in these discussions was whether to stabilize prices by addressing supply or demand, with very few actually noting that there’s nothing stopping anyone from doing both. There are indeed many factors at play here; if you address one or few you only make a dent. If you address most or all then you may actually get somewhere.
Vancouver Keith
at 3:06 am
JT won’t run in the next election. It was doubtful before the end of his marriage, after three wins and with children old enough to feel the pain of being the children of a major politician in the online age. It will be the old strategy of a leadership campaign close to the election call, a fresh face and attendant coverage on to the campaign trail. JT has many options other than politics for a career, and he won’t run in a losing cause.
Poilievre has a tougher battle to become Prime Minister than many seem to think. The right wing is more fractured than at any point in history, and while the electorate has moved to the left in this century Poilievre is out of step with the center. If he moves too far to the right, he alienates mainstream Canadians to the point of unelectability. A lot of Canadians are calling for a return of the Progressive Conservative style of politics – socially progressive with strong fiscal and economic policies. Pandering to the trucker convoy and promoting cryptocurrency won’t cut it.
The Conservatives should have given O’Toole and his pragmatic and very sellable campaign policies a second chance. He got out politicked last time, but he would have learned and grown stronger. The Liberals are the most successful federal political party because they are masters of the game, and underestimating them has been a losing hand.
Derek
at 4:21 pm
Few PMs have ever resigned while still in power as PM (Chretian did), as opposed to resigning after losing the election. It would probably be necessary for the Liberal Party to identify a clear successor and behind the scenes, have the votes to force JT out in an upcoming leadership vote. That is, he would probably need to know he will be removed as leader if he refuses to resign. Things change, but a barrier to that outcome has been the perceived lack of any replacement who brings sufficient net pros (votes and money) to outweigh JT’s net cons. I am hopeful that JT wants to go, despite most PMs never voluntarily going while in power, and that the spending more time with his children will provide a way for him to convince himself he can leave without fear of some other negative perception of the reason for leaving.
Jimbo
at 9:35 am
I think a policy that targets 500k and admits 1.2m explains how the Liberals treat and run everything…….
I think students do play a part in how the rental market has increased in value in some areas. I wouldn’t include Toronto as one of those areas.
There is also a huge difference in a kid coming here for those private colleges associated with other campuses vs the ones that attend at the U15 type of schools. The latter generally have more than enough money to survive here without needing student residences, and will most likely try for the post graduate work permit. Every U15 university needs to invest in more housing if they are going to attract international students, but I don’t think the majority are suffering because of a lack of accommodation on campus…….
As for the kids coming to Lambton college in Mississauga, I believe they are being exploited and it is a known issue. I just hope they do something about this before it translates to more suicides……..
Anwar
at 10:38 am
You’re letting JT off east here. The housing situation isn’t entirely his fault but the rhetoric is irresponsible. He’s going to push immigration to the brink but then sit back and blame the municipalities of not building fast enough. Your pal John Pasalis was spot on here. Trudeau is like a parent making a mess and then blaming his kids for sitting in it.
Bryan
at 11:30 am
I think the trouble, as ever, is that it seems we (we being the general public) don’t have the capacity or desire to evaluate the problem holistically.
The fundamental reality in this country is that there is a massive amount of economic potential and not enough people to fulfill it. On top of that, a pair of people in Canada has, on average, 1.4 children. So in order to reach its economic potential (which I think we all want), a ton of people need to immigrate here. We can argue about how many of them there should be each year, what type of people they should be and all of that stuff…. but it seems the general consensus is that ideally, working age people would immigrate at the same rate as we have needs in the economy that can’t be filled by the people who are already here (determined by economic policy). There are huge issues all over the immigration system (international student exploitation jumps to mind), but I think the number of people coming over in the last decade or two seems to be generally in line with the number of people the country needs (as evidenced by steady unemployment and economic growth). That number, however, has been more than the number of homes created by a whole bunch for a long time… so the price of housing has gone up. That means investors jump into the market, and bad realtors do too in order to make a quick buck, exacerbating the issue.
