Elections For Canadians (and sure, Americans and others can chime in): Is this a good reason to vote Liberal in the upcoming Canada election?

[Crazy Source]

Which direction did the wealth go over the past 10 years?

It's been distributing upwards for a very long time.

 

[MrShady]

I don't think you fully understand what was most devastating about the Covid public health response. My kid's TKD school, run by a guy too old to work in a warehouse, closed down because public health orders prevented him from having in-person classes, while he still had to pay the expenses of maintaining a building. The business never came back after the restrictions were lifted because everybody had his own story of being worse off financially.

I've lost money on my RRSP, even more so than I lost to inflation. Why should I invest in large companies, which are crushing the moms and pops, as opposed to running a small business that I can handle in old age, being a landlord? It's not logically consistent of you: We should abandon small businesses in favor of investing in evil global corporations. Is this what you do with your own money?

I rented when I started out, and I was glad that there was a run down dwelling that I could afford to live in. Did you ever rent? I've even rented in my forties, while waiting to see if a short-term job became a long-term job. Who would you prefer to be on the other side of the renting transaction if not a fellow individual citizen?

Maybe you misunderstand where I'm coming from.

I'm well aware of how the Covid response affected small business. We're on the same page here, no disagreements. Like I said, greatest wealth transfer in history, destroying the middle class and small businesses while everyone's portfolios and gains were maximized.

In regards to being a landlord. Like I said, the culture of it drastically shifted where if you wanted to buy a modest home, and raise a family, or even rent out to a family while they may contribute to your mortgage youre not profiting off it on top, nothing wrong with that. You cared about the home. You put time and sweat and effort into it. You wanted either your family or a family to call it a home.

It turned from that to people buying homes for the SOLE purpose of flipping it. Leaving it vacant. "Renovating it". Foreign investors. Speculators. Corporations buying up entire subdivisions. The floodgates were open thanks to the governments favorable policies for the landlord class. The primary purpose was to maximize gains and sell. First time home buyers were screwed because everyone outbid one another.

Do what you want with your investment strategies, I'm simply pointing out how every country got to this point and why our kids will not be able to afford homes without us massively helping them.

 

[gatchaman]

Maybe you misunderstand where I'm coming from.

I'm well aware of how the Covid response affected small business. We're on the same page here, no disagreements. Like I said, greatest wealth transfer in history, destroying the middle class and small businesses while everyone's portfolios and gains were maximized.

In regards to being a landlord. Like I said, the culture of it drastically shifted where if you wanted to buy a modest home, and raise a family, or even rent out to a family while they may contribute to your mortgage youre not profiting off it on top, nothing wrong with that. You cared about the home. You put time and sweat and effort into it. You wanted either your family or a family to call it a home.

It turned from that to people buying homes for the SOLE purpose of flipping it. Leaving it vacant. "Renovating it". The primary purpose was to maximize gains and sell.

Do what you want with your investment strategies, I'm simply pointing out how every country got to this point and why our kids will not be able to afford homes without us massively helping them.

At some point, I will consider a rental property in too poor a shape to continue renting it out. If I take the single family house off the rental market, replace it with a duplex, and sell it for more money then did I flip it? What should I do instead?


I don't think I am misunderstanding you. You started here: "It used to be that you saved up and bought a home you intended to live in and start a family in. You stayed within your budget and means."

This is the story of Poilievre's mother. How far back do we have to go to see how things used to be?


Is Poilievre's mother a bad person because she miscalculated on her rental property investments like I miscalculated on my RRSP investments? I think she is a good person for adopting Poilievre from a single mother who miscalculated on her ability to raise children. And I think she is a good person for providing rental properties for people who could not afford to buy, just as I myself could not afford to buy decades ago.

 

[MrShady]

Again, nothing wrong with being a landlord if that's your passion. If you care about the home. If you care about the people renting your home. Good. Do that. It's a honest way to making a living and also provide opportunity for the next generation or the next family.

The issue arose when everyone realized they can double their money in a couple years or less, put no effort or work into the home, and sell it to some Chinese rich kids for above market value.

When the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP and all it can do at this point is remove the bandaid from one wound to another, there are no real solutions, only tradeoffs.

Housing investors were a huge driver of housing price inflation. By driving prices up and competing while rates were low, first time home buyers were displaced who would have bought and lived in those properties. Instead, all those people stayed in the rental pool which drove the cost of rentals up.

