Canadian Federal Election

[yaletown_fella]

Carney wont offer any top up for TFSA like Pierre is. So its clear which party is in my own best financial interest. I admit my bias is rooted in who financially benefits me the most. Its the lesser of two evils for me.

Id rather deficit spending went to giving me more TFSA room than a patchwork of beurocratic programs. Thats my personal bias.

If the people spewing complete hysteria like Marshsparrow are public sector union workers , I dont fault them voting red or orange. Just dont pretend the LPC/NDP are any good for the average self employed private sector .

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Carney wont offer any top up for TFSA like Pierre is. So its clear which party is in my own best financial interest.

If the people spewing complete hysteria like Marshsparrow are public sector union workers , I dont fault them voting red or orange. Just dont pretend the LPC/NDP are any good for the average self employed private sector .

Who can afford to take advantage of more contribution room in their TFSA? This type of benefit applies more to the top 10% than anybody else.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Who can afford to take advantage of more contribution room in their TFSA? This type of benefit applies more to the top 10% than anybody else.

Likely appeals to more to younger people who can no longer get into the Canadian unlimited TFSA (housing).

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yes, and a smaller amount under Carney's plan. But are either of these good ideas when we have a massive deficit? Isn't that what PP has been crowing about? How will that even bigger deficit hole be closed now?




How will that change under PP? It's well documented that the public sector pays well for basic jobs, but the ceiling is far lower for higher end positions.



I know self-employed contractors, nobody makes anything like $60k in that realm. More likely they are billing at ~$200/hr.

Pierre wont continue the absurd hiring spree unlike the LPC/NDP. A party's track record matters.
He will at least trim through attrition.

And clearly these contractors are in a totally different sector than me.

Uber drivers earning 10-20k per year less than me after expenses are also self employed contractors.

Theres a huge earning range.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You should probably google some basic facts before posting about them.

Tell that to MarshSparrow and your liberals

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by theman23

Likely appeals to more to younger people who can no longer get into the Canadian unlimited TFSA (housing).

Thank you for talking some sense into this LPC echo chamber.

Im a relatively low earner but I live like a pauper and manage to put by between 9-12k per year.

Trudeau famously stated that the TFSA only benefits the wealthy. Silly statements like this are because a lot of the liberal laptop-work-from-home elite cant imagine a life without UBER Eats, holidays abroad, grocery delivery, name brand clothes, european luxury car payments etc. In their minds its impossible to save money on a 60k income like I manage to. And many workers on modest incomes are smarter and more frugal than me.
Its also convenient how Trudeau gave preferential treatment to people with multi million dollar homes over indexing a renters TFSA to inflation. Seeing as he owns a lot of inherited real estate it makes sense.


And Im not patting myself on the back, as I wasnt a great saver in my 20s and I anecdotally know several people who are better savers than me.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Thank you for talking some sense into this LPC echo chamber.

Im a relatively low earner but I live like a pauper and manage to put by between 9-12k per year. And Im not patting myself on the back, as I wasnt a great saver in my 20s and I anecdotally know several people who are better savers than me.

A few years ago on this forum I mentioned that an expanded TFSA could be a solution to address the impending generational wealth gap. It seems like we've now given up on home ownership, so it'll give zoomers and millennials a path to match some of the windfalls that older Canadians will get to enjoy in their retirement. It would be even better if it was somehow restricted to those who don't utilize the primary residence cap gains exemption.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by theman23

Likely appeals to more to younger people who can no longer get into the Canadian unlimited TFSA (housing).

Honestly find this hard to believe given that this is the same group facing high rents, high home prices, high daycare costs, etc. It seems like a giveway to top earners, which is statistically less likely to include those in their 20s and 30s.

I struggle to imagine who the young person is who has a high enough income to not be able to get into the housing market but is also consistently maxing out their TFSA. You could say they are saving for a downpayment, but then they also have this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...s/topics/first-home-savings-account.html

And they can max out their RRSPs and use this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...related-plans/what-home-buyers-plan.html

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by theman23

Likely appeals to more to younger people who can no longer get into the Canadian unlimited TFSA (housing).

