# The Canadian Nightmare



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I know this topic is not new, but I can't help feeling that I am one of the very few who are increasingly concerned about the economic issues that Millenials and newer generations are facing. I don't want this to be a "woe is me" thread. I want to discuss how the issues millenials are facing actually could impact everyone else negatively, as well. I want to know why things are not being done to change the economic landscape and I want to know how this landscape CAN be changed.

By definition, I am a millenial. I am 30 years old. For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how anyone of this generation or newer is able to get ahead. I am personally becoming fatigued, both mentally and physically. Trying to work more, harder, faster, efficiently, or sacrifice even more leisure time seems to be something that is required just to stop yourself from falling behind more than your peers. Because let's face it, 99% of us are falling behind.

Let me be clear about my choice of words when I say "falling behind". I am strictly speaking about purchasing power, discretionary/disposable income, you know... The things that can actually help make your life more enjoyable. What I'm NOT debating is standard of living... I am not debating access to education or healthcare or environmental safety. I am strictly voicing my concerns that the gap between millenials and other generations is widening at an insane rate. Not only that, but even boomers are finding things to be tough if they didn't play their cards right.

In fact, I will even argue that the gap between millenials is widening at an insane rate, as well. The truth is that wages simply aren't increasing, but everything else is. Every single economic or financial dagger is being aimed directly at most of us.

Low wages. High inflation. High taxation. High asset prices (RE, Stocks, dare I say crypto...). High commodity prices (food, oil, lumber, etc). High privatized services (insurance companies, oligopoly banks and telecommunications companies).

What exactly is it about Canada that makes everything so punishing, exhausting, infuriating and downright discouraging?

How is it that the average Canadian home increased $130k last year? Does anyone see how insane this is? Are we living in some kind of sick joke? $130k is an insane number. What's more insane is when you factor in that this is a net amount and you still need to add mortgage interest. What's even MORE insane is that the average salary in Canada is what? Maybe 55k gross?

Someone please tell me what I'm missing. It appears to me that after you account for taxation and interest, the average home went up by over 5x the average salary. Am I getting this right?

Now, I know, I know. Some of you boomers will come in here saying things like "A home is not a right, it is a privilege" or something of that nature. And this is true. I do agree. But just because I agree doesn't mean it is fair. And I know life is not fair. But at what point does the scale tip too far? At what point are people (like myself) ready to throw in the towel and say "fk it"?

It seems like in this day and age, working is more or less a waste of time. It's a means to an end. It just gets you by. That's great for those that don't care, but I need more. I need continuous improvement. I don't want to just "get by" and I know I'm not the only one.

What is the solution? Wages are low but you can't possibly tax companies more or they will leave. Canada is already an expensive country to employ people in. We need better taxation. We need better fiscal policies, especially policies surrounding real estate. 

How have we let ourselves get this deep? We are destroying future generations. We are destroying this country. We are on the fast track to an impoverished society. Canadians are being gouged, nickle and dime'd, and otherwise squeezed from every angle.

Are people not concerned about inflation?
Are people not concerned about rising rates?
Are people not concerned about asset prices?
Are people not concerned about wages?
Are people not concerned that DB pensions are basically non-existent and now everything is DC?

I am just perplexed. I am perplexed at our governments actions. I am confused by the non-chalant behaviours of my community and peers. I am shocked when I learn that most people I know or talk to "just don't care" and even more frightened when most people have no idea what I'm talking about or why there is any need for concern.

Each day, I fall further behind. And so do 99% of Canadians. But as I said, nobody seems to care. I am beginning to think this is the right attitude. Maybe that's all I can do at this point. I don't know. But I took a week off work because I was no longer feeling like it was a good use of my time.

I'm open to all opinions or criticisms. Someone just please say something because I'm losing my mind and I have nobody to talk to about these things because nobody understands like some of you folks will. I can't be the only one feeling these feelings.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

A lot of millennials have similar concerns

A podcast recent queued me to the 4th Turning generational theory. As human history seems to repeat itself we are currently in a financial crisis exactly 4 generations following world war era that was 4 generations following the civil war. The boomers always like to say that good times created weak millennials.. but the 4th Turning predicts it is the millennials who will clean up this **** show rather than the ones who enjoyed the "good times"

What amazes me is that you can write a post so detailed and yet not see the answer in front of you


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

m3s said:


> What amazes me is that you can write a post so detailed and yet not see the answer in front of you


I'm not sure which answer you are referring to.
I guess I really don't see it.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

If I was a young person, I would counsel them to invest in themselves hard. That could be education or simply taking the necessary steps to advance your career - move, hustle, work your butt off, whatever it is. Those millennials or younger who spend 10-15 years off gallivanting around the world or not taking personal advancement seriously are in for a world of suffering. You have to unlock your human capital. And you will need a life partner who does the same. Unfortunately, that means a lifetime of working and not leisure. But that is not unlike previous generations. Unless you are willing to take a serious reality check in your living circumstances.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> How is it that the average Canadian home increased $130k last year? Does anyone see how insane this is?


I'm a millennial too, and if things stay the way they are, I doubt that I will ever be able to afford a house.

On the other hand regarding wages, I want to point out that when you're in your 20s and early 30s, you really haven't hit your income earning peak. In this phase of the career, wages will feel low to you. This is the trend that every generation sees, and towards your late 30s, and into your 40s, your income will likely be much higher.

As I understand it, most people can only really save money and accumulate wealth in their 40s and up. I don't think anyone really is well off in their 20s with few lucky exceptions.

Just remember to push HARD for rising wages. Push for raises, and if you don't get it, look for another job. It just occurred to me recently for example that I should raise my contract hourly rate by 7%.

All of us have to keep pushing hard for higher wages, and *ditch employers* that don't pay them. Be strategic and always look for higher salary opportunities.

Another thing that is for sure is that you have to become an asset owner. Accumulate assets. This could be stocks, bonds, real estate, whatever... but you have to accumulate assets over time.



KaeJS said:


> Each day, I fall further behind.


It's probably hard to get an accurate reading on this. Just because other people drive new cars and have big homes, does not mean they are well off, or even financially stable. People make a lot of stupid decisions.

A lot of people are broke. Even a lot of high income earners are barely scraping by, so try not to make assumptions about how others are doing.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The government could solve the problem within a couple of years.

Buy land. Service land. Hire contractors to build 1200 square foot bungalows with egress windows so the basement can be finished.

Hire a sales team (no commissions), set up mortgages, remove land transfer taxes for them, eliminate the need for lawyers.....and start selling them by the thousands. First time home buyers will buy them. Retirees moving down will buy them opening up sales of their bigger homes. It would provide stability for young families and solve a housing problem.......and the government can recoup all the costs by holding the mortgages at a fixed 30 year rate.

Of course......land speculators, home builders, banks, real estate lawyers, and realtors will say it won't work.......but it has in the past and would again.

And.......existing home owners won't like it much because it would provide some competition to them selling their home for "lottery win" profits.

We owned many homes and know how home owners think. It is only human nature.

We all used to chat happily about our rising home prices but nobody wanted to chat about it anymore when the prices stopped rising or started to decline.

All we are lacking is the political creativity and the will to fix the problem.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> I'm not sure which answer you are referring to.
> I guess I really don't see it.


One solution I can see is that we can organize. We keep having governments that serve the interest of wealthy elderly people sitting on their assets; no wonder we keep getting screwed.

Politicians don't look out for us (young people) because they don't represent us.

If we (as a generation) take control of government, we could make a few big changes. End the CMHC subsidies and financial stimulus. Crack down hard on real estate incentives, freebies, tax breaks, benefits for property developers, jack up interest rates ... we could pull the rug out from under the real estate market / property bubble.

We could come down hard on property developers and real estate speculators. These people currently RUN cities and get all the freebies. We can put an end to their rampage.

We could tax the living daylights out of wealthy people and use the tax revenue to fund things that are actually useful for society. We still have a tax system which heavily favours extremely rich, old people.

Now watch the rich old people at CMF react to my post. Come on guys, let's hear what you have to say!! lol


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

sags said:


> The government could solve the problem within a couple of years.
> 
> Buy land. Service land. Hire contractors to build 1200 square foot bungalows with egress windows so the basement can be finished.
> 
> ...


Of course, your idea would work. Anyone who says it wouldn't work is a fool, so long as those bungalows are not built in the middle of nowhere.

The problem, as you said, is making something like this happen.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

james4beach said:


> One solution I can see is that we can organize. We keep having governments that serve the interest of wealthy elderly people sitting on their assets; no wonder we keep getting screwed.
> 
> Politicians don't look out for us (young people) because they don't represent us.
> 
> ...


I see a lot of young people voting for the wrong governments. I feel like lots of youth don't understand or they lack the competitive drive of older generations.

I work with many guys in their 20's that would never vote for something like this. It blows my mind.

Also, I do have a townhouse, but I still want home prices to fall. I'm not really sure how it benefits me to have home prices rise. When prices rise, it just means I will be stuck in a townhouse forever. If home prices fall, it suddenly becomes easier for me to get a detached home.

I don't understand the hysteria behind rising home prices. Who cares? It doesn't really benefit anyone. It benefits only those who are leveraged to the tits looking to move out of the cities.

James,

You are obviously right about assets. But this is my whole point... How are my shares of Bell, CNR, TD Bank, or Enbridge keeping up with all the other inflation?

You are right that these assets help me. But overall, they are still lacking. They pale in comparison to the other inflation going on around me.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I live in London, Ontario.......and our home prices have risen at insane levels because of people moving here from Toronto.

I can drive in any direction out of the city......any direction, and within 1 minute will be surrounded by nothing but land.

The real estate cartel is the same as the doctor cartel. They keep the numbers low so the price is kept high.

If we really wanted more family doctors.....there are hundreds of thousands of well qualified doctors in China who work at part time jobs to survive.

If we want more houses built.......we have to push the middle men completely out of the way and just build them.

Maybe the NDP would take up such a proposal ? If they did.........they could gain a lot of support from millennials.

Better than them sitting around griping to the Liberal government about high home prices. That isn't building anything.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

doctrine said:


> If I was a young person, I would counsel them to invest in themselves hard. That could be education or simply taking the necessary steps to advance your career - move, hustle, work your butt off, whatever it is. Those millennials or younger who spend 10-15 years off gallivanting around the world or not taking personal advancement seriously are in for a world of suffering. You have to unlock your human capital. And you will need a life partner who does the same. Unfortunately, that means a lifetime of working and not leisure. But that is not unlike previous generations. Unless you are willing to take a serious reality check in your living circumstances.


I'm not saying you're wrong.
But I think you do make it sound easier than it is.

Working on yourself is one thing. That is something you can control, and you will ALWAYS get out what you put into it.

But what about the things you CAN'T control? This is the issue!

Some millenials are lazy. Absolutely. I can confirm. But some are seriously extremely hard working, diligent, focused individuals. Yet, it doesn't seem to be enough. Why? Because outside factors they can't control are outpacing their efforts.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

sags said:


> I live in London, Ontario.......and our home prices have risen at insane levels because of people moving here from Toronto.
> 
> I can drive in any direction out of the city......any direction, and within 1 minute am surrounded by nothing but land.


I am close to you.

I'm in the Kitchener Area. Had family that used to live near Wonderland Rd and an ex girlfriend in Woodstock. I know alllllll about it.

The worst part is that London is largely a service/college city. It's not even that heavily focused on "well-paying" jobs, and yet, the prices are flying.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> I don't understand the hysteria behind rising home prices. Who cares? It doesn't really benefit anyone. It benefits only those who are leveraged to the tits looking to move out of the cities.
> 
> James,
> 
> ...


Home price inflation is a tremendous boost to all the middle men who get rich off real estate. All the home building, house flipping, financing, renovations (which increase when home prices rise), all employ a lot of people. The Canadian economy is a home-flipping, renovation economy these days. Corporate lobbyist interests from the real estate industry influence the government policy, to keep the party going, to keep enriching themselves.

But I don't think stocks should be shrugged off.

I feel like BCE, CNR, TD, ENB do keep up with inflation over the long term. Here's a chart, and I don't see how this is lacking with 15% long term return. My own Canadian 5-pack holds similar stuff.



KaeJS said:


> I'm in the Kitchener Area.


Nice place. I lived in the KW area for nearly a decade.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I feel like BCE, CNR, TD, ENB do keep up with inflation over the long term. Here's a chart, and I don't see how this is lacking with 15% long term return. My own Canadian 5-pack holds similar stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice place. I lived in the KW area for nearly a decade.


You might be right.

But let's say the companies are growing at 12+% a year...

The problem is that real estate uses leverage. The other problem is that these companies that you invest in use leverage to generate these returns. So...

I mean. It's great that I MAY get 12% yoy on my portfolio, but 12% of my portfolio is not the same as 12% on a million dollar home.

Because my portfolio is not a million dollars.

Also, what made you leave the KWC area and where did you end up?


----------



## MyCatMittens (Oct 20, 2015)

james4beach said:


> We could tax the living daylights out of wealthy people and use the tax revenue to fund things that are actually useful for society. We still have a tax system which heavily favours extremely rich, old people.


I'm not old, nor rich, but I'll bite. What rate do you feel would be reasonable? What amount constitutes "wealthy people"? 1M? 10M? I think the majority of Canadians would consider you wealthy, no?

LOL - Maybe I should ask what "old" is too... in case I fall into your target 



james4beach said:


> We still have a tax system which heavily favours extremely rich, old people.


Can you explain? Do you mean the capital gains rate? Primary residence exemption?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MyCatMittens said:


> Can you explain? Do you mean the capital gains rate? Primary residence exemption?


Oh I'm sure we'll figure out something.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> Also, what made you leave the KWC area and where did you end up?


I found a good job in Toronto at the time, so I moved to Toronto and lived there for a few years. And I really liked (central) Toronto ... pretty fun place. That was many years ago, before the new building binge started. You can see how the property developers are destroying what remained of Toronto's appeal.

After that, our jobs were outsourced to China. Very literally... the company even flew in a guy from China and made me train him. Shortly after, everyone was laid off. Me and my coworkers all scattered, because we couldn't find work in Toronto any more.

I then found a job in the US, so I moved there and worked for a while. I guess you can call me an economic refugee who had no choice but to move to another country to get good income.

After a few years in the US, I moved back to Canada. Life is better in Canada overall.

All this constant moving has made it hard for me to stay close with my friends, and it's also made it difficult to find a girlfriend / wife and settle down. I dated a couple nice American ladies but they didn't want to move to Canada so there wasn't any long term potential there.

These economic pressures have shaped my life, with some big consequences -- like being unable to start to a family. Too much moving, because that's really the only way to find a decent job.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

james4beach said:


> After a few years in the US, I moved back to Canada. Life is better in Canada overall.


I never would have come back.
I'd do anything for a Green Card.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> I never would have come back.
> I'd do anything for a Green Card.


My personal opinion, but it's not as great as it looks. Many parts of America are basically like a third world country, though with a lot of glossy paint making it look shiny.

America is only really great if you're filthy rich. It's a pretty bad deal for most citizens and I actually think the middle class is better off in Canada.

The crime, social problems, rampant drug addiction, and lunatics all over the place are unbelievable. Not to mention the ludicrously high healthcare costs.

IMO the better countries are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and much of Europe


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Consider a nice condo in Toronto....look at the gorgeous view of the city. Plunk down big bucks and 5 years later your view is the side of a building 20 feet away. 

People don't want to live in high density housing. They want room to stretch out.....a small bit of ground and a neighborhood for their kids to play in.

We hear about all those who can't afford to buy a home and are stuck paying rising monthly rent payments. But there is another group of young people who own a "first time" home and are stuck there because they can't afford to "move up"........like past generations did.

You sell now.........and you are either paying a huge cost to move up or you stay put where you are.

At some point the government is going to be forced to take action. I think taxing current home owners is the wrong solution.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

james4beach said:


> My personal opinion, but it's not as great as it looks. Many parts of America are basically like a third world country, though with a lot of glossy paint making it look shiny.
> 
> America is only really great if you're filthy rich. It's a pretty bad deal for most citizens and I actually think the middle class is better off in Canada.


Yup..........rent a luxury vacation condo on the Gulf coast near Indian Shores, Florida and from the balcony......you can see how many Floridians really live.

Armed security guards in the complex, gangs of people gathered in the dark streets, the sound of gunfire.........a typical night in paradise.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Yup..........rent a luxury vacation condo on the ocean near Indian Shores, Florida and from the balcony......you can see how Floridians really live.
> 
> Armed security guards in the complex, gangs of people gathered in the dark streets, the sound of gunfire.........a typical night in paradise.


Absolutely true. I went to Florida a few times on business trips. This is an incredibly scary state. The only reason snowbirds think it's fun is that they are hiding in gated communities, artificial enclaves where the rich hang out and try to ignore the third world conditions surrounding them.