The issue started long ago. We looked at housing as everything but a fundamental human goal to achieve for every person and family. It shouldn't be an investment goal that you have 10+ rental properties under your portfolio just as we should've never allowed the foreign investor class and corporations to buy homes and price out the average Canadian.

 

[gatchaman]

Again, nothing wrong with being a landlord if that's your passion. If you care about the home. If you care about the people renting your home. Good. Do that. It's a honest way to making a living and also provide opportunity for the next generation or the next family.

The issue arose when everyone realized they can double their money in a couple years or less, put no effort or work into the home, and sell it to some Chinese rich kids for above market value.

When the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP and all it can do at this point is remove the bandaid from one wound to another, there are no real solutions, only tradeoffs.

Housing investors were a huge driver of housing price inflation. By driving prices up and competing while rates were low, first time home buyers were displaced who would have bought and lived in those properties. Instead, all those people stayed in the rental pool which drove the cost of rentals up.

The issue started long ago. We looked at housing as everything but a fundamental human goal to achieve for every person and family. It shouldn't be an investment goal that you have 10+ rental properties under your portfolio just as we should've never allowed the foreign investor class and corporations to buy homes and price out the average Canadian.

Most of my social circle is Chinese immigrants. Are they bad people for doing exactly what I do? The most successful ones will have 10+ rental properties. If I save $10M then am I a bad person for investing in real estate instead of using the money to buy stocks in global corporations?

This is the point that I was hoping that we would reach: "the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP". But I think we differ on the solution. I think your solution is that government should still warp market forces, just in a different direction. This is what caused Poilievre's mother to lose her rental properties, the deflation caused by central banks raising interest rates by over 10%. My parents got hit even harder. Their overseas families got hit by the Weimer dollar collapse, whereby almost overnight, all of their cash holdings became worthless.

Which brings me back to my original question: if you are against buying property then how do you propose for a citizen to protect his savings from inflation? I don't like large cash holdings, such as stocks purchased through a bank, because these holdings are subject to a Weimer dollar scenario. But am I really a bad person if I save $10M and choose rental properties as an alternative to cash investments?

 

[MrShady]

Most of my social circle is Chinese immigrants. Are they bad people for doing exactly what I do? The most successful ones will have 10+ rental properties. If I save $10M then am I a bad person for investing in real estate instead of using the money to buy stocks in global corporations?

This is the point that I was hoping that we would reach: "the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP". But I think we differ on the solution. I think your solution is that government should still warp market forces, just in a different direction. This is what caused Poilievre's mother to lose her rental properties, the deflation caused by central banks raising interest rates by over 10%. My parents got hit even harder. They're overseas families got hit by the Weimer dollar collapse, whereby almost overnight, all of their cash holdings became worthless.

Which brings me back to my original question: if you are against buying property then how do you propose for a citizen to protect his savings from inflation? I don't like large cash holdings, such as stocks purchased through a bank, because these holdings are subject to a Weimer dollar scenario. But am I really a bad person if I save $10M and choose rental properties as an alternative to cash investments?

It could be Chinese, Indian, Russian the point is rich foreign investors come in buy homes in cash, and flip it for profit.

Canada is a haven for money laundering and the laws make it easy for wealthy people to put their dirty money in homes.

You keep mentioning I'm against buying property. I'm not when it's reasonable. I know landlords who have one or two properties and they truly care about their homes and their renters. They look after them and they reinvest profits into the homes.

The issue is and will always be the speculators and the investor class who solely want to maximize gains and profits, they'd rather leave a home empty on the market than to rent it out for the waiting game when markets get hot again.

First time home buyers and the young generation will be screwed. This is an undeniable fact. Canada and it's politicians across all parties allowed this to happen. They're too busy watching their retirement nestegg grow to care about first time homebuyers.

 

[gatchaman]

It could be Chinese, Indian, Russian the point is rich foreign investors come in buy homes in cash, and flip it for profit.

Canada is a haven for money laundering and the laws make it easy for wealthy people to put their dirty money in homes.

You keep mentioning I'm against buying property. I'm not when it's reasonable. I know landlords who have one or two properties and they truly care about their homes and their renters. They look after them and they reinvest profits into the homes.