Younger people who have more than $7k/year after tax to sock away into savings? Still in the upper end of the income spectrum.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by theman23

A few years ago on this forum I mentioned that an expanded TFSA could be a solution to address the impending generational wealth gap. It seems like we've now given up on home ownership, so it'll give zoomers and millennials a path to match some of the windfalls that older Canadians will get to enjoy in their retirement. It would be even better if it was somehow restricted to those who don't utilize the primary residence cap gains exemption.

People facing rising bills will never be able to save their way to wealth parity, no matter how many vehicles you create for them. It's mathematically impossible. Simply having more assets allows one to grow assets even faster. And they will crowd out those who don't have capital. Indeed, give more TFSA room and the same group who have capital will simply accumulate assets faster. And this is what happened in the last decade, particularly in housing because we didn't put limits on leverage (using HELOCs to speculate on housing), didn't put limits on principal residence exemption (allowing massive gains to go untaxed),etc. Suggesting that all of that will be solved by offering a tad more room in TFSA to a mostly broke cohort of young people would be hilarious, if it wasn't offensive.

To be clear, we need sincere and honest efforts to make sure the generational wealth and the growing generational inequality doesn't get worse. We're quickly creating a country (and world) where 80% of your success is determined by who your parents are and how much they can support you. But this is one of those classic "wicked problems" that token policy like more TFSA room won't address.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Honestly find this hard to believe given that this is the same group facing high rents, high home prices, high daycare costs, etc. It seems like a giveway to top earners, which is statistically less likely to include those in their 20s and 30s.

I struggle to imagine who the young person is who has a high enough income to not be able to get into the housing market but is also consistently maxing out their TFSA. You could say they are saving for a downpayment, but then they also have this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...s/topics/first-home-savings-account.html

And they can max out their RRSPs and use this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...related-plans/what-home-buyers-plan.html

The FHSA is popular, but requires you to buy a home if you want to achieve it's full benefit. Otherwise it's expanded RRSP, which is not bad but doesn't give you the same tax benefits of owning a house. The TFSA does. Expanded room just gives Canadians more flexibility- they can choose to continue to save up for a down payment for the unlimited TFSA (housing), or they can opt out of owning a home but still benefit from the tax benefits of the shelter.

People don't get younger and it's pretty clear that our future is going to involve a lot more Canadians renting. Zoomers will be entering their 30s soon and millennials are entering their 40s. The cost of housing has far outstripped income growth for Canadians, but this gives them an alternative place to park their money and reap the same tax benefits.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Suggesting that all of that will be solved by offering a tad more room in TFSA to a mostly broke cohort of young people would be hilarious, if it wasn't offensive.

I've suggested nothing of the sort. I wish this wasn't the reality, but it's a morsel of a crumb to offer young people. As I said, the policy would be even fairer if it excluded anyone who utilized the primary cap gains exemption on primary residence but that would be political suicide.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Pierre wont continue the absurd hiring spree unlike the LPC/NDP. A party's track record matters.

Harper inherited a surplus and ran 6-7 deficits in a row.

The Cons like to cut taxes first and "let the budget balance itself".

[NotToScale]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Charest, O'Toole, Mulroney, Ford - they'd all be +20% and be able to keep a unified party together and none of them would have relied on Jenni Byrne...

hilarious (sarcasm)

[NotToScale]

Originally Posted by theman23

The FHSA is popular, but requires you to buy a home if you want to achieve it's full benefit. Otherwise it's expanded RRSP, which is not bad but doesn't give you the same tax benefits of owning a house. The TFSA does. Expanded room just gives Canadians more flexibility- they can choose to continue to save up for a down payment for the unlimited TFSA (housing), or they can opt out of owning a home but still benefit from the tax benefits of the shelter.

People don't get younger and it's pretty clear that our future is going to involve a lot more Canadians renting. Zoomers will be entering their 30s soon and millennials are entering their 40s. The cost of housing has far outstripped income growth for Canadians, but this gives them an alternative place to park their money and reap the same tax benefits.




