|
PT6A posted:There are valid reasons to be cautious about credentials from developing countries but it's absolutely insane that there is not an easy process to validate those credentials and/or provide the necessary additional training and get these people using their skills in Canada. The only jurisdiction that has a good enough mechanics licence for Alberta is Ireland. loving Ireland. My German Licence was no good until I had 8000 hours of verified work experience, which is four years more than my apprenticeship took. The exam for it was a loving joke. I had to work for years as an apprentice, and then was presented with something a first year apprentice wouldnt have too much trouble with.
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
cowofwar posted:Oh cool a rambling pile of words with no thesis or any practical alternatives - just hand wringing about taxes. It was less about the taxes but complaining about how Oakridge development was bad... To be fair that is when I stopped reading so maybe he said something that eventually justified his tenure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 07:11
|
|
|
Hubbert posted:Patrick Condon recently prepared a 'draft' opinion piece on the proposed UBC Skytrain line ... and why it's a terrible idea. Yeah I'm pretty sure he got at least a few things outright wrong. One of them is his assertion that the UBC extension will benefit Vancouver residents only -- I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people riding it will be UBC students (and employees) who live in suburbs outside Vancouver. As for the long-term, "what do we do when climate change starts biting" perspective, a subway is still a hell of a lot less "big" and "grey" than a freeway, and a whole hell of a lot easier to keep running than thousands of cars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 07:14
|
|
|
"hey let's stop building mass transit so we can spend even more money financing and subsidizing the suburban sprawl that will inevitably clog our streets with more traffic and take over the ALR because Oakridge is a bad development!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
old man yells at cloud
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
You can tell that he's a bitter grizzled tenured professor because he spends most of the article calling his boss and everyone a complete idiot with sarcastic Snipes and then forgets to make a coherent point or offer any worthwhile alternatives. I mean he might have a point about increased supply not helping to lower prices much, but he talks about the cost without going over the projected utilization or alternative options. If development charges pay for it and it has enough ridership to justify the maintenance costs then what's the problem? Yes, a few people will grift their way into massive profits off the project but that's capitalism. I compare it to the Scarborough sibeay extension which cynical conservative councillors all support despite everything shred of evidence showing that it's a huge wasteful piece of poo poo and vastly worst than the previously fully funded and cheaper LRT plan. There's no hint whatsot that development charges will cover more than a tiny fraction of the costs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
luxury condos are gonna get built one way or the other. refusing to build mass transit doesnt prevent it
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Here's an example of small ball boomer environmentalism that doesn't get much further than "plant more trees..??"quote:
Like I recognize he's a landscape architect, but even still, you gotta have a bigger viewpoint here. Skytrain is insanely good for the environment because it has the capacity to take a huge amount of cars off the road. I know he's a fan of LRT but that solves a different sort of problem. Skytrain is the perfect technology for the sort of nodal travel that is common along broadway, where people just want to hit the big stops, UBC, Kits, the Hospital, City Hall, Main and Commercial.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
Glad I'm not the only one who's eyes glazed over halfway though that profs article. You'd think with that much academic experience you'd learn how to present an argument clearly and concisely. Quit wagging your dick around. Say what you want to say, and hurry the gently caress up with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
The Butcher posted:You'd think with that much academic experience you'd learn how to present an argument clearly and concisely. Not really sure where anyone would get this impression.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 07:31
|
|
|
There are arguments against skytrain expansion, but that is a mess of an argument. My favorite part was complaining about rich people not wanting to use the canada line at oakridge and then immediately moving on to arguing that the only way rich people will buy ubc property is if there is a skytrain... Also, somehow never actually talking about the existing users of the b line routes is weird. The 99 is the busiest bus route in north America. The b lines serve something like 60% of the 2011 canada line's daily ridership already and can't keep up with current capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 08:40
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/charliesmithvcr/status/1083007529427193858 Another brilliant analysis from Housing Genius Editor of the Georgia Straight Charlie Smith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 18:40
|
|
'Twas a nice two year run for Vancouver condos. Too bad more lower middle/working class people couldn't get some of that sweet sweet equity. quote:Fraser Valley Condo Prices Slide 7.7% since June https://vancitycondoguide.com/fraser-valley-condo-prices-slide-7-7-since-june/
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
I love all the "highest since some meaningless date!!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
I love Vancouver crash deniers in 2019. https://twitter.com/FIVRE604/status/1083181684915298304?s=19
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 06:29
|
|
|
I'm thinking about investing in some PBR right now. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 08:17
|
|
|
The boat in Apocalypse now was a PBR.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 08:49
|
|
|
communism cannot and will not work
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 11:24
|
|
|
avshalemon posted:communism cannot and will not work Unfettered capitalism sure isnt the answer either. Maybe a regulated middle ground would do the trick?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
avshalemon posted:communism cannot and will not work 100% incorrect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
avshalemon posted:communism cannot and will not work Communism and I are very similar in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
