Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Liberals And Trudeau - Performance Review!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • People of colour under pressure to accept Trudeau's apology, says activist

    https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/people-of-colour-under-pressure-to-accept-trudeau-s-apology-says-activist-1.5291967



    "Hurry up and get over it! We need those nice 'banks of ethnic votes' in time for Oct 21! You better remember how good we've been for you, or you will get those racist conservatives in power!"

    Comment


    • Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by kcantor View Post
        Originally posted by Replacement View Post
        Originally posted by kcantor View Post
        Originally posted by Replacement View Post
        ^^Agreed with everything you said there PRT. One of the several reasons I try to reduce footprint and consumeristic reliance.

        The whole world order is set to ensure haves and enslave have nots. Within countries excessive stratification of income and resource also creates other forms of servitude if not serfdom.

        Really any homebuyer now starting from scratch that isn't rich to begin with is a serf. 25, 30, 40yr amortizations out of sticker price necessity for vastly overpriced dwellings.

        We're talking the majority of adult life spans paying off those granite counters and shiny digs. Just for somewhere to live.

        Consumerism should be best seen as a ball and chain, for all, to differing and variable degrees.

        An economic system less reliant on consumer expansion has to occur. As long as it doesn't everybody and the planet suffers and no matter how much money no one gets out.
        emphasis added...

        bull tweety if you'll pardon my french.

        if you think 25, 30, 40 year (there are no legal 40's that i'm aware of) amortizations make one a serf, try looking at 8 or 12 or 16 or 20 percent first mortgage interest rates.

        there's always an option. it's called renting.
        Yeah, renting at 3 times as much as that which would be paid here just 30-40yrs ago. Perhaps oddly median wages have not grown as much and people are now required to pay much more of a proportion of their income towards housing than was formerly required.

        Servitude IS of course increasing as economic stratification becomes more pronounced and the filthy rich frolic while the ranks of the working poor, and even working homeless increase.

        Many people, increasingly, can't afford to rent either , making your comment somewhat deplorable in the "let them eat cake" sense.
        really? that's what i said?

        we owned and rented a house in goldbar when we had to relocate elsewhere in 1984.

        it rented for 1,200 per month. similar homes today are listed at asking rates of 1,500 - 1,900/month.

        at 1,800, that's a grand total of 50% more over a 35 year period or 1.165% per annum.

        inflation over that same period of time was 117.26% or 2.24% per annum. at that rate, that home would rent for 2,606 today.

        which means that same home is effectively being rented today for less than it rented for in 1984. not so attractive for the landlord, not so deplorable for the renter after all.
        Well that example works if wages have also gone up by 1 to 2%, but for people especially on the lower end that is not always the case. Also, I recall the 1980's and particularly in the early 80's I don't think rent or housing was that affordable in Edmonton. As the years went on and the boom turned to bust that changed. I think it may have bottomed out in the mid 90's or so. In addition, that house is now 35 years older, so you may not be exactly comparing the same thing unless that house has been very well maintained.

        Comment


        • Trudeau has shown himself to be a lying, misogynistic, culture appropriating, violent racist. The perfect leader for the Liberals.

          Comment


          • So how is this all going to get tied in with Liberal Party performance? Tax rate changes, higher MTRs for high income, estate taxes, protectionism, tearing up free trade agreements, subsidies, taxes on automation, ...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
              Originally posted by kcantor View Post
              Originally posted by Replacement View Post
              Originally posted by kcantor View Post
              Originally posted by Replacement View Post
              ^^Agreed with everything you said there PRT. One of the several reasons I try to reduce footprint and consumeristic reliance.

              The whole world order is set to ensure haves and enslave have nots. Within countries excessive stratification of income and resource also creates other forms of servitude if not serfdom.

              Really any homebuyer now starting from scratch that isn't rich to begin with is a serf. 25, 30, 40yr amortizations out of sticker price necessity for vastly overpriced dwellings.