The issue is and will always be the speculators and the investor class who solely want to maximize gains and profits, they'd rather leave a home empty on the market than to rent it out for the waiting game when markets get hot again.

First time home buyers and the young generation will be screwed. This is an undeniable fact. Canada and it's politicians across all parties allowed this to happen. They're too busy watching their retirement nestegg grow to care about first time homebuyers.

I have two problems with "when it's reasonable". For one, what is reasonable is a moving target even for you. "It used to be that you saved up and bought a home you intended to live in and start a family in. You stayed within your budget and means." At first, it seemed to me that you were of the opinion that there should be no landlords whatsoever, and then everyone would be able to afford a home for personal use. Then it moved to: "It shouldn't be an investment goal that you have 10+ rental properties under your portfolio." But I don't understand this limitation either. If you have saved enough to afford 10+ rental properties then what should you be doing instead to protect your savings from inflation?

The second problem I have is who gets to determine what is reasonable? Do you trust any of Carney, Poilievre, Blanchet, May, or Bernier to determine what is reasonable? Who? If not, who should decide instead?

 

[MrShady]

I have two problems with "when it's reasonable". For one, what is reasonable is a moving target even for you. "It used to be that you saved up and bought a home you intended to live in and start a family in. You stayed within your budget and means." At first, it seemed to me that you were of the opinion that there should be no landlords whatsoever, and then everyone would be able to afford a home for personal use. Then it moved to: "It shouldn't be an investment goal that you have 10+ rental properties under your portfolio." But I don't understand this limitation either. If you have saved enough to afford 10+ rental properties then what should you be doing instead to protect your savings from inflation?

The second problem I have is who gets to determine what is reasonable? Do you trust any of Carney, Poilievre, Blanchet, May, or Bernier to determine what is reasonable? Who? If not, who should decide instead?

The people should decide. I don't trust any politician because they are all driven by power and greed, and bought by donors and corporations. My solutions are not realistic in this world, I understand that. I think it's too far late to have a society in which your kid and his future wife/husband will be able to afford a home in Toronto for example, without a large inheritance or support.

There's a reason why people don't want to start new businesses and just buy property, it's easier and the environment is perfectly situated to make sure you don't fail.

Maybe I didn't clarify my point exactly so it's difficult for you to interpret my idealistic vision of what I mean when I say reasonable, that's my bad.

Reasonable would imply that you have what you need. Obviously peoples needs are different, and there in lies the problem. Whereas people should be financially set being a successful landlord with one or two properties, a couple million in the retirement funds, the drive and greed to attain more is the problem at it's core. They don't just want 1 mill, they want 10.

In my idealistic and fantasy world, large groups of people would come together with common goals in mind and hold their politicians accountable to measure to that standard - one being to realize, recognize and understand that housing should be a fundamental human goal achievable by realistic measures.

Now, if everyone wants to be a landlord or if everyone wants to buy and sell homes, naturally what do you think happens to the supply/demand metrics of real estate when the supply side is targeted directly/indirectly to ensure it doesn't meet demand.

First time homebuyers, normal Canadians wanting to buy homes, future generations, get screwed. They cannot compete in the marketplace that is dominated by speculators, foreign investors, and corporations.

Of course the answer is to build more homes! But it is the landlord and wealthy and political class who, by design, create barriers to building more homes (one example is NIMBY).

So what's the solution? My TLDR is there is no real solution, only tradeoffs. Home values will continue to rise, wages will continue to stagnate, and your kids will not grow up in a world that is generous or kind when it comes to making it on their own. You keep asking about where to put your savings to protect from inflation? Buy one or two properties. Tend to them. Tend to your renters. Take the job of being a landlord as serious as any other job. Buy some bonds or gics. Buy some gold and silver. And enjoy your life.

 

[MrShady]

Am I dumb (most likely) or have the Conservatives not released their platform yet, 8 days away from the election?!

Whats the holdup

 

[gatchaman]

The people should decide. I don't trust any politician because they are all driven by power and greed, and bought by donors and corporations. My solutions are not realistic in this world, I understand that. I think it's too far late to have a society in which your kid and his future wife/husband will be able to afford a home in Toronto for example, without a large inheritance or support.

There's a reason why people don't want to start new businesses and just buy property, it's easier and the environment is perfectly situated to make sure you don't fail.