News round up for the week. Alleged 'shadow' mortgage broker implicated in dozens of shady deals quote:B.C. financial authorities have identified a woman accused of acting as a 'shadow' mortgage broker by feeding altered tax documents to licensed professionals on behalf of dozens of people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for loans. It's the sort of feel good 'lax banking' story that CI loves. Of course stuff like this has probably been happening for years and years undetected. BC Liberal Candidate Quietly Deletes Line From Website Declaring He Enjoys Real Estate Speculation lmao B.C. gaming investigators repeatedly warned bosses of 'horrendous' money laundering quote:When former RCMP deputy commissioner Peter German brought down his Dirty Money report in June, he guessed the amount of suspicious cash laundered through B.C. casinos "exceeded $100 million" over approximately seven years. When Peter German released his low ball number the supply siders feasted on the news as evidence that money laundering couldn't have had any impact on the exceptional movements in Vancouver real estate in the last several years. Well now we know differently. Of course no one is going to admit they were wrong. Lastly Ian Young published a hit piece on local anti-SFH UBC academic Nathan Lauster, which of course got everyone on twitter in a tizzy, as everyone defended 'their side' or used the piece as a way to try to score a few points. Apparently long time foreign investment denier Nathan Lauster's strata decided to sell the property and guess who bought it..? Foreign investors of course. ho ho ho. That's about all there is to this story. Young tries to spin this into some sort of 'conflict of interest' thing but I don't see it. The most remarkable thing to me coming from this story was to see supply siders come out of the woodwork to not only understandably defend Lauster against what they saw as an unfair hit piece, but also to use the opportunity to try to once again discredit the impact of foreign capital on Vancouver real estate. At this point there's not only the foreign buyer tax, but also the speculation tax. The battle is over. Why keep fighting it, and most of all why bother being the white knight for some millionaire foreign or otherwise? I can understand it when I see demand siders defend the existence of exclusionary zoning, as many of them would obviously stand to benefit if the price of housing collapsed and they were able to then buy a SFH. The value proposition of a detached home is more than that of a duplex or apartment, so if one is fairly wealthy enough to potentially buy a home then they could benefit from the exclusionary zoning that suppresses land values. I'm completely baffled however by the psychology of supply siders defending foreign buyers and investors. Most of these defenders' activism is to oppose exclusionary zoning and support purpose built rental. I don't see how they benefit from the status quo that allows global wealth to move unfettered and I don't understand why they'd care to oppose the speculation tax or other policies that target foreign capital. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Jan 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Perhaps the "baffling" supply siders have a vested interest in selling real estate (primarily new condos) to foreigners and/or are paid shills on behalf of those who do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
James Baud posted:Perhaps the "baffling" supply siders have a vested interest in selling real estate (primarily new condos) to foreigners and/or are paid shills on behalf of those who do? Well we had this discussion a few pages back. If you look deep into who is behind Abundant Housing and adjacent supply oriented housing activists they're not from a real estate background and it doesn't seem likely that they're paid shills.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
James Baud posted:Perhaps the "baffling" supply siders have a vested interest in selling real estate (primarily new condos) to foreigners and/or are paid shills on behalf of those who do? I think they are all conflicted by their own interests (myself as well) because we all have either a vested interest in having a place to live. The speculators are more conflicted because not only do they need a place to live, but they generate their income off of selling others places they could (or could not) live. As for the hit piece, this prof sounds like the typical idiot sociologist no-nothing. I don't quite see the IY piece making a lot of sense either - to bring national socialism into the mix (which we all know is a way of not having to say Nazi) is foolish, particularly for someone whose only academic stock in trade is in words, so he should know better. Is this guy an idiot and a hypocrite? Yes. Is he part of some larger conspiracy? Not really - his strata sold, and from the article, he wasn't on the council or really anything except a voter. But he is certainly guilty of using his position as a UBC professor to push his position (stupid though it is) and tone deaf to think that his claim on one side is consistent with his actions on the other.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Apparently long time foreign investment denier Nathan Lauster's strata decided to sell the property and guess who bought it..? Foreign investors of course. ho ho ho. Does this mean that they bought the management company? If so, I dont understand why it matters to housing supply or pricing, unless having a foreign owner affects who can live there or dramatically changes the strata fees or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Does this mean that they bought the management company? If so, I dont understand why it matters to housing supply or pricing, unless having a foreign owner affects who can live there or dramatically changes the strata fees or something. The strata voted to dissolve itself, sell the land and pay out all the owners. The buyers of the land in this case were, ironically for Lauster who has dismissed the impact of foreign capital on the Vancouver real estate market, very likely foreign funded.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
Wow, thats not something I had ever considered happening. I assume a lot of owners were pissed off about having to move.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Wow, thats not something I had ever considered happening. I assume a lot of owners were pissed off about having to move. It used to require unanimous agreement in the strata to sell in BC, but BC did away with that mid-2016, making it require only 80% support because all-praise redevelopment and anything that keeps driving up speculative land values. (AB and ON don't require unanimous support either, but unsure of what their threshold is.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 22:43
|
|
|
James Baud posted:It used to require unanimous agreement to sell in BC, but BC did away with that just three-ish years ago, making it require only 80% support because all-praise redevelopment and anything that keeps driving up speculative land values. (AB and ON don't require unanimous support either, but unsure of what their threshold is.) Private companies often have bring-along clauses like that so that an investor holding 1% cant keep a sale from going through, but I didnt think about it in the real estate context. I wonder where to look for the ON threshold...