Is it investors? agents? bad economic policy? Too much economic growth? Too much immigration too fast? Not enough housing being built? Governments blaming each other? entitlement? Trudeau? Likely yes to all in part… but if anyone is ever going to accomplish anything for “housing affordability” all of these will need to be tackled holistically rather than one at a time at the whim of whatever the public thinks is the current housing boogeyman.
JL
at 1:58 pm
I’ll just flag that per capita GDP and labor productivity has been falling, so not sure “people coming = amount needed” is entirely accurate. At least at some level, and especially in recent years, we seem to be fueling the economy by induced demand from population growth.
Bryan
at 12:46 pm
Not really sure how you figure that one.
For GDP per capita, it is true that there was a pretty significant correction in 2015 and then a smaller (and more understandable) one during COVID in 2020, but otherwise we have been trending up pretty significantly for the last 20 years. GDP per capita was ~$55k for 2022. If we take the standard 1, 3, 5, 10 and 20 years prior for comparison, GDP per capita has risen by 5%, 18.5%, 21.8%, 4.5%, and 94.23% respectively. Tough sell to say that this has been falling. Tougher sell still to say that if it were falling it is because of immigration (which has accelerated in more recent years where we have returned to GDP per capita growth).
As for labour productivity, I really don’t know what to make of this. The graph is bonkers. We were sort of cruising along in the 100-110 range going up and down with a gentle upward slope overall from 2010 to 2020…. then in 2020 we had the biggest and fastest increase in history, shooting up to 130 in a month before plummeting over the course of 2020 and 2021 to end up back between 105 and 110 where it remains now. Not sure what the heck that was about, but if you remove the very obvious outlier from COVID, productivity is trending right along with where it has been since 2010 (and far far far higher than it ever was before that). So while you are correct that labour productivity has decreased in the last couple years, I think it is far more likely that this is a base effect (and/or working from home effect? economic hopelessness effect?) than an immigration fueled decline.
JL
at 1:45 pm
I’ll concede “flat” rather than “falling” is more appropriate for GDP per capita, especially over the last 15 years. Canada had about ~$52K in 2011, and is at ~$55K now. Compare to US going from $50K to $76K in the same period. It will be interesting to see where the trend heads over the next few years, but relative to other countries Canada has been slipping on a GDP per capita basis over the last few decades. Also agree it wont be entirely a population growth issue (which is where low labour productivity comes in), but population growth can exacerbate things if implemented at an accelerated pace.
https://economics.td.com/ca-falling-behind-standard-of-living-curve
Bryan
at 5:00 pm
This is actually a very interesting report. Thanks for sharing. The key quote in terms of this discussion is this one though…..”There may be a tendency to pin the blame for Canada’s sagging per-capita showing on the country’s rapidly-growing population base given that it has inflated the denominator of the calculation. However, at the crux of the problem is insufficient growth in the numerator, which in turn is tied to longstanding productivity issues.”
It goes on to talk about large underinvestment in workers, and how we lag in R&D spending compared to other nations, naming both as potential causes for a lack of productivity.
Very interesting stuff (perhaps reflecting poorly on the government)…. but I do not see anything in here to refute the idea that immigration is faster than demanded by the economy.
Derek
at 12:45 pm
I expect that when Mr. Poilievre become PM, housing affordability will be solved in short order. His party’s policies on housing affordability, housing supply, immigration, monetary policy, and foreign buyers will be vastly different and housing issues will disappear. All the underhoused, the renters, owners, investors, builders, developers, bankers, mortgagers, and housing industry dependents shall rejoice when those PC solutions are unleashed.
Jenn
at 1:07 pm
Not a hint of sarcasm, but this must be sarcastic?
Derek
at 5:08 pm
Not at all. For example, under a PC government, led by PM Poilievre, you can expect the federal government to transfer federal tax dollars directly to municipalities to build affordable housing geared to income. The Liberals, for no supportable reason, have failed in their obligation to do this. However, it is a sacred PC tenet to do so. Developers, under a PC government, led by PM Poilievre, will, in fact, build these units wholesale, at cost, without regard to profit. This is but one of the bullet points in the huge portfolio item of “Housing” that will immediately be solved by a PC government.