On business travel I saw the "real America". On the road, I stopped somewhere in Florida for a slice of pizza, and meth head junkies start sizing me up. My coworker saw what was happening and came from the car into the store basically to rescue me, we abandoned the order and got the hell out of there.

My other female coworker was going to her car in the morning and another junkie started following her, and she called 911 and ran screaming (also Florida). Later at the office people were angry at me for not escorting her and helping protect her.

There's a reason everyone in America carries guns. A very good reason.

If you're under the misconception that America is a good place to be ... holy cow. America truly is a third world country, along with crime rates you'll find in the biggest sh*t holes on earth. Just has a few protected enclaves where you can pretend things are fine.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> I never would have come back.
> I'd do anything for a Green Card.


Grass-is-greener syndrome.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> ... We could tax the living daylights out of wealthy people and use the tax revenue to fund things that are actually useful for society. We still have a tax system which heavily favours extremely rich, old people.
> 
> Now watch the rich old people at CMF react to my post. Come on guys, let's hear what you have to say!! lol


So now the Canadian tax system sucks after all those posts about how it was value for money compared to the US.

Interesting.

Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eclectic12 said:


> So now the Canadian tax system sucks after all those posts about how it was value for money compared to the US.
> 
> Interesting.


Our tax system is a better deal than the US, for sure.

I think our system is more fair than the US tax system. But there's still room for improvement. I would start with the basics: the CRA is under funded. We have rich people failing to pay their taxes, and we just have to spend more effort on enforcement for *existing rules*. I would be quite happy if we just focused on better enforcement and tax collection, including prosecution of tax cheats.

Even tax experts (there's a survey somewhere) say that one of the biggest problems are poor enforcement of existing rules, and too many rich people not paying taxes which they are supposed to pay under existing rules. CRA employees agree with this.

The poor people tend to pay their taxes. It's the rich people who break the rules -- they are the problem.

This includes hiding assets off shore, games using shell corporations, charitable scams, abuse of the corporate structure, etc


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> ... I want to know why things are not being done to change the economic landscape and I want to know how this landscape CAN be changed ...


Getting people to talk about it might help .... but most people run away from such topics or any of the details of policies or complications.




KaeJS said:


> ... For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how anyone of this generation or newer is able to get ahead.


Spend less than you make, invest and look for opportunities to increase assets (could be more skills, could be taking in a renter, could be a hobby that does not seem like work that people will pay for).



KaeJS said:


> ... How is it that the average Canadian home increased $130k last year? Does anyone see how insane this is?


And I can recall Europeans in the '90's shocked at how cheap Canadian RE was. The question is how much is money flowing in from outside (a new record of $43.6 billion came into Canada from Hong Kong as China cracked down), how much is global pricing, criminal funds and other factors. There's parts of New Brunswich where those who have river front access are all foreigners.




KaeJS said:


> ... And this is true. I do agree. But just because I agree doesn't mean it is fair. And I know life is not fair ...
> It seems like in this day and age, working is more or less a waste of time. It's a means to an end. It just gets you by. That's great for those that don't care, but I need more. I need continuous improvement. I don't want to just "get by" and I know I'm not the only one ...


Who said it would be fair?

The question is what improvements are you making that are a waste of time and what ones can help you?



KaeJS said:


> ... Wages are low but you can't possibly tax companies more or they will leave. Canada is already an expensive country to employ people in ...


Why would you think they can't be taxed more?
You do know that Burger King bought Tims to be able to pay less taxes with a Canadian merged company versus staying US based, right?

IN 2015, Canadians paid a reported $145 billion in income tax while corps paid $41 billion. 
Why do credit unions pay triple the income taxes the banks do?
Why does the gov't discuss closing loopholes for small business while if the Canadian banks paid similar tax rates to their US operations, billions more would be in gov't coffers?




KaeJS said:


> ... Are people not concerned that DB pensions are basically non-existent and now everything is DC?


People run away from finance topics. 
And several who are more skilled have posted here that with people changing jobs so often, in their opinion, a DC pension or RRSP matching is better.




KaeJS said:


> ... Working on yourself is one thing. That is something you can control, and you will ALWAYS get out what you put into it.
> But what about the things you CAN'T control?
> This is the issue!


It's also about marketing oneself and putting oneself out there.

Co-workers complained they couldn't move to other jobs. When I looked at their resume, it listed what they had worked on ... which was not the growth area. Listing the skills needed in the hot areas with what they worked on as specific examples meant they would be considered instead of being labelled as a dinosaur that couldn't learn.

There was also the person complaining in the lunch room about seeing the ad for a job they wanted at another company. They took the qualifications at face value and did not apply. Their _trainee_ applied and go the job!!!


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> ... The problem is that real estate uses leverage ...
> I mean. It's great that I MAY get 12% yoy on my portfolio, but 12% of my portfolio is not the same as 12% on a million dollar home ...
> Because my portfolio is not a million dollars ...


And have you considered using your RE to have a tax deduction with an increased investment portfolio?
Renting out a room (some expenses are 100% deductible while other are are pro-rated)?




KaeJS said:


> ... Also, what made you leave the KWC area and where did you end up?


This wasn't directed at me but in my case, it was to become a traveling management consultant for a 60% pay raise (without counting annual bonus) compared to current job/KW jobs. Someone in my network pointed out that Peoplesoft was a hot skill where convincing the interviewer you had modest skills, you could handle clients/travel and could continuously learn, you would be hired. It's the only job when the management update two months into the job was how it was great that only 30% of staff had left for better pay, down from 45% the year before.

Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> I never would have come back. [from the US]
> I'd do anything for a Green Card.


Same thing as my relative who was moved to Chicago as a VP said.
He came back to Canada in about sixteen months, despite all the things he listed as great before leaving.

I was expecting he'd say the number one frustration was the extra fees that would have been covered in Canada through taxes.
To my surprise, he said his number one reason for returning was how few job candidates he though might be marginally good employees.

I much preferred to be a Canadian tax resident when loaned out to the US arm of the consulting firm. By US law, the US employee's per diem was stuck at $30 USD a day to avoid being taxed. The per diem for use Canadians was $80 USD a day.

I also found it strange that the US tech team lead was gushing at the introduction lunch where the US techies and Canadian techies were introduced. He was happy because he'd worked with the US techies before so he knew they were competent and the Canadians had passed his test questions with flying colours. In later discussions, it seems that most of the internal US company resumes posted where people claimed upgrade experience really meant they had done some powerpoint slides for a project office instead of upgrade tasks.


IAC, if you do get a green card - remember to file your US taxes no matter where you are in the world as my understanding is an active green card means filing taxes on world wide income no matter where you are in the world or what country you work in.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> Absolutely true. I went to Florida a few times on business trips. This is an incredibly scary state. The only reason snowbirds think it's fun is that they are hiding in gated communities, artificial enclaves where the rich hang out and try to ignore the third world conditions surrounding them ...


Some yes ... there was no gate where my folks bought a forty foot trailer with a sun room in a trailer park.
I haven't noticed much difference between Florida, California or New York state. 

Particular spots in Buffalo, San Francisco and Michigan had me scared.

'Course about a year after I was finished in Maryland is when that area experienced the Beltway sniper.




james4beach said:


> ... On business travel I saw the "real America" ...


My co-worker's sister was out for a walk in Anaheim, CA. A cop car stopped her where they asked what she was doing. She said she was out for a walk. They advised her that it was a bad area to be walking in and then they drove off!!




james4beach said:


> .... If you're under the misconception that America is a good place to be ... Just has a few protected enclaves where you can pretend things are fine.


And lots of places with no gates where it's fine. The main difference is the extremes are side by side with few transitional parts.

Cheers


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

Eclectic,

Thank you for posting so much. I don't even know where to begin.

Regarding the real estate and room rentals and "increasing my worth" or finding new avenues... I do actually have 3 tenants and 2 properties that bring in roughly $2200/mo. I also do have a few "side hustles". However, I still feel this is not sufficient enough for the life I want.

Am I doing better than most? Sure. Probably. I can see how that would be the case for lots of my peers. Some are doing better than I. I'm definitely not at the bottom. But the fact still remains that I'm not increasing at a fast enough rate to obtain what I want. No, I don't need a yacht or a Lambo. But I do want a detached home with a 2 car garage in the suburbs.

With all that said, you and others have provided the correct advice as it pertains to working on one's self.

Regarding Canadian taxation of companies... I do own QSR but I had no idea there were tax benefits for BK to own Tims. I thought it was just a strategic takeover.

In response to you, @sags and @James regarding America... Yes. You are all right. I have family in multiple parts of America. Personally, I would never live in a place like Washington, Cali, Florida, etc. If it were up to me, I'd probably live in the upper class suburbs of Indiana, away from downtown and places like Gary, IN that are full of crime and poverty. I don't need waterfront. I just need a nice home with nice neighbours and some local eats to go to, maybe a liquor store and a grocery store or Walmart. As an aside, I am a gun owner. Please don't make me out to be a psycho. I have never had a criminal record and I do not agree with all of America's gun laws or leniency. However... I will say that being a gun owner does make you feel a "tiny" bit like you have a chance, should you ever need to (unfortunately) use it in America.

I would agree, though, that I would like to turn a blind eye to the poverty. Maybe a nice house in the hills of Durham or Raleigh, NC, surrounded by trees. That would be nice.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> I know this topic is not new, but I can't help feeling that I am one of the very few who are increasingly concerned about the economic issues that Millenials and newer generations are facing. I don't want this to be a "woe is me" thread. I want to discuss how the issues millenials are facing actually could impact everyone else negatively, as well. I want to know why things are not being done to change the economic landscape and I want to know how this landscape CAN be changed.
> 
> By definition, I am a millenial. I am 30 years old. For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how anyone of this generation or newer is able to get ahead. I am personally becoming fatigued, both mentally and physically. Trying to work more, harder, faster, efficiently, or sacrifice even more leisure time seems to be something that is required just to stop yourself from falling behind more than your peers. Because let's face it, 99% of us are falling behind.
> 
> ...


You are 100% right. I have seen this coming since the early seventies, could not predict what form it would take but saw the slow deterioration of the average person's life. Governments have all kinds of wonderful programs and policies, but assume no matter what they will do the private sector will go on as before providing the money to pay for everything. Why should it? Why wouldn't their laws and regulations have bad effects they never counted on? Because they do.
I don't know what can be done about it. They do the things they do because they think the public wants them, or ought to want them, or something and the people can't seem to figure it out. You and I are two of the few exceptions. If you could somehow get people to see that actions have consequences, sometimes unexpected consequences or side effects that are bad, it might help. It seems a lot of young people sense that something is wrong but don't know what. The meme right now seems to be, to get them to put the blame on the boomers when the boomers had no more to do with the decisions than you have. It's just a way to get you to throw granny under the bus while the big boys rob her pension and your inheritance.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Honestly a lot of the problem is bad policy and a lack of understanding of reality.
Every new development is met with protests and petitions, so there is a lack of housing.

The problem with wages is that low value jobs are disappearing, and we're shipping a lot offshore, why pay a Canadian Engineer when you can get an Indian Engineeer at 1/4 the price? Starting wages have been stagnant for years.

There are no easy answers, but I think there are too many popular bad answers, high minimum wages and UBI won't help, they'll make things worse.
Just like rent controls reduce housing supply, wage controls will reduce the available jobs.

The real answer is make people more productive and more valuable.. not sure how to do that, but it's the most logical answer.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

For a long time Canada had high wages, low prices and a high standard of living for everyone because our farms and factories were so productive. Much of the productivity came from being more mechanized and industrialized before the rest of the world and partly from the freedom to try new things and develop new inventions and processes. Now other countries have caught up and passed us on both.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> For a long time Canada had high wages, low prices and a high standard of living for everyone because our farms and factories were so productive. Much of the productivity came from being more mechanized and industrialized before the rest of the world and partly from the freedom to try new things and develop new inventions and processes. Now other countries have caught up and passed us on both.


I don't think that's the reason, he's not talking about all things, he just thinks young people have it harder these days.
And in many ways they do, like every other generation they have it more difficult, but also much easier.

When I was a teen/young adult we had these exact same conversations and discussions.
This is normal.

Now I think today part of the problem is that advocacy and pushing for change is highly rewarded. If you're politically active, you get scholarships and can become quite wealthy. 
Many of these advocates aren't actually pushing for solutions, they're simply "raising awareness". 
I think that is useful only to a point, at some point people have to do the hard work of actually making things better.

From the old person side, it's a bunch of noisy people complaining about how bad it is, but not working to make things better.

It's like the people decrying corporate overlords, and that we should have co-ops, but they rarely start their own co-ops. Lots of talk, not enough action.

Also the victim mentality is prevalant, and it discourages action.

FWIW I know a single guy, in his 20s, making starting wage salary, who bought a house in London. It just takes a bit of focus and sacrifice. I think there is a way forward, but there are trade offs.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Seriously, do you really think employment opportunities, standard of living, house prices etc are as good for the working class as they were 50 years ago?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

KaeJS said:


> Regarding the real estate and room rentals and "increasing my worth" or finding new avenues... I do actually have 3 tenants and 2 properties that bring in roughly $2200/mo. I also do have a few "side hustles". However, I still feel this is not sufficient enough for the life I want.
> 
> Am I doing better than most? Sure. Probably. I can see how that would be the case for lots of my peers. Some are doing better than I. I'm definitely not at the bottom. But the fact still remains that I'm not increasing at a fast enough rate to obtain what I want. No, I don't need a yacht or a Lambo. But I do want a detached home with a 2 car garage in the suburbs.


Sounds like just a lack of patience if you ask me. Your ambition is admirable but there is a cost to ambition and your current frustration is that cost.

The baby boomers who own those assets that are currently appreciating are many decades older then you. Most, including myself, struggled when we were 30. There was no easy route for most of us. Time did most of the work and as you have noticed that clock moves at a glacial speed, when it comes to compounding money. At any reasonable rate of interest a compound interest chart will always show growth going mostly sideways for 80% of the time frame and almost straight up for the last 20%. That mathematical law been the same for all of us. It was slow for my generation, it will be slow for your generation and it will be very slow for the generation behind you, looking at how easy you had it compared to how hard things are currently for them.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Come on Optsy......there are price bubbles everywhere.

Boomers don't deserve and didn't expect these price increases, but are happy to take the money and run.

The bubbles will collapse as they always do. The question is who gets caught holding the bag.

Will it be the person who bought the home or the person who didn't sell when they could have ?

Likely it will be some from both camps.

Seriously Optsy......do you think cardboard sports or Pokemon cards are worth tens of thousands of dollars ?

Comic books, NFTs, bitcoins, dogecoins ? .....LOL.

These bubbles are so stupid that they defy all logic, economics or explanation. But they can and do carry on until they don't.

People inside the bubble can't see out. Some people don't know what a bubble looks like.

But some have seen bubbles before and recognize them for what they are. They also know how they always end.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

How much wealth did you have when you were 30?

Time will allow for more bubbles then the lack of it. That is the issue here. When the bubble bursts I suspect the average 60 year old will still have more money then the average 30 year old. That was my point.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

sags said:


> These bubbles are so stupid that they defy all logic, economics or explanation. But they can and do carry on until they don't.
> 
> People inside the bubble can't see out. Some people don't know what a bubble looks like.
> 
> But some have seen bubbles before and recognize them for what they are. They also know how they always end.


Fractional reserve banking, printing fiat money to artificially kick financial problems down the road. Thanks boomers

Luckily the millennials are building a solution from the ground up that will replace fractional reserve banking crisis. Despite all attempts from the boomers to discredit it

This fits perfectly into the Fourth Turning cycle. Everyone under the age of boomer should learn about this and understand what is happening


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Seriously, do you really think employment opportunities, standard of living, house prices etc are as good for the working class as they were 50 years ago?


Employment opportunities, not really.
Real wages have been flat for years.


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/11f0019m/11f0019m2013347-eng.pdf?st=te1t9uvA



Standard of living, way higher.
House prices.. no but there are a few reasons.

1. They dont' make land, people want huge houses in specific areas, outside those areas it gets cheap.
2. Super low rates and people more comfortable with rates. 50 years ago a 5yr mortgage was 18%, that's a MUCH larger payment. This IMO is one of the biggest problems.
3. Bad government housing policy.
4. Anti development, high permitting costs etc.

Outside major centers, where land is harder to come by, homes are still reasonably priced, when you account for interest rates.

What we really need is higher interest rates, these artificially low rates are destructive, particularly for the poor.


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

10 years ago I would have said you could just do what I did financially and you could expect the same results. I don't see that as true any more. You see the starting point was that I as a high school graduate could get a sufficient job to buy a house at 4X annual salary and live in a city and thus not run a car, and go to the local university (eventually) to boost my earnings potential. Current housing prices make the house/income ratio for say $40,000 annual income in Ottawa in the range of 10 or 12X.

I think it mostly comes down to the house/income ratio. Fix this somehow and life will be good again eventually. Allow this to fester and disaster awaits.