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Wow, thats not something I had ever considered happening. I assume a lot of owners were pissed off about having to move. A friend of mine's parents live in a similar strata not too far from Oakridge, that went through this process recently. I don't think they decided to sell in the end, but from the sounds of it there was an unholy combination of bitter acrimony and lawsuits which basically tore the strata community apart. Fun times. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 23:46
|
|
James Baud posted:It used to require unanimous agreement in the strata to sell in BC, but BC did away with that mid-2016, making it require only 80% support because all-praise redevelopment and anything that keeps driving up speculative land values. (AB and ON don't require unanimous support either, but unsure of what their threshold is.) Have you had to deal with a strata before? Pretty sure my old one couldn't get a 100% unanimous vote on anything. If only because there are multiple bitter rivalries between the old ladies who would vote against each other out of spite.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
UnfortunateSexFart posted:Have you had to deal with a strata before? Pretty sure my old one couldn't get a 100% unanimous vote on anything. If only because there are multiple bitter rivalries between the old ladies who would vote against each other out of spite. My strata is pretty great and everyone is fairly respectful but despite that getting 50 ish people to 100% agree on anything is nigh impossible. People just have different views, especially in terms of what a home represents. Guaranteed there will always be one person who doesn't want to move, unless the amount they're getting paid is astronomical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:The strata voted to dissolve itself, sell the land and pay out all the owners. The buyers of the land in this case were, ironically for Lauster who has dismissed the impact of foreign capital on the Vancouver real estate market, very likely foreign funded. Yeah at least one of the listed owners on the numbered company that bought it has also been active in Richmond politics fighting against restrictions on mansion size in the Agricultural Land Reserve.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
In comedy news, though: https://www.thestar.com/vancouver/2019/01/11/surrey-real-estate-lawyer-sentenced-to-eight-months-of-house-arrest-for-tax-evasion.html quote:A Surrey lawyer has been sentenced to eight months of house arrest for tax evasion for not reporting $1.28 million of taxable income related to real-estate transactions, according to the Canada Revenue Agency. quote:He provided real-estate legal services through his law corporation and did real estate lending through Ferengi Trading. "Hey we need a private mortgage. This guy who named his company after shady fictional scam-artists sounds legit..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
House arrest? That sounds like a major theft from the Canadian government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
There's a new poll out by Abacus on housing. Turns out affordable housing is the most important issue for millennials and millennials would really like to be able to buy property one day. Who'd have thunk it?   No surprise that low supply and foreign buyers show as a major influence in Vancouver but not elsewhere. Of all these things on the chart these would be the easiest and most direct things for the government to tackle, so if the government wanted to improve affordability in the rest of Canada where low supply and foreign buyers are not perceived to be an issue, they're stuck with much less options. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Jan 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 04:18
|
|
|
Govt spending at 58% lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 04:22
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Govt spending at 58% lol. Regan mind hosed all the olds with the whole "It's not a revenue problem its a spending problem". Stupid fucks bought it hook line and sinker, now their social safety net is full of person-sized holes that I hope they fall through before the next generation does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
apatheticman posted:Regan mind hosed all the olds with the whole "It's not a revenue problem its a spending problem". True, but this poll was just of millennials (18-38). Not a lot of them were politically receptive during the Reagan years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 05:30
|
|