Federal Government & Politics II

[Dengler Avenue]

It's interesting that some of you mentioned making it better for the next generation.
I was just watching this video last night:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1eUjrFfyBs (There are English subtitles.)
28:00 onward especially...
Laurent Turcot is a history professor at U du Québec à Trois Rivières so he knows this stuff. This video from him is surprisingly more philosophical than historical IMO.
When the generation is bent on "self, self, self", we wonder why the next gets screwed.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by giallo

The avocado toast commentary? Really? That's so 2014, and was aimed at Millennials.....and is BS.

How does a Gen Zer compete with someone like my wife? Even if they do, jobs requiring 3-5 years experience only pay between $40,000-$55,000......in Vancouver. I had an interview where they wanted me to handle their five social media accounts, do all video production, all photography, copywriting and produce a weekly podcast with all of my own equipment. Their offer was $45,000 per year. How is some Gen Zer going to be able to get into the market when they need to spend $10,000+ on their own equipment just to get in the door (if the algorithm lets them). And then once they have the job, they'll have to live with at least one roommate (in a one bedroom) just to make it all work.

How do businesses expect you to survive on $45k with top notch skills?......they don't and that's the whole point.

They know they won't get Canadians to take the job and this means they can go to the feds and say they can't get anyone for the job and hence qualifying them to get an immigrant to do it. The immigrant will find that kind of money a gift from the Gods and will jump at the chance to move to get it. Even if they know about the cost of living and how low their standard of living will be, it's their foot in the door and once here they can never be turfed out. They also get help from their families while here because as soon as they get their citizenship, thru our grotesque family reunification program, their Mom, Dad, brothers and sisters and all their kids get a "get into the country free card".

Even if you were willing to take accept such a low wage, they wouldn't give you the job anyway because it's easier to just import cheap slave labour. It's a very sad reality but reality none the less.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

How do businesses expect you to survive on $45k with top notch skills?......they don't and that's the whole point.

They know they won't get Canadians to take the job and this means they can go to the feds and say they can't get anyone for the job and hence qualifying them to get an immigrant to do it. The immigrant will find that kind of money a gift from the Gods and will jump at the chance to move to get it. Even if they know about the cost of living and how low their standard of living will be, it's their foot in the door and once here they can never be turfed out. They also get help from their families while here because as soon as they get their citizenship, thru our grotesque family reunification program, their Mom, Dad, brothers and sisters and all their kids get a "get into the country free card".

Even if you were willing to take accept such a low wage, they wouldn't give you the job anyway because it's easier to just import cheap slave labour. It's a very sad reality but reality none the less.

No it's because Vancouver gets every 20 something fleeing boring corporate life in Toronto, returning from Dubai or back from Australia so such employees are in a huge surplus. It's been long been true in Vancouver and evidence of little.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

No it's because Vancouver gets every 20 something fleeing boring corporate life in Toronto, returning from Dubai or back from Australia so such employees are in a huge surplus. It's been long been true in Vancouver and evidence of little.

Salaries in Toronto aren’t really any higher. Anyway, I’m not sure how you can easily handwave away low salaries. Clearly these things happen for reasons and there are other desirable cities in the world that manage to mantain much higher wages. It wasn’t that long ago that our political leaders boasted about our permissive immigration policy and low wages as a competitive advantage in the tech sector and it seems unlikely that these things are just coincidences.

You also say the weirdest things. I’ve been here nearly 10 years now and haven’t met a single person who has just returned from Dubai. That round trip seems far more common in central Canada. While there are obviously people that go abroad and return, that isn’t specifically a Vancouver thing.

[casper]

Originally Posted by theman23

Salaries in Toronto aren’t really any higher. Anyway, I’m not sure how you can easily handwave away low salaries. Clearly these things happen for reasons and there are other desirable cities in the world that manage to mantain much higher wages. It wasn’t that long ago that our political leaders boasted about our permissive immigration policy and low wages as a competitive advantage in the tech sector and it seems unlikely that these things are just coincidences.