The wealth of most people my age, lets be honest, is mostly in unearned RE gains. So I think the young people need to vote for policies that attack this with capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes, and property taxes. My generation has been unfairly lucky, and yours has been unfairly unlucky. As the demographics turn over in the next decade or so, you will have the voting block to make this so. Full disclosure: I have not made my money this way. My shitbox rural property's value might be in 6 figures that starts with a 3 instead of a 2 now. MPAC number is about $225,000.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

hboy54 said:


> Current housing prices make the house/income ratio for say $40,000 annual income in Ottawa in the range of 10 or 12X.


In Toronto, try 20x.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Sorry kids, you're screwed.
Artificially low interest rates have everyone leveraged so they can't go up.
Which pushed housing prices up, so you'll have to pay up.

The high rates will inflate the economy, lowering whatever meager savings you have.

Also the government has borrowed like crazy and has taken on generational debt, we could go from our current near 50% total tax burden to 100%, and it would still take years to pay off the debt.

You're screwed, and the current government seems intent on making it worse.

The real choice is to bite the bullet and realize that it's going to take decades to dig out from this mess. But nobody wants to hear that.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Everyone is over-reacting.

At what point in history was life affordable? Who goes around saying, "life was so much cheaper when I was growing up"? 

Every new generation provides a different perspective from the previous generation and that will continue forever. 

Stop blaming society or depending on the government to help you afford the latest luxuries. 
Its nothing new and every generation went through the same difficulties: 

can't afford a house? rent
can't afford a car? take the bus
can't afford brand name items? change store
can't afford a vacation? explore your neighborhood

Only YOU can determine how you will afford your lifestyle. If you want to keep up with everyone else, well don't blame everyone else if you can't keep up.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Easy to spot the boomers


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Sounds like a case of "can't keep up with the Jones" if not a "woe me" thread.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> Easy to spot the boomers


 ... ask your parents (presumably boomers too) if they didn't have to make sacrifices to get you where you are now.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

m3s said:


> Easy to spot the boomers


If you're referring to me, I'm definitely not a boomer - imagine that.

I could assume you're of the "entitled" generations......but I won't.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... ask your parents (presumably boomers too) if they didn't have to make sacrifices to get you where you are now.


I'm far ahead of the jones thanks to my parents providing good examples of poor choices. But this isn't about me.. you're just getting offended and defensive by trying to make it so.

It's about the boomers greedy decisions to kick major issues down the road to the millennials rather than make the tough decisions. Boomers embody everything they claim the millennials to be.

They need to move on and let the younger generations start cleaning up their mess they are too proud to acknowledge.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> I'm far ahead of the jones thanks to my parents providing good examples of poor choices. But this isn't about me.. you're just getting offended and defensive by trying to make it so.
> 
> It's about the boomers greedy decisions to kick major issues down the road to the millennials rather than make the tough decisions. Boomers embody everything they claim the millennials to be.
> 
> They need to move on and let the younger generations start cleaning up their mess they are too proud to acknowledge.


 ... why would I get offended and defensive - sounds quite the opposite with your response, with the "Easy to spot the boomers" or preferably "millennials should declare war on boomers" because the "boomers made greedy decisions to kick major issues down the road ... blah, blah, blah ... aka easier to blame others".

You know you can't deny the nature of things or that the boomers (and GENX) were born before the millennials. And who is going to clean up both the millenials' mess since they can't clean up after the GENX + boomers + the generation before that ( Depression era?) + ... the Neantherdals ... + Primates. Sheesh.

If this is not the case of "can't keep up with the Jones" or as mortgage u/w better description as "sense of entitlement", then it's a simple case of "jealousy" with the OP. "The grass on the opposite side always greener" mentality.

Reminder: The OP should be seeking mental help from his company's (believe it's BMO?) EAP = Employee Assistance Program.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

If this complaint is all going to focus around one issue, "buying a house" then I am sure we can all find something to complain about. I am not going to argue on either side of that issue, but I will remind everyone reading here that we all won two lotteries in life:

1) being born - has anyone ever thought about the astronomical odds of the conception between your mother and father actually resulting in your birth? Trust me, winning lotto max is many times more probable then any of us actually being alive.

2) being born in Canada - I woke up this morning and did not experience one single Palestinian rocket blasting down in my neighbourhood. Women do not have the Taliban telling them that if they go to school they will be executed on sight. I turned on a faucet in my house and clean running water just comes right out of the tap. One side of it was actually hot. My fridge is full of food. Some guys came this morning and took the garbage I put out on my front lawn completely away. How cool is that? Don't get me going on the benefits of flushing toilets.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... why would I get offended and defensive - sounds quite the opposite with your response, with the "Easy to spot the boomers" or preferably "millennials should declare war on boomers" because the "boomers made greedy decisions to kick major issues down the road ... blah, blah, blah ... aka easier to blame others".


Freaking millenials got Trudeau to put us in generational debt that's going to make my kids lives a lot harder.
hey I'm angry at the mess the boomers made, but really it seemed logical at the time.

They could have never guessed that the government would slash rates so low, and our birthrate would drop below replacement.

Sure they voted themselves lots of money, leaving us with a massive debt, but that's nothing compared what Millenials are doing to their kids.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Everyone is over-reacting.
> 
> At what point in history was life affordable? *Who goes around saying, "life was so much cheaper when I was growing up"*?
> 
> ...


While I generally agree with most of what you say, I'll have to say that the bolded is something to address.

Lots of anecdotal stories about older generations saying how after high school, with no education, they were able to get a good paying job and able to buy a house with land on a single salary. So, yes, things were cheaper when growing up for some things. But mainly houses.

When I think back when I was growing up, my parents probably had the same salary as myself, but the house price was essentially equivalent to 1 years salary. Not the case any more. Some of it is due to inflation, but mainly due to interest rates (I'm sure many remember the 18% mortgage rates that was considered cheap). 

Is there something the government can do? The obvious answer (with regards to housing prices), is to limit the access to easy money. The policies for house affordability have always been counter to what needs to be done, and actually act as a positive feedback loop. For example, prices increase so you need a bigger downpayment. Easy, change the policy to decrease the minimum downpayment for a mortgage, or increase the amortization period which increases buying power, which feeds into inflating housing prices. Somehow, people don't get the idea that having access to more funds is just going to mean that sellers are going to demand more.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> If this complaint is all going to focus around one issue, "buying a house" then I am sure we can all find something to complain about. I am not going to argue on either side of that issue, but I will remind everyone reading here that we all won two lotteries in life:
> 
> 1) being born - has anyone ever thought about the astronomical odds of the conception between your mother and father actually resulting in your birth? Trust me, winning lotto max is many times more probable then any of us actually being alive.
> 
> 2) being born in Canada - I woke up this morning and did not experience one single Palestinian rocket blasting down in my neighbourhood. Women do not have the Taliban telling them that if they go to school they will be executed on sight. I turned on a faucet in my house and clean running water just comes right out of the tap. One side of it was actually hot. My fridge is full of food. Some guys came this morning and took the garbage I put out on my front lawn completely away. How cool is that? Don't get me going on the benefits of flushing toilets.


Well I've said, since I was a teenager.. which has been a while.

The greatest success of Canada is that things are so good here, most people literally can't conceive of actually having to experience real hardship.
When i mean hardship, I mean the lived reality for the vast majority of the planet that has is much worse.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Good post. In the past, if you wanted a detached home there were plenty of affordable ones just outside of the city. They might have been a bit rough around the edges, but nothing that a bit of hard work couldn't fix. That's no longer the case anymore -- everything, even the houses that need work are absurdly priced. The average person under 35 will have to find a way to be happy in a condo, or else they're going to be constantly depressed. If you already own a townhome at 30, then you're doing pretty well. Even at 41, that's all I could realistically afford without putting myself into the poor house. If I wanted a detached home, I would need to put about 500K down to get the mortgage payments low enough to afford. It's completely ridiculous.

The sad part is that I'm actually doing well compared to a lot of my peers. When I look around at my friends, the only ones doing better than me are those who got married. The ones who are still single are all living paycheck to paycheck, renting or paying mortgages on small condos with ever-increasing maintenance fees. A dual income is basically a necessity if you want any standard of living nowadays. Either that or just rent the cheapest condo you can find and focus all of your energy elsewhere.

I might just wait until I'm retired to buy a detached home. I should be able to afford it by then, plus I'll have more time to enjoy it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

nathan79 said:


> Good post. In the past, if you wanted a detached home there were plenty of affordable ones just outside of the city. They might have been a bit rough around the edges, but nothing that a bit of hard work couldn't fix. That's no longer the case anymore -- everything, even the houses that need work are absurdly priced.


Just don't live in the city.
The real issue is that if 10 people want to live in one place, either 9 of them need to move away, or they have to make a higher density house. That's just part of a growing population.

If you stay outside the cities, prices can get a lot better.. however with remotework that's going to be messed up for a while. 
The real solution is hike interest rates so that people don't "invest" so much in real estate.

Also I'd rather be a young person today than at any other time in history (well if you take away COVID, and the social justice crap)


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Just don't live in the city.
> 
> The real solution is hike interest rates so that people don't "invest" so much in real estate.


Houses are going for 1 million an hour outside of the city. If you want any employment options, it's kind of hard to go further out.

Agree on the second point.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

nathan79 said:


> Houses are going for 1 million an hour outside of the city. If you want any employment options, it's kind of hard to go further out.
> 
> Agree on the second point.


I moved to a smaller center because of quality of life/job trade off.
Someone was trying to recruit me to work in Missisauga, they said they'd pay to compensate.
I said sure, they said 20% premium, I said no 200% premium.
They hired someone else, I kept my lower paying job and haven't looked back.

Companies have to start paying enough to attract employees, and the employees must refuse to do it for that prices.
Companies already outsource to lower cost countries.
They can "outsource" from Toronto and save a pile.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Millennials will inherit the debt......and the hospitals, highways, water treatment plants, schools, subways, and everything else built with the debt.

How much debt do they think it cost to build the 400 series highways for the past 70 years ? How much would it cost to build today ?

Maybe boomers should have lived with balanced budgets and left the next generation 2 lane roads, one room schools, and small hospitals.

After all that is what the boomers inherited. Back when I was young some people still didn't have indoor plumbing, and going to TO was a long trip.

Of course the current generation has no clue about how long it took to build and costly the infrastructure was that they take for granted every day

Canada owes over $1 Trillion in debt nationally. Pffft.......you couldn't replace the subway system in Toronto for that today.









Ontario Highway 400 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Millennials will inherit the debt......and the hospitals, highways, water treatment plants, schools, and everything else built with the debt.
> 
> How much debt do they think it cost to build the 400 series highways ? How much would it cost today ?
> 
> Maybe boomers should have lived with balanced budgets and left the next generation 2 lane highways.


Yes, maybe they should have lived within their means.
But they didn't so their kids have to deal with it.

now their kids are grumpy and doing the exact same thing to their kids.


----------



## Johnny199r (May 20, 2014)

I'm a millennial.

Why do so many of my peers believe that housing is the be all - end all of their existence?

I live in a nice apartment building that a 2 story gym, roof top deck and other amenities. My apartment is 1200sq and 3 bedrooms. I pay $1800 per month. 

Why cant you have a wife and a kid in that situation? Why are we all obsessed with having a single family home? Do we all believe that is the only measure of success?

If little Jimmy doesn't have a backyard to play in, rather than the public park across the street, have you failed as a parent? Why do 3-4 people need 2,000sq?? Why is 1500 "too cramped"? Do you need two vehicles in the driveway?

Why have all of my cohorts fallen into the trap of what is "required" to have a family? Look around the world. Why do we only bring up cheaper, U.S cities where money can go further in buying a home, rather than European cities, where buying is often difficult or bigger, more desirable U.S cities?

I honestly can't figure out why having the house makes so much difference to people that they are willing to throw away a decent chance of retirement, or other pursuits.

Is a house the only way to grow your net worth and have a comfortable life? Hell no, just look at the stock market since 2009. Were people smart with their money? Did they invest it during the biggest bull run in history? Why don't more people acknowledge that?

Why does a single structure or piece of land dictate success for so many people? I dont have the answer. I think they're crazy. Give me a couple million in my various investment accounts and retirement 55 on the beach somewhere over that nonsense.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Well, the voters put some guy in charge that has no place trying to run a country. Perhaps if the government were to focus on putting Canada and Canadians first, as opposed to the rest of the world and minorities, things might improve. Then there is the issue of too many government employees, all getting fat paychecks, benefits and pensions. I don't know where it will end either. Yes, I am one that has benefited from increased value of my homes over the last 40+ years but my first one was still 4 times my salary and we struggled to pay the mortgage and keep our kids fed and clothed. No such thing as latest TV's, electronics and new vehicles in our budgets. It's not like we can access the increased value of a home either as if you sell high, you buy high.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Johnny199r said:


> I'm a millennial.
> 
> Why do so many of my peers believe that housing is the be all - end all of their existence?
> 
> ...


I think it's great that you feel that way. Anyone who wants a detached house to feel "successful" probably has some deeper issues, and it's unfortunate that society pushes that narrative. Another issue is FOMO, which has people stretching themselves to buy houses they don't really need because they think they won't get another opportunity later. You shouldn't try to predict the future, you should buy what you need when you need it.

However, not all of us are happy living in condos/apartments for several reasons (just like not everyone would be happy living in a detached home!). Housing is a lifestyle choice which also depends on someone's age, personality, hobbies and interests. When I was in my 20's, I was mostly just working and hanging out with friends so I was pretty happy living in a condo. It wasn't until my early 30's that I really started to want a detached home. Now that most of my friends are busy with their own families and careers, I find myself spending a lot more time at home and less time hanging out (obviously even more so with COVID, lol, but even before that). This means that I have a lot more time for doing my hobbies, which would really benefit from a detached home.

I think condos/apartments suit a lot of people very well; particularly those who travel often, minimalists, people who don't drive, young people, and those who don't have outdoor hobbies (or anything that requires a shop/garage).

There's definitely no reason that you can't raise kids in a condo or a townhome that is of a sufficient size and near amenities such as parks and schools.


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

Johnny199r said:


> I'm a millennial.
> 
> Why do so many of my peers believe that housing is the be all - end all of their existence?
> 
> ...


I think you are on the right track. As an owner (or renter of money from the bank) a house does consume alot of your time and a good chunk of your monthly cash flow. Time that could be spent exploring, camping, traveling. If you invest diligently, soon you will have a have a big enough nest-egg to cover your rent with passive income you can choose whatever dwelling type you want.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Johnny199r said:


> I'm a millennial.
> 
> Why do so many of my peers believe that housing is the be all - end all of their existence?
> 
> ...


I'm glad there are still logical people out there.

Totally agree with you.

Lodging space has been shrinking. Many years ago, people lived on large acreages. Today, 3000 sqft is luxury in some parts of the country. Go to China and tell the locals you live in a 1200 condo!

Issue, really, is people are not willing to adapt and accept change.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Seriously, do you really think employment opportunities, standard of living, house prices etc are as good for the working class as they were 50 years ago?


And we have a lot of data on this. We know what homes used to cost (using things like house price to income ratios) and homes were much cheaper in the past, more affordable.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Johnny199r said:


> I live in a nice apartment building that a 2 story gym, roof top deck and other amenities. My apartment is 1200sq and 3 bedrooms. I pay $1800 per month.
> 
> Why cant you have a wife and a kid in that situation? Why are we all obsessed with having a single family home? Do we all believe that is the only measure of success?


I agree completely and I made the same argument in this other thread. Canada has a cult of home ownership, and everyone cares way too much about big homes.

The idea of getting a HUGE house is really an American ideal. Meanwhile, Europeans and many others live in apartments. They have children, etc.

Americans in recent years only are the ones who came up with this idea of buying disgustingly large homes, and having everyone live like a rich playboy, with their giant lawns, pools, multiple cars in the garage, so many bedrooms.

Look at the sizes of homes in previous generations *even in America*. They were much smaller. Really a lot of this agonizing is about buying HUGE homes, part of this obscene house culture we're living in right now.

I would argue that people are simply living beyond their means, and think they deserve a luxury lifestyle in a luxury home with multiple cars. Most people can't afford that, and they couldn't afford it in the past either.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Johnny199r said:


> Why does a single structure or piece of land dictate success for so many people? I dont have the answer. I think they're crazy.


Greed, for a life of luxury. Everyone thinks they deserve luxury.

Envy and jealousy over what they see their friends doing it. "I want that too!"

Meanwhile, everyone lies to each other, has huge debts (which they don't share of course) as they struggle to afford a luxury lifestyle and fake their way through it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Everyone I know that owned a lot of real estate retired wealthy. Most people I know who rented retired broke.

My aunt and uncle bought a large country estate and 2 cottages in the 1960s. They sold everything for millions a few years ago.

My wife's aunt owns a home in West Vancouver, that she bought in the 1960s. It was valued at $6 million a few years ago.

It would be pretty difficult to capture that kind of wealth from equity investments.........and all you have to do is pay the mortgage and live in it.