I've suggested nothing of the sort. I wish this wasn't the reality, but it's a morsel of a crumb to offer young people. As I said, the policy would be even fairer if it excluded anyone who utilized the primary cap gains exemption on primary residence but that would be political suicide.

well said

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Honestly find this hard to believe given that this is the same group facing high rents, high home prices, high daycare costs, etc. It seems like a giveway to top earners, which is statistically less likely to include those in their 20s and 30s.

I struggle to imagine who the young person is who has a high enough income to not be able to get into the housing market but is also consistently maxing out their TFSA. You could say they are saving for a downpayment, but then they also have this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...s/topics/first-home-savings-account.html

And they can max out their RRSPs and use this:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/...related-plans/what-home-buyers-plan.html

It feels to me that the electorate is less impressed by politcians throwing our own money at us, this time around. Likewise, tolerance for mud-slinging seems to have gone down.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Trudeau famously stated that the TFSA only benefits the wealthy.

Dude it's not a fantasy it's a statistical fact:

TFSA Holders by Total Income Class

Congrats on exceeding your savings goals compared to your peers, but look who is maximizing TFSA contributions.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Dude it's not a fantasy it's a statistical fact:

TFSA Holders by Total Income Class

Congrats on exceeding your savings goals compared to your peers, but look who is maximizing TFSA contributions.

We fixated too much on income. A 45 year old earning $150,000 is not necessarily better off than an age matched person owning a home that earns less. The latter also gets the benefit of an unlimited tax free savings vehicle that the former doesn't.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by theman23

The FHSA is popular, but requires you to buy a home if you want to achieve it's full benefit. Otherwise it's expanded RRSP, which is not bad but doesn't give you the same tax benefits of owning a house. The TFSA does. Expanded room just gives Canadians more flexibility- they can choose to continue to save up for a down payment for the unlimited TFSA (housing), or they can opt out of owning a home but still benefit from the tax benefits of the shelter.

People don't get younger and it's pretty clear that our future is going to involve a lot more Canadians renting. Zoomers will be entering their 30s soon and millennials are entering their 40s. The cost of housing has far outstripped income growth for Canadians, but this gives them an alternative place to park their money and reap the same tax benefits.

I've suggested nothing of the sort. I wish this wasn't the reality, but it's a morsel of a crumb to offer young people. As I said, the policy would be even fairer if it excluded anyone who utilized the primary cap gains exemption on primary residence but that would be political suicide.

I'd buy this argument if the only people getting more room were renters. But when you give it to everybody, the only people who will end up using that room are exactly the people who you want to stop accumulating more.

It's going to be hard to solve wealth inequality if we're not going to be honest about the problem that we're facing. And those folks renting are going to be damn bitter in 10-20 years if all they got was a tad more TFSA room while their friends are getting massive inheritances from their parents.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

To be clear, we need sincere and honest efforts to make sure the generational wealth and the growing generational inequality doesn't get worse. .

And which party is proposing any of this? The old aphorism "perfect is the enemy of good" applies here.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'd buy this argument if the only people getting more room were renters. But when you give it to everybody, the only people who will end up using that room are exactly the people who you want to stop accumulating more.

It's going to be hard to solve wealth inequality if we're not going to be honest about the problem that we're facing. And those folks renting are going to be damn bitter in 10-20 years if all they got was a tad more TFSA room while their friends are getting massive inheritances from their parents.

There are ways to solve this - the CRA can keep a ledger and make sure that people who've benefitted from the primary home exemption don't (and vice versa). But that's not an option anyone has proposed.

I agree we need to do more. I think the future of young people (and thus the country) looks pretty dismal right now (sorry for talking down Canada). But this is a thread on the 2025 election, and none of what you're suggesting been proposed by anyone.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Honestly find this hard to believe given that this is the same group facing high rents, high home prices, high daycare costs, etc. It seems like a giveway to top earners, which is statistically less likely to include those in their 20s and 30s.

It's weird. According to Conservatives, under Trudeau the cost of living has skyrocketed so that people can't afford groceries, yet also according to Conservatives raising the TFSA will help people save money... that they don't have because they're spending too much on groceries?