Secondly, it is well known that the Liberal government’s policy of outsized immigration numbers is a calculated maneuver designed to keep them in power. 1 Million new Liberal voters per year!!! The incidental consequences including labour resources for corporate interests and support for elevated real estate prices / demand (as two examples) are of course anathema to all governments except the Liberal Party. There is no grey area here. There is no concerted effort by the current government to balance many macro and micro consequences of the Liberal immigration policy. It is calculated to get new voters. A PC government is certain to come out of the gates strong and hard, an axe in lieu of a scalpel, and especially without regard to corporate interests and property values, two known Liberal interest groups.
Edwin
at 4:39 pm
When have the Conservatives ever done anything positive for low-income earners beyond lowering overall tax rates (which arguably hurts the social services they use)?
Vancouver Keith
at 8:19 pm
The Conservatives haven’t brought in a single major social program that I heard of. Not CPP, OAS, socialized medicine, EI, or dental care. Their tax cuts usually provide more benefit to higher income earners than lower income earners. The idea that they will finance low income housing in a major way is seriously at odds with their history, and with balancing the budget and tax cuts first on the agenda, I doubt they could find the money. If they gain power, they will face serious fiscal issues – their ideology of smaller government will certainly preclude a program of affordable housing.
Derek
at 11:43 pm
The PC silver bullet will be the end of the scourge of gatekeepers. This word is not only catchy, it both broadly and precisely defines the error of the current government’s ways. It does not even require explanation. One just needs to utter it and all nod with understanding. The war on gatekeepers led by the despectacled PM Poilievre will be glorious for all.
Josh Friesen
at 5:01 pm
Paid troll.
Appraiser
at 5:32 am
There are compelling reasons why the government needs to maintain high immigration levels.
Due to an aging population Canada’s death rate and retirement rate are accelerating.
“In the midst of high job vacancies and historically low unemployment, Canada faces record retirements from an aging labour force: number of seniors aged 65 and older grows six times faster than children 0-14.” https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220427/dq220427a-eng.htm
Also: There are more than 780,00 job vacancies in Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410032501
JL
at 8:01 am
The demographic issue is something most if not all developed countries will face, and while many are looking at immigration as a solution, none are doing so at this level or pace. I can see how importing labor is a convenient way for governments to smooth the economic impacts, but it can’t be the only long term solution, and it shouldn’t be done in policy isolation ignoring all else. If that’s how it does get implemented, at a certain point the cure will cause more issues than it solves.
Appraiser
at 6:04 am
From the Statscan article:
“More than 1 in 5 (21.8%) persons of working age are aged 55 to 64. This is an all-time high in the history of Canadian censuses and one of the factors behind the labour shortages facing some industries across the country.”
“Population aging is not new, but other changes to the age structure are more recent, such as a decrease in the number of very young children due to declining fertility since 2016.”
cyber
at 9:25 am
Look up “StatCan report casts clouds on claims of a widespread labour shortage in Canada” article – basically, there’s two unemployed people with Bachelors degree per opening that requires one. So the ‘good’ jobs – the type that most educated and skilled immigrants coming in using the points system are gunning for – are not really experiencing an employee shortage at all. (https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/statcan-report-casts-clouds-on-claims-of-a-widespread-labour-shortage-in-canada-1.6415810)
There’s only truly been a shortage of jobs requiring high school education or less, and even that only starting in 3rd quarter of 2021 (i.e. during COVID when many people in service industry up-skilled and got better jobs, or retired). The fact that wages haven’t really gone up even in this job category – despite the high and growing vacancy number – suggests employers are just tolerating a certain level of vacancies and turnover in order to keep the costs down.
TL;DR: employers don’t need immigration to fill jobs – they need it to keep wage costs down and growing much slower than cost of living (i.e. they need workers willing to work for them at a comparably lower standard of living over time). It’s the government that needs immigration to juice GDP through higher aggregate demand, as they’re too incompetent to fix the persistent (lack of) productivity growth issue that’s putting us on pace to be a slowest-growing economy in G20 over the coming decades.
ParkhurstBessborough
at 9:43 am
Great blog post. Mainstream publications can’t write honestly about this topic, which is a shame.
