Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

[Brad Sallows]

.

Sounds great. What happens when the demand on building materials sky rockets ?

People who want to make money work to increase the supply of building materials, provided we still allow people to make profits by providing things other people want.

All profit-limiting schemes are essentially the equivalent of saying "don't bother" to people whose profits are being limited.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Sure, 350. So we're at 900+350.
1250.

And maintenance, I budget 5000 a year for potential repairs and property improvements (landscaping, etc).
420
So we're at 1670.

And profit, 20% say, 334 dollars a month.
This puts it right at 2000. That's actually more than a two to three bedroom goes for around Medicine Hat. A landlord would have to own 10 units of this type to make 50,000 a year.

You must be great landlord. Every landlord I've done work for wants the absolute quickest and cheapest work possible to the code. I've seen them leave rooms unpainted.

That's the cost of doing business ?

Perhaps being a landlord shouldnt be someone's primary income source.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Fine, let's include insurance and property tax into the monthly mortgage payment.

All costs have to be included, including risk factors (eg. delinquent tenants). Perhaps what you mean is the profit margin should be limited to 15% (ie. rent = all costs * 1.15) ?

 

[Halifax Tar]

And a limit of 15% of your mortgage would kill supply. Nobody would rent out anything. If I had a mortgage free property I wouldn’t be able to charge any rent. I would just refinance and take a larger mortgage over a longer period , increase my tax deductible interest payments and lower my principal and charge more. Which would actually raise rent no lower it.

I was a landlord for a few years. My rent charged was based on local market equivalents, (ie my competition) my costs and my desire to attract a suitable renter.

Was 1250 a month for a two bedroom condo garden style home with parking. No yard but a balcony. Comparables were 1300. I shaved off 50$ to compete. My mortgage was about 850, condo fees were 250$ (and went up every year). Other costs were insurance. All told my actual profit/income was about 100$ a month. Now I did get tax breaks on my costs. The 100$ « income » was set aside as incidental expenses (I had to get a new fridge at one point) repairs, etc.

In the three years I had a tenant I never raised the rent. She was good and I wanted to keep her.

Using your model I would be bleeding money and would be better off leaving it vacant and claim the loss (if I have no tenant I can claim that as a business loss) and save me the hassle of dealing with a tenant.

I posted originally where if there is not mortgage it remains at the last level payed.

 

[Halifax Tar]

All costs have to be included, including risk factors (eg. delinquent tenants). Perhaps what you mean is the profit margin should be limited to 15% (ie. rent = all costs * 1.15) ?

That's my intent.

 

[Remius]

I posted originally where if there is not mortgage it remains at the last level payed.

Again, that would fluctuate based on your mortgage year after year. Up and down when you go to renew. Basically you would take a loss every renewal unless you re-financed. Which would make no sense. And would be unpredictable to renters.

As someone said you would kill the rental market.

 

[Brad Sallows]

That's my intent.

You might be overshooting the mark, then. A quick search suggests to me that - depending on a lot of factors - profit margins from 5% to 20% are reasonable.

Might be best to just leave it to the people who have the local knowledge; governments tend to f*ck things up badly when they impose targets.

 

[brihard]

You must be great landlord. Every landlord I've done work for wants the absolute quickest and cheapest work possible to the code. I've seen them leave rooms unpainted.

That's the cost of doing business ?

Perhaps being a landlord shouldnt be someone's primary income source.

For most of us who own a second property it’s not. And many people live in residences that are owned as a second-and-only-other property by ‘small’ landlords. In our case our tenant is two older family members living on a fixed (disability) income, and they pay well below market. We basically break kind of even.

I posted originally where if there is not mortgage it remains at the last level payed.

And when a property is purchased in cash with there being no mortgage held? That’s our situation.

Of course we're not. That way companies can keep prices inflated. How do you plan to change that ? Should the Gov own the means of production? What about the near monopoly some regions like the maritimes have with Irving ?

My point is that won't create adorable housing.

That will still just drive up the prices.

You’re all over the place here. I’m not sure even you know what you’re advocating for. I certainly can’t make clear sense of it. You actually seem to be arguing against increasing housing supply? But I can’t square that with your apparent overall concern (that most of us share) with the price of housing.

