|
Baronjutter posted:My wife on the other hand does not. She wants big windows and sun and a little more space. She wants to not be so close to her in-laws even though they don't really interact with us, it's more just the principle. She also works in insurance (how the gently caress doesn't this guy know about condo insurance eh?) and every day she's writing policies for people beaming about their brand new house or condo. She also works with people who recently bought, or have ties to real-estate so all she hears is that we're not in a bubble, that the bubble will never burst because *best place on earth*, and that as a young couple we NEED to buy a "starter home" to start building equity (this is the hugest bullshit). All I have to counter is "well see some people on something awful said... no honey we can't they'll pee on me... no your co-workers realtor husband is wrong and these goons are right because they just are, they like know math and all these financial terms I don't understand, trust me!" You should sever, clearly your wife is cheating on you with real estate developers. Have you considered therapy? My mother recently bought a house. She went through a divorce and they split the proceeds from the old one. I tried desperately to get her to rent but she insisted that "renting is for fools, I'm at a point in my life where I can own!" I can see where this mind set came from. The family house she sold literally tripled in price since they bought it; yet she refuses to believe that there could be a real estate bubble "because the nice realtor says there isn't" 
Rutibex fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jul 31, 2013 |
#
¿
Jul 31, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:21 |
|
|
Lexicon posted:Umm, I don't give a gently caress about people buying anything they like. Don't worry they won't have to reduce themselves to begging. They already have it covered! They're just going to take the money directly from your bank account when they need it, Cyprus style: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/04/02/f-rfa-macdonald-canada-cyprus-banks.html
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Yeah, agreed. I only make the claim because there has been talk in months past in this thread that the banks would blow up when the crash eventually comes. Don't worry in the event of a crisis they have already set up a contingency plan; the tax payers will be safe! http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/04/04/jim_flahertys_cyprusstyle_bank_rescue_plan_walkom.html
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:Oh yeah I forgot about China. Yeah that would about do it. The thing about China is; push comes to shove they are still mostly a centralized system. It doesn't really matter if their capitalist financial system collapses, government enterprises will run if the Chinese Communist Party wants them to run. They would not even bat an eye if rationing or price controls where needed to stave off any kind of financial crisis. Building so many luxury apartments may be a waste of resources, but it's not going to create a crisis like it would in a capitalist economy. It does however put many people to work doing something at least semi-productive. When other places are slashing budgets, China continues to grow. In fact, all these corrupt new wealthy Chinese capitalists have invested heavily in these bogus projects. When the market collapses it will take at lot of these capitalists with it. Sounds like a good way of controlling the oligarchs so they don't get stupid like the USSR and think about splitting up the company 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2014 11:39
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I'm honestly baffled that so many people are so keen to become amateur landlords. First off, all the usual detractor talking points aside (high transaction costs, illiquid, etc) - it's simply a terrible investment generally. Net of all costs, a condo in most places in say, BC, will barely break 4% in annual return, and that's assuming all goes to plan. People like the feeling of having power over others. It makes them feel smart "Heh this idiot is paying my mortgage for me; I'm such an advanced investment genius!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:He is much luckier than I in that he will not have to live through the coming train wreck that will result from his policies. He doesn't deserve a parade. He was a millionaire; lets be honest he was never going to have to live with the consequences of his policies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:gently caress golf courses. Seriously just loving been golf now. Minigolf is the sport of kings. Unfortunately my favorite course was bulldozed so that a Wal-Mart could move two blocks down the road and pay slightly less rent 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Serious question: how do we fix this poo poo in the least painful way? How do we deflate the bubble without totally destroying the economy and completing screwing over a vast majority of "home owners" ? Or at least how do we do it in the way that will have the least overall negative effects on society, and then how do we keep it from happening again? Simple: everyone gets to own the property they currently live in and all mortgages are nullified.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
 Oh no the bankers and landlords would be ruined!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
on the left posted:Yes, a multi-billion dollar handout to people who probably already have decent jobs and definitely already have a house. What a good idea!  Everyone lives somewhere, that includes people that are renting. It would be a bigger handout to low income people. Everyone would get something unless you are literally homeless.*Homeless people should be given free homes as well* Rutibex fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Jun 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Re the 'bankers', do you have a pension, federal or otherwise? If yes, you're taking money out of your own pocket, as that's who owns all the mortgages in the country, and that's who would lose if you torched mortgages. Combine with a guaranteed minimum income. Any important businesses that fail due to the transition are nationalized. Bam, done.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Wasting posted:You'd be providing a payout to the the richest 70%+ of the population. The people who would most need that money do not have mortgages. This is a stupid idea, and you are stupid for suggesting it. People that are currently renting would now own their property and no longer need to pay rent. It would also be an anti-payout to anyone that owned rental property or investments in mortgages. It's not perfect egalitarianism but it's a lot closer to it than we have now and would cause a lot less social disruption. FrozenVent posted:And the Romano Fafard sets off in search of a new planet to relocate six billion dumbasses. I had no idea there was a Canadian Star Trek. I wish it was in english 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Wasting posted:I'll take back the stupid comment if you can provide a reasonable answer to ownership claims, in the case of someone renting from someone with a mortgage on their property (this is very common now, with condos and townhouses). Similarly, what about people renting from a rental agency? Its quite simple; ownership transfers to whoever the current resident is. In the case of apartment buildings/condos/town homes the ownership becomes a common co-operative with each resident having an equal share. Obviously a moratorium on evictions would be necessary right before. Any currently vacant residences go into a common pool to be distributed to the homeless. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jun 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