Ace Goodheart
at 8:04 pm
Lots of condos for sale in Toronto that can’t find buyers.
I bought a piece of land the size of a small town for 80K a few years back. Could maybe get 90K for it now. No roads to it, but lots of paths. The hike in takes the better part of a day. Beautiful when you get there.
You can buy a house in Northern Ontario for under 100K. No one wants them.
Houses in Mantioba cost less than many parking spots in Toronto. I don’t see lines of people waiting outside of the open houses.
You can rent a one bedroom apt in north bay for $500.00 per month. You will be the only rental application.
Why are people surprised that houses in Canada’s largest city cost a lot? Is anyone complaining about the “housing crisis” in New York because a Brownstone costs 30 mil US?
If every immigrant wants to live in Toronto’s prime neighbourhoods, can they complain about the prices?
What about the GTA? You can buy a condo for under 300k, but you won’t like the neighbourhood.
There is no housing crisis.
There is a group of young people who feel the world owes them a living. That any problem they face, resulting from their own decision making, is someone else’s fault.
That if they decided to buy a house with over a million in financing, on the assumption that interest rates would never rise, then they should be bailed out with other people’s taxes, or borrowed money added to the Federal debt, if interest rates do what they always do, and eventually go up.
These entitled young folks are smart, well connected and they have the ear of the media tuned into their complaints.
Do you hear from the low income black mother of three about her roach infested Jane and finch apartment?
Or do we hear about the entitled young couple who work in six figure jobs, borrowed large front the bank of Mom and Dad, and despite their privileged upbringings and the fact they have had everything handed to them since they were infants, still managed to get themselves into debt trouble? By purchasing a house they could never afford with debt they never should have taken on?
Who makes front page of the media?
There is no housing crisis
There is a crisis of entitlement.
The “me” Generation is growing up.
Josh Hryniak
at 9:37 pm
Sure grandpa, its all the woke media and woke kids and woke wokesters woking.
Let’s get your meds into you and get you back to bed, old timer.
Ace Goodheart
at 10:00 am
If you want a house, there are plenty available.
You just can’t live in a prime Toronto neighbourhood, unless you have money.
So folks without money have to start out somewhere else.
I can understand how terrible this must be for entitled youngsters promised the world by parents, teachers and socialist governments.
The woke need to wake up. Hard work gets you stuff, not whining complaining and socialism.
Ace Goodheart
at 2:44 pm
I spent 37 years working my way up to the house I have in Toronto. I owned houses all over Ontario. I fixed them myself. I worked at real jobs where you had to be there by 7am and you didn’t leave until the sun went down.
I was able to pay cash for a big four bedroom house in the Junction. 1.8 mil all cash.
Now have young people saying they are entitled to my house. They’ve worked a year or two (or pretended to work somewhere but never actually been there – ” work from home”).
They feel that they are owed a house. They deserve it. Want to push old folks out of their hard earned places.
Good luck to you. Socialism doesn’t work and you’ll all end up with nothing.
Young lazy and entitled.
Time to grow up.
David Fleming
at 9:30 pm
@ Ace
I’m with you 100% on this one.
But I’m 42-years-old so I’m going to be the target of the “Okay, Boomer” retort as well, even though it’s exceptionally inaccurate…
cyber
at 9:41 am
Agreed that there is lots of entitlement, no one is ‘owed’ a detached in High Park as a birthright. There’s no such articles in Paris or New York because detached houses in the core (heck, even 900 SF apartments in the core) are not even for the well-paid but for the wealthy.
That being said, people who grew up here are frustrated by working harder than their parents and being able to afford way less than what they grew up with. For example, I bought a house from a nice retired couple where man was a general construction worker and woman was a homemaker. Today, same type of couple would need to also have the wife working full time, just so that together they can afford to rent the basement apartment in the same exact house at market rate.
If you worked the same “real jobs, 7am until sundown” TODAY, in the same way you did before, how much cash exactly would you be able to save and what exactly could that get you TODAY? At least some level of empathy should be in order for people who are facing today’s Toronto housing market where average home is 10x the income (vs 2.5x in ~1980).