 

[FJAG]

Here's a story I haven't seen on CBC news yet.

Moment furious heckler refuses to shake hands with Justin Trudeau

The video, which has now gone viral, shows a confident Trudeau waving at supporters who had lined up to meet him as he marches up to greet them with his security guards standing just yards away.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[TacticalTea]

Here's a story I haven't seen on CBC news yet.

Yep that's the one.

The video I was talking about a few comments back.

 

[Halifax Tar]

For most of us who own a second property it’s not. And many people live in residences that are owned as a second-and-only-other property by ‘small’ landlords. In our case our tenant is two older family members living on a fixed (disability) income, and they pay well below market. We basically break kind of even.



And when a property is purchased in cash with there being no mortgage held? That’s our situation.



You’re all over the place here. I’m not sure even you know what you’re advocating for. I certainly can’t make clear sense of it. You actually seem to be arguing against increasing housing supply? But I can’t square that with your apparent overall concern (that most of us share) with the price of housing.

As stated the aim is to keep landlords in control. And make rent prices reasonable and fair. When landlords are charging 2500$ for a apartment this year, that was 900$ 2 years ago something is wrong.

Landlords should be able to make money. But the big money should be when you sell the property, not someones months rent.

I'm cool if my idea won't work. But something needs to be done.

 

[Remius]

As stated the aim is to keep landlords in control. And make rent prices reasonable and fair. When landlords are charging 2500$ for a apartment this year, that was 900$ 2 years ago something is wrong.

Landlords should be able to make money. But the big money should be when you sell the property, not someones months rent.

I'm cool if my idea won't work. But something needs to be done.

I get what you are trying to express.

But there are already plenty of rules that prevent that sort of rent hike on a tenant. I can’t just raise the rent like that on my tenant. This year, the max you can raise rent is 2.5%. There is rent control here as well as exceptions to rent control for particular circumstances.

In my personal example, I never raised the rent by the allowable amount. My tenant leaves and now I decide to catch up to the market rate. The rent for my place would have jumped from 1250 to 2000. So yes rent for one place that was going for 900 jumping to 2500 can happen and it is just the market adjusting.

This does not mean that landlords or tenants, I might add, don’t try and game the system. There are chronic squatters who do not pay their rent and it can take months and years in some cases to get rid of them at significant loss. Why? Because the tenant rights are heavily skewed in their favour to prevent abuse.

Renovictions is one way some landlords try and ditch long term tenants who got in at very low rates. My wife’s uncle is in that situation. His old landlord was an old lady that hadn’t raised the rent on a downtown Toronto unit for the last 20 years. She died, the place was bought by a group of doctors as an investment. They tried to evict him for renovations in order to raise the rent but I sent him some stuff from the landlord tenant act to help him out as it isn’t that easy to do. He’s still paying his rent at the same price (subject to annual increases) and the renos aren’t happening yet after 5 years of being put on notice.

That being said, that landlord likely has a case to apply for an increase with the board to increase the rent to fair market value.

The problem is that a lot of tenants (and landlords) don’t know their rights and just assume that they have to comply,

 

[Fabius]

As stated the aim is to keep landlords in control. And make rent prices reasonable and fair. When landlords are charging 2500$ for a apartment this year, that was 900$ 2 years ago something is wrong.

Landlords should be able to make money. But the big money should be when you sell the property, not someones months rent.

I'm cool if my idea won't work. But something needs to be done.

I don’t have answers but I fundamentally question much of the thinking on one side of this problem.

Why does something have to be done?

Does something have to be an active thing or can it be a passive thing. Active equaling rent control and passive equalling stopping wholesale immigration.

On what time line must our actions have what effect?

What is reasonable and fair? Reasonable for who, fair for who? Who gets to decide and determine that? Who do you trust with that, what body do you trust with making that determination?

We have got to where we are because of government actions why do we think more active government intervention will result in a positive outcome?

 

[Eaglelord17]

The issue rent control is creating is basically a caste system of those who got in before and those who didn’t. Lots of places in the country where people cannot afford to move again because their rent will go up substantially. This isn’t a good thing.

 

[lenaitch]

I think you're down playing it. The price of lumber alone is already crazy. And that's just one family of building materials.

Higher demand equals higher prices. That's beginner economics.