              We're talking the majority of adult life spans paying off those granite counters and shiny digs. Just for somewhere to live.

              Consumerism should be best seen as a ball and chain, for all, to differing and variable degrees.

              An economic system less reliant on consumer expansion has to occur. As long as it doesn't everybody and the planet suffers and no matter how much money no one gets out.
              emphasis added...

              bull tweety if you'll pardon my french.

              if you think 25, 30, 40 year (there are no legal 40's that i'm aware of) amortizations make one a serf, try looking at 8 or 12 or 16 or 20 percent first mortgage interest rates.

              there's always an option. it's called renting.
              Yeah, renting at 3 times as much as that which would be paid here just 30-40yrs ago. Perhaps oddly median wages have not grown as much and people are now required to pay much more of a proportion of their income towards housing than was formerly required.

              Servitude IS of course increasing as economic stratification becomes more pronounced and the filthy rich frolic while the ranks of the working poor, and even working homeless increase.

              Many people, increasingly, can't afford to rent either , making your comment somewhat deplorable in the "let them eat cake" sense.
              really? that's what i said?

              we owned and rented a house in goldbar when we had to relocate elsewhere in 1984.

              it rented for 1,200 per month. similar homes today are listed at asking rates of 1,500 - 1,900/month.

              at 1,800, that's a grand total of 50% more over a 35 year period or 1.165% per annum.

              inflation over that same period of time was 117.26% or 2.24% per annum. at that rate, that home would rent for 2,606 today.

              which means that same home is effectively being rented today for less than it rented for in 1984. not so attractive for the landlord, not so deplorable for the renter after all.
              Specious example. People that have to rent, they usually rent apartments, and can't afford to rent houses and have to limit their costs and expectations.

              A two bedroom rental in Edmonton in late 80s was still around 400bucks. The same today is more like 1300. Further utility costs in total back then were around 100bucks if that(including free cable or satellite). Now the average renter is saddled with hundreds of bucks in utilities not even including cable.. you really want to compare overall costs?

              I'll add that in the 80's or 90's that humble 2 bedroom was commonly found. now due to gentrification, buyer influx, renoviction, reconversion to these being sold instead of rented, and shortage of supply the same 2 bedroom we just walked into anywhere is wait listed and rare now and with prospective renters having to face more detailed checks than were ever required before.

              While we were living in a brand new apartment in a great area with a huge deck in 80's, the lesser priced 2 bedrooms found now would be slum tenements that are old, infested, and with ample problems. Usually located in the worst areas of the city.


              The difficulty, and you know this is that affordable housing was extremely common in the 80's and its rare now. Developers and owners are better off, not so much the renters trying desperately to find anything approximating affordable housing.

              https://globalnews.ca/news/5038718/i...g-report-says/

              https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/j...-worse-in-2019

              Thus renting is not necessarily "always an option". Your throwaway statement notwithstanding.
              okay... i will move past my own specious example for you.

              the average cost of a 2 bedroom apartment in edmonton in 1982 according to the city of edmonton (cmhc data only goes back to 1992 and i can't find a 1984 number at the moment) was 496.

              the average cost of a 2 bedroom apartment in edmonton in 2019 according to cmhc is 1,306.

              that's an average annual increase of 2.65%.

              the average rate of inflation over that 2 year longer period is 2.46%. ( https://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/related/inflation-calculator/ ).

              not quite as attractive a cake for a renter but no real windfall for a landlord either.

              please note as well that my specious example was for the same home (or the same size of home in the same neighborhood) in 1984 and in 2019 so "like for like" assuming both homes are in the same condition albeit one is now older. the rents reported both by the city and by cmhc would be average rents across all units new and old, not necessarily like for like.

              again, it's difficult to match data sets but, for perspective, the minimum wage in 1982 was 3.80. today's 15.00 represents an average annual increase of 3.68%

              the minimum wage in 1988 was raised to 4.50. today's 15.00 represents an average annual increase of 3.92%. while these "straddle" the 1984 year we started with, the progression is pretty consistent and outpaces the rise in rents.

