# Downsizing in retirement



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

There is a considerable percentage of people who decide to downsize and move when they go into retirement. There are a lot of sensible reasons for considering this. For example, you can sell up in the city, move to a lower priced area of the country and free up considerable capital in many cases, which you can then invest, etc. You can reduce living expenses like property taxes. Many people take freed up capital, buy an RV and plan to travel around N. America for a period time (usually winters) each year. Probably the most common example of this 'downsizing' thinking is a move from a house to a condo. You can just 'lock the door and go' is a major attraction of doing that for people who want to do increased travel after retiring. Lots of reasons to consider such a change obviously.

However, it may or may not work out as anticipated. The question then becomes, how to know if it is right for you? That is the topic I am offering for discussion here.

I have gone through this personally as well as having met quite a few others who also made such a move. I observed several primary factors that people struggled with. We moved into a new condo complex and over half the buyers were recent retirees. That provided a fairly broad range of observable examples. Many were in fact actually downsizing in terms of home size but without actually realizing what that would mean. They tried to put say 2500 Sq. ft. of household goods into a 1200 Sq. ft. condo. One couple complained their storage locker in the underground parking garage was too small. I noticed that they had 6 large plastic tote boxes of Lego included. When I asked why they had all that Lego, it was for when the grandkids visited! A small point but a good example of what may be important to one person vs. another and totally incompatible with 'downsizing'. If you cannot get rid of half your possessions, downsizing may not be for you.

Quite a few found having to obey condo bylaws and rules as to what you can and cannot do was difficult for them to accept. No you cannot hang laundry, store your bicycle or paint a mural, on your balcony. If you insist that all condo rules be rules that you are happy to live with, condo life is probably not for you.

In my own case, a major factor for my wife was the loss of having her own garden. I was happy to give up all the maintenance of a home like cleaning roof gutters, etc. My wife thought that the increased freedom to just lock up and go would be more important than having a garden but she missed the garden more than she liked the freedom. There is no way to know that kind of thing ahead of time. 

Which brings me to my own answer to my question of how do you know if it is right for you? The answer is that you don't and can't until you try it. We tried it and it found it wasn't for us, YET. That then brings me to what I believe we learned from trying it. 

Usually, this kind of decision is made based on 'future' needs and anticipation of them. If you move to a condo now, you won't have to think about making another move when you become unable to physically do what is required to maintain your own house and garden etc. Seems sensible to anticipate that. But is is NOT in my opinion. What makes sense is to do what works for you NOW, not in the future. Worry about the future when or IF you get there.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Longtimeago said:


> What makes sense is to do what works for you NOW, not in the future. Worry about the future when or IF you get there.


Agree completely.

When we moved from Vancouver to a somewhat remote, off-grid, oceanfront acreage some years ago we had friends there (and in other big cities where I had lived, including Toronto and Los Angeles) telling me that I was a big city kid and suggesting that maybe I was making a mistake and, OMG, maybe we won't like our new living situation. My answer to them was always along the line of, well, if we don't like it, then we'll change it. How simple is that? Nothing has to be written in stone or forever. As it turns out, the relocation has surpassed our expectations. But we were prepared to change course if things had not gone as planned. I told friends that I would rather try it and find it unsuitable than not try it and always wonder about the path not taken.

So I agree about the sense of such things as moving into a condo when it's really not what you want today, but you rationalize it on the basis that "someday I'll be old and infirm and it will suit me then". Believe it or not, some of those folks actually pass on before becoming old and broken down. 

The other one I hear all the time, even from people in their 50s or younger, is the desire to buy a house with no stairs, as insurance against the day when they cannot manage stairs. That one always makes me laugh. Same thing. Who says you'll live that long or become that decrepit? Moreover, for me anyway, I reckon that if I am so enfeebled that a staircase represents an insurmountable obstacle, I belong in a nursing home or, better yet, the beneficiary of a suicide, assisted or otherwise. 

On the topic of stairs, my father, who lived to close to 100, lived with my mother in their Toronto home until their last year. My father, in winter and it was more cold and icy than he wanted to deal with in taking exercise by going for a walk, would spend 20 minutes or so a day climbing the stairs from the basement to the second floor. He was doing that in his 90s. He always said stairs were one of the best forms of exercise. I think he was right. I think gyms that people pay to use these days have equipment called "stair climbers", or so I have heard. 

One thing I really appreciate about living where we do and in the way we do, is one gets regular exercise without thinking about it. The notion of paying to go to a gym and be around a bunch of people you probably would not care to invite to dinner leaves me feeling queasy. Where we live, it's a rather physical existence. Always stuff to do. No place to be a couch potato. I still refuse to break down and buy a splitter for the 5 cords or so of firewood I bring in each year. I can happily swing an 8-pound maul for a few hours. I use a 10-pound sledge and steel wedges for the tough stuff. Will I end up in a condo someday? Maybe. Hope not. I'd rather go out where I am, with my steel-toed boots on. My wife can then chop me up and use me to bait our prawn and crab traps. Perhaps a small chunk to jig for a ling cod or a snapper. Nothing wasted. Maybe after a few years my wife will move into a condo. At least if she can keep her flock of chickens and if they can free range in the neighbourhood.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Different strokes for different folks. We got together as a couple 7 years ago after retirement, sold our relatively modest places in AB, and upsized to a large 3400 square foot walkout ranch with a pool in the BC Okanagan with a grand lake view. Lots of maintenance and extra costs that are now starting to wear on us as we enter our 70s. Maybe another 3-5 years of this before we throw in the towel.

Not sure what we will be looking for but likely something half the size, and ideally a bungalow in a strata retirement community where we have the pleasures of a single home with minimal maintenance. I won't have trouble ruthlessly getting rid of stuff but spouse will.

Added: Currently like the concept of a strata retirement community (village) where we can be as independent as we like, but also can potentially be part of a social community, but time will tell. There are a number of such arrangements/options in the Okanagan (different styles) so will see what hits our buttons then. A box condo doesn't sound terribly appealing. And if we don't like it, well, as MP says, can always make another change at a later date.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Yeah, I do think about this stuff a fair bit. When I retired 13 years ago I bought a small 1200 sq. ft bungalow in a really nice older neighborhood. My thinking was that it was a size I could maintain until I fall down dead. I don't hold onto much stuff and I'm sure it would easily fit today into a condo, but the idea of that just creeps me out. I'd be miserable. I hope I fall down my stairs before that happens. I do use my long basement stairs as an exercise device (as Mukhang pera points out), so the stair falling may well be my demise.

I get tons of exercise, with biking at least an hour and a half a day, and shoveling snow off my 100 foot driveway in the winter and generally taking care of my house. I see my young 40 year old neighbor next door paying for all lawn and snow care and then pays to go to a gym - go figure.

When I'm doing a job around the house I find myself asking how long I'll be able to that particular job when I'm in my 80's and 90's. I was up on my roof caulking some flashing last week and also climbed my backyard tree to trim some branches, so I suppose that's the kind of thing I'll have to hire someone to do when I'm older. I often fashion my projects and work so that in the future that same job may be easier for an old fool.

If you suddenly get sick, I suspect attitudes change pretty quick, so I'll just go day to day and enjoy it.

ltr


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Sounds like the right attitude, ltr.

I am adhere strongly to the view that the longer you carry on doing the type of physical chores you describe, the longer you'll be _able_ to carry on. Once you stop and do less, then your capacity adjusts accordingly, and you lose the ability to do some things. Of course, there comes a point when, if one lives long enough, one must accept _some_ decline in capacity for physical tasks. But I am convinced that the more you do, the more you are able to do. When I was a kid, older people were encouraged to become sedentary. There was a view that older folks would live longer by doing nothing. I think that view no longer holds, at least not universally.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Sudden health issues can derail plans in a hurry, so a reason why not to get too stubborn or entrenched in one's ideas.