Wasting posted:So if someone were renting their house to three people, it would now become a cooperative between the owner and the three people it was rented to? I'm about as far left as you can get, but that's basically confiscating property, and it's completely unrealistic. Yeah I can understand situations where people are renting out rooms in their house becoming difficult; maybe in those cases the renters could be classified as homeless and have access to the common pool of vacant properties (with a rent subsidy until something become available/built in the mean time)? There is already a distinction in rental law for people that rent space that has common kitchen/facilitates with the owner.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Because you didn't get my sarcasm earlier: This is completely unrealistic; utopic would be using too kind a word. It won't happen short of the kind of social upheaval that would make this housing bubble a trivial issue. You're wasting your time talking about a fantasy most people grow out of before they graduate college. You're right of course  New plan: Wait for the housing bubble to burst and prey the powers that be don't steal too much from the public to shore up their insolvent banks so as to preserving their position in society.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:At the of of the post of mine you quoted I specifically mentioned a much more quick and aggressive option. Socialist paradise theories aside, arbitrarily nuking debt would gently caress up the structure of capital markets for years. Killing debt wouldn't gently caress up 'the banks' or whatever straw man bad guy you throw up... It would most hurt the 'average joe' whose pension is comprised at a significant level of investments in structured mortgage and consumer debt. By the time that it's my turn to collect anything resembling a pension or social security it will be long gone from 30 years of neoliberal budget cuts and banking crisis. Excuse me if I don't really give a gently caress when I have a mountain of student debt to worry about now. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 17:37 on Jun 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Neither is throwing out ridiculous hypotheticals that will never ever happen. From the moment I have become politically aware the world has been getting worse; more wars, more riots, more inequality, more cuts, more poverty, more unemployment. How is it unreasonable to project this trend into the future? What is going to stop it? Have public services not been continuously privatized to ill effect? Have pensions not been cut or destroyed by banking crisis? Nothing has improved in my entire lifetime; why should I assume it ever will if I just sit back and wait?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Nationalized banking is literally the worst idea. Who backstops personal deposits when it's the government that's holding them? How does the government have the knowledge or capability to run a bank effectively? Your right best we leave the real power to people that are accountable to no one rather than those shifty elected politicians. As we all know it's impossible to consult and appoint experts.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Comments like that one seem to be made out of a heartfelt wish for how government should be - rather than taking into account the actual greed, incompetence, and capture that inevitably always occurs. Basically yeah. I'd rather see the banks nationalized than bailed out for being "too big to fail". The public is going to be paying for this when the poo poo bubble pops ether way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:On balance it's hard to find examples of businesses that have been run better in government hands. It's also telling that the largest government bureaucracy in the world looked at nationalizing banks in the wake of 2008, when it arguably would have had more political / popular support than any time in its history, and decided it was a bad idea relative to other policy options. I'm pretty sure China has the biggest government bureaucracy in the world not the USA.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
Kafka Esq. posted:Lexicon, did you just go on the Bank of Canada website to do that? I feel like we just did that exact same thing here. My grandparents bought their house for $60,000 and recently retired and sold it for $1.2 million. My parents bought a house for $150,000 and last year sold it for $650,000. This was after the city took a quarter of the yard to build a sidewalk and gave them a fat cheque for $50,000 for their troubles (that my stepfather used to buy a Hummer). They keep asking me why I am so irresponsible and haven't settled down and bought a house yet; it's a great investment! 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Bleu posted:Do that many Canadians even cook? All I see are statistics and reports that say that Median Modern Two-Income Household barely cooks at all. Like this one I found in a few minutes: http://www.ats-sea.agr.gc.ca/inter/5527-eng.htm Anecdotal but 2 friends I know "made it" they both have very nice jobs and renovated their kitchens. Granite countertops, brand new gas oven, super expensive pots and pans, professional knives (I love these), the works. They both eat out 6 days a week. I can't afford to eat out; I cook every day. I use a 30 year old electric stove, with plastic countertops and a $10 walmart knife set
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
PT6A posted:There's a big difference between things that are just cosmetic (granite countertops) and things that can be expensive, but are clearly better or more useful, like good knives, a gas range instead of electric, or good quality pots and pans (though those are, I would say, much less helpful than good knifes and a gas range). Yeah I have cooked in their kitchen and believe me I notice a difference. The knives alone are a huge deal. They also have stuff like a professional mixer, a deep frier, professional food processor, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:Something like that. My girlfriend works in that big building attached to the Eaton centre and says the same thing as Rime: even when they turn on the AC in the morning the office doesn't cool down until 11 AM-12 PM. This is part of some green initiative or something. Yeah the same "green initiative" that meant the owners never turned the AC on in the back kitchen where I worked in the height of summer. Strangely enough their head office always seemed exempt from those environmental concerns.... Those deep friers went up to 450 degrees 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Rime posted:
That's for chumps; this is how its done: 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The only reason they don't own is because prices are too high. They complain it's yet another case of "being poor is expensive" in that they have to waste their money renting rather than building equity owning and that the government needs to "do something" to make it easier for them to get their starter condo so they can get in on the property ladder. It's really distressing to hear educated left-wing folk basically saying the government needs to do MORE to make debt more available. Ironically if the government raised interest rates it would do wonders for the affordability of houses.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Does this mean that smaller cities will grow as those small towns get abandoned, or will we just see places like Toronto and NYC get even bigger? Los Angeles 2019 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The slighest dip in home value or the economy can absolutely screw this sort of person over, and we've structured our entire financial system to encourage poeple like this to exist. I don't know if it's just short term stupidity or an actual "people up to their eyeballs in debt to sustain a very comfortable life don't rock the political boat" way of controlling society and ensuring the status quo is maintained. It's the structure of capitalism. When you pay people less than the value that they produce debt levels need to continue to increase or no one would be able to afford anything. Think about it. The economy produces X amount of products. The producers of said products are paid X-profit. People will never have enough money to buy everything they produce unless they go into debt. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Jesus gently caress, is that before or after tax? Maybe I've been oblivious to how hosed the rest of Canada is, after all...  that would be before and after tax due to Canadas tax structure.As a resident of Ontario I did not find that level of pay unusual; so yes you are oblivious.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
eXXon posted:“People think I make a lot of money because I do, and because I spent $4,000 a month on housing and loving wine combined as a single man and still have enough money left over to buy thousand-dollar suits regularly, dick around in Vegas and max out my RRSP contributions... but the taxes!” drat $800 a month on wine (not counting eating out). I could drink a bottle of liquor every day on that budget, or an ounce of fine weed every week. This guy must be blasted out of his mind 24/7 if he's getting wine with dinner too. I feel he is not being taxed enough.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I would probably tone down the loathsome talk until they start having $300 monthly expenses for throwing empty bottle at homeless people, or memberships at the dwarf tossing range. They are wealthy idiots, not Pol Pot. It doesn't bother me that they spend $800 on booze every month. It bothers me that they do it at the same time as they complain about their taxes and whine about how poor they are.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:And I dunno, even if all these people default on their mortgages anyways they'll have probably paid a million or two in taxes and blown through another million or two in all the poo poo they've consumed. Those taxes go towards running government services which they have constantly consumed. They haven't "broken even" if they pay a million in taxes over their lives and default on a million dollar insured mortgage.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Read it and weep, millenailures: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/07/19/richest-seniors-ever-how-the-luckiest-generation-keeps-making-money-and-spending-it/ I have suddenly developed a hankering for some Soilent Green.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:This is, of course, a country that pays bureaucrats to taste cheese for sufficient differentiation from domestic offerings before permitting import at a non-punitive tariff, so I really shouldn't be surprised. How do I get this job?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Look at this NIMBYesque vancouverite. Yeah our city does this too. It's really not all that bad once you get into the hang of it; the bin has a good seal on it no rotting food smell escapes into the kitchen. Separating out the recycling and food waste we only generate one bag of garbage per week now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 05:46
|
|
but my family and some friends bother with it and it's working out pretty good.
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, I can't say I have a particular problem with it either. Where did the idea come from that people who write software embrace objectivism? It seems to have caught on around here, and I can't figure out why. Even I, everyone's favourite right-winger around these parts, think Ayn Rand is a heinous woman whose writings are only of any use whatsoever if one runs out of toilet paper. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Yo embed that poo poo. I love how everything has a asterisk after it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Because generalizing all people who are sufficiently financially independent to own property isn't just as lovely as any other sweeping generalization about a group of people. No sorry, wealthism is not "just as lovely" as racism. eat the rich
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Saltin posted:I'm not advocating for it, since I am successful and happy within the current system but it is an option for those who are directing vitriol in this thread toward "people with money". There is nothing inherently wrong with having money. If you're unhappy about the system that allows people who aren't you to get ahead, do something about it. That might include socialist revolution, it might include making better life choices. I don't know, since I don't know what anyone else's deal is. So you would prefer a mob of angry peasants storm up to your house and turn it into a homeless shelter in the name of the peoples revolution than get bad words directed to you on the internet?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:21 |
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:I can't believe I didn't think of posting about it back when we were talking about people living in containers in Saskatchewan. It never surprises me any more when the world becomes more and more like Snowcrash.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 17:31
|
|