Maybe I didn't clarify my point exactly so it's difficult for you to interpret my idealistic vision of what I mean when I say reasonable, that's my bad.

Reasonable would imply that you have what you need. Obviously peoples needs are different, and there in lies the problem. Whereas people should be financially set being a successful landlord with one or two properties, a couple million in the retirement funds, the drive and greed to attain more is the problem at it's core. They don't just want 1 mill, they want 10.

In my idealistic and fantasy world, large groups of people would come together with common goals in mind and hold their politicians accountable to measure to that standard - one being to realize, recognize and understand that housing should be a fundamental human goal achievable by realistic measures.

Now, if everyone wants to be a landlord or if everyone wants to buy and sell homes, naturally what do you think happens to the supply/demand metrics of real estate when the supply side is targeted directly/indirectly to ensure it doesn't meet demand.

First time homebuyers, normal Canadians wanting to buy homes, future generations, get screwed. They cannot compete in the marketplace that is dominated by speculators, foreign investors, and corporations.

Of course the answer is to build more homes! But it is the landlord and wealthy and political class who, by design, create barriers to building more homes (one example is NIMBY).

So what's the solution? My TLDR is there is no real solution, only tradeoffs. Home values will continue to rise, wages will continue to stagnate, and your kids will not grow up in a world that is generous or kind when it comes to making it on their own. You keep asking about where to put your savings to protect from inflation? Buy one or two properties. Tend to them. Tend to your renters. Take the job of being a landlord as serious as any other job. Buy some bonds or gics. Buy some gold and silver. And enjoy your life.

I think your belief that everything used to be better is limited by narrowing your vision to the boomers. My parents were from the Forgotten Generation. My father was drafted at 14 or 15 years old to fight in WWII, for the side who killed his father in a concentration camp. My mother had to pack everything the family would have for the future in one trunk to flee the Russians. She became a refugee in her own country, working in a factory, with wooden clogs for footwear, in exchange for welfare and still being skin and bones. Cigarettes were functioning as currency. Have you heard of the Fourth Turning? My parents lived through it, and my kids will likely live through it. But how would you rather be raised to prepare yourself for living independently in the world, hard or soft?

It was very instructive to me to see how the institutions of Canada, highly reputed in the world, treat the elderly. I mean the elderly who shit themselves, like my parents. You think a couple of rental properties and a couple of million will provide for retirement, thinking that people can cut back, but you have not budgeted for having someone available twenty-four hours a day for when you shit yourself. Maybe you think that the government provides old age homes for these circumstances, world renowned ones in fact. Watch Animal Farm.

Watch what happens to the horse. This is the ending that Carney and the other politicians have planned for you. I've seen that ending, not just in a cartoon, but in real life. When you realize that you are on your own, perhaps you will stop begrudging people their 10+ rental properties.

 

[Andy Capp]

Again, nothing wrong with being a landlord if that's your passion. If you care about the home. If you care about the people renting your home. Good. Do that. It's a honest way to making a living and also provide opportunity for the next generation or the next family.

The issue arose when everyone realized they can double their money in a couple years or less, put no effort or work into the home, and sell it to some Chinese rich kids for above market value.

When the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP and all it can do at this point is remove the bandaid from one wound to another, there are no real solutions, only tradeoffs.

Housing investors were a huge driver of housing price inflation. By driving prices up and competing while rates were low, first time home buyers were displaced who would have bought and lived in those properties. Instead, all those people stayed in the rental pool which drove the cost of rentals up.

The issue started long ago. We looked at housing as everything but a fundamental human goal to achieve for every person and family. It shouldn't be an investment goal that you have 10+ rental properties under your portfolio just as we should've never allowed the foreign investor class and corporations to buy homes and price out the average Canadian.

The government warped the market? Aside from getting out of the business of building housing, which should never have happened, and not addressing foreign ownership sooner--those being things they didn't do--what specific actions did the government take to cause this? Not saying you're wrong, but I am not aware of them.

In terms of relying upon construction and so on for productivity, it's been going on for decades, as you say in your last paragraph. I believe I first heard of it being pointed to as a weakness in the economy in the 90's. But in what way was it deliberate rather than simply overlooked? I agree entirely with your last sentence, as well.