I have relocated more than a dozen times as an adult, so have no aversion to moving yet again.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> I have relocated more than a dozen times as an adult, so have no aversion to moving yet again.


haha, I just added up my moves and it's 10, so you beat me, but my moves did include 6 different cities - all in Ontario.

I think you went to the States though?

ltr


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

My US moves included Alaska, Oklahoma, Texas and DC/Virginia while my Canadian moves were from Nfld to BC (back and forth GTA/Calgary a few times).


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> My US moves included Alaska, Oklahoma, Texas and DC/Virginia while my Canadian moves were from Nfld to BC (back and forth GTA/Calgary a few times).


OMG, you are the traveling man for sure. 

I do know that some people love to travel and can't wait to retire so they can spend time doing just that. Me, I truly hate it. 

I was so glad to retire and take back control of my life and decide where I would live. My work required travel and I did not enjoy it at all. I was a single parent and every time being away from home was a logistical nightmare. I remember living in a hotel room as a part of my job for about half a year in Montreal trying to keep my life together for my kids in another city. Lots of telephone time for sure. Everyone has their own story.

I often think when I read about someone who wants to travel in retirement, that they have led a sheltered life in one place and so pine for new experiences in exotic places, at least in their minds. Those that have spent their careers traveling, I'll bet most of them would rather settle into one situation and not spend any more time with this travelling balony. 

If I want to experience the joy of travel, I will watch a travel show on TV. It's a great way to see all the things foreign places have to offer without the hassle, nightmare and expense of actually traveling.

ltr


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

like_to_retire said:


> I get tons of exercise, with biking at least an hour and a half a day, and shoveling snow off my 100 foot driveway in the winter and generally taking care of my house. I see my young 40 year old neighbor next door paying for all lawn and snow care and then pays to go to a gym - go figure.
> 
> When I'm doing a job around the house I find myself asking how long I'll be able to that particular job when I'm in my 80's and 90's. I was up on my roof caulking some flashing last week and also climbed my backyard tree to trim some branches, so I suppose that's the kind of thing I'll have to hire someone to do when I'm older. I often fashion my projects and work so that in the future that same job may be easier for an old fool.


I'm not a big fan of yard work either and though I do it now, I will likely pay someone in the years ahead. I like to get my exercise doing the things I enjoy doing. I've always done everything myself (when possible) to keep costs down and to make sure the job is done correctly but as time goes on I feel less inclined to do all those tasks. I'll likely downsize to something lower maintenance when chores become too much or expensive but I don't see that happening in the near future.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> I have relocated more than a dozen times as an adult, so have no aversion to moving yet again.


Wow, that's a lot ... I've only moved 3 times in my life, all in the same city.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

...


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I've seen enough aunts and uncles and my own mother be handicapped, or at least dangerously challenged, by stairs that eventually traps them on one floor. None of them were yet in any need to be 'committed'. Our big walkout rancher is effectively a bungalow with our master on the main floor. There is rarely a need to be on the lower level and our next downsized home will definitely be only one floor.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

cainvest said:


> like_to_retire said:
> 
> 
> > haha, I just added up my moves and it's 10, so you beat me, but my moves did include 6 different cities - all in Ontario.
> ...


IIRC I am at sixteen moves involving six different cities in two countries.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Longtimeago said:


> ... Usually, this kind of decision is made based on 'future' needs and anticipation of them. If you move to a condo now, you won't have to think about making another move when you become unable to physically do what is required to maintain your own house and garden etc. Seems sensible to anticipate that. But is is NOT in my opinion. What makes sense is to do what works for you NOW, not in the future.
> 
> Worry about the future when or IF you get there.


I don't think one size fits all. I personally would have no problem moving but others do. Then there's the warning signs that indicate a move should be coming soon that I see older folks ignoring. Then when the worst hits, they fight their kids who are forced to move them.


Cheers


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Plugging Along said:


> ...


An insightful post, reflecting what many on cmf are probably thinking, while displaying an impressive economy of language.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Mukhang pera said:


> An insightful post, reflecting what many on cmf are probably thinking, while displaying an impressive economy of language.


Lol…:excitement: Sometimes less is more. I had a very long post at first that was a bit rambling, but for some reason was not able to delete it. I thought would edit it and then put it back later, however, three dots is all it came out too.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

This forum software sucks... It doesn't allow full deletion of posts. So we end up with 'nothing' posts.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

When DW and I got together in 1995, we each left large estates behind with our spouses (5000+ sq.ft.). So we ended up in a 3300 sq.ft. penthouse in West Vancouver. By 2007, we decided on a lifestyle investment in Mexico so purchased a condo. Now we are looking for a more modern building closer to the beach, and purchased new construction for 2185 sq.ft.

We have maids in both places so the size is not a problem. Each has 3 bedrooms.

So the idea of downsizing does not wash with us. If we see the need for extra help perhaps we will hire them but right it suits us fine.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

I own a modest 1000 sq ft house. My girlfriend sold her 1400 sq ft house last year when she retired and downsized to a 1100 sq ft rental (we had just started dating). Now we both have to purge even more stuff when she moves in with me in fall after her lease ends. We'd both like to stay in my house for several reasons so a lot of stuff has to go make 1000 sq. ft. feasible.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> ... Usually, this kind of decision is made based on 'future' needs and anticipation of them. If you move to a condo now, you won't have to think about making another move when you become unable to physically do what is required to maintain your own house and garden etc. Seems sensible to anticipate that. But is is NOT in my opinion. What makes sense is to do what works for you NOW, not in the future. Worry about the future when or IF you get there.


LTA, I'm not sure the decision to downsize is "usually" based on future needs. I suspect most who move before they need to (for health reasons) are either freeing up capital from their house, moving to be closer to family, or moving to a more desirable retirement climate and lifestyle. I suppose we could call those future needs though.

I agree that otherwise, your current situation should be your priority. I think what is more often the problem is that people don't move when their current health or mobility is saying that they should. If they have the resources to stay and pay for the support they need - no problem. But I have seen instances where the children have to step-in in a major way. Sometimes that works for everyone involved, sometimes not.

My parents lived in a 4-level split (stairs x4) until they were age 86 & 84. Fortunately they decided on their own when the steps had become a larger fall risk than reliable exercise, and when the dementia of one was affecting their ability to cook and clean properly. They chose to move into a retirement apartment - no stairs, no cleaning, served dining room meals. I'm hoping I'll know like they did, when it is time to pull the plug on our own 4-level split house (or die before mobility/health decline makes that necessary).


----------



## martik777 (Jun 25, 2014)

The cost to downsize is significant, easily 50k just for commission, transfer taxes, legal, moving and maybe another 20-30k for renos. If you change your mind add another 50k. If you move from a major center like metro Vancouver to a rural town, your grocery costs can double, access to medical will be limited and travel costs to visit the family back home must be factored in. The thought of living in a condo is depressing, reminds me of when I was a kid living in an apartment, too many rules, ridiculous strata fees, no EV charging and no space. Maintaining my house, garden, workshop has been an enjoyable part of my retirement for many years.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

We downsized from 3700 sq feet to an 8X8X16 container which we put into storage for a 10 months while we traveled and then rented a furnished apt for a few months. After that it was four years of renting until we purchased again. Travel, and renting changed our thoughts a little about what type of home we wanted next.

Downsizing to the container took some work but looking back we are glad that we did it this way. It forced us to think in real terms about downsizing and we do not regret it. In fact, there were still some things in that container that we have since given away because we did not need or want them. We wanted a lock on leave. No pets, no plants. We bought in a well managed HOA area that takes care of snow removal and all gardening. Our neighbours check each others homes since most are like us and travel frequently for longer periods of time.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

martik777 said:


> The cost to downsize is significant, easily 50k just for commission, transfer taxes, legal, moving and maybe another 20-30k for renos. If you change your mind add another 50k. If you move from a major center like metro Vancouver to a rural town, your grocery costs can double, access to medical will be limited and travel costs to visit the family back home must be factored in. The thought of living in a condo is depressing, reminds me of when I was a kid living in an apartment, too many rules, ridiculous strata fees, no EV charging and no space. Maintaining my house, garden, workshop has been an enjoyable part of my retirement for many years.