              edmonton's median household income in 1984 was 30,000 and it was 85,000 in 2016 (the latest number i have ready access to). if unchanged in the last 3 years and that 85,000 is extended to 2019, that's an average annual increase of 3.3% and also outpaces the rise in rents.

              apartment vacancies in 2019 are 5.3% which compares to 11.4% in 1984 which saw the peak of murb construction enter the market. vacancies in 1977 were less than 1% so most of the increase was the result of new inventory being brought on stream (much like what is taking place today with the resurgence in construction of purpose built rental on top of those strata units which end up on the rental market and not owner-occupied).

              i trust this is less specious enough information for you...

              "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
                Ahhhhhh, that was his persona for many, many years.

                Are you saying that he had no history of posing for selfies, hugs supporters in Canada's most ethnically diverse city? That he also had the most diverse cabinet with a balance of women as well, that Canada had ever seen before.
                Optics on this are a beotch though, aren't they?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Stoneman View Post
                  Originally posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
                  Ahhhhhh, that was his persona for many, many years.

                  Are you saying that he had no history of posing for selfies, hugs supporters in Canada's most ethnically diverse city? That he also had the most diverse cabinet with a balance of women as well, that Canada had ever seen before.
                  Optics on this are a beotch though, aren't they?
                  no they're not... they're entirely consistent in that with justin trudeau it's always about the image and the selfie. even with that most diverse cabinet with a balance of women as well, it was all in how it made him look, not in how it empowered them. and you don't need to take my word for that, you can start by just asking jody wilson-raybould and jane philpott whether it was about them or about him.

                  oh, wait... maybe that is a beotch for his self-image - and how we perceive him - after all.
                  "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                  Comment


                  • I primarily reacted Ken, to your specific point, that "renting is always an option". That is a fictional view. In current times and with a crisis in affordable rentals going, in Edmonton, and with nearly 5K waitlisted currently for Edmonton Capital housing, you picked a bad time to make that kind of general comment, which were your words. Myself I think its not overly kind to use that kind of wording in the current perspective of the Edmonton market. Surely, in retrospect, you agree.

                    You are a thoughtful knowledgeable poster and thus you are aware of this crisis in affordable rental housing;


                    https://globalnews.ca/news/2584480/d...nce-fall-2014/


                    "The wait list for the group – which provides social and affordable housing in the Edmonton area – now sits at 4,300.
                    To compare, it was just 1,200 in the fall of 2014.
                    Greg Dewling, Capital Region Housing Corporation CEO, said this is the biggest spike the group has ever seen."

                    As you acknowledge the apples to oranges comparisons in data is not perfect. Many more two parents working homes exist now whereas in 1982 the probability of one bread winner was much more pronounced, thus why the household income figure is somewhat misleading. The actual individual wages have not gone up as much as that. So that with both parents in working poor families the daycare expenses are also higher.


                    I put less stock in average inflation stats as well because those are also hard to compare as at different times indexes include, chose not to include different things. If the scales were always consistent and longitudinally took MORE cost factors of living into account they would be perhaps more valuable.

                    Some might say the cost of housing is comparable and has kept in line with the Cost of living index. Another look is that the cost of living, combined with the rampant cost of housing creates a double whammy effect and with the poor getting hit in the head in every direction. Its convenient for economists to allow one to explain the other, but they are often corollary impacts that just mean that similar standard of living costs a lot more now. For instance housing/utilities.

                    One of the shocking things is that Edmonton itself currently features 3 different wards that are the worst in the entire province for proportional cost of rent/utilities.

                    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...rovince-report

                    "Edmonton is home to the only three federal ridings in Alberta where 40 per cent or more of residents spend upwards of 30 per cent of their income on rent and utilities, according to a new report."