You also say the weirdest things. I’ve been here nearly 10 years now and haven’t met a single person who has just returned from Dubai. That round trip is far more common in central Canada. While there are obviously people that go abroad and return, that isn’t specifically a Vancouver thing.

Doing social media is not a tech position but a marketing position. I don't have a lot of experience hiring people in those roles and can't say what is reasonable or not.

For tech positions where your hiring software or hardware engineers it may start low but ramps up fairly quickly. If it is with a large multi-national tech company it can make living in Vancouver reasonable comfortable.

Average salary in Vancouver (across all industries) is in the high $60s or low $70s depending on the source.

I know someone who went to Saudi Arabia (not Dubai) and came back. He was raised in the UK, but had Pakistani ancestry. He did not care for the class structure, and this is a white collar position working for a major oil company. There are a lot of people quite happy to live and work in the middle east, but you need to know what your getting yourself into and be comfortable with the dynamics at play.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by casper

Doing social media is not a tech position but a marketing position. I don't have a lot of experience hiring people in those roles and can't say what is reasonable or not.

For tech positions where your hiring software or hardware engineers it may start low but ramps up fairly quickly. If it is with a large multi-national tech company it can make living in Vancouver reasonable comfortable.

Average salary in Vancouver (across all industries) is in the high $60s or low $70s depending on the source.

I’m confused. You brought up your inexperience outside of tech but then posted examples of salaries across all industries. What are those actually examples of?

And yes, the typical profile of someone going to work in the Middle East is a south asian Muslim, often Pakistani. There are relatively few of those in BC.

[casper]

Originally Posted by theman23

I’m confused. You brought up your inexperience outside of tech but then posted examples of salaries across all industries. What are those actually examples of?

I am not going to comment on what a reasonable salary is for a social media expert. They do valuable work, but I just don't know what the going rate is for someone in that field.

Yes, the in the example posted above it is below the average salary in Vancouver.

Originally Posted by theman23

And yes, the typical profile of someone going to work in the Middle East is a south asian Muslim, often Pakistani. There are relatively few of those in BC.

My example, is British born, with a UK engineering degree. After spending a decade working Canada tried going to the middle east and came back.

Yes, western trained engineers with Pakistani or India heritage are actually quite common.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by theman23

Suburbanite is also correct - if more Gen Z bought less avocado toast and pulled up their boot straps, housing prices would go up even further and our Dutch disease would worsen. It seems like the best financial decision (or the one being encouraged by the usual suspects in this thread) one can make in this country is to excessively leverage yourself.

Well, if the Scheme continues at full steam, yes, it's indeed one of the best financial decisions one can make

In a few short years there'll be 50 million people in this country, all wanting roofs over their heads in our main cities.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by bolognium

I've been meaning to say this for a quite a while now, but I really enjoy reading your posts, thewave46. You have some of the most objective, and level-headed posts in these threads and they're honestly pretty damn refreshing. Threads where things often get divisive and partisan, I can always count on your posts being open-minded and thoughtful.

Thanks!

Exactly! Same here! thewave46's posts are always a treat to read, but there are many other users whose posts are always interesting. Almost too long to list them all. (Anyone who's not a crazy TruAnon nut, basically.)

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Median real (that means adjusted for inflation) incomes are up for every age group since 2002. Yes if you are stupid enough to be buying your first house in April 2024 that purchase is more difficult for a gainfully employed person than in many previous periods. In even 2021 but especially 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 and 2015 it was mostly better as long as you lived a moderate lifestyle and banked the huge increase in earnings that you had over a baby boomer. If instead you enjoy the massive increase in services and goods that are available then sure.

I guess politically it doesn't matter. Envy is all that matters.

Real income is based on CPI. CPI massively undervalues housing costs. For example, mortgage interest is 3.46% of the CPI basket, while clothing and footware is 4.77%.

Yes, your Ikea dollars go farther than they did in 2004. In the categories that matter though you are way worse off.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/...023003-eng.htm

[lio45]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes if you are stupid enough to be buying your first house in April 2024 that purchase is more difficult for a gainfully employed person than in many previous periods.