It must be a satisfying feeling to be enjoying the cottage at the lake knowing that every day the value is going up.

Unfortunately, I wasn't smart enough to buy up cheap cottages when I had the chance. I remember a large island for sale in Muskoka for $15,000.

Take me back to 1975 please. I want a do-over.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

sags said:


> Unfortunately, I wasn't smart enough to buy up cheap cottages when I had the chance. I remember a large island for sale in Muskoka for $15,000.
> 
> Take me back to 1975 please. I want a do-over.


Real estate is crowded now because of this mentality. Every generation won't get wealthy on the same asset. In the future it will be something different.

Boomers had the chance to buy cheap real estate. Millennials had the chance to buy cheap crypto. Those buying overpriced real estate are not going to have the same insane capital gains

I would never bid up the price of real estate above asking price. The majority of people don't seem to understand the difference or see their own opportunities


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

I don't know if I remember a time when I was like, man, housing is cheap. It just seems to oscillate between feeling expensive and really expensive.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

nobleea said:


> I don't know if I remember a time when I was like, man, housing is cheap. It just seems to oscillate between feeling expensive and really expensive.


I bought a house in Canada 2008 for 2x salary. I shopped around and found someone who was pressured to take an offer.

If you need to blind bid way above asking against a bunch of FOMO buyers.. there's your sign..


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Everyone I know that owned a lot of real estate retired wealthy. Most people I know who rented retired broke.
> 
> My aunt and uncle bought a large country estate and 2 cottages in the 1960s. They sold everything for millions a few years ago.
> 
> ...


I've more than tripled my Real estate portfolio (about 3.5x) in about 17 years (based on purchase price)


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I was working all day and wish I could have been more active on here. Glad to see there is discussion.

But let's be honest... Unless you're crippled, old, alone... Like who doesn't want a house?

Also, everyone who knows anything about finance knows that leverage is very important. Real estate is inherently leveraged.

@Beaver101 I no longer work for BMO. For you to suggest I need some sort of counseling or help would be insulting - if I was the type of person to be insulted. Choose your words more wisely. There is nothing wrong with me or my mental state. There is a hell of a lot wrong with the world, and mental disorders such as depression are actually expected and are a result of how effed up everything is, not an individuals own issue.

Look -

I'm most interested in how to get wealthy quickly. Aren't we all? I don't care how I get wealthy as long as I do it and it's as fast as possible.

Options make people happy. No longer having the option to own a home is not a good thing, regardless if you want to or not, it should still be something that is obtainable if you work hard.

These days, hard work is worth a Mexican peso.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I tell my son........slow and steady wins the race. It will provide all you will need in the future. Don't chase rainbows.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

And then I say......some day all we have will be yours.......the Visa bill, the Mastercard bill, the car loan, and truckloads of stuff to cart off to the Goodwill.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

For you to suggest I need some sort of counseling or help would be insulting - if I was the type of person to be insulted. Choose your words more wisely. There is nothing wrong with me or my mental state. There is a hell of a lot wrong with the world, and mental disorders such as depression are actually expected and are a result of how effed up everything is, not an individuals own issue.

"Someone just please say something because I'm losing my mind and I have nobody to talk to about these things because nobody understands like some of you folks will. I can't be the only one feeling these feelings."


@KaeJS someone indicating they are losing their mind and have nobody to talk to can easily be interpreted as someone expressing concern over their mental state. I am appalled that people still believe suggesting seeking help from a mental health professional is an insult. I don't believe you mean any ill will but in fairness I saw Beaver's suggestion as Both physical and mental health are on a spectrum (perhaps the same is true of financial health). Sometimes we feel well. Sometimes we don't. I think you have identified that many in society are not doing well on many fronts for many reasons. The current pandemic has created a larger gap between the haves and the have nots. I don't have any suggestions on how to fix things I just wanted to chime in that I believe @Beaver101 was legitimately concerned for your well being. 

You have been a long time contributor to this forum and a brilliant individual. I know it can be a struggle to keep on target especially when we experience setbacks or the market gets ahead of us. Just remember it's not a sprint, it's a marathon. You have diversified streams of income, human capital and lots of years ahead of you. just keep at it. The rewards will come.

Cheers


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I 've only scanned some of the posts here briefly. One of the major errors I am seeing here is comparing house prices which is totally non-relevant. It is carrying cost, i.e. mortgage principal plus interest, versus purchasing power (income). If mortgage rates and amortization today were the same as in the 1970s, house prices would be maybe 1/3rd what they are today, or less. Any relaxation of amortization or interest rate does not make housing more affordable. Supply/demand just jacks up prices so that affordability remains the same. Everyone knows that is how the housing game unfolds.

When I bought my first house in 1974 (a poorly constructed duplex unit that wouldn't pass inspection today), I could barely afford the payment. We had used furniture and apple crates for living room accent tables until we could afford to furnish one room at a time, a year at a time. We too, as young professionals starting out, looked with envy and frustration at those who were 15-20 years senior to us (pre-Boomers?) and well established with nice houses in good Oakville and Burlington neighbourhoods. It was tough for those graduating from post-secondary in 1970 and later to find good jobs too although when they did land one, DB pensions were still alive and well. Many of my engineering classmates had trouble landing jobs. I see no "relative" difference today between 20somethings and 40somethings that didn't exist 50 years ago in most areas of life.

It just takes 10-15 years, e.g. mid/late 30s for almost any professional to move into the 'comfortable' category to have some meaningful net worth and asset ownership to participate in the great dream. Patience!

Added: All of my own children and that of my spouse are Gen-Xers or leading edge millenials (all with university degrees). In every case, it took them until at least age 35 to believe they got their heads above water enough to start enjoying the rewards of their hard effort to succeed.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

KaeJS said:


> I was working all day and wish I could have been more active on here. Glad to see there is discussion.


I agree ... It's been an interesting discussion to see all the different viewpoints.



KaeJS said:


> But let's be honest... Unless you're crippled, old, alone... Like who doesn't want a house?


Not everyone does. I know quite a few that don't want a house and honestly, they don't spend much time at home. A know a couple that spent 12 years living in a van!  For me a house with a garage is a must have, space for all the toys. It's a lifestyle choice.



KaeJS said:


> I'm most interested in how to get wealthy quickly. Aren't we all? I don't care how I get wealthy as long as I do it and it's as fast as possible.


Again, this is a personal choice and getting wealthy quickly isn't for everyone. Personally, I just need enough to enjoy my hobby time but I don't sacrifice my everyday work time to forward my financial position. In other words, I do a job I enjoy and not the one that'll make me more money at the expense of being happy overall. My hours spent on work must allow me enough free time to enjoy my hobbies on a regular basis or I wouldn't do it.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I don't know anyone in our family under the age of 40 who would call themselves comfortable, never mind 'wealthy'. All of our Gen-Xers and millenials will be over 50 yrs of age to be able to consider 'cutting' the employment cord and retire or pursue other callings (my definition of 'wealth'). I didn't cut the cord until 57.

If one's life is going to be defined at becoming wealthy (however one defines it) as early as possible (30?35?40?), most are in for an unhappy period of life. Other than some lucky ones being in the right place at the right time, or can tap into the wealth of a successful parent, it isn't going to happen that quickly. Don't let it define your life.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

londoncalling said:


> "Someone just please say something because I'm losing my mind and I have nobody to talk to about these things because nobody understands like some of you folks will. I can't be the only one feeling these feelings."


OK. Maybe that was a bit dramatic.
I see your point.
=)


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Although I agree with a lot of what you say AltaRed, I think it's a mistake to dismiss house prices. What about people who have a large downpayment, but can't carry a big mortgage? In the past you could simply save up for a few years and easily carry the balance in a mortgage. Nowadays, even with a 50% down payment, you need a high income to carry the mortgage.

As recently as 8 years ago I could buy a house in my area for 350K. Now it would take more than that for just a down payment, plus a six-figure income to carry the mortgage on the same house which now costs 900K.

In the 80's, my parents raised me in a detached home on a single income the equivalent of 65K adjusted for inflation.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> *We too, as young professionals starting out, looked with envy and frustration at those who were 15-20 years senior to us* (pre-Boomers?) and well established with nice houses in good Oakville and Burlington neighbourhoods. It was tough for those graduating from post-secondary in 1970 and later to find good jobs too although when they did land one, DB pensions were still alive and well. Many of my engineering classmates had trouble landing jobs. I see no "relative" difference today between 20somethings and 40somethings that didn't exist 50 years ago in most areas of life.
> 
> It just takes 10-15 years, e.g. mid/late 30s for almost any professional to move into the 'comfortable' category to have some meaningful net worth and asset ownership to participate in the great dream. Patience!
> 
> Added: All of my own children and that of my spouse are Gen-Xers or leading edge millenials (all with university degrees). In every case, it took them until at least age 35 to believe they got their heads above water enough to start enjoying the rewards of their hard effort to succeed.


Thanks for sharing, and I think this is a good perspective for us young people to keep in mind. Very important points here, and this is stuff I forget about as well.

It's unrealistic for anyone in their 20s to really have much wealth. It just doesn't happen. One should hit their big income earning years after their 40s -- depending on career etc -- but as I understand it, the bulk of wealth accumulation happens somewhat later on.

See for example this podcast episode with a retirement planning professional. Late in the podcast, around the 40 minute mark, the expert talks about how people in their 20s and 30s shouldn't beat themselves up over having a low net worth. This typically is when people are struggling to get by and NOT when their wealth is rapidly growing.

He also mentions the danger of young people suffering from "learned helplessness" where they, prematurely, think they are doomed to financial failure. The key point is to not beat yourself up as you struggle to get by in your 20s and 30s. It's normal for young people to not have much wealth.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

@nathan79 You are missing the point on affordability. Real estate prices have a direct relationship between monthly mortgage payment and eligible earning power (today it is mostly two incomes, not one). The stress test was introduced because too many people were buying too much house based on 2-4% interest rates and driving prices even further. By introducing the stress test, it has kept house prices lower than they would have been without it. Prices are always a direct balance of supply vs demand. Nothing else. Until people get that in their heads, they do not understand economics at all.

Added: I came cross a study on affordability/price relationship about a year ago. It laid it out in clear detail that it is no more difficult today than it was 50 years ago. It is just the metrics have changed today that include mostly 2 incomes, amortization, down payment threshold, and most importantly interest rates.... plus 2 wages with so much growth. I made $630/month as a young engineer starting out in 1971 and only one wage qualified. C'mon now.... Sit down with a calculator and do the math.

Added2: I debated whether or not to get into the house 'argument' in my earlier post for the very reason people are not doing the math and refuse to do the math. I will look tomorrow for the affordability study but I am not going to waste more time on this useless argument. It holds no water.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> @nathan79 You are missing the point on affordability. Real estate prices have a direct relationship between monthly mortgage payment and eligible earning power (today it is mostly two incomes, not one). The stress test was introduced because too many people were buying too much house based on 2-4% interest rates and driving prices even further. By introducing the stress test, it has kept house prices lower than they would have been without it. Prices are always a direct balance of supply vs demand. Nothing else. Until people get that in their heads, they do not understand economics at all.


You're basically admitting that single people are pretty much screwed today -- I agree.

By the way, I support the stress test. I think it's the only housing policy the Liberals have introduced that doesnt completely miss the mark.

Edit: you're talking about the early 70's and I'm talking about the mid-80's. Maybe we're not comparing apples to apples here. But my argument about single people being screwed still holds.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

nobleea said:


> I don't know if I remember a time when I was like, man, housing is cheap. It just seems to oscillate between feeling expensive and really expensive.


I do, the early 90s. The 80s real estate boom busted and real estate was on the bargain counter. I tried to tell my friends, they wouldn't listen. In 1995 I bought a six plex for $137,000 that brought in 3600 a month. If you know real estate that is a GRM of 3.17. Cap rate of about 20%. How good do you want it? The property was run down, under power of sale and needed work but mainly cosmetic, it took about 6 months to put it in good shape doing all the work myself. I borrowed $150,000 to buy and renovate it, and when it was done it paid the mortgage (at 8.75%) and all expenses and gave me $1000 a month clear.
A few years later I bought a duplex for $65,000, got a mortgage for $69,000. It cost me nothing to buy and I got $4000 change, and it paid all expenses, mortgage payment, and gave me $400 a month clear. Is it any wonder I loved real estate?
Those days are long gone. I bought as much as I could but money was almost impossible to get, not like today. The free and easy low interest rate mortgages came in around 2005 and since then prices are up, up, up.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> But let's be honest... Unless you're crippled, old, alone... Like who doesn't want a house?


Many Europeans live in apartments their whole lives. They raise kids, etc.

You seem to have a very low opinion of people who live in apartment style dwellings and I'm not sure why. My view is the same as Johnny in post #61


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> *Freaking millenials got Trudeau to put us in generational debt that's going to make my kids lives a lot harder.*
> hey I'm angry at the mess the boomers made, but really it seemed logical at the time.
> 
> They could have never guessed that the government would slash rates so low, and our birthrate would drop below replacement.
> ...


 .. another example of "poor me, mom & dad didn't leave me their bank accounts" . Entitlement much? 

So how're you (as a GENX? non-boomer for sure) teaching your kids? You do realize that your favourite PM has kids too so your kids can go cursing his kids for the mess and massive debts that his dad and grand-dad had left behind for all of us Canadians?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> .. another example of "poor me, mom & dad didn't leave me their bank accounts" . Entitlement much?


If only the boomers wouldn't leave us their mountains of debt while retiring with excessive RE, RVs, boats


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> .. another example of "poor me, mom & dad didn't leave me their bank accounts" . Entitlement much?
> 
> So how're you (as a GENX? non-boomer for sure) teaching your kids? You do realize that your favourite PM has kids too so your kids can go cursing his kids for the mess and massive debts that his dad and grand-dad had left behind for all of us Canadians?


I'm teaching them economics, they started their own business when they were single digits in age.
They have an allowance they can spend however they want.
They can borrow money from me if they want. Interest free.
They really understand how debt can be empowering and limiting at the same time.

They understand the power and disadvantages of debt, they understand profit margins, they understand how hard it is to earn $100.
They know a budget, and planning, and how much things cost.
We had a long discussion about taxes and why they're good, and why they're bad.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> I was working all day and wish I could have been more active on here. Glad to see there is discussion.
> 
> But let's be honest... Unless you're crippled, old, alone... Like who doesn't want a house?
> 
> ...


 ... just saw your post here to me. I didn't mean to insult you but was trying to help or get the help you might need since you sounded so desperately wanting someone to talk to [or to relieve your "frustrations" I get now.]

Anyhow, since you declare your mental state is fine (on the lines of not being crazy (ie. able to tell from right and wrong) from your POV), then I think your thinking(s) is obviously faulty or it's just your personality. 

I'm going to keep my response simple (since just about everyone has responded to your frustrations/concerns). Just looking at your last statement (bolded) above. That's hardly someone with a good sense of esteems ... you should be proud of your achievements. You worked hard and am making good money or made good money - what's wrong with working hard to get there? Not everyone is born with a silver-spoon in their mouth. Even the "rich" you may be envying has skeletons in their closet. Having money is a responsibility too. for some, it's a burden. You can also be rich and miserable at the same time. As educated as you're I'm sure you can find examples.

Bottomline: Stop looking at others and making comparisons. Be happy with what you got, achieved. Money is not everything and neither is power. You got only 1 life to live.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> If only the boomers wouldn't leave us their mountains of debt while retiring with excessive RE, RVs, boats


 ... they can't take their RE, RVS, boat, toys, etc. with them either.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> I'm teaching them economics, they started their own business when they were single digits in age.
> They have an allowance they can spend however they want.
> They can borrow money from me if they want.
> 
> ...


 ... so your kids are going to be fine. Just don't teach them to curse the prior generations for any mess they see and yet can't control.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... so your kids are going to be fine. Just don't teach them to curse the prior generations for any mess they see and yet can't control.


They get enough of that from school and the media.

Previous generations have given us an incredibly wonderful world, and a lot of ungrateful @#[email protected]#$ want to tear it all down.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... they can't take their RE, RVS, boat, toys, etc. with them.


Sadly these won't pay off the societal debt of their consumerist lives


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

m3s said:


> Sadly these won't pay off the societal debt of their consumerist lives


Gen-Xers and millenials are at the trough too. Think CERB, CCB (Canadian Child Benefity), negligible income tax at salaries under $50k, free health care, and all the infrastructure that has been built (albeit much of it is aging), etc, etc. Most of that benefits the younger set for an even longer time than boomers have remaining on this earth. They will also inherit all that has been horded away by the Boomers as they die off (process well underway).