                    The mayor himself describes this as a crisis and that the market has simply not supplied low cost housing. Theres not only not been much in the way of those builds, but much more of the pre-existing stock of affordable housing has disappeared. The shocking thing is that Edmonton has expanded immensely in every different direction, population has increased drastically and record housing units have been build in recent decades. Just not a fair proportion of affordable housing.

                    I've never seen such a rental disaster in Edmonton since around 1971, and at which point Edmonton had been booming but with new housing starts not matching that yet.
                    Last edited by Replacement; 23-09-2019, 05:27 PM.
                    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                      Originally posted by Stoneman View Post
                      Originally posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
                      Ahhhhhh, that was his persona for many, many years.

                      Are you saying that he had no history of posing for selfies, hugs supporters in Canada's most ethnically diverse city? That he also had the most diverse cabinet with a balance of women as well, that Canada had ever seen before.
                      Optics on this are a beotch though, aren't they?
                      no they're not... they're entirely consistent in that with justin trudeau it's always about the image and the selfie. even with that most diverse cabinet with a balance of women as well, it was all in how it made him look, not in how it empowered them. and you don't need to take my word for that, you can start by just asking jody wilson-raybould and jane philpott whether it was about them or about him.

                      oh, wait... maybe that is a beotch for his self-image - and how we perceive him - after all.
                      Not what I'm talking about. More referring to the timing of posing in a love-in with minorities. Doing it NOW a mere few days after this blew up.

                      Comment


                      • This is a bit different view on relative wage increases as well. Taking into account inflation wages haven't really gone up.

                        https://globalnews.ca/news/3531614/a...nada-stagnant/

                        As the article states this is despite Canadians now being much more educated and with far more post secondary qualification.

                        Cost of living (including all factors, not just the indexed factors) has gone up a whole lot, the proportion of income taken up strictly by housing/utilities has gone up, despite many more multiple earner homes.
                        Last edited by Replacement; 23-09-2019, 05:30 PM.
                        "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ralph60 View Post
                          Trudeau has shown himself to be a lying, misogynistic, culture appropriating, violent racist. The perfect leader for the Liberals.
                          Sounds like he is a shoe in for Trump's 2020 running mate... VP Trudeau
                          Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                          Comment


                          • Looks like Greens are also learning from Liberal fakery:

                            https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...-13aec37c53af/

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Snail View Post
                              Looks like Greens are also learning from Liberal fakery:

                              https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...-13aec37c53af/
                              Btw, metal straws pose safety risk for individuals with disabilities:

                              https://www.livescience.com/65925-me...raw-death.html

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                                ^^Agreed with everything you said there PRT. One of the several reasons I try to reduce footprint and consumeristic reliance.

                                The whole world order is set to ensure haves and enslave have nots. Within countries excessive stratification of income and resource also creates other forms of servitude if not serfdom.

                                Really any homebuyer now starting from scratch that isn't rich to begin with is a serf. 25, 30, 40yr amortizations out of sticker price necessity for vastly overpriced dwellings.

                                We're talking the majority of adult life spans paying off those granite counters and shiny digs. Just for somewhere to live.

                                Consumerism should be best seen as a ball and chain, for all, to differing and variable degrees.

                                An economic system less reliant on consumer expansion has to occur. As long as it doesn't everybody and the planet suffers and no matter how much money no one gets out.
                                Back to your beginning statements. The consumerism is still to a great degree a choice. While there are many expenses that are unavoidable, many consumers still embrace spending for things such as granite countertops. Even owning a home shouldn’t be seen as a necessary measure of one’s standard of living. Buying a home only if and when it makes sense should be a prime consideration and to do that, accessing the right mechanisms (financing etc) and building the capacity (down payments, knowledge of mortgages, knowledge of boom bust market effects etc) should be part of every plan.

                                We should also question whether it is the debt buildup that plays a significant role in setting people on a path to servitude and serfdom. Basic financial knowledge is lacking among most homebuyers taking on mortgages. Governments do a poor job of discouraging uninformed consumerism preferring the jobs now and then haphazardly dealing with the fallout later.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X