How can you call someone "stupid" for simply being born in a certain era rather than in another?!? The people who are at the point where they'd like to buy their starter home right now have had no control over when they were born.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by giallo

The avocado toast commentary? Really? That's so 2014, and was aimed at Millennials.....and is BS.

Gen Z absolutely has it rough. Have you been in the current day job market?

My wife has over 15 years of product management experience with two Fortune 500 companies, and it was absolutely eye-opening seeing what it takes to even get an interview these days in Canada. Basically, Indeed has cornered the market as a recruitment tool, and it's all run by AI algorithms. Trying to get a real, live human being to read your resume is a confusing and frustrating experience. One resume consultant, and $1200 later, my wife was able to get a CV together that could get past the AI, and actually to the email box of a few HR firms. She ended getting a job at a far lower level, and for way less pay then she had prior, but at least it was something.

How does a Gen Zer compete with someone like my wife? Even if they do, jobs requiring 3-5 years experience only pay between $40,000-$55,000......in Vancouver. I had an interview where they wanted me to handle their five social media accounts, do all video production, all photography, copywriting and produce a weekly podcast with all of my own equipment. Their offer was $45,000 per year. How is some Gen Zer going to be able to get into the market when they need to spend $10,000+ on their own equipment just to get in the door (if the algorithm lets them). And then once they have the job, they'll have to live with at least one roommate (in a one bedroom) just to make it all work.

The market is full of talented and experienced Gen Xers and Millennials that aren't going anywhere for a long time. And with an economy that's stagnant, I'm interested why you think, "There has never been a better time to enter the job market" for anyone, much less Gen Z.

Are you serious about jobs in Vancouver only paying $45,000 for something that requires skills for what you mentioned?!? That obviously isn't going to work for anyone. What a terrible employer.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Real income is based on CPI. CPI massively undervalues housing costs. For example, mortgage interest is 3.46% of the CPI basket, while clothing and footware is 4.77%.

This is exactly what Generation Squeeze called out. It's a formula that is practically designed to hide and facilitate home price inflation. Keeping home price inflation out of the CPI calculation l(by only including interest) et's them keep interest rates low, even though practically speaking people are paying more for housing. As long as interest rates stay low, housing can go to the moon and the index will say that inflation is low.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Real income is based on CPI. CPI massively undervalues housing costs. For example, mortgage interest is 3.46% of the CPI basket, while clothing and footware is 4.77%.

Yes, your Ikea dollars go farther than they did in 2004. In the categories that matter though you are way worse off.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/...023003-eng.htm

This is a bit misleading. Shelter is 28% which is an increase over previous estimates as it has been larger than overall inflation.

That is like saying women's clothing is only 1% when most women spend 3-4% on clothes. Unless Men's and children's clothes are stagnant it reflects overall consumption. The other components especially replacement costs but also rent and maintenance and repairs have also increased so the overall component reflects what people are paying. As others have pointed out it doesn't reflect someone buying a house today at current prices and interest rates but by that measure buying a place in the summer of 2020 was dirt cheap as mortgage interest was nothing.

But back to the topic in terms of electoral politics. Does bringing in a million unskilled fake students harm young people disproportionately absolutely. It lowers entry level wages and stopped a rent and housing crash which would have benefitted younger people and hurt boomers and older Millennials.

If you think the Cons are going to let the market crash because well I have a bridge I can sell you. If you think stopping government spending will bring down interest rates and stopping the "gate keepers" will allow lots of new cheap housing without the aforementioned crash well sure. Housing is plenty affordable in Italy and other places with absolutely horrendous youth unemployment and let's see where it's better to be a new grad.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

This is a bit misleading. Shelter is 28% which is an increase over previous estimates as it has been larger than overall inflation.

That is like saying women's clothing is only 1% when most women spend 3-4% on clothes. Unless Men's and children's clothes are stagnant it reflects overall consumption. The other components especially replacement costs but also rent and maintenance and repairs have also increased so the overall component reflects what people are paying. As others have pointed out it doesn't reflect someone buying a house today at current prices and interest rates but by that measure buying a place in the summer of 2020 was dirt cheap as mortgage interest was nothing.