However, I don't get the "all it can do is move the bandaid" part. They can certainly proactively increase supply like they used to. A lot of damage has been done to affordability but I don't think it is impossible to address. I don't think the foreign/investor ownership issue is immune from changes either. It will take awhile, but significant improvement can be made if people get behind it.

 

[MrShady]

When is their platform coming? Is this incompetence or are they hiding something?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/lack-of-costed-conservative-platform-is-an-opportunity-lost-says-analyst/

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Am I dumb (most likely) or have the Conservatives not released their platform yet, 8 days away from the election?!

Whats the holdup

Pierre’s incompetence is the holdup. Dude has been working his entire career to this point, was gifted a 20 plus point lead as party leader and got complacent. Thought he was going to be anointed without having to do the leg work. He still may win, not without almost blowing a potential record blowing lead. Lucky for him, most of his base are too stubborn to let a little thing like lack of a platform alter their view and vote.

 

[Brigfa2]

Man i've known all kinds of people from all kinds of places but i've never seen people as delusional as western liberals(They are not even liberals lmao, it has completely different meaning in other countries)

 

[Bojka]

Most of my social circle is Chinese immigrants. Are they bad people for doing exactly what I do? The most successful ones will have 10+ rental properties. If I save $10M then am I a bad person for investing in real estate instead of using the money to buy stocks in global corporations?

This is the point that I was hoping that we would reach: "the government has warped basic market forces for real estate to inflate its GDP". But I think we differ on the solution. I think your solution is that government should still warp market forces, just in a different direction. This is what caused Poilievre's mother to lose her rental properties, the deflation caused by central banks raising interest rates by over 10%. My parents got hit even harder. Their overseas families got hit by the Weimer dollar collapse, whereby almost overnight, all of their cash holdings became worthless.

Which brings me back to my original question: if you are against buying property then how do you propose for a citizen to protect his savings from inflation? I don't like large cash holdings, such as stocks purchased through a bank, because these holdings are subject to a Weimer dollar scenario. But am I really a bad person if I save $10M and choose rental properties as an alternative to cash investments?

I think the government should just put a high tax on any homes bought after your 1st one. Pretty easy solution.

 

[Andy Capp]

When is their platform coming? Is this incompetence or are they hiding something?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/lack-of-costed-conservative-platform-is-an-opportunity-lost-says-analyst/

Ah, man. You beat me to it. I was going to post the same thing.

Pierre’s incompetence is the holdup. Dude has been working his entire career to this point, was gifted a 20 plus point lead as party leader and got complacent. Thought he was going to be anointed without having to do the leg work. He still may win, not without almost blowing a potential record blowing lead. Lucky for him, most of his base are too stubborn to let a little thing like lack of a platform alter their view and vote.

I think it's because he thinks more swing voters will turn out to vote Conservative at the advance polls if he doesn't tell them what he's going to get up to. It seems pretty obviously likely to me.

 

[rikibobby]

Pierre’s incompetence is the holdup. Dude has been working his entire career to this point, was gifted a 20 plus point lead as party leader and got complacent. Thought he was going to be anointed without having to do the leg work. He still may win, not without almost blowing a potential record blowing lead. Lucky for him, most of his base are too stubborn to let a little thing like lack of a platform alter their view and vote.

If any party or person is lucky in this election, it is 100% the liberals and Carney for Trump's election and his tariffs. That is a no-brainer.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Ugh...carneys faltering has ndp back near 12 seat projection. Aside from top 1% tax cuts and being pro business / anti poor the best thing he could deliver is neutering the NDP at the federal level

 

[rearnakedchoke]

If any party or person is lucky in this election, it is 100% the liberals and Carney for Trump's election and his tariffs. That is a no-brainer.

Carney got lucky that conservatives chose a guy like PP who couldn’t come up with his own personality, ripped off trump every way he could until it bit him in the ass and doubled down on that? Ok. I guess that is lucky.

 

[MrShady]

If any party or person is lucky in this election, it is 100% the liberals and Carney for Trump's election and his tariffs. That is a no-brainer.

Yeah but this also shows Pierre's inability to pivot accordingly and do more than just trash Trudeau and use slogans.

How do you blow such a big lead that it's now a tight race. And STILL no cost platform released? I mean come on dude this is a terrible look and screams incompetence for people who aren't Liberal/Conservative and still undecided.