Gen-Xers/millenials, if they feel so hard done by, need to get out and vote in politicians that will be more disciplined in their spending. Don't blame the boomers for the likes of Trudeau et al. They are paying the bulk of the freight already as per Posthaste: Canada’s top 10% of earners pay 54% of taxes — but here’s the kicker, many are just middle-class

Also play with some numbers here for various percentages High income tax filers in Canada and look in particular at median age for the top 1% and top 10%. At the 10% level, with a median age of 49, more than half are Gen-Xers and even millenials under the age of 50 (oldest Gen-Xers are now 57 years of age_


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

This is not the affordability graph I was looking for but it represents the same theme in a slightly different way. Go to Real Estate Market: Definitions, Graphs and Data and pick 'Show all' to get a 1980 to 2020+ graph. With the exception of major job/economic recessions in circa 1982, 1990 and 2008, the affordability index has remained remarkably constant. 

Which is exactly how supply/demand economic balancing works and is supposed to work. House prices on their own are a useless measure.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

The current market is "affordable" for high income earners who can finance extremely large mortgages - no question. Those people can benefit the most from the very low mortgage rates. But it's unaffordable for basically anyone who doesn't make a six-figure income, unless they have a gigantic down payment.

My parents could not buy a detached home today on the same inflation-adjusted wage my dad earned in the 1980's. They could barely buy a 1-bedroom condo today.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Argue all you want. Affordability is based across all incomes across all geographic regions. BoC and StatsCan do not make this stuff up.

Average house price in Canada is $717k as of March 2021. Median house price would be less due to McMansions disproportionately affecting price. National Price Map – CREA

Added: Median data for 2020. Canada: house prices 2018-2020 | Statista


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

nathan79 said:


> But it's unaffordable for basically anyone who doesn't make a six-figure income, unless they have a gigantic down payment.


Guess I'd better tell my younger friends the homes they are paying for aren't real. None of them by the way are making 6 figures or had a big down payment.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> This is not the affordability graph I was looking for but it represents the same theme in a slightly different way. Go to Real Estate Market: Definitions, Graphs and Data and pick 'Show all' to get a 1980 to 2020+ graph. With the exception of major job/economic recessions in circa 1982, 1990 and 2008, the affordability index has remained remarkably constant.


In the data you linked, the New House price Index is the highest since 2008 and climbing rapidly. This doesn't include the first 4 months of 2021, which has only seen prices climb higher. It also shows affordability beginning to decline. I'd like to see what these charts say six months from now. Prices continue to increase and mortgage rates have also been creeping upward.

The chart shows that affordability was much better in the mid-80's, late 90's - early 2000's, and early 2010's.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Guess I'd better tell my younger friends the homes they are paying for aren't real. None of them by the way are making 6 figures or had a big down payment.


Too little information. When did they buy, where, what type of homes, and for what prices?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

nathan79 said:


> Too little information. When did they buy, where, what type of homes, and for what prices?


Well I'm not about to give detailed information about people I know but will add the following (off the top of my head).

2 bought 3-4 years ago, 1 bought 2 weeks ago and 1 is in the process of buying right now waiting on the sale of their current house. Their homes are all 1200-2200 sq ft with multi-car (2-6) detached garages. Point being, there are affordable homes out there for people making less than 6 figures ... maybe not in the location you want though.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I still maintain that prices do matter.

If a house is 3X the median income, it's much easier to save up a larger down payment compared to when a house is 10X the median income. This is just common sense.

Not everyone can finance a huge mortgage. Some of us need to save up a larger down payment and take a smaller mortgage. I've been saving up for 8 years now, but house prices keep running away from me.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Well I'm not about to give detailed information about people I know but will add the following (off the top of my head).
> 
> 2 bought 3-4 years ago, 1 bought 2 weeks ago and 1 is in the process of buying right now waiting on the sale of their current house. Their homes are all 1200-2200 sq ft with multi-car (2-6) detached garages. Point being, there are affordable homes out there for people making less than 6 figures ... maybe not in the location you want though.


Fair enough. Moving to another location may be an option for some, but work and family obligations will no doubt play a role as well.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Everything increases in price over time. Latest cell phones are $1000+ but no one is complaining. Groceries, building materials, clothing, cars, everything. 

I find most people complaining about housing prices are the same people that have the latest iphone, newest luxury car and trendiest wardrobe. 

There are choices to be made in life. We all need to eat, dress, get around, and lodge ourselves. There are alternatives in all these categories.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Mortgage u/w said:


> I find most people complaining about housing prices are the same people that have the latest iphone, newest luxury car and trendiest wardrobe.


I have a used iPhone 6s, my car is 18 years old, and I buy my clothes at Marks.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

james4beach said:


> And we have a lot of data on this. We know what homes used to cost (using things like house price to income ratios) and homes were much cheaper in the past, more affordable.


True, I think homes were generally more affordable. But they were also a lot simpler in design, size and construction.

The last house I owned in Vancouver was on a 60 x 130-foot lot. On it sat a 1,300 s.f. bungalow, built in 1914. All single-glazed windows. 2 x 4 framing. Minimal insulation. One bathroom (one more was added shortly before we bought). Very simple bathroom at that. Not what would be seen as decent today. No dishwasher or microwave. A primitive kitchen by today's standards. Arborite counters. Limited cabinets and a single-bowl porcelain sink. Those that lived there over many decades had no tv and, when it came, it was black and white with a roof antenna. No monthly cable bill to pay. No internet and monthly bill. No cell phones. No computers. In general, a lot less on which to spend money. Most families had but one car and cars when I was a kid were a lot simpler and less expensive to build I would guess. All of that left more money for a house purchase. Condo was not in the vocabulary.

Also, lots of younger people today have travelled internationally. Some, do so regularly. That was not always the way. Eating out was for special occasions. Apart from a house, not a whole lot on which to spend one's money. Very different now, I think.



KaeJS said:


> Regarding the real estate and room rentals and "increasing my worth" or finding new avenues... I do actually have 3 tenants and 2 properties that bring in roughly $2200/mo. I also do have a few "side hustles". However, I still feel this is not sufficient enough for the life I want.
> 
> Am I doing better than most? Sure. Probably. I can see how that would be the case for lots of my peers. Some are doing better than I. I'm definitely not at the bottom. But the fact still remains that I'm not increasing at a fast enough rate to obtain what I want. No, I don't need a yacht or a Lambo. But I do want a detached home with a 2 car garage in the suburbs.


Sounds like our OP is doing much better than many of his peers. Better than many here were doing at age 30 I would think. But, he's honest and refers to having "not sufficient enough (sic) for the life I want." That says a lot. Few rich boomers here had it all at age 30 I dare say.



OptsyEagle said:


> ... but I will remind everyone reading here that we all won two lotteries in life:
> 
> ... being born in Canada...


Agreed. I have seen enough of the third world to feel a bit guilty about what I have compared to so many. There are millions who live in something well below the standard of "a detached home with a 2 car garage in the suburbs."


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

nathan79 said:


> The chart shows that affordability was much better in the mid-80's, late 90's - early 2000's, and early 2010's.


Cherry pick the data of course. Look at the full 40 year period. Anecdotes and data mining don't help arguments nor do any references about the absolute prices of houses


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The house price affordability in our city is not comparative to any time in history.

Sellers of an average home are asking $700,000 and selling for $850,000. The median family income in our city is $71,553.

If you aren't prepared for a bidding war with 10 other buyers with a certified money order for $100K and a no conditional offer.......dont't bother.

The realtors are telling people to add $5,000 to $10,000 to the offer for each other bidder involved.

If people are counting on low interest rates forever..........good luck with that. They are already rising and inflation is ramping up.

The bubble will burst as all asset bubbles do. It looks like the crypto bubble is already starting to deflate.

Bitcoin down to $48,000 from $63,000 and Dogecoin down from 74 cents to 38 cents.

Oh and.... Elon Musk announced that Tesla will no longer be accepting bitcoins, and Cathie Wood's ARK ETF is getting hammered.

_What goes up........must come down, spinning wheels go round and round........_


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I already explained why absolute prices matter. Pick any size down payment you want... will you save up more quickly when home prices are 3X the median income vs. 10X? Common sense.

Look, there's obviously a huge disconnect between the data and the actual reality a lot of people are experiencing. The data makes a number of assumptions that may or may not be relevant to individual situations.

_N is the number of monthly payments (assumed to be 300 over 25 years) and M0 is the total value of the mortgage, where we assume a *95 per cent loan-to-value ratio*, so that M0=(0.95)*P0.3 P0 is the 6-month moving average of the Multiple Listing Service average resale price; therefore, this measure strictly reflects existing homes and would *include all housing types sold in Canada.* _

It goes without saying that you won't be purchasing a detached home in Metro Vancouver at 95% LTV. And even if you could, do you want to guess the household income required to carry that mortgage? 

The data doesn't even distinguish between detached homes and condos. How useful is that? What if the number of condos is increasing and the number of detached homes is decreasing? Wouldn't that cause the affordability to appear to be improving, even while detached homes are becoming LESS affordable? 

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> Regarding the real estate and room rentals and* "increasing my worth" or finding new avenues... I do actually have 3 tenants and 2 properties that bring in roughly $2200/mo. I also do have a few "side hustles". However, I still feel this is not sufficient enough for the life I want.*
> 
> Am I doing better than most? Sure. Probably. I can see how that would be the case for lots of my peers. Some are doing better than I. I'm definitely not at the bottom. *But the fact still remains that I'm not increasing at a fast enough rate to obtain what I want.* No, I don't need a yacht or a Lambo. But I do want a detached home with a 2 car garage in the suburbs.
> 
> ...


Are things harder than it was for my parents? I am not sure. 
Will things be harder for my Gen Z kids? I am not sure. 
Are things different and do we have to adjust? Yes, I am sure.

We list all the advantages and disadvantages the Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z have had to deal with, and I am sure we will find that there was no one 'golden' time of rainbows and unicorn living. Things are just different and people need to adapt.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't know Plugging.....I listen to 60s on 6 on Sirius XM and a lot of boomers have fond memories of the 1960s as the best era in their lives.

Both my grandparents owned a home and both had 4 kids. Neither grandmother ever worked. The grandfathers both had blue collar jobs.

My parents owned a home and had 5 kids. Mom never worked outside the home. My dad was a commissioned salesman.

That is one scenario that has changed dramatically. There must be a reason that forced the change to both parents working full time jobs.

We sold our 15 year old executive type home in 2005 for $214,000. Today it would sell for $800,000 plus.

We couldn't afford to buy our old home back at today's prices, even though we have more "net" income now than we ever did.........LOL.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Plugging Along said:


> We list all the advantages and disadvantages the Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z have had to deal with, and I am sure we will find that there was no one 'golden' time of rainbows and unicorn living. Things are just different and people need to adapt.


You can't deny that a period following a crisis such as the great depression and world war leads to a period of prosperity that the boomers benefitted from

The cycle seems to repeat every 4 generations. The good times create weak policies that lead to bad times. Boomers just don't want to admit or are oblivious


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

nathan79 said:


> Look, there's obviously a huge disconnect between the data and the actual reality a lot of people are experiencing. The data makes a number of assumptions that may or may not be relevant to individual situations.


The plural of anecdotes is not data. Personal experiences are anecdotes. Millenials today are tapping into the bank of Mom and Dad by the tens of thousands. Something the boomers never had available to them from tight wad pre-Boomer parents with rare exceptions. Those I know directly or indirectly in Vancouver under the age of 40 that now 'owns' a property has had the bank of Mom and Dad pop for the down payment on a total, or sometimes 1:1 basis. Fantastic break!


> _N is the number of monthly payments (assumed to be 300 over 25 years) and M0 is the total value of the mortgage, where we assume a *95 per cent loan-to-value ratio*, so that M0=(0.95)*P0.3 P0 is the 6-month moving average of the Multiple Listing Service average resale price; therefore, this measure strictly reflects existing homes and would *include all housing types sold in Canada.* _
> 
> It goes without saying that you won't be purchasing a detached home in Metro Vancouver at 95% LTV. And even if you could, do you want to guess the household income required to carry that mortgage?


Who cares about Vancouver, or Toronto, or Saint John specifically? Live and work somewhere else. FWIW, I wouldn't be caught dead in any of those 3 places myself. P.S. Incomes vary by region too, as in just a bit more in TO and Vancouver than in Saint John.



> The data doesn't even distinguish between detached homes and condos. How useful is that? What if the number of condos is increasing and the number of detached homes is decreasing? Wouldn't that cause the affordability to appear to be improving, even while detached homes are becoming LESS affordable?
> 
> There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.


Could be, and likely is, but it does not ultimately matter. Housing is housing of an aggregate basis. As MP said as well, quality and size of houses have increased dramatically. How many folks would buy a 3 bedroom 1000 sq ft bungalow today? About the size of a 2 bed 2 bath townhouse/townhome today.You are data mining again to force your argument.

I did say earlier that I didn't want to get sucked into this horse dung...but I did with aggregate and historical data. If you don't like it, tough! I am ready to bow out and enjoy the great outdoors this afternoon.

Added: Every one of our 5 adult children, now aged 38 to 45, bought their houses in the last 3-15 years in places like Kelowna, Calgary, Red Deer without down payment help from their parents. If they can do it, so can every one else in that 30-35 age group. 

And by the way, here is an example of a first purchase detached home for the Boomers if you must insist on detached. Check out this listing I only use this example because this is the same type of house my brother bought for his first property in that particular neighbourhood of Malborough Park in Calgary. Indeed, the upgrades in this one are far superior to the quality of finishings that existed circa 1980 when he bought.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

Why is nobody addressing the issue with percentages?

I don't really care about affordability. Whether or not something is temporarily affordable (like right now with low rates) does not mean it is affordable long-term (like in 5 years when rates are higher and home prices are also higher).

A 700k house appreciating at 5% a year is not the same as the guy making 70k a year salary appreciating at 2% per year. These are the real issues. Interest rates change.

There are lots of factors out of whack and things that are driving up home prices, including our government and banks who NEED the market to keep rising.

Once again, just because something is affordable now, doesn't mean it always will be. And just because it is affordable doesn't mean it is a wise decision. Paying off a home for 25+ years at x amount per month based on current rates and not potential future rates can get messy.

The problem is that a hamburger stays relatively the same price. A 1% change in a 700k home is not the same as a 1% change in a hamburger. This is how younger generations are being screwed.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Yup......and less expensive homes in less popular areas won't have the same increases as more expensive homes in sought after areas.

A $100,000 house in a small town in the middle of rural Saskatchewan won't increase the same dollars as a $1.5 million dollar home in Toronto.

Real estate has always been location, location, location.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Mukhang pera said:


> True, I think homes were generally more affordable. But they were also a lot simpler in design, size and construction.


OK, this is a good point. Homes were smaller then and as you point out, simpler and less feature-packed.



nathan79 said:


> I still maintain that prices do matter.


So do I.

My issue with home affordability is that these measurements of "affordability" (which economists come up with) always consider the cost of debt. They are saying that low interest rates make homes affordable, and assume everyone will mortgage finance their purchases.

Personally, I don't want a huge mortgage. I think that this "debt servicing cost" view of affordability is flawed, because it saddles people with enormous debts and then pretends this is no big deal. The mortgage *is* a big deal.

Imagine for a moment that every day, someone came to CMF and said the following: "Hi everyone, I only have 60K of savings but I think it's time that I start up a 600K stock portfolio. So I'm going to put the 10% down and borrow the rest, and just like that, I'll own 600K of stocks".

How would people respond to that? Would we all be saying: "Great idea, yes it's a perfectly sensible idea for you to borrow $540,000 because the only thing that matters is that low interest rates make this affordable".

No... we'd say, that's ludicrous. You're going to ignore a massive debt and pretend that _only the servicing cost_ matters? Did some idiot economist tell you that you can actually afford to buy 600K in stocks?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> Imagine for a moment that every day, someone came to CMF and said the following: "Hi everyone, I only have 60K of savings but I think it's time that I start up a 600K stock portfolio. So I'm going to put the 10% down and borrow the rest, and just like that, I'll own 600K of stocks".


Not quite as simple as your example otherwise this is also true ... 
I'm buying a monthly fund that has a 100% MER and zero returns and will contribute $1500 a month for the rest of my life into ... does that sound good?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Yes, only if I own that fund (aka a "savings" fund/account). Even then, that should be earning some interest, not zero returns.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

In fairness, housing affordability isn't a Canada only problem. It looks like it particularly when compared to the States, but New Zealand is having similar issues. And for the record they banned foreign ownership since 2018.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-and-new-zealand-both-have-hot-housing-markets-but-only-1-has-plan-to-cool-things-down-1.5942438










NZ house prices up 19.1% annually, Auckland up 21.6%


Highest volumes nationally in an April in five years, but change expected.




www.nzherald.co.nz


----------



## Gallop (Jan 26, 2021)

Welcome to the Consumer Industrial Complex!
It’s a one way ratchet. 
I think the biggest contributor to all this is the increased ability of suppliers to affect demand. By suppliers, I lump in all people trying to sell stuff to other people. Our ability to get the guy beside us to want more has accelerated in my opinion. It’s locally lumpy but generally increasing, so it works as the fundamental driver at the bottom of the stress (when it’s not working) and the calm (when it is).


----------



## Joe Jones (May 27, 2021)

Edmonton / Calgary home prices have not gone up much at all.


----------



## scorpion_ca (Nov 3, 2014)

Joe Jones said:


> Edmonton / Calgary home prices have not gone up much at all.


I can't comment about Edmonton but Calgary house price has increased at least 15%-20% in the last couple of months. I have seen house sold over asking price this year that I haven't seen since 2018.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

Joe Jones said:


> Edmonton / Calgary home prices have not gone up much at all.


Certainly the mature neighbourhoods in the core have seen some price increases. Not 20% though. Have not seen much in the suburbs and bedroom communities. Stuff is moving fast though. Rare to be on the market for more than 2 weeks unless something is wrong with it.


----------



## FairTrade (Apr 29, 2021)

KaeJS said:


> Options make people happy.


This Ted Talk, I think, can be a great benefit to us overthinkers out there. I believe so many choices are contributing to the deterioration of mental health.









The paradox of choice


Psychologist Barry Schwartz takes aim at a central tenet of western societies: freedom of choice. In Schwartz's estimation, choice has made us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied.




www.ted.com


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

FairTrade said:


> This Ted Talk, I think, can be a great benefit to us overthinkers out there. I believe so many choices are contributing to the deterioration of mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's why I artificially limit choices, and say no a lot.

Also "good enough" is good enough.

As far as other choices, don't stew on them, don't regret.
Make a good choice based on the information available, and be done with it.


----------



## mattw (May 14, 2013)

These issues seem to be centered around Vancouver and Toronto and area. You may have to move if you want to get ahead. I know the situation is different in Alberta but high majority of friends make an above average income $100,000+ and most do not have an secondary education. And no ones income is related to oil & gas success. Doesn't mean AB is the place to be but to get ahead you may have to look elsewhere. Wish that wasn't the case but massive inflows of capital are landing in large cities, pushed by low interest rates, and people willing to overpay.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Real Estate is an interesting game. Everybody talks about how it's near impossible to get onto the property ladder in Vancouver and Toronto as 30 something. The advice is to always look further afield. Just to throw a twist into the discussion. What if you were in your 50s and had to relocate from Halifax to Toronto. I would imagine most people even with a home and a cottage would not be able to afford a home. One way to win the property game is to go from high value property area to lower value property area. I know lots of people that bought in Calgary in the late 90s to cash out a decade later at peak oil and relocate elsewhere to again get in the market at half the price only to ride that market wave up as well. My guess is home ownership may become a multigenerational purchase in the future like it is in other parts of the world.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I just don't understand how people afford things.

I always see people driving $50k+ cars and have nice detached houses. How does that happen?

I even saw a dude who was MAYBE 40 years old driving a G-Wagon today. How?

There are so many Corvettes on the road, too... And those are minimum like $75k.

I just don't understand.


----------



## FairTrade (Apr 29, 2021)

Maybe you're seeing the few who do while not seeing the thousands who don't. Don't forget, you CAN buy one too. If your priorities were different, you possibly would.

My example on the other end of the spectrum- early 40s, wife and two kids, household income bouncing +/- $100k, net worth 1.4 million, parked in the driveway of their modest suburban bungalow is a rusty Jeep and an old Civic. 

I appreciate this conversation. There's all kinds of people- all if them in unique situations and motivated by different things.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

^ I appreciate this post.

I'll put myself out there. I'm single (girlfriend, but not married and no kids). I'm 31 and my NW is 600k.

Could I have a Corvette? Sure.
I could get one tomorrow.
But I don't want to sell my investments.

Are other people just living above their means? Are they spending everything? Are people really that dumb?

I don't know.
I have two cars, but they are worth 25k combined and obviously they are both paid for.

It just irks me when most cars on the road are worth more than mine. Either I'm doing it wrong, or everyone else is.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> I just don't understand how people afford things.
> 
> I always see people driving $50k+ cars and have nice detached houses. How does that happen?
> 
> ...


Coming from a lower middle class background myself, it's difficult to come to terms with how things are today, even though many of the causes are quite evident... such as record high real estate values, record low interest rates, gifted money, foreign wealth, government handouts, etc. It seems like the only people not getting ahead are those who actually have to work for a living and don't have all of those other advantages.

I live in a smaller city outside of Vancouver, and every day on my travels I see huge mansions under construction all over the farmland around town. Not just a few, but literally hundreds. This has been going on for at least 15 years already, but it seems to be accelerating. I alway ask myself WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE and how did they get so rich? Never mind why they need a 10K square ft house to begin with. Of course I know the answers, I just don't want to accept them.

The sheer amount of wealth that appears to be out there, and the number of people flaunting it, is mind boggling. I would pretty much expect that kind of thing on a site like CMF, but this place seems tame now compared to what I see in real life. I even see friends who are making less than $25 an hour driving new 30K vehicles.

Let's be real, we know why this is happening, we just don't want to accept it. I'm not sure what regular people can even do about any of it. The government has sold us down the river for a flawed economic model that doesn't reward hard work and gives wealth to those who already have the most wealth.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

KaeJS said:


> I just don't understand how people afford things.
> 
> I always see people driving $50k+ cars and have nice detached houses. How does that happen?


Loans, mostly. Some people also have wealthy parents. But I'd say it's mostly loans. And that's based on data we have, such as the loan growth as reported by Canadian banks (really off the charts in this country) plus other national statistics.

Buddy, it's all an illusion. Don't fall for it or you're going to drive yourself crazy. You can see the car and the house with your eyes, but you can't see the mountain of debt that comes along with it.



nathan79 said:


> The sheer amount of wealth that appears to be out there, and the number of people flaunting it, is mind boggling. I would pretty much expect that kind of thing on a site like CMF, but this place seems tame now compared to what I see in real life.


Why does CMF seem tame? It's because many of the people on here are actually wealthy, and most (older) wealthy people don't go around flaunting their money.

But I really think @KaeJS and @nathan79 are being fooled by the loans. Many people are very deep in debt; or didn't you see all the headlines about Canadian debt ratios? We have some of the craziest personal debt numbers in the entire world.

It's all loans. Mortgages, car loans, lines of credit, HELOCs, payday loans, credit cards.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

Yeah, at 31 having a 600k net worth is VERY much above average. Even if most people could afford to have such a net worth at that age, they would most likely blow it on nice cars or housing. People don't consider saving for retirement (at least beyond their employer provided plans) until their late 40s, generally. I'm not saying that's everyone -- clearly, most people on this board are not like that. But I do think it's the majority of the population.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> ^ I appreciate this post.
> 
> I'll put myself out there. I'm single (girlfriend, but not married and no kids). I'm 31 and my NW is 600k.
> 
> ...


Your situation is already the dream that most won't ever achieve. I'm 33 and I certainly wish I had $600k when I was 31.

I finished school at 25, started working as an engineer at $48k. I changed job 3 times and got promotions in each, which got me to $100k this year at 33.

When I met my girlfriend, she was 30, got out of school at 28 as she struggled finding her path and did 9 years at the university. She was struggling as a dietician barely making $20k. Now she's 35 and she's making $90k working for the government.

Yet when I was 31 and my spouse was 33, we bought a property in 2019 when our household income was about $140k. My spouse had no savings, only a student debt. I had about $100k which allowed us to buy a $600k property with unfortunately only 5% down payment and the remaining money kept for renovations.

Now, as we are 33 and 35, my spouse still couldn't afford to have savings. I have a few savings. We have a property which is now worth something between $750k and $800k but we have a mortgage currently at $585k and a $100k loan and this year our joint account will get emptied and we'll have to use $10k of our line of credit.

So, to sum up, we are currently 33 and 35, this year we have a household income of about $200k, but that was certainly not the case the previous years. We bought a property in 2019, we got married in 2020 (super low budget wedding, the cash gifts were enough to pay for the wedding), we did $200k renovations in 2020-2021, we are about to have a child in 2021, we have a property worth about $800k, mortgage of $585k, loan of $100k and LoC of $10k, so let's round up or net worth at about $200k. I didn't talk about vehicles because we have a Hyundai Accent 2014 worth less than $7k and I have a motorcycle worth less than $8k. And my spouse is still paying her student loan.

If I had $600k at 31, I'd be aiming for FIRE at 40 wish is a dream I won't ever achieve. At the moment, I'm aiming for FIRE at 50 but I believe it could be unrealistic because I need 20% CAGR or much more income. I'll more likely retire at 55 or 60.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrBlackhill said:


> Your situation is already the dream that most won't ever achieve. I'm 33 and I certainly wish I had $600k when I was 31.


And my situation is the dream that others won't ever achieve.

I have a cousin working really hard, much more hours than I do, but their household income is certainly nowhere near ours. They dreamed to live in my city, but never could afford it, so they live in a city where houses cost half the price.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> Are other people just living above their means? Are they spending everything? Are people really that dumb?


Yes, yes and yes.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> It just irks me when most cars on the road are worth more than mine. Either I'm doing it wrong, or everyone else is.


I think for a lot of young guys, their car is basically peacocking. That is, an ostentatious display of wealth as a proxy for fitness. The girl won't find out until later that dude makes $60k per year, is renting and the car is on an 84 month financing.

You could definitely afford to buy a splashy car, you just don't feel like it. You can't let 'keeping up with the Jones' eat you alive because it is mostly an illusion and a race to the bottom.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)




----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> But I really think @KaeJS and @nathan79 are being fooled by the loans. Many people are very deep in debt; or didn't you see all the headlines about Canadian debt ratios? We have some of the craziest personal debt numbers in the entire world.
> 
> It's all loans. Mortgages, car loans, lines of credit, HELOCs, payday loans, credit cards.


Fooled? Naw... I fully realize that a lot of it is "fake", but there's also a lot of "real" wealth sloshing around. I say "real" because much of it is still imaginary. It's all basically a product of QE and low interest rates, but wealth is what wealth does.

The first time I heard the headlines 10 years ago I was shocked: "Half of Canadians just $200 away from insolvency!". Wow, I thought, this thing is going to blow up! Then they start repeating the same headline every few months for years and years, but somehow nothing ever happens. The reckoning is always right around the corner. Just like the real estate crash that's been brewing since 2005.

That's when you begin to understand that the government is basically supporting this whole mess. If this housing/debt bubble ever bursts, it's going to be Armageddon. I'm sure they'll introduce interest-free government loans, bring back 40 year mortgages, and whatever else it takes.

Let's also make a distinction between types of debt. The wealthy (asset owners) acquire debt to increase their assets, generally at very favourable interest rates. Everyone else (the people without assets), acquire debt to increase their liabilities by purchasing vehicles and other depreciable consumer goods. Even if they wanted to invest in assets, no one is going to loan them money at a favourable interest rate.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I find it hard to believe that everyone is just carrying debt. Even if they are, how do they keep up with it? How do they even get approved?

I saw another G Wagon this morning, not the same one. This one was black. I believe there is money out there. It's just not in my pocket. I have a hard time believing that everyone is just rocking loans.

The issue is that it is becoming increasingly (actually, impossible) to get ahead if you do not own real estate. For the people that didn't own RE, or didn't own enough of it, what is the solution to this now? How are these people going to play catch up?

Even if you own a starter home. How will people ever upgrade to a bigger home? The problem is huge. Not only have house prices increased, but rent has also increased. Inflation is here. There is interest to pay on these mortgages and I'm not sure people think about how much extra a house actually costs after interest. Wages are low and stagnant.

Of course, I agree with the whole "move to a less desirable area if you want something cheaper", but that doesn't change the current economic climate in hot cities. It still doesn't change the fact that people have money in those cities.

But yes, hard work is not rewarded anymore. Wealth seems to be accumulated mostly through luck these days (RE, crypto, meme stonkz, lottery, inheritance).

I don't really have a basis for this post and I realize it is scattered. It's more of my thoughts as they came to me rather than a cohesive, well-thought out post.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> I saw another G Wagon this morning, not the same one. This one was black. I believe there is money out there. It's just not in my pocket. I have a hard time believing that everyone is just rocking loans.


According to this website, you must already be part of the top 1% for your age group.









Net Worth By Age Percentile Calculator for Canada with 2022 Data | The Kickass Entrepreneur


Do you ever wonder how your net worth compares to other Canadians based on your age group? Enter your age and wealth into the online calculator to find out.




www.thekickassentrepreneur.com





And since the top 1% in their 40s are multimillionaires, I guess they can afford all what you see. To me, top 1% is still a lot of people. For every 100 people you cross during a day, you should statistically stumble upon one being part of that top 1%.

Hell, I don't even know a hundred people and yet I know many who are part of the top 1%.

When I was a kid, I knew someone whose dad was in the top 1%. Sick parties, I can tell you...

My spouse has 4 sisters and at least 2 of them are in the top 1%. And she has a friend in the top 1%.

My ex was in the top 1%.

How did those 5 got in the top 1%? 

Business owner
Business owner
High paying job
Very very high paying job
Luck


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

KaeJS said:


> I find it hard to believe that everyone is just carrying debt. Even if they are, how do they keep up with it? How do they even get approved?
> 
> I saw another G Wagon this morning, not the same one. This one was black. I believe there is money out there. It's just not in my pocket. I have a hard time believing that everyone is just rocking loans.
> 
> ...


When I was younger I used to consider my house as part of my financial net worth. Maybe even obsess over it. Now closer to retirement I never consider the financial value of the house, I only see it as lowering my cost of living - by locking in a virtual rent payment as the sum of property taxes, maintenance and insurance - call it 1k per month which will help me in retirement. It is only through working, saving, investing and getting rid of debt that I finally feel well off and it was (is) a 25-year journey. I think it is wrong to say hard work is not rewarded. Maybe others appear to have won the lottery with a well-time house purchase but that may not tell the whole story until they sell it or are generating real positive cash flow from renting. Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts for most of us (even boomers). Stay the course and you will get ahead with or without real estate


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> I just don't understand how people afford things.
> 
> I always see people driving $50k+ cars and have nice detached houses. How does that happen?
> 
> ...


I think its pretty common to feel this way for people who care enough about their networth. Thread I created before about 10 years ago shows my similar thoughts. We had a higher networth than you but we were a couple and both in the top 2% of earners. Our earning power has dropped considerably (we are making less than we did in our original thread 9 years ago), however, our perspectives have changed quite drastically.

I know many 0.01% who are legitimately wealthy (networths in the 8 digits). I also live in a fairly affluent area of my city where I am guessing there are lot of 1% income. I see expensive cars and houses all the time. We have the cheapest house out of almost everyone we know. We pulled our kids out of private school when they were young because it was crazy how much the kids have. 

Here's what I have come to realize. A lot of these very high incomes, some yes, they are doctors/specialist, lawyers, (both parents) business owners, executives, etc. They can legitimately afford their lifestyles. Don't compare to them because you didn't choose their occupation. For those that seem to be 'average' like us in terms of two professions making really decent incomes, you have those that seem to be doing a lot better than you, but they don't have much in savings or investments, but have alot of toys. My neighbor their kid in private school, a boat, a big *** trailer with truck to tow. They were just telling us about how hard it is with the making all the payments, and that their kid better get scholarships because they don't have any savings. However, they have provided all the 'memories' for the kid. This seems to be the same with a lot of people we know that have beautiful massive houses with similar jobs as us, and large mortgages and payments on expensive vehicle.. A young coworker sold her BMW X5 for cheap because she couldn't afford the payments (she makes 1/2 of what I do and is single). 

My observation there is a small pocket of people that really can afford all of their stuff and have it all materially. There is a group of people that make choices to be more material at the expense of savings, they instead of using their money to invest, they do it on what I call expensive lifestyle choices. They are able to get the material things due to the ability to have payments or at the cost of not having any savings for the future. Then there is a group that is just living the high life they cannot afford. 

There are the people that you are probably noticing because they seem to have all of the toys. What you probably miss are the people like me (and you). I have one of the smallest, most run down houses on our block and with our the group of people we associate with. We have a crappy 7 year old Nissan Versa (no comment on my spouses truck), we have no overly luxurious/expensive items so would bring no attention to ourselves. What people don't know is we have multiple properties all paid for (except rentals), two fully funded education funds, and enough investments that we could have weather anything (see my previous thread). But you would never compare yourself me because you wouldn't want to on material items. 

Keep in mind unless you are in that category of having super high incomes, most people have to make the choices. A funny story with my frugal family member. He was an executive and a found at his company. He is worth mid 8 digits. He prides himself on being frugal and down right cheap. On a company team building ski day, he intentionally used my old skis from the 90's to show it wasn't the equipment that made you good, but the person behind it. One day, the office was running around trying to tow the car in the exec's spot. It was my family member, he took his other car - an almost 20 year old honda accord. Everyone thought it was the interns or something. Nope, the intern drove a BMW. When people asked him why he didn't just get X or spend more. He always replied, 'Is it better to pretend to be able to afford everything, or better to actually have enough money to afford everything' 





MrBlackhill said:


> According to this website, you must already be part of the top 1% for your age group.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Chances are there are 1% around that you don't even know they are the 1%. Its quite a misconception on what a 1% looks like.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

My biggest regret is selling the stuff I bought with debt 30 or more years ago. That "stuff" is worth a fortune today.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> My biggest regret is selling the stuff I bought with debt 30 or more years ago. That "stuff" is worth a fortune today.


My biggest regret is not becoming a teacher.
Amazing pay and benefits.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

KaeJS said:


> The issue is that it is becoming increasingly (actually, impossible) to get ahead if you do not own real estate. For the people that didn't own RE, or didn't own enough of it, what is the solution to this now? How are these people going to play catch up?
> 
> Even if you own a starter home. How will people ever upgrade to a bigger home? The problem is huge. Not only have house prices increased, but rent has also increased. Inflation is here. There is interest to pay on these mortgages and I'm not sure people think about how much extra a house actually costs after interest. Wages are low and stagnant.


Our net worth was a bit lower than yours at the same age. We're at 1.5M now with an average age of 41.5. We have owned homes that entire time and I can tell you that the real estate had almost no bearing on where we are now. Definitely not 1%, but healthy incomes (when I was working).

You don't know the story of the G-wagons, etc. A lot of it could be generational wealth. In some cultures (parts of asia), the kid gets all the parents wealth at a certain age and have to house and care for the parents. That explains the expensive cars and the big house.

Being so focused on the wealth and status of others is not healthy. It's like gravity, you can't control it so why worry.


----------



## potato69 (Mar 21, 2018)

andrewf said:


> Yes, yes and yes.


I have a hard time with financial balance.

To be honest, I'm feeling really paralyzed in life right now. I feel stuck in my condo which costs $2700 a month. There are very few cheaper options that aren't basement suites at this point. The Victoria market is brutal. I'm a government employee and that eats up probably about 60% of my take home.

Buying right now is at best, a high risk move, AND and possibly more importantly I don't think I could get a mortgage for a house I would actually want... Plus it's hard for me to imagine living here for the next 20 years....

I don't know what to do.


----------



## wayward__son (Nov 20, 2017)

nobleea said:


> Being so focused on the wealth and status of others is not healthy. It's like gravity, you can't control it so why worry.


wise words. Two paths to the same destination : (1) get a pile of money, buy all the stuff you want (2) want less stuff


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

Also, a wise saying I really like: Comparison is the thief of joy.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Plugging Along said:


> I think its pretty common to feel this way for people who care enough about their networth. Thread I created before about 10 years ago shows my similar thoughts. We had a higher networth than you but we were a couple and both in the top 2% of earners. Our earning power has dropped considerably (we are making less than we did in our original thread 9 years ago), however, our perspectives have changed quite drastically.
> 
> I know many 0.01% who are legitimately wealthy (networths in the 8 digits). I also live in a fairly affluent area of my city where I am guessing there are lot of 1% income. I see expensive cars and houses all the time. We have the cheapest house out of almost everyone we know. We pulled our kids out of private school when they were young because it was crazy how much the kids have.
> 
> ...


I agree 1000%.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Spudd said:


> Also, a wise saying I really like: Comparison is the thief of joy.


THIS! I learned long ago when you start comparing your self to others, you will be unhappy. There will always those who look like they have more or are doing more. When you learned to appreciate what you have, that's when you are happier.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> My biggest regret is not becoming a teacher.
> Amazing pay and benefits.


I considered it. I did tutoring in HS and had several teachers tell me I should pursue a career. I earn more than now than I would have as a teacher, but I have a more stressful job and less time off (only 21 vacation days per year _sniff_ will be 26 in a couple years). The real reason I didn't is that I don't really like snot-nosed teenagers. I didn't even when I was one! Honestly, managing 20-somethines can feel like parenting sometimes. That's enough for me.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Plugging Along said:


> THIS! I learned long ago when you start comparing your self to others, you will be unhappy. There will always those who look like they have more or are doing more. When you learned to appreciate what you have, that's when you are happier.


"Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today."


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Comparisons are just to prove a point. I don't think KaeJS said he wants a G-Wagon (maybe he does, maybe he doesn't). He's just wondering how people can afford it. The point is how difficult it is for regular people to get ahead today. Everything is based on a dual income and/or taking huge amounts of debt. If you're single, you're probably stuck in a 1-bed condo unless you earn 6-figures or got into the market years ago. The lower middle class who don't already own are basically shut out, while the middle class is rapidly being priced out. Gen-Z may be the first generation where the majority will never own a home. The upper middle class are buying the same houses that my parents raised me in as a lower middle class family in the 80's and 90's. Oh, but they're renovated... big deal. It's still the same house on the same size lot.

I don't need to live downtown or have high-end finishes in my home. I don't need a new car. I've never owned a car newer than 10 years old in my life. I rarely travel. A modest house on a bit of land doesn't seem like a huge ask. I don't care if it was built in the 60's and has shag carpeting. I don't even mind being an hour outside of the city. 

What seems ridiculous though, is the suggestion that everyone should just move to a small town. Not everyone wants to be completely isolated from their friends and family, especially single people. It might work better for married couples, assuming they can find jobs.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

You shouldn't get to move ahead just for existing. That's an entitlement attitude. Getting ahead should be a lot of work, or else everyone could do it and then you wouldn't be getting ahead. I have friends that have all kinds of recommendations on movies, tv shows, documentaries to watch since that's what they do from 8-midnight every night. I can never find the time as I'm editing clients' photos, fulfilling orders, checking out new products, and researching stocks and markets.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Maybe "get ahead" was a bad choice of words, but "keep up" sounds even worse. I guess you can thank the Jones's for that. So... if you can't expect to keep up -- let alone get ahead -- by putting in an honest day's work, saving, investing wisely, and living below your means... then I'm not sure what's left. Fall behind more slowly? I thought that as Canadians we aspired to be better than that.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

One thing we don't talk about enough is how real estate investors in Canada eat up the supply of homes, often by using debt (made possible by low interest rates). These are people who own several homes, NOT because they need a place to live, but because they want investment "returns".

Instead of getting those returns in stocks, bonds or GICs, they borrow money and pile into real estate, driving up the prices of everyone's homes and also removing houses from the available supply:









Questions About Investment Properties


What are thoughts on Real Estate, specifically rental properties in these bizarre markets? I am sitting on 3 properties in BC that bring in around 8% ROI of the original purchase price. Now though, because of property value increases and rent controls, my actual "cash flow" return is closer to...




www.canadianmoneyforum.com


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> The real reason I didn't is that I don't really like snot-nosed teenagers. I didn't even when I was one! Honestly, managing 20-somethines can feel like parenting sometimes. That's enough for me.


I think people overlook that. I'm wondering if one of the effects of COVID and home-schooling, parents will be more appreciative of what teachers have to go through.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> I think people overlook that. I'm wondering if one of the effects of COVID and home-schooling, parents will be more appreciative of what teachers have to go through.


Yeah, 6 hours of classroom time for <10 months and $80k, sign me up.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, 6 hours of classroom time for <10 months and $80k, sign me up.


Choose wisely your province / territory. And wait 15 years to reach that.



https://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/Research/Reports/Cross-Canada%20teacher%20salaries.pdf


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Choose wisely your province / territory. And wait 15 years to reach that.
> 
> 
> 
> https://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/Research/Reports/Cross-Canada%20teacher%20salaries.pdf


Well in Ontario the experience cap is hit at 10 years.
Also your chart doesn't show Secondary school teachers.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> One thing we don't talk about enough is how real estate investors in Canada eat up the supply of homes, often by using debt (made possible by low interest rates). These are people who own several homes, NOT because they need a place to live, but because they want investment "returns".
> 
> Instead of getting those returns in stocks, bonds or GICs, they borrow money and pile into real estate, driving up the prices of everyone's homes and also removing houses from the available supply:
> 
> ...


Indeed... maybe it's time to consider limiting investors to new builds. This would increase the supply of homes overall, as well as prevent the removal of supply from the resale market.

Current owner investors would be grandfathered, but would be prevented from flipping their homes to another investor.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, 6 hours of classroom time for <10 months and $80k, sign me up.


You would probably last about 20 minutes in a hormone laced grade 8 class on a Friday afternoon!


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, 6 hours of classroom time for <10 months and $80k, sign me up.











I Get Paid for 180 Days of Work Each Year, but I Actually Work More Than 250


It's a full-time job with part-time pay.




www.weareteachers.com


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> I Get Paid for 180 Days of Work Each Year, but I Actually Work More Than 250
> 
> 
> It's a full-time job with part-time pay.
> ...


Boo hoo, the average Teacher income in Ontario at 80k is 30% higher than the median Canadian FAMILY income.

Oh, and teens are a great age group to work with, it's the 6-9 yr olds that drive me crazy.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Boo hoo, the average Teacher income in Ontario at 80k is 30% higher than the median Canadian FAMILY income.


So you believe their work doesn't worth that income?

The $60k median Canadian household income is *after taxes*.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> So you believe their work doesn't worth that income?
> 
> The $60k median Canadian household income is *after taxes*.


No, I said it's a very nice well paid job.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> No, I said it's a very nice well paid job.


I was unsure when you said "sign me up", so I guess you'll change job soon and tell us your experience as a teacher because you seem very interested.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

MrBlackhill said:


> I was unsure when you said "sign me up", so I guess you'll change job soon and tell us your experience as a teacher because you seem very interested.


I doubt he would be qualified but even if he was would the Thames Board hire him.

Maybe after being on the supply list a few years they might give him a chance.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Zipper said:


> I doubt he would be qualified but even if he was would the Thames Board hire him.
> 
> Maybe after being on the supply list a few years they might give him a chance.


Career change at this point is tough, and not worth it.

Most of the teachers I went to school with went to remote and underserved areas, go live in the country on a teachers salary.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I'm skeptical about the 80k average pay. I remember see many of my high school teachers on the sunshine list in the early 2000s. There are ten thousand secondary school teachers in Ontario on the sunshine list (100k+)





__





Secondary Teacher salary info | Ontario Sunshine List


Search the list of people with the position 'Secondary Teacher' that appeared on Ontario's sunshine list.




www.ontariosunshinelist.com


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, 6 hours of classroom time for <10 months and $80k, sign me up.


Let us know what university you have registered for teacher's college.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

bgc_fan said:


> I think people overlook that. I'm wondering if one of the effects of COVID and home-schooling, parents will be more appreciative of what teachers have to go through.


You'd think.

Unfortunately, there are people who think that school closures are because teachers are lazy.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Tostig said:


> You'd think.
> 
> Unfortunately, there are people who think that school closures are because teachers are lazy.


I think it's part teachers, part government, but mostly teachers union leadership causing ****.

The Government wants safe daycare for kids, the teachers (most) want the kids to succeed, or at least learn something, and that's better in class.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Plugging Along said:


> My observation there is a small pocket of people that really can afford all of their stuff and have it all materially. There is a group of people that make choices to be more material at the expense of savings, they instead of using their money to invest, they do it on what I call expensive lifestyle choices. They are able to get the material things due to the ability to have payments or at the cost of not having any savings for the future. Then there is a group that is just living the high life they cannot afford.





KaeJS said:


> I find it hard to believe that everyone is just carrying debt. Even if they are, how do they keep up with it? How do they even get approved?


There is a lot of debt out there, and there are also people who are blowing their entire (huge) paycheques every month on expensive lifestyles. Even if someone is not massively in debt, they might be spending all their money.

I wanted to share this segment of an interview, especially for @KaeJS @MrBlackhill @nathan79 because this guy really does a good job explaining the popular belief of what "being rich" means and how what you see with your eyes is misleading. I linked to 20:22 in the video

"Wealth is the money you have *not* spent yet." So it's invisible. All the nice stuff you see with your eyes, the big cars and fancy house, is not wealth.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

james4beach said:


> "Wealth is the money you have *not* spent yet."


To me, financial wealth is simply your *net* worth.

And I do want to be a millionaire to spend that million. Why else would I want to be a millionaire? I am currently increasing my *net* worth only so that I can reach the point where I *spend* all of my net worth throughout the rest of my life. The issue is not spending the million, the issue is how you spend the million.

The worst thing that could happen to me would be to die as a millionaire. I want to die with a net $0 (after funerals are paid by my own money), no more, no less.

Give $1M to some kid, he'll go buy some expensive clothes, a luxury sports car and party every night, he'll show off until he's broke again a few years later.

Give me $1M and I retire tomorrow. I'll keep my Hyundai Accent 2014. I'll keep my current clothes that I bought 5 years ago. But I'll make a budget so that at 95 years old I'll have net $0. And I'll take all of my time to live slowly all the experiences I want to live. I'll read books in my hammock. I'll take some music classes, dance classes, cooking classes, I'll go back to school, I'll do some hiking, I'll learn languages, I'll travel the world with only a backpack and do some couch surfing.

Give me $10M and I'll redistribute $9M to family, friends, good causes. I don't need more than $1M. I simply need just enough to do what I value in life.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> And I do want to be a millionaire to spend that million. Why else would I want to be a millionaire?


I agree with what you're saying here, but the point made by that guest was that the impressive things that you see others displaying (like fancy cars) is NOT their wealth. Someone's wealth is invisible.



MrBlackhill said:


> Give me $1M and I retire tomorrow.


Is this really enough? At a 4% withdrawal rate, that would generate 40K before taxes are considered. Does that pay all your living expenses?

As a single person, I'm living on about 40K a year but I'd want to allow some extra room in there for more spending in retirement. If I figure that I need 50K annually to live off, that suggests I need something like 50 / 0.04 = $1.25 million to retire.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

james4beach said:


> I agree with what you're saying here, but the point made by that guest was that the impressive things that you see others displaying (like fancy cars) is NOT their wealth. Someone's wealth is invisible.


I agree that wealth is invisible. Some guy may not have fancy clothes nor fancy cars and be very wealthy. Some guy driving a Ferrari could hide huge debts making him poor.

Yet, some have both. They are wealthy and they can display they wealth. Bezos has a half billion dollar yacht.

Some guy could go a buy a $10M house and yet have a net worth lower than mine due to his debt, but that $10M house is still displaying that he can afford something that I can't. (But I don't care, because if he has a $10M house but a low net worth, then he's bad at managing his money)


----------



## damian13ster (Apr 19, 2021)

I have a very Lean lifestyle apparently. Live on around 30k/year. No family to take care of though.
Figure I need 750k for retirement at minimum. If I hit that while I am in a job I hate, I will quit at that very moment.
If I like the job I am at at the moment, I will continue for a little bit more to be on the safe side


----------



## Gallop (Jan 26, 2021)

Re: original point regarding CDN housing market…
Not sure how to link to it robustly but on the the Preet Banerjee podcast Mostly Money, guest Ben Rabidoux throws out some numbers behind the hot market.
A couple of interesting points that reinforce what’s been discussed here:
Residential investment (new housing construction, renovations, ownership transfer costs)= 9.5% of GDP (previous peaks were 7%)
Peak in US before ‘08 bubble just over 6%
Residential investment has been 1/2 of the economic growth since 2018.
Canada spends 3x more on broker costs than all CDN businesses spend on R&D.
Residential investment is 40% of Canadian Gross fixed capital formation. Only Greece, Ireland and Spain in the 00’s got higher.
Under construction right now in Canada 100k purpose built rentals, less than 60k single family homes, complete mismatch to demand.
Toronto : 7-8 realtors per house for sale 
Things Gov’t (any party) might do while not squashing the economic engine of housing which no one will touch in an election year. 
National Beneficial Ownership Registry 
Curb foreign speculation ( probably doesn’t cool the market much, but politically feasible)
Local gov’t :Curb short term rentals some more
Crack down on money laundering and criminal sources of cash being infused
Eliminate the blind bidding going on in most places.

Lots of good stuff. Recommended.



The whole thing is good but from 40:48 on is particularly interesting.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrBlackhill said:


> The worst thing that could happen to me would be to die as a millionaire.


I'd strongly disagree. But I see how you are saying that for effect. I'd argue it's much worse to deplete your savings early and spend your last years dependent on government provided care.

In practice, the only way to achieve this 'safely' is to annuitize your savings. Most people are loath to do this.


----------



## Gallop (Jan 26, 2021)

One of the first financial books I ever bought was Pollan’s Die Broke. It spoke to me at the time and I also bought his follow up Live Rich.
It tilts quite a bit to the US with estate tax rationale etc., but at the time it felt like good advice. 
I used to think I wanted to die broke but I think I’ve aged out of it as a driving principle. Wife, kids etc. and as I have more money and freedom.
In the second book he says “To live rich you need to have the freedom to do whatever you want”. Which is definitely where I’ve landed. 
So my comment to the OP is to focus on living rich (whatever that means for you) and shelve the die broke for now. 
For what it’s worth, here are the axioms he lists for the money side of live rich:
Make Money- work is for dollars in pocket, “Look for God in church, satisfaction at home and money at work”
Don’t Grow, Change- Look for new opportunities rather than promotions
Take Charge- can’t be reactive, stop viewing yourself as victim, take responsibility for yourself, stop looking down for pennies and look to the sky for dollars.
The 4th axiom has one for employers and one for employees.
The employee one is: 
Become a Mercenary. The only bottom line at work is your take home pay.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

andrewf said:


> I'd strongly disagree. But I see how you are saying that for effect. I'd argue it's much worse to deplete your savings early and spend your last years dependent on government provided care.
> 
> In practice, the only way to achieve this 'safely' is to annuitize your savings. Most people are loath to do this.