But back to the topic in terms of electoral politics. Does bringing in a million unskilled fake students harm young people disproportionately absolutely. It lowers entry level wages and stopped a rent and housing crash which would have benefitted younger people and hurt boomers and older Millennials.

If you think the Cons are going to let the market crash because well I have a bridge I can sell you. If you think stopping government spending will bring down interest rates and stopping the "gate keepers" will allow lots of new cheap housing without the aforementioned crash well sure. Housing is plenty affordable in Italy and other places with absolutely horrendous youth unemployment and let's see where it's better to be a new grad.

Shelter cost is mostly home renovation and "other shelter costs" which is rather irrelevant to the current crisis. Mortgage interest/rent cost is not like women's clothing, it is the biggest expense most people under 40 have, but because Statscan weights it so low it means "real" stats can be seen as improvement, despite the housing crisis poisoning the economy and society.

The massive increase in immigration and spending didn't prevent a crash, it caused massive inflation of housing prices and rent. Without it house prices still would have been stable. There was no need for this.

[giallo]

Originally Posted by Loco101

Are you serious about jobs in Vancouver only paying $45,000 for something that requires skills for what you mentioned?!? That obviously isn't going to work for anyone. What a terrible employer.

I do need to point out that this was the most egregious example of a job that I came across, and had some interaction with. I've seen similar jobs offering the same amount, but with much less workload.

The standard rate for a full time content creator/manager (photo, video and social media) that I'm seeing on Indeed in 2024 is between $50,000-$60,000. Still, a low salary for Vancouver, and not something that's sustainable.

Hourly wages for photographers have seen a slight bump recently. Last year, I'd see many listing for $16.75 per hour (yes, BC's minimum wage for a professional photographer), but now it's more common to see wages between $20-$25 per hour. Still far too low for an in-house professional photographer.

I've been lucky to work with some clients that obviously understand the worth of a professional, and pay accordingly, but I've also had some really low paying gigs that I took just to get myself out there.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is exactly what Generation Squeeze called out. It's a formula that is practically designed to hide and facilitate home price inflation. Keeping home price inflation out of the CPI calculation l(by only including interest) et's them keep interest rates low, even though practically speaking people are paying more for housing. As long as interest rates stay low, housing can go to the moon and the index will say that inflation is low.

If cars and iPhones don't get any pricier while rents and real estate values double, someone who owns their house free and clear (like many Boomers for example) will honestly experience very low inflation, i.e. many personal situations will greatly diverge from the average -- on both ends. The average will be something like "moderate inflation", renters will feel extreme inflation, those who have owned for a long time will feel no inflation.

Millions of Canadians have been experiencing wage deflation (relative to their greatest budget item -- housing) thanks to Trudeau, that's for sure, but as you say, the stats seem designed to obfuscate this fact.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by theman23

I’m confused. You brought up your inexperience outside of tech but then posted examples of salaries across all industries. What are those actually examples of?

And yes, the typical profile of someone going to work in the Middle East is a south asian Muslim, often Pakistani. There are relatively few of those in BC.

I don't think this is true. Pakistani Canadians would get treated as 2nd tier expats. There are a ton of Canadians in the gulf. Teachers and nurses firstly but a lot of the same chickies and cool dudes who work in social media, real estate, or higher end service jobs (assistant hotel restaurant manager etc that are the type flooded in Vancouver because of desirability.

I don't think a social media manager in Vancouver salary is lower because of immigration, or any other federal government policy. You think these fake students are who they want? Supply and demand in the job market is pretty basic. Now working holiday folks from UK Australia or spouses etc sure but I don't see anyone proposing changes there. Isn't the claim here mostly we need more skilled immigrants?

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

But back to the topic in terms of electoral politics. Does bringing in a million unskilled fake students harm young people disproportionately absolutely. It lowers entry level wages and stopped a rent and housing crash which would have benefitted younger people and hurt boomers and older Millennials.