The cost of a move is indeed significant but it is not the 'end of the world' if one gets it wrong. Think your specific view of the world is rather narrow (limited?) since we know for a fact (from direct family members) having moved from Vancouver to the Okanagan. I can assure you the Central Interior has well established medical/hospital/surgery facilities and lower food costs (among other goods and services) than Vancouver. Almost everything is more expensive in Vancouver due to the cost of higher overhead, i.e. business rents, etc. Obviously, such moves are very situational based on family and friends and social networks too.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Our driver for downsizing was lifestyle. Yes, it cost to downsize and sell but for us it was either that or drop 200K into the house for renos. One of our pleasant surprises while traveling was having zero home costs. Surprising how those costs add up.

We are spending significantly less money on our home. Taxes are down from 7K to 3K. So is everything else from utilities and insurance through to mtce. Not to mention that we did not want to keep six bedrooms, four bathrooms, and three levels of home maintained. Inside and out.

The real win has been lifestyle. We were fortunate. Four years renting a very nice condo on a golf course convinced us that condo living, elevators, common areas were not for us. If someone were to ask us for advice on a downsize move and was not certain what they wanted our strong advice would be to rent for a year in order to really determine where and what type of downsize is best for you.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Stairs keep you young until you fall down them.

"Says the guy who continues to live in a 5 level backsplit for the last 37 years.":cocksure:


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

like_to_retire said:


> OMG, you are the traveling man for sure.
> 
> I do know that some people love to travel and can't wait to retire so they can spend time doing just that. Me, I truly hate it.
> 
> ...


Many people do not have an interest in travel but you cannot jump to, "Those that have spent their careers traveling, I'll bet most of them would rather settle into one situation and not spend any more time with this travelling balony." That may be your opinion but it hardly makes drawing a conclusion based on your opinion logical. I travelled extensively while working, have always loved travel and continue to do so. So my view alone equates to your single view and cancels out any possible conclusion being reached as to how most who have travelled for business might view travel in retirement.

What I never understood when I was working and travelling on business, is why people who did not want to travel started or stayed in a job that required them to travel. Duhhh.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

cainvest said:


> I'm not a big fan of yard work either and though I do it now, I will likely pay someone in the years ahead. I like to get my exercise doing the things I enjoy doing. I've always done everything myself (when possible) to keep costs down and to make sure the job is done correctly but as time goes on I feel less inclined to do all those tasks. I'll likely downsize to something lower maintenance when chores become too much or expensive but I don't see that happening in the near future.


As time goes on, how someone views yard work, maintenance, projects, etc. will change obviously. When I was working, I would not take on any project that I could not complete in a long weekend. My free time was worth more to me than the cost of paying someone to do something. When I no longer needed to work for a living, that changed as I had more than enough free time and did not mind starting a project that might take me a week or two to do myself. More recently, I find that there are two kinds of jobs I will not do myself, those I no longer feel I am physically able to do happily and those I simply see as 'work' and would just rather not do myself if I can afford to pay someone else to do them.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> I've seen enough aunts and uncles and my own mother be handicapped, or at least dangerously challenged, by stairs that eventually traps them on one floor. None of them were yet in any need to be 'committed'. Our big walkout rancher is effectively a bungalow with our master on the main floor. There is rarely a need to be on the lower level and our next downsized home will definitely be only one floor.


Stairs are indeed an issue for some people as they age. Interestingly, if you watch the UK tv series like 'Escape to the Country', how some people view living on one floor quite different from here in N. America. You will see people referring to a 'bungalow' as a derogatory word. In their culture, 'bungalow' has always been associated with being for 'old people'. Also you will see people expressing discomfort with the idea of bedrooms being on the ground floor. They perceive it as 'unsafe', that is if someone breaks into your house, you are at more risk. Hilarious.

I had quite a few discussions on this subject when living in the UK. I would ask people why they thought two story houses were build rather than something like a ranch style bungalow that is far more common here in N. America. Not why did they believe two stories was preferable, why were they build with two stories rather than just one? Most had difficulty trying to answer that question. 

A builder can build twice the square footage on a lot half as large and it will also cost half as much to roof it. That is the primary reason to build up rather than out. There is no actual advantage to adding a second story and stairs from the resident's side at all. But once something becomes the norm, people invent reasons for preferring it, like it's 'safer' or single story is only for 'old people'.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I traveled for business. Sometimes so much so that my spouse referred to herself a single mother at times. And we both traveled internationally for company functions. In between we renovated three homes and moved a few times. We traveled on vacation-with and without children. Been retired for eight years. Started it with seven months of travel. Now we do two-three months of international travel twice a year with some short last minutes in between.

We both like to travel. As does our son...who worked his way through the 'stans' a few years ago. Daughter likes the comforts of high end resorts, AI's as do we from time to time. To each his/her own. It is why we went for a lock and leave home environment.

It is an interest. No different than gardening, woodworking, or restoring vintage automobiles. Working on a fall trip now, and an extended winter trip in Jan. Independent travel involves some hard work but is rewarding for us. Perhaps later we will do less independent/spontaneous and more of the longer term condo rental or cruise type of trips.

As for ground floor units in multi story condos....our experience after shopping and working the market for four years is that they are harder to sell often yield a slightly lower price. As our realtor says, few single women that she has had as clients would ever consider a ground floor condo or apt. Not saying I agree with this, just our experience in shopping for real estate and dealing with a very experienced real estate sales person. 

Dirt is expensive. We looked at a few of those three story jobs on 30 foot lots that were marketed to our age group. Master bedroom on the top floor. No thanks. Why on earth would the two of us want three small footprint levels plus a basement that could be developed. No more renos for us. Very happy to live on one level now. We paid more for less but it is on one floor in a great location. It is all about trade offs. 1400 sq feet is plenty for us.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

martik777 said:


> The cost to downsize is significant, easily 50k just for commission, transfer taxes, legal, moving and maybe another 20-30k for renos. If you change your mind add another 50k. If you move from a major center like metro Vancouver to a rural town, your grocery costs can double, access to medical will be limited and travel costs to visit the family back home must be factored in. The thought of living in a condo is depressing, reminds me of when I was a kid living in an apartment, too many rules, ridiculous strata fees, no EV charging and no space. Maintaining my house, garden, workshop has been an enjoyable part of my retirement for many years.


That's a pretty strange view in my opinion. I take it you 'don't get out much' or have much experience of moving. You seem to have an extremely narrow view of the subject. How you can jump to the conclusion that the costs are significant boggles the mind. What would you say if I told you that I can't recall ever having moved and not made a profit when doing so? Or what if I told you that the first EV charging outlet I ever saw was in a condo building garage?


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

ian said:


> We downsized from 3700 sq feet to an 8X8X16 container which we put into storage for a 10 months while we traveled and then rented a furnished apt for a few months. After that it was four years of renting until we purchased again. Travel, and renting changed our thoughts a little about what type of home we wanted next.
> 
> Downsizing to the container took some work but looking back we are glad that we did it this way. It forced us to think in real terms about downsizing and we do not regret it. In fact, there were still some things in that container that we have since given away because we did not need or want them. We wanted a lock on leave. No pets, no plants. We bought in a well managed HOA area that takes care of snow removal and all gardening. Our neighbours check each others homes since most are like us and travel frequently for longer periods of time.


LOL, I'm trying to picture you living in the container ian, that is after all what you wrote. Couldn't resist.

When I first retired and left Canada, I put a lot of 'stuff' into storage and prepaid a year rental. At the end of the year, having still not returned to Canada to live, I was looking at paying another year's rent and asked myself why. If there was nothing in storage that I had actually needed in a year, then how important was it and was it really worth paying to store? I called my Brother and had him and my Son go empty the storage locker and keep, sell or throw away everything. I still haven't missed anything yet.

I have a pet theory about 'possessions' and which is the possessed and the possessor. Do you possess your 'possessions' or do they possess you? But that may be easier for me to deal with than most people as I have moved so often and discarded so much each time that there are very few possessions that I consider indispensible at all. For example as an reader I have always had bookcases full of books wherever I lived and each time I have got rid of them all when I moved on. The same with DIY tools, I always want to have them when I am living somewhere but I have rarely moved them with me from one place to another. I just buy them all over again.

If you look around at how many Storage facilities exist in N. America it is incredible. The same if you look at how many garages are full of 'stuff' rather than a vehicle. People hoard 'stuff' that they never actually need ever again. This is actually a good bet for real estate investment.
https://www.curbed.com/2018/3/27/17168088/cheap-storage-warehouse-self-storage-real-estate


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

It is even worse. After having our container unloaded and moved into our rental condo we promptly gave away some items that we thought we needed to a family who had been flooded out of the home in Calgary. Lamps, pictures, bedding, camping supplies.

Also given away....a hedge trimmer, and last week an electric tile saw and an edge trimmer. How those things got into the container I will never know but they did. And now...they have much better homes and more useful lives. I certainly have no use for them, nor do I want to ever use them again. Still have a few other items that made it into the container that we hope to never use or need again.... I am told that the storage locker business is one of the fastest growing in NA. MY BIL and SIL rented one for five or six years. Paid the monthly rent, then discarded most of the contents. Go figure. Out of sight, out of mind.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> I have a pet theory about 'possessions' and which is the possessed and the possessor. Do you possess your 'possessions' or do they possess you?[/url]


For sure time spent on possessions can add up. Doing all the maintenance on 2+ vehicles and 4 motorcycles keeps me busy then there is the home on top of that. I generally follow a pretty good rule though, if I'm not using it, I get rid of it.

One possession I always scratch my head about is a cottage, every single person I know with one always seems to be working on them and that's on top of the regular chores they do out there. For me I can't imagine doing that but they do seem to enjoy themselves.


----------



## martik777 (Jun 25, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> The cost of a move is indeed significant but it is not the 'end of the world' if one gets it wrong. Think your specific view of the world is rather narrow (limited?) since we know for a fact (from direct family members) having moved from Vancouver to the Okanagan. I can assure you the Central Interior has well established medical/hospital/surgery facilities and lower food costs (among other goods and services) than Vancouver. Almost everything is more expensive in Vancouver due to the cost of higher overhead, i.e. business rents, etc. Obviously, such moves are very situational based on family and friends and social networks too.


I would not consider Kelowna in the Okanagan as a small rural town. We have a couple family members in small rural towns, Creston for example, who need to regularly commute to either Calgary or Vancouver for medical treatments. Without access to cheap nat gas and a colder winter, their heating costs are triple. We have found their grocery and other goods and services much more expensive due to the lack of competition and economies of scale we have in the lower mainland.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I wonder if the growth in the storage locker business mirrors the growth rate of consumer credit/debt in Canada?

We are sometimes amazed at the amount of useless junk that some people by on a regular basis. Just stand outside the exit at Costco for a little while while you are waiting for your spouse to exit!


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

martik777 said:


> I would not consider Kelowna in the Okanagan as a small rural town. We have a couple family members in small rural towns, Creston for example, who need to regularly commute to either Calgary or Vancouver for medical treatments. Without access to cheap nat gas and a colder winter, their heating costs are triple. We have found their grocery and other goods and services much more expensive due to the lack of competition and economies of scale we have in the lower mainland.


Again, you are taking a very limited view and using one example to try and justify a conclusion. The common example of that kind of false logic is this. 'John is a man and John wears a hat. Therefore all men wear hats.' That is what you are trying to say martik777 with your contention.

Kelowna is a small rural town to someone who grew up in Toronto. Whether you consider it one or not is simply your viewpoint, not everyone's. I live in a small Ontario rural town of 3000 population. My family doctor is 5 minutes away and there are 4 hospitals less than 1 hour away. Average temperatures in our area are higher in winter than those of Toronto, therefore we pay less for heating than the same house in Toronto would pay. Our groceries cost less than in Toronto and other goods and services also cost less. For example, a plumber, electrician, auto mechanic or any other trandesperson you care to think of all charge less than one in Toronto does. How do you explain that?

You really need to try and think outside of your own little world martik777. There are always going to be individual examples that lean one way or the other but to think that because you see one leaning one way means they all lean that way is simply false logic based on too small a sample size.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ No offense intended here LTA, but your place sounds like Utopia. Where is it?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

martik777 said:


> I would not consider Kelowna in the Okanagan as a small rural town. We have a couple family members in small rural towns, Creston for example, who need to regularly commute to either Calgary or Vancouver for medical treatments. Without access to cheap nat gas and a colder winter, their heating costs are triple. We have found their grocery and other goods and services much more expensive due to the lack of competition and economies of scale we have in the lower mainland.


As LTA suggested, you don't have a credible response if you use selective bias. I wouldn't live in any of those particular towns either for all similar reasons but there is a whole world of wonderful places to live outside that urban bubble called GVR that don't involve the isolation of Creston, Midway, Revelstoke, etc. Many good towns within an hour commute of major facilities, goods and services in BC, all at a much lower cost of living than urban monstrosities.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Longtimeago said:


> Kelowna is a small rural town to someone who grew up in Toronto.


I grew up in Toronto and, starting in 1985 and through 2007, I stayed in Kelowna (mostly at the Park Lake Hotel, later the Prestige Inn) on business for many weeks. It never occurred to me that Kelowna was a small rural town. Today, with its population of about 200,000, it looks even less of a small rural town to me than it did years ago. I need to revise my parochial way of thinking.

The nearest place to us of any size is Campbell River. With its measly population of 35,000, it has the temerity to call itself a "city". It too needs to have some revision to its thinking. It's really no more than a rural encampment.

An obvious corollary to what we are learning here is that, to someone who grew up in Chongqing, Toronto is a small rural town. In the end, I suppose the takeaway is that the notion of a "small rural town" is a rather elastic concept that dwells in the eye of the beholder. 



Beaver101 said:


> ^ No offense intended here LTA, but your place sounds like Utopia. Where is it?


It gets even better, Beaver. Most of the tradespeople there are retired and have no need of earned income. They are happy to donate their expertise just for something to do. The family doctor will make a house call in exchange for a live chicken. The 4 hospitals offer free limousine service. The inexpensive groceries are delivered to your home at no extra charge and put away for you. In fact, the whole place bears more than just a passing resemblance to Clifford Simak's _New Folks' Home_.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> Kelowna is a small rural town to someone who grew up in Toronto. Whether you consider it one or not is simply your viewpoint, not everyone's. I live in a small Ontario rural town of 3000 population. My family doctor is 5 minutes away and there are 4 hospitals less than 1 hour away.


Kelowna is a city despite where you grew up, anyone can call it a town, they'd just be incorrect in doing so.

Point being that living in a town may or may not have good medical access, lower or higher living costs, each location has looked at separately. If the town is in close poximity to a city, chances are not much will be different over the nearby city but in more remote areas it can change significantly.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Hell we live in a district (not even a town) of West Vancouver, population under 50k. What people passing through do not realize is that there is no industry, just residential with one major plaza and local shopping areas.

Most days we survive just fine never leaving. We have lived here since 1995.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

I thought you lived in British Properties Keith? Or was it Shaunessy?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Zipper said:


> I thought you lived in British Properties Keith? Or was it Shaunessy?


Neither. I live on a bus line.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ No offense intended here LTA, but your place sounds like Utopia. Where is it?


It's in southwestern Ontario just south of Chatham. There are a dozen small towns all along Lake Erie which are much the same. All in the Banana Belt of Ontario. Heard of that?
http://rmcguirephoto.com/wordpress/2009/07/25/journey-to-canadas-banana-belt/


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

cainvest said:


> Kelowna is a city despite where you grew up, anyone can call it a town, they'd just be incorrect in doing so.
> 
> Point being that living in a town may or may not have good medical access, lower or higher living costs, each location has looked at separately. If the town is in close poximity to a city, chances are not much will be different over the nearby city but in more remote areas it can change significantly.


If by 'city' you are simply referring to an arbitrary definition based on population alone, then yes, it's a city according to say Stats Canada. However if by perception you ask a life long Torontonian visitor if it is a 'city' the answer is likely to be no, it's a town.

Having grew up in Toronto and having also lived in the Okanagan for a few years, to me it is a town with little appeal at all actually. To suggest that I am 'incorrect' to call it a town is to show only a limited viewpoint.

I agree completely that any small town can have equally as good access to anything as in a city and in some cases better and easier access.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Should someone from Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo or Manila describe Toronto as a town ... does this mean you would agree?

Just curious.


Cheers


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Who really cares a wit about where someone else chooses to live in retirement. Who cares if it is called a city, a town, back of beyond, or whatever.

People make choices based on their personal preferences and their compromises. Why would anyone care if Kelowna was called a city, a town, or a village? What difference does it make to anyone's life? Same for any other retirement location. 

I will say that after two years of neuro issues, followed up with surgery, we are very thankful for where we live. The specialists and the procedures were available in Calgary and Vancouver. Cannot imagine driving four or five hours each way for every appt. Lots of specialist appts and hospital appts. My niece lives in Peterborough. She has cancer and has to make the two hour trip into Toronto frequently for treatments. No fun when you are doing chemo or radiation. But Peterborough seems to be a retirement haven for many people.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> If by 'city' you are simply referring to an arbitrary definition based on population alone, then yes, it's a city according to say Stats Canada. However if by perception you ask a life long Torontonian visitor if it is a 'city' the answer is likely to be no, it's a town.
> 
> Having grew up in Toronto and having also lived in the Okanagan for a few years, to me it is a town with little appeal at all actually. To suggest that I am 'incorrect' to call it a town is to show only a limited viewpoint.


lol, you have that backwards! Stats-Can provides the definition and the "Toronto raised person" is providing the arbitrary definition. Of course I could be wrong ... maybe Bob from the mail room in Stats-Can randomly decides which is a city or a town based on where he is from.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Eclectic12 said:


> Should someone from Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo or Manila describe Toronto as a town ... does this mean you would agree?
> 
> Just curious.
> 
> ...


I doubt anyone from one of those cities would consider Toronto to be a town Eclectic12. I don't consider New York, London(UK), Zurich, Athens, etc. etc. to be towns. Nor do I consider Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, etc. to be towns but Kelowna, yeah, it's just a town. It's a town based not on it's population but on its culture or lack thereof.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

ian said:


> Who really cares a wit about where someone else chooses to live in retirement. Who cares if it is called a city, a town, back of beyond, or whatever.
> 
> People make choices based on their personal preferences and their compromises. Why would anyone care if Kelowna was called a city, a town, or a village? What difference does it make to anyone's life? Same for any other retirement location.
> 
> I will say that after two years of neuro issues, followed up with surgery, we are very thankful for where we live. The specialists and the procedures were available in Calgary and Vancouver. Cannot imagine driving four or five hours each way for every appt. Lots of specialist appts and hospital appts. My niece lives in Peterborough. She has cancer and has to make the two hour trip into Toronto frequently for treatments. No fun when you are doing chemo or radiation. But Peterborough seems to be a retirement haven for many people.


It appears that those who want to insist Kelowna can only be referred to as a city care ian, not me. I refer to it as a town while having to problem with people wanting to refer to it as a city. I just object their trying to insist that I can't refer to it as a town. 

Re your medical anecdotal evidence, I live 3 hours from Toronto but under 1 hour from London Health Sciences where IF the type of cancer someone has is top of their list of types treated there, may well provide BETTER treatment than at the Princess Margaret in Toronto. The assumption that the best care is only available in the largest cities is just an assumption and in some cases an incorrect assumption.
https://cpp.ca/five-questions-to-ask-your-doctor-to-get-the-best-cancer-treatment/

Living anywhere in Canada is no guarantee of the best healthcare in the country for a given illness. If the best are in Toronto, then why would anyone go for treatment in Vancouver? Or vice versa. 

This thread is about moving and downsizing and the reasons why people do so along with the potential pitfalls to avoid. This sidetrack into medical care in fact is an example of when people make their decision based on FUTURE needs rather than on what would be the best fit for them NOW. Choosing where to live based on access to Cancer treatment if you ever end up needing it is no different than choosing based on any other single criteria someone can think up.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

cainvest said:


> lol, you have that backwards! Stats-Can provides the definition and the "Toronto raised person" is providing the arbitrary definition. Of course I could be wrong ... maybe Bob from the mail room in Stats-Can randomly decides which is a city or a town based on where he is from.


Who, as in what person or persons decided what constitutes a city cainvest? Do you not consider that person or persons as having made an arbitrary decision as to their definition? In fact, it most likely was not anyone at Stats Canada who decided what constitutes a city, they most likely just used a definition based on population that was suggested by someone else in some other country in the past. 

The same is true of many things such as what constitutes a lake vs. a pond? In the UK, people refer to a lake when I look at it and see a pond. What is a hill vs. a mountain? These are arbitrary definitions given by someone at some point and then accepted by others as as good a definition as any but in fact usually measure only one criteria, size.

There are equally as used definitions such as a city being a place where a bishop of the catholic church has his seat. No bishop, no city. By that definition, in Canada, Kelowna is not a city but Kamloops and Nelson are, they have bishops. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/city-town-village-difference/

They are all arbitrary definitions as they must be. Bob in the mail room can refer to anywhere any way Bob wants to, as can you and as can I. Kelowna is a town in my view simply because it doesn't meet MY criteria of what it takes to be considered a city. Try fitting the word cosmopolitan to Kelowna for example. Does it fit under the definition here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cosmopolitan


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

With all due respect Longtimer, if you had a heart attack or stroke would you rather be in Leamington or London?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Zipper said:


> With all due respect Longtimer, if you had a heart attack or stroke would you rather be in Leamington or London?


Where there is a good hospital.... No one knows when poo hits the fan. 

FWIW, it really doesn't matter what people think about Kelowna, but it has as good a cancer treatment facility as any, short of certain types of surgery. DIL has been getting excellent treatment for ovarian cancer here in Kelowna, and had to go to Vancouver (UBC hospital) only for the major surgery. She is also going to participate in clinical trials (Canada wide) on a new drug in Kelowna shortly. 

People short change smaller cities way too much, and especially if they haven't been around in 10 years. A number of high rise condo developments are underway in downtown Kelowna. One of them is https://onewaterstreet.ca/ Another is https://liveatella.com/ The rental vacancy rate is currently 1.9% despite a number of apartment rentals having been constructed.

Kelowna is now a significant tech centre and just last week had a networking conference with venture capital investors from across Canada and Silicon Valley. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/kelowna-forefront-canadian-tech-innovation-2018

It just depends on what one is looking for. We prefer wines, hiking and lake activities.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Longtimeago said:


> ... but Kelowna, yeah, it's just a town. It's a town based not on it's population but on its culture or lack thereof.


Well, the old joke used to be: What's the difference between Calgary and yogurt? Yogurt has a _live_ culture.

Now, LTA has elevated Calgary to city status, it would seem. But Kelowna? A cultural wasteland? C'mon Kelowna-ites. Don't take that abuse!


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Haha.... Don't care what LTA thinks. We don't get a lot of the big name acts that want $200 a ticket and 15000 fans here, but we do get some good entertainment, some good shows from the likes of Cirque, and our Symphony Orchestra is pretty good too. Vernon actually has quite a wonderful theatre with mezzanines et al. Take that!


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I think LTA just argues to create activity since such arguments are circular. South of London vs. Kelowna? I will take Kelowna for the winter skiing. In the London area they get a lot of snow but you just shovel it! Summers are lovely but too humid for me. We used to boat The Thames! I prefer north to Grand Bend than south to Port Elgin. But then what does it matter? Shall we all continue another LTA argument and waste valuable keystrokes?


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Downsizing? LOL... I hope that by retirement I can finally afford some decent-sized accommodations. :tongue:

Of course, I think that being "downsized" is already pretty standard for a lot of people under 40. I suspect that many of them will skip the "up-sizing" phase entirely, so perhaps they won't ever need to worry about downsizing.

For me, living small is more of a compromise in order to live near friends, family and work. Once work is out of the picture, it will be easier to "up-size" to somewhere more affordable.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> Who, as in what person or persons decided what constitutes a city cainvest?


For me, I just consult a higher power to determine if it's a city or not ... yup, Google.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

kcowan said:


> But then what does it matter? Shall we all continue another LTA argument and waste valuable keystrokes?


Awe come on, some times those replies are mildy entertaining, lol.


----------



## Dilbert (Nov 20, 2016)

Thanks for my morning chuckle, AR. I checked out the condo development links you provided. Urban living in Kelowna? LOL!

But I digress, hiking and sipping wine sounds good to me.....


----------



## martik777 (Jun 25, 2014)

Those condos in Kelowna would be up-sizing for many retirees in the lower mainland and supersizing from somewhere like Calgary. This is why I mentioned small rural towns like Creston, locations such as Kelowna are not really a down-sizing option unless you are relocating from the west side of Vancouver or similar.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The point was the Okanagan,and Kelowna as a city, has plenty of amenities and things to do and a wide variety of places to live..... Nothing more, nothing less. There are regional centres that are not shite-holes outside the GVR. Shite holes like Creston are what they are because few people actually want to live there! If they did, they'd be big bustling centres.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Zipper said:


> With all due respect Longtimer, if you had a heart attack or stroke would you rather be in Leamington or London?


That is a perfect example of using a FUTURE need to make a CURRENT decision Zipper. It's like planning to get 'hit by a bus'. What if you DON'T get hit by the bus? Will living in London then be better than living somewhere else while you wait for that bus that never arrives?

If you have a history of heart problems then by all means, include that in your criteria when looking at where to live. But if like me, you have never had any health issues, have never been on any medication and your GP refers to your state of health as 'remarkable', why would you consider a heart attack as part of your decision making?

Access to medical care should be part of anyone's decision but at the same time, that does not mean you have to live next door to a hospital in a big city. I live within under 5 minutes of our GP's practice; also within 5 minutes of the local Ambulance station and within the 'golden hour' of 4 hospitals including London. What do you think living IN London would change in any of that? In fact, I can easily conceive of living in some parts of London resulting in it taking longer to get to a hospital after a heart attack, than it would take if living in Leamington.
https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/golden+hour

Your argument is in fact not even an argument, only a simplistic belief that you would be better off living in London.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> The point was the Okanagan,and Kelowna as a city, has plenty of amenities and things to do and a wide variety of places to live..... Nothing more, nothing less. There are regional centres that are not shite-holes outside the GVR. Shite holes like Creston are what they are because few people actually want to live there! If they did, they'd be big bustling centres.


Please remember that I have lived in the Okanagan AltaRed, I am speaking from experience. The difference is in our ideas of 'plenty of amenities'. The lack thereof was one of the major reasons for our leaving the Okanagan. We all define things based on our own experiences. No one who has grown up in Toronto is going to say Kelowna has NO amenities but most would say it does not have 'plenty of amenities'. It shouldn't be hard to understand that difference in viewpoint.

People talk of wineries and hiking and as it happens my wife and I are interested in both. But I am sure you know as well as I do, that visiting wineries no matter how many there are soon becomes less exciting than for someone there for a vacation finds it. It's what I call the 'Niagara Falls Experience.' Everyone wants to do it but how long can they stand there and watch water fall off a rock?

Hiking on the Kettle Valley Trail is nice a few times. How many times? When you have experienced hiking in a similar sized valley area as you will find in the Davos-Klosters area of Switzerland for example, where you will find 700km of marked trail, how would you see Kelowna in comparison? Would you say Kelowna has 'plenty of amenities' in regard to hiking by comparison? I think not. Our perceptions are based on our indvidual experiences. For you Kelowna is great even allowing for your obvious bias as you choose to live there, but for me, it's just a nice little town with 'some' amenities that can hold our interest for a short time.

We have no regrets of the 3.5 years we lived in the Okanagan but that was as long as it could hold our interest. I've often said to people who commented with something like, 'oh you lived in the Okanagan, we think it is wonderful there, why did you leave', after you have driven the 10 small backroads, ten times each, it just isn't enough any more.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

kcowan said:


> I think LTA just argues to create activity since such arguments are circular. South of London vs. Kelowna? I will take Kelowna for the winter skiing. In the London area they get a lot of snow but you just shovel it! Summers are lovely but too humid for me. We used to boat The Thames! I prefer north to Grand Bend than south to Port Elgin. But then what does it matter? Shall we all continue another LTA argument and waste valuable keystrokes?


The key word in that statement kcowan is 'think'. You may think whatever you want obviously but if you cared to ask me why I post some things I do, I would be happy to answer you. I post some things that I do, not to create circular arguments but to try and get people to look at things from more than one viewpoint. I find that many people have difficulty seeing that more than one viewpoint is possible.

I accept that AltaRed loves Kelowna for example and considers it a city. But why is it that some people cannot accept that someone else who has actually lived in the area, may not see it the same way? 

Here is another example of differing viewpoints. You mention Kelowna for skiing. My response would be, really? You think of the Kelowna area as having good skiiing? Compared to what? The Alps? That is what I compare to based on my experience, not Blue Mountain in Ontario. Compared to Blue Mountain, yes, Kelowna's Big White would compare favourably but compared to Chamonix or Alpe D'huez in France or Zermatt etc. in Switzerland, Big White would come out bottom of the list.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

So why continue the argument? No one cares.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Arguments usually occur because people think there is a right or wrong answer. ie. Kelowna is a city not a town. But often, there is no right or wrong answer, only an opinion. Nevertheless, people will cherry pick their examples or anecdotal evidence to support their contention that their answer is right. That's when you get what kcowan is referring to as a 'circular argument'. If those who hold different opinions agree however that both opinions are possible, there is NO argument.

As for no one caring, obviously you for one do care. You want to insist Kelowna is a city and NO ONE can call it a town and be RIGHT from their viewpoint. It's a city any which way you look at it as far as you are concerned and anyone who says otherwise is WRONG. 

I am not insisting YOU call it a town AltaRed, I'm just insisting it is equally as valid for someone else to see it as just being a town.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

LTA, I actually don't care what anyone thinks of the area where I live nor do I care about your definitions and dissertations. 

I did care about the individual upthread making a blanket statement that anything outside the GVR was the hinterland with high living costs. I simply used the Okanagan/Kelowna area as an example to refute it. Time to move on me thinks.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Ok, I have no problem with LTA calling Kelowna whatever they want. They can even call it a TOWN if it will stop the debate.
In LTA's subjective mind they are RIGHT. 
By any objective definition they are WRONG. 
In psychology they'd be talking about ego and the ability to admit being wrong, but since this is(?) a financial(?) forum, let's leave that aside and move on.

Tangential perhaps, but it is interesting how individuals plan/don't plan for the future differently. My parents were like this and I note that my wife and I are quite different as well. Not in conflict, just different in thinking. Maybe it comes from years of business planning, budgets, etc.

I think about where we'll be in 20 years and what might happen to the house. I can see our single dau, then 53, retired and perhaps moving back out of the city core to enjoy our quiet gardens and bee hives (her idea). So that might be one scenario. My wife on the other hand, thinks its crazy to be talking about 20 years from now. I do find that difference spills down to larger short term decisions as well though. 

I think some people by nature are willing to plan and 'pull the trigger', others are willing to 'let the cards fall where they may'.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Well, OMO, maybe you are right that continuing the "town" debate is flogging a dead horse, if you will. And an unseemly spectacle for a financial forum. But then we perhaps we should erase the threads on Instant Pots, lawnmowers, sightseeing in the Rockies and on and on. We could really trim down the storage space consumed by rigorous pruning. 

But I think we should be reticent to leave this matter without answering the question, is Kelowna a one-horse town? Maybe a 7-horse town? Take Calgary, with its stampede. It has many horses. If it must endure the ignominy of being called a town, at least it's a multi-horse town. Or do its horses have to be in permanent residence to qualify? How 'bout 180 days a year? How one measures a town's horsepower is a question worthy of consideration. It has financial overtones. Should one buy a rental property in a town of modest horsepower?

For my part, I would like to hear more about the beehives. That's more interesting to me than the usual musings about whether one should be buying up more NHL, FLQ, CNN, AMA, CBA, & c.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I think some people by nature are willing to plan and 'pull the trigger', others are willing to 'let the cards fall where they may'.


As with anything, I think it is helpful to have a scenario of where one thinks they will be in various increments over the next 20 years, and if you call that a plan, so be it. Life gets in the way though, so it means re-calculating (like the Jeep navigation ad) as one proceeds along life's journey. Being too 'certain' just hinders one from making rational decisions on changes when opportunities arise. I still don't know what the future holds for myself at age 70 other than a general idea how the finances might unfold over my last 20 years or so.

P.S. Sometimes people have certain ideas about downsizing. To me, it is about "physical" downsizing as I age and become less able, not necessarily financial downsizing. I can see our next place being half the physical size at quite a different location, but it could easily be higher purchase cost than what we have now.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Our decision points were the same. It was not about financial. It was all about physical downsizing, eliminating the mtce burden, lock and leave, and getting rid of a lot of dust collectors that we no longer wanted or had any use for. 

Since early retirement and extensive travel we have become far more spontaneous in our decision making process. That includes where we live. We could easily decide to pick up sticks and move somewhere else over the next few years. I think renting for four years also impacted this attitude.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Mukhang pera said:


> ... But I think we should be reticent to leave this matter without answering the question, is Kelowna a one-horse town? Maybe a 7-horse town? Take Calgary, with its stampede. It has many horses. If it must endure the ignominy of being called a town, at least it's a multi-horse town. Or do its horses have to be in permanent residence to qualify? How 'bout 180 days a year? How one measures a town's horsepower is a question worthy of consideration. It has financial overtones. Should one buy a rental property in a town of modest horsepower?...


Good question Mukhang! I do note that if one is downsizing in retirement, moving to Kelowna, AND planning to bring their horse (or horses), they should plan for the future (oops). 

That is to say, according to  Bylaw 5481-82 of the City of Kelowna (please insert Town if so inclined), Regulation 2(a)(iii) through 2(a)(vi) (I'm thinking you'll love this stuff?) states that to keep your one horse within city limits (please insert town if so inclined) your lot must exceed 1 acre (0.4ha) in RR3 and RU1 zoned lands. To own a horse for the missus as well you'll need a lot greater than 2 acres (0.8ha) in size. 
To bring the whole damn herd from that condo in GVA, you'll need to move to an A1, RR1 or RR2 zoned lot greater than 1 acre (0.8ha) in size.
Now should your horse get out and be impounded, you'll face a $30 impounding charge ($15 if it's a foal) plus a $5/day ($3 for a foal) boarding fee. So you may want to increase your retirement allocation to cash if your horse is unbroken and troublesome or the fences of your retirement acreage are in poor repair when you initially move in.

This doesn't speak to your question of whether Kelowna is a one-horse town (moot if it is a city?), and I'm not sure if animals are captured in the local census. Those more enterprising GIS-types may want to convolve lot sizes within Kelowna City/Town limits with zoning, and determine the MAXIMUM horsepower capacity of Kelowna.

Hmmm. I wonder if potential horsepower could be a workable criteria for distinguishing a town from a city?


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

ian said:


> Our decision points were the same. It was not about financial. It was all about physical downsizing, eliminating the mtce burden, lock and leave, and getting rid of a lot of dust collectors that we no longer wanted or had any use for.
> 
> Since early retirement and extensive travel we have become far more spontaneous in our decision making process. That includes where we live. We could easily decide to pick up sticks and move somewhere else over the next few years. I think renting for four years also impacted this attitude.


A lot of my retired friends have downsized or are considering downsizing, and many of them for the same reason...they're just tired of maintenance and household chores. Anyone who owns a house knows that there's always something to fix, replace, or repair. 30+ years in a house and many people have had enough. So they sell the house and move to a condo or apartment and let someone else fix things. Lock and leave on a moment's notice.

I haven't reached that stage yet...I'm an avid DIYer and enjoy projects. But, I can see their point and one day I'll be joining them.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Good question Mukhang! I do note that if one is downsizing in retirement, moving to Kelowna, AND planning to bring their horse (or horses), they should plan for the future (oops).
> 
> That is to say, according to  Bylaw 5481-82 of the City of Kelowna (please insert Town if so inclined), Regulation 2(a)(iii) through 2(a)(vi) (I'm thinking you'll love this stuff?) states that to keep your one horse within city limits (please insert town if so inclined) your lot must exceed 1 acre (0.4ha) in RR3 and RU1 zoned lands. To own a horse for the missus as well you'll need a lot greater than 2 acres (0.8ha) in size.
> To bring the whole damn herd from that condo in GVA, you'll need to move to an A1, RR1 or RR2 zoned lot greater than 1 acre (0.8ha) in size.
> ...




horses are passé. The key criterion to determine level of citified kulcha here in quebec is whether or not an incorporated municipality allows residents to keep egg-laying flocks of hens at their homes.

it used to be percentage of habs fans but a few years ago they changed to hens by popular demand


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> horses are passé.


Yes Humble, sadly I have to agree with you. Even Calgary, which Mukhang referred to as town of many horses, has apparently stooped to allowing emotional support (ES) chickens within city limits. Just don't bring your  ES peacock onto to my flight thank you.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Good analysis and more thought-provoking questions, OMO!

hp has pointed out that, at least in la belle province, horses are passé. But how 'bout our national animal? This talk of critters put me in mind of an issue concerning beavers that arose in Pennsylvania. Kinda' funny, arising from a letter sent to a man named Ryan DeVries regarding a pond on his property. It was sent by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Quality and I reproduce it below. Probably amusing to only me on this site. I have observed cmf types to seldom crack a smile. Humour is rare here. Cmfers are a serious lot. They carry the weight of the world upon their shoulders. But I'll post it anyway.


Dear Mr. DeVries:

It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above-referenced parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond.

A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department's files shows that no permits have been issued therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, 
Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Pennsylvania Compiled Laws, annotated.

The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 2010.

Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action.

We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.

Sincerely, David L. Price 
District Representative and Water Management Division 

~~~ AND THE REPLY:

Dear Mr. Price,

Your certified letter dated 11/17/09 has been handed to me. I am the legal landowner but not the Contractor at 2088 Dagget Lane, Trout Run, Pennsylvania.

A couple of beavers are in the process of constructing and maintaining two wood 'debris' dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of nature's building materials 'debris.'

I would like to challenge your department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic.

These are the beavers/contractors you are seeking. (photo) As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity.

My first dam question to you is:

(1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers, or

(2) Do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said Dam request?

If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through the Freedom of Information Act, I request completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued. (Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Pennsylvania Compiled Laws, annotated.)

I have several dam concerns. My first dam concern is, aren't the beavers entitled to legal representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said representation so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer.

The Department's dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event, causing flooding, is proof that this is a natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names.

If you want the damed stream 'restored' to a dam free-flow condition please contact the beavers -- but if you are going to arrest them, they obviously did not pay any attention to your dam letter, they being unable to read English.

In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green and water flows downstream. They have more dam rights than I do to live and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the natural resources (Beavers) and the environment (Beavers' Dams).

So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more elevated enforcement action right now. Why wait until 1/31/2010? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice by then and there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them.

In conclusion, I would like to bring your attention to a real environmental quality, health, problem in the area... It is the bears! Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your dam step! The bears are not careful where they dump!

Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office.

Thank you,

Ryan DeVries & The DAM BEAVERS


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

i was going to say polar bears are now the national animal but this beaver story ^^ is fun

few years ago GP out in the country got a phone call from his tenant in highly distressed mode at the rented farm down the road

it was raining, beavers had dammed up the crick opposite the culvert in the gravel road at the tenant farm, now the beaver pond was overflowing across the road & into the tenant's basement. IIRC something was going wrong w tenant's water supply and/or septic tank system as well.

GP - a patriarch with a famously short fuse - grabbed axe & crowbars plus every able-bodied dau, son, SIL & DIL he could recruit at the main farmhouse & they all took off at the height of the rainstorm for the illegal beaver dam 5 km down the road

chop chop chop! IIROC it took more than 3 hours. At some point they had to go into tenant's farmhouse to adjust something (tenant was the village librarian) (ok they had a library so the collection of houses + general store + post office was actually a city according to this thread)

by nightfall the poor beavers were chopped out. Homeless. Crick was flowing normally. Grand-père returned in very black humour w rain-soaked sodden helpers all looking like hillbillies. This drama played itself out on a treacherous winding tertiary gravel track known as the Leadville Road. 


.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^^ Re post #178 ... :highly_amused: :highly_amused: :highly_amused: ... LMAO!!!


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Prairie Guy said:


> A lot of my retired friends have downsized or are considering downsizing, and many of them for the same reason...they're just tired of maintenance and household chores. Anyone who owns a house knows that there's always something to fix, replace, or repair. 30+ years in a house and many people have had enough. So they sell the house and move to a condo or apartment and let someone else fix things. Lock and leave on a moment's notice.
> 
> I haven't reached that stage yet...I'm an avid DIYer and enjoy projects. But, I can see their point and one day I'll be joining them.


One of the exact points I was making in the OP Prairie Guy. It makes sense when you actually reach that point but in reality I have observed that many people make the change BEFORE they actually reach that point. They anticipate reaching it and make the decision not on their abilities today but rather on their anticipated future needs. Sometimes as in my own case, only to find that in fact it doesn't fit today's real needs because you aren't actually 'there' yet.

The same is true of people who use the mentioned proximity to a major city hospital as a criteria to make a decision when in fact their health today is not an issue. As I wrote, that's like anticipating being run over by a bus and making a move while you wait for the bus to come along that will run you over.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

The beaver story is amusing as are all similar stories we sometimes see about the ridiculousness that bureaucracy can result in.

In all seriousness however, it is not relevant to the topic of this thread. Just joking Mukhang.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> One of the exact points I was making in the OP Prairie Guy. It makes sense when you actually reach that point but in reality I have observed that many people make the change BEFORE they actually reach that point. They anticipate reaching it and make the decision not on their abilities today but rather on their anticipated future needs. Sometimes as in my own case, only to find that in fact it doesn't fit today's real needs because you aren't actually 'there' yet.
> 
> The same is true of people who use the mentioned proximity to a major city hospital as a criteria to make a decision when in fact their health today is not an issue. As I wrote, that's like anticipating being run over by a bus and making a move while you wait for the bus to come along that will run you over.


I still see nothing wrong with considering future needs. Some decisions need to be made BEFORE you reach there. It some situations, by the time you 'get there' it is too late or you are no longer able to make that decision because you cannot see that you are 'there'. Many elderly I know were in great shape, and didn't need to be in a bungalow or near a hospital until they fell. True, at that point they can move, but they are often the same ones in denial, until they fall again.

The evaluation of these risk decisions and what one chooses is a combination of how the individual views the risks and their ability to cope and deal with the risk.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ +1. Not sure why being proactive is an abnormal idea here, for the OP.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

^ Not sure either. I have spent most of my life thinking about the future and different outcomes in both my work life and personal life. Strategic planning is one of my areas work, where we are planning out 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 years out. There is nothing guaranteed other than I won't around to see if I am right. 

The idea of strategic planning or having strategic foresight is looking at many different realities and outcomes, then trying to shape the most desirable, and reduce the likelihood of the less desirable. In addition, by looking at multiple scenarios, then you gleem an idea of what could happen and decide at a high level what MIGHT you do. 

Preparing and selling your home at the point where you have fallen or are not well enough to live there by yourself is much more difficult than when you well and not stressed. its much easier to be prepared and thought of scenarios than waiting until something happens.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Plugging Along said:


> ... Preparing and selling your home at the point where you have fallen or are not well enough to live there by yourself is much more difficult than when you well and not stressed. its much easier to be prepared and thought of scenarios than waiting until something happens.


And your children are likely to be appreciative that you are making proactive decisions rather than leaving it to them to deal with.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

All my parents/in-laws deferred any moving decisions until they went feet first. They just suffered from the unsuitable accommodations in their later lives, even when we offered to help out.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Throughout our personal and our working lives we have made our plans in a proactive manner. Never wanted to be day late or a dollar short. Retirement planning, financial, personal, and health wise has been the same for us. We find it easier than being in react mode.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We retired 15 years ago and considered moving up north (Elliott Lake) where the cost was considerably less to buy a property. The lakes and 300 miles of ATV trails were attractive.

We decided to rent and think about it. Fifteen years later and we would have to move back by now.

One point seldom mentioned is how it costs more to rent every year and how that impacts when to start renting, when your income is relatively fixed.

We moved in and paid $950 a month. Fifteen years later we pay $1100 a month due to rent controls. If we moved somewhere today the rent would be $1700+ a month.

We save $600 a month because we moved in 15 years ago. That $7200 a year saving will likely erase any profit we would have made from a home sale in the area we were considering.

We have friends who moved to the lake or to a rural area and they have all moved back to the city. That "extra" long distance move is what we wanted to avoid.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Thanks for the great post MP...........

The national animal of the UK is the lion. The national animal of the US is the eagle.

Our national animal is a beaver........which is a large, nocturnal, semi-aquatic rodent.

I think there may be an electoral gain for one of the political parties to propose an animal a little more.........impressive shall we say.

Maybe the Canadian goose, moose or bear. A bobcat, wolf, or maybe a cougar, but surely not a weasel.

Heck a loon is a much better symbol than a beaver.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

So by comparison, here is the beaver's call........


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> I think there may be an electoral gain for one of the political parties to propose an animal a little more.........impressive shall we say.
> 
> Maybe the Canadian goose, moose or bear. A bobcat, wolf, or maybe a cougar, but surely not a weasel.
> 
> Heck a loon is a much better symbol than a beaver.


I think we also need animals to represent our political parties, like the US has the elephant and donkey.

The loon and weasel are the obvious clear choices for liberal/PC IMO ... maybe the muskrat for NDP?


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

It would appear that the beaver needs a vocal coach in order to compete with the loon.

I learned to appreciate loons growing up around Ontario lakes. Where we live now on out-of-the way BC oceanfront, we have the pleasure of their company year round. Both common and arctic loons (the latter more in winter, often in large flocks). I never tire of hearing their calls.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The beaver is industrious and a master engineer at dam construction. Don't confuse looks with ability!


----------