Here's one take that I tend to generally agree with.

moneyGenius

moneygenius.ca

Most of us remember seeing barren lumber yards at the height of Covid. Prices have indeed come down but I doubt we will see a return to pre-Covid prices, nor should we probably expect to. Existing mills still have elevated input costs such as fuel and financing. The mills that idled can come back; the mills that closed and were torn down are harder to replicate. I don't know if they face labour shortages like other industries; mills tend to be in one-industry or at least primary industry towns.

 

[brihard]

The issue rent control is creating is basically a caste system of those who got in before and those who didn’t. Lots of places in the country where people cannot afford to move again because their rent will go up substantially. This isn’t a good thing.

My family members were in this position, in an increasingly bad neighbourhood, until we bought the condo we now own and moved them here to live in it.

 

[YZT580]

I don’t have answers but I fundamentally question much of the thinking on one side of this problem.

Why does something have to be done?

Does something have to be an active thing or can it be a passive thing. Active equaling rent control and passive equalling stopping wholesale immigration.

On what time line must our actions have what effect?

What is reasonable and fair? Reasonable for who, fair for who? Who gets to decide and determine that? Who do you trust with that, what body do you trust with making that determination?

We have got to where we are because of government actions why do we think more active government intervention will result in a positive outcome?

you nailed it with the last line

 

[rmc_wannabe]

The issue rent control is creating is basically a caste system of those who got in before and those who didn’t. Lots of places in the country where people cannot afford to move again because their rent will go up substantially. This isn’t a good thing.

It's also why we don't see the "moving up" sensation with starter homes in the buying market.

I bought a starter home, we have long since outgrown it, put some work into it, and would see a pretty handsome doubling of my investment should I sell tomorrow.

But

I would then have to buy again. And what I would get for my large return would be less house for more money. Or a larger mortgage. Or moving away from where we have laid roots.

Until supply goes up, in either direction, or supply goes down; it's not going to get better.

 

[ModlrMike]

If history repeats itself, as it tends to do, then wage and price controls can't be far off. Like father, like son?

 

[Happy Guy]

Potential problems with the LPC-NDP alliance.

The NDP are frustrated with their low polling numbers in comparison to the CPC.

The current NDP leader is not resonating with Canadian votes. IMO, Mr. Singh is not relatable to common Canadians with his expensive suits, Rolex watch which is perceived as in congruent with a socialist belief - perhaps I'm dating myself here and I'm wrong.

New Democrats split on their deal with Liberals, seek harder line from Singh

New Democrats attending the party's policy convention are split over the deal their party has struck with the Liberals, as senior leadership focuses on pitching the NDP as the change voters are looking for in the next federal election.

www.ctvnews.ca

The NDP has spent nearly 17 months helping keep the minority Liberal government in power under a confidence-and-supply agreement.

Some NDP want a harder line in dealing with the LPC as they (NDP) were not given credit for the dental-care benefits for children in low-income households, one-time rental supplements for low-income tenants and a temporary doubling of the GST rebate, which were NDP priorities.

An emergency resolution that's been given top priority on Saturday calls for the party to pull out of the confidence-and-supply deal unless the Liberals commit to a universal and entirely public pharmacare program.

The next few months will be interesting given the following:

International
a. UKRAINE - RUSSIA war.
b. ISRAEL- HAMAS (PALESTINE) war.
c. CHINA - TAIWAN dispute
d. on-going global humanitarian crisis

Domestic

• cost of living crisis, affordable housing
• carbon tax / climate change policies
• immigration
• threat of economic recession (due to world instability)
• growing internal domestic terrorism (threats against Jews, threats against Muslims, right wing groups, wokeism)

Can the NDP be an effective and cre3dible leader in Canada and the world stage?

If the NDP pulls the rug from the LPC:

• can the CPC form a gov't?
• can the NDP form a gov't?

If a federal election is called:

• can the CPC / LPC / NPC win a majority gov't?
• if the CPC / LPC / NDP wins a minority gov't how long can it last?
• will CANADA see a repeat of successive minority gov'ts, 2004 2011 in the next decade or so?

I cannot see the NDP winning enough seats to form either a majority or minority gov't in the foreseeable future unless something dramatic happens in which we see a political transformation in either the Canadian public or the NDP itself.