If you think the Cons are going to let the market crash because well I have a bridge I can sell you. If you think stopping government spending will bring down interest rates and stopping the "gate keepers" will allow lots of new cheap housing without the aforementioned crash well sure. Housing is plenty affordable in Italy and other places with absolutely horrendous youth unemployment and let's see where it's better to be a new grad.

This is where debate becomes tedious.

"If you vote for Team Blue, Canada will turn into Italy-lite and the housing market will crash." Really? That's the bogeyman we're trotting out? There's so much pent-up demand that high(er) interest rates haven't really dented housing. To get back to 2015 levels of pricing would require huge supply to hit the market (not happening), a mass deportation of people (doing the opposite now), or much higher interest rates (unlikely given 5% BoC rates are producing screaming).

"If you re-elect Team Red, all will be sunshine and rainbows." Except for the fact they've presided over the largest housing inflation and labour-busting immigration scheme in recent history.

It's just so simplistic and tiring.

There's actually a middle ground here. It looks like immigration levels of the 2010s, combined with pro-development housing policy, and limits to the amount of debt people can take on. I don't think the Conservatives have a magic bullet FYI, but I see why those who've been shafted by Team Red's history are looking elsewhere. Either you take your chance with the new guy, or vote for more of the same.

Generally governments are authors of their own demise. If this is the tack of pro-Team Red, maybe they deserve to lose. President's Xi's "Eat bitterness" slogan might work, but perhaps a more 2020s-media friendly "Hey younger Canadians, eat avocado toast. We got ours! #teamred." on Twitter might be appropriate.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by thewave46

This is where debate becomes tedious.

"If you vote for Team Blue, Canada will turn into Italy-lite and the housing market will crash." Really? That's the bogeyman we're trotting out? There's so much pent-up demand that high(er) interest rates haven't really dented housing. To get back to 2015 levels of pricing would require huge supply to hit the market (not happening), a mass deportation of people (doing the opposite now), or much higher interest rates (unlikely given 5% BoC rates are producing screaming).

"If you re-elect Team Red, all will be sunshine and rainbows." Except for the fact they've presided over the largest housing inflation and labour-busting immigration scheme in recent history.

It's just so simplistic and tiring.

There's actually a middle ground here. It looks like immigration levels of the 2010s, combined with pro-development housing policy, and limits to the amount of debt people can take on. I don't think the Conservatives have a magic bullet FYI, but I see why those who've been shafted by Team Red's history are looking elsewhere. Either you take your chance with the new guy, or vote for more of the same.

Generally governments are authors of their own demise. If this is the tack of pro-Team Red, maybe they deserve to lose. President's Xi's "Eat bitterness" slogan might work, but perhaps a more 2020s-media friendly "Hey younger Canadians, eat avocado toast. We got ours! #teamred." on Twitter might be appropriate.

I don't disagree with the criticism of the over simplification my point is just the other answer is not so simple. There was no sharp break in any of these stats in 2015. There was of course in 2020 but that's worldwide.

We need to know the cause of things being bad, how bad they are, before we can decide on a solution. I don't disagree dramatically with your pro development, reduced immigration and even reduced debt limits though that hurts those without equity the most.

The first pro development pro economic growth is the way forward. This is why I quibble with the things are horrible sentiment. From 1995-2015 (maybe even 2019) we were well governed and focused on prosperity not handouts. This saw a substantial increase in well being for all generations. If we say that is not true we tend towards new radical solutions when all we need to do is re-incentivize work, take advantage of our natural resources, tilt social programs down a bit to pay for productivity inducing tax cuts and we will lift all boats. Changing tax policy to move away from housing investment to more productive investments would also be helpful/critical. If we want to help the next generation and I'll vote for that though doubt the boomers will, we could eliminate student loans by making education nearly free, or even something more radical like making the first $200k tax free. Crazy housing schemes don't work anywhere that has tried them that I see. And owning a house is not the be all and end all many societies have lower housing ownership rates and are perfectly healthy.