I mostly meant that I don't think at 80 I'll still need to have $1M in front of me in case I live 100 years. But at 50 I'd need that $1M in case I live 90 years.

And I'd reassess my life expectancy and financial situation after each 10 years of life.

And I hope I won't die at 60 with $1M after a frugal life not spending my money and waiting for retirement.





__





Life expectancy at various ages, by population group and sex, Canada


This table contains 2394 series, with data for years 1991 - 1991 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...), Population group (19 items: Entire...




www150.statcan.gc.ca


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I could read through this forever:


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/oncjbj


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> I could read through this forever


I'm also in my 30s and trying to get ahead. But that's not a Canadian issue. I believe it's a world issue where we have to pay for the quality of life.

According to some sites, countries with the best quality of life are (in order, Canada ranked the highest). In parenthesis, I've put another data which is the cost of living index, with the ranking for that country, where a higher ranking means a higher cost of living.

Canada (97.4, #21)
Denmark (117.3, #8)
Sweden (103.9, #18)
Norway (113.0, #12)
Switzerland (142.9, #2)
Australia (109.2, #14)
Netherlands (97.4, #22)
Finland (105.6, #16)
Germany (90.5, #26)
New Zealand (104.5, #17)
Austria (96.2, #24)
Belgium (96.3, #23)
Japan (106.9, #15)
United Kingdom (100.7, #19)
Ireland (113.8, #10)
Singapore (74.8, #31)
France (95.4, #25)
South Korea (83.4, #28)
Spain (79.9, #30)
United States (100.0, #20)
So if you still want to live in a country that is ranked high for the quality of life, but at a much cheaper cost of living, you'd have to go to Singapore, South Korea or Spain. Otherwise Germany could also be a better balance. Or move to the Netherlands (or Austria, Belgium, France) to have something similar while still being a different experience.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrBlackhill said:


> Canada (97.4, #21)
> Denmark (117.3, #8)
> Sweden (103.9, #18)
> Norway (113.0, #12)
> ...


Actually, this data below would be better. I used the purchasing power (cost of living vs income), now a higher ranking means a higher purchasing power.

Canada (67.7, #24)
Denmark (81.1, #15)
Sweden (78.5, #18)
Norway (105.1, #5)
Switzerland (93.3, #10)
Australia (74.6, #21)
Netherlands (82.7, #14)
Finland (71.3, #23)
Germany (78.8, #17)
New Zealand (61.6, #27)
Austria (81.1, #16)
Belgium (75.6, #19)
Japan (59.0, #29)
United Kingdom (63.5, #26)
Ireland (84.7, #13)
Singapore (111.3, #4)
France (67.3, #25)
South Korea (59.8, #28)
Spain (57.7, #31)
United States (100.0, #6)
So, maybe this is a better picture. Now Canada looks expensive and certainly the best place to live would be Norway.

Anyways, all this analysis depends on the data source and how they calculated it, so in the end it may be pretty meaningless.

Also, Norway actually has a higher property price to income ratio compared to Canada. But again, that ratio is meaningless, because if everything else is less expensive then maybe it isn't that bad.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

All that being said, Canada is always in the top 10 countries to live in, among other countries which are also always in the top 10, like Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Netherlands, Iceland, New Zealand, Australia.

So I'm not sure we can find greener grass. Maybe a very slightly better cultural and value fit.


----------



## OneSeat (Apr 15, 2020)

"The only bottom line at work is your take home pay."
What a sad comment - sort of like 'the only important person is me'.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> I could read through this forever:
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/oncjbj


Yeah government is pushing inflation higher, so many necessities are increasing in price.

But yeah, Canada is still pretty much the best place in the world to live.

I think part of the problem is that people need a reality check.
Everyone seems to have multiple big screen TV's, and walking around with $1k cell phones they replace every year, then wonder why they have no money.
You're spending money like there's no tomorrow, then wondering why you have no cash tomorrow.


I agree things are getting tougher, but those are the policies people are voting for.
The results are predictable.

Make minimum wage too high, they'll get rid of the minimum wage jobs, and increase the cost of things depending on those jobs.
Lower interest rates to encourage people to borrow money, and they end up in piles of debt.
Legislate against landlords, and rental housing will dry up.

It is still possible to live a nice life on a middle class income, kids, house car, a small local vacation every year. You just have to cut back on some things. You can have anything, but you can't have it all.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrMatt said:


> It is still possible to live a nice life on a middle class income, kids, house car, a small local vacation every year.


Very possible I'd say ... all the millennials I know have the house, car(s) and at least one vacation per year plus some (but not all) have kids. Not sure what the problem is ...


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

These national level comparisons are a good stage one sort, but diverse countries like Canada, US and Mexico offer vastly different experiences within their national borders. That has been our experience in travelling within those countries,

Same in Europe (Malaga vs Madrid, Nice vs Paris, Capri/Sorrento vs Rome as examples.)


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

OneSeat said:


> "The only bottom line at work is your take home pay."
> What a sad comment - sort of like 'the only important person is me'.


That was actually my favourite one.

What's so sad about it?

What's really sad is how much money companies make and yet they still exploit, use and abuse their employees.

I don't know about you, but I go to work to get paid. I couldn't give two shts about anything else. Friends are a bonus, but I go there to make dollars.


----------



## spiritwalker2222 (Nov 7, 2017)

KaeJS said:


> That was actually my favourite one.
> 
> What's so sad about it?
> 
> ...


I would rather enjoy my work than just focusing on making more money. And do.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

spiritwalker2222 said:


> I would rather enjoy my work than just focusing on making more money. And do.


It's a trade off. 
Myself I get good money for a pretty good job. I could make more at a shitty job, or I could make less at a "better" job.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

spiritwalker2222 said:


> I would rather enjoy my work than just focusing on making more money. And do.


I would also rather enjoy my job than just working for the money. But I'm now 33 and still haven't found my career calling after 8 years jumping from job to job, so I'm working for the money. And that's a pretty depressing and frustrating situation as it feels like a waste of my potential. I don't know what's wrong with me, but I've never found a job I would enjoy that would bring decent income and leverage my strengths, interests and passions.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I don't think there is any job that I would enjoy. There are just jobs I would do and jobs I wouldn't. But I feel like I would never enjoy any of them. Not unless they consist of eating pizza and drinking beer.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> I think part of the problem is that people need a reality check.
> Everyone seems to have multiple big screen TV's, and walking around with $1k cell phones they replace every year, then wonder why they have no money.
> You're spending money like there's no tomorrow, then wondering why you have no cash tomorrow.


I used to think those habits were really bad, too. But I've come to realize that they just don't move the needle very much. While I was saving a few pennies a day by cutting out those expenses, the cost of living was going up by multiples of what I was saving. I'm not saying they are good habits to have - as a matter of fact they are quite bad from a sustainabililty/environmental point of view - but they just don't matter that much in the larger financial picture.

I will admit I'm still using an 11 year old TV and an iPhone 6s that I bought used, but that's more due to ingrained frugality. I no longer really believe I'm going to save a meaningful amount of money by doing so. I just hate being wasteful and replacing perfectly good stuff, or buying something with features I don't need. Saving a few bucks a month is a bonus, I suppose.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

nathan79 said:


> I used to think those habits were really bad, too. But I've come to realize that they just don't move the needle very much. While I was saving a few pennies a day by cutting out those expenses, the cost of living was going up by multiples of what I was saving. I'm not saying they are good habits to have - as a matter of fact they are quite bad from a sustainabililty/environmental point of view - but they just don't matter that much in the larger financial picture.
> 
> I will admit I'm still using an 11 year old TV and an iPhone 6s that I bought used, but that's more due to ingrained frugality. I no longer really believe I'm going to save a meaningful amount of money by doing so. I just hate being wasteful and replacing perfectly good stuff, or buying something with features I don't need. Saving a few bucks a month is a bonus, I suppose.


I just replaced my old 720p plasma (about 15 years old) with a nice new 4k oled, it's awesome, and a huge upgrade, and totally worth it.

I was talking to someone about buying a premium item costing about $80, and he said "you dn't have $80", I'm like sure, but I don't have $80 for each of the hundred items I, my wife and kids want.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

nathan79 said:


> While I was saving a few pennies a day by cutting out those expenses, the cost of living was going up by multiples of what I was saving.


This is a good point that people miss out on. I remember the whole big thing was the "Latte factor", with the implication that if you save a few dollars a day, somehow that will turn out to a nest egg of a million. Meanwhile, living expenses are increasing, or you've cut to the bone and not getting anywhere. At that point you're viewed as a spendthrift and it's your fault for not getting out of the hole.

The only positive idea is that it does make a person refocus on what's important and worth spending on.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> This is a good point that people miss out on. I remember the whole big thing was the "Latte factor", with the implication that if you save a few dollars a day, somehow that will turn out to a nest egg of a million. Meanwhile, living expenses are increasing, or you've cut to the bone and not getting anywhere. At that point you're viewed as a spendthrift and it's your fault for not getting out of the hole.
> 
> The only positive idea is that it does make a person refocus on what's important and worth spending on.


Assume 1 lattee a day at $4, that's more than $1k/yr.
Not by itself "life changing", but over time it's not too shabby 








Investing $100 a Month in Stocks for 30 Years


Find out how you could potentially earn hundreds of thousands of dollars just by investing $100 a month in stocks during your working years.




www.investopedia.com





There is a lot here, also with minimalism.
I like coffee, I'll spend on coffee, but there's a lot I can cut out and save.
I buy coffee, but drink less alcohol.
I pay for fast internet, but skip cable TV.

Lots of ways to save a bit and put it where you want.

Also saving those lattees (or other frivolous expenses) and ending up with hundreds of thousands in assets is AWESOME!


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Assume 1 lattee a day at $4, that's more than $1k/yr.
> Not by itself "life changing", but over time it's not too shabby
> 
> 
> ...


But oversold. If you remember the selling point is that over 40 years it'll be worth a million. But the fine print is 12% expected return, and funds would have to be held in a non-taxable account, with no-cost trading, which means no-load mutual funds for the most part. 

I think the main criticism of dealing with the minutiae spending, you overlook the real big ticket items like cars, houses, kids (kidding, kind of).


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Assume 1 lattee a day at $4, that's more than $1k/yr.
> Not by itself "life changing", but over time it's not too shabby
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, well, the $100/month always skips the adjustment for inflation.

Let's say you start broke since you focused on paying your debts and you just started an empty account where you'll put $100/month from scratch. Let's say the annual inflation is 2% and to keep up with inflation you increase your monthly contribution by 2% every year. After 40 years of hard work from 25 to 65, your account is now at $525k after 9% CAGR in stocks only assuming you have what it takes. But $525k in 40 years will be worth $238k when adjusted for the 2% inflation. Sure, it's better than empty pockets, but you won't retire on that. And hopefully that $100/month you took didn't decrease your daily well-being, which is also important since we don't know what the future holds for us.

But I agree that people should prioritise and take time to think about what they really need for their daily well-being. That's why I don't have junk food at home (chips, cookies, candies, and every other processed foods). And I don't have alcohol.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> And hopefully that $100/month you took didn't decrease your daily well-being, which is also important since we don't know what the future holds for us.


Well planning for the future or not is a personal choice.
Honestly I don't miss cable TV at all, so it didn't decrease my daily well being.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Well planning for the future or not is a personal choice.
> Honestly I don't miss cable TV at all, so it didn't decrease my daily well being.


Same for me, I buy only what I truly need. I don't even own a TV, it's been 6 years without TV. Actually, I never owned a TV, but I've lived with ex-girlfriends who had a TV. When my wife met me, she noticed I had no TV which is unusual, but then she's been with me for 5 years and never missed not having a TV, even though she couldn't brought her TV to my apartment when she moved, but she didn't. I didn't make any living room in my studio apartment, there was just a couch that the previous tenant left me for free. We watched stuff on Netflix on a laptop or on our cell phones. I had a laptop until the end of my studies in 2012. That laptop died a few years ago and I never bought a new one, so I don't have a computer. My job's laptop and my cell phone are sufficient for what I have to do, no need for a personal computer. All my stuff is on the cloud. All I need is a web browser.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Same for me, I buy only what I truly need. I don't even own a TV, it's been 6 years without TV. Actually, I never owned a TV, but I've lived with ex-girlfriends who had a TV. When my wife met me, she noticed I had no TV which is unusual, but then she's been with me for 5 years and never missed not having a TV, even though she couldn't brought her TV to my apartment when she moved, but she didn't. I didn't make any living room in my studio apartment, there was just a couch that the previous tenant left me for free. We watched stuff on Netflix on a laptop or on our cell phones. I had a laptop until the end of my studies in 2012. That laptop died a few years ago and I never bought a new one, so I don't have a computer. My job's laptop and my cell phone are sufficient for what I have to do, no need for a personal computer. All my stuff is on the cloud. All I need is a web browser.


How do you do online banking etc?
I remember watching guys trade stocks on work computers...
When they realized IT had full remote access one of two things happened.
1. They freaked out realizing that they're literally showing their finances to IT guys.
2. They didn't understand why it might be a problem sharing your finances and account numbers with everyone in IT.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> How do you do online banking etc?


I pay all my non-automated bills with the banking apps on my personal cell phone.

I admit I buy stocks using my job's laptop, but I could do it on my cell phone's web browser.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> I don't think there is any job that I would enjoy. There are just jobs I would do and jobs I wouldn't. But I feel like I would never enjoy any of them. Not unless they consist of eating pizza and drinking beer.


I guess you don't like tackling challenges and beating them? I find that is what makes my job enjoyable. It isn't easy per se, but I get a sense of achievement. The main downside for me is dealing with HR, admin, and increasingly diversity kool-aid drinking (though I am generally quite sympathetic to many of these diversity concerns, I'd rather not spend a lot of time at work thinking about them--my job has very little to do with them).


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Well planning for the future or not is a personal choice.
> Honestly I don't miss cable TV at all, so it didn't decrease my daily well being.


I have never directly paid a cable bill in my life, except for 8 months in residence at university where it was mandatory. I paid it even though it was in my room-mate's name because he was a deadbeat.

I have a TV, but really just use it as a very large external monitor for netflix/youtube. It's hooked up to a laptop by hdmi and I use a wireless keyboard/trackpad. The TV is a pretty basic 65" Sharp model I bought for around $400 during boxing week sales. I am quite content with it.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

andrewf said:


> I guess you don't like tackling challenges and beating them?


This is assumptive and not true.

I love challenges and I love conquering them. But only if it revolves around things I care about. I don't really care to solve a challenge for a company I don't care about in the same way that I don't really care to solve climate change or pollution.

I would care about setting a new lap time record with my car, pushing more weight at the gym, making more money than the year before, etc...

But it's very hard for me to get excited about workplace challenges. I simply just don't care. But I guess that's because it won't benefit me. It just benefits the company.

If I worked for someone who would directly compensate me for fixing things or setting new records... I guess I would be more apt to try. But when there is no extra reward, why should I care?


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> If I worked for someone who would directly compensate me for fixing things or setting new records... I guess I would be more apt to try. But when there is no extra reward, why should I care?


There are jobs out there with bonuses for performance. You could work in the sales.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Perhaps I've said this before but it doesn't hurt to repeat it. Job satisfaction is the finding the sweet spot between stress and boredom. Too much of either results in animosity towards the workplace and in turn can create a toxic workplace. Success in personal interest usually trump work accomplishments. One needs to connect purpose to pay. This doesn't necessarily mean performance to pay but it could be. When one feels they must be rewarded for everything they do it can create disappointment when it doesn't. rewards may not be immediate nor may they necessarily be monetary or recognition. some times the reward is knowledge and experience. KAEJS based on my experience and your contributions to this forum you are an accomplished, intelligent and capable individual. You are well ahead of may others in your age range currently. I would go the further step to say you way ahead at your current age than others that were once your age that have managed to create financial independence and success ahead of the normal retirement age. Growth of wealth is not linear it is exponential. I don't disagree that things are different than they were for Gen X and for Boomers. In some ways better in other way worse. Real Estate is expensive but interest rates are low. Wage growth has not followed cost of living for quite a long time yet we have access to so many amenities and luxuries than ever before. There definitely is an increasingly widening gap between the haves and the have nots. At some point, somehow it will swing back the other way. How or when I couldn't say but it will happen.

Added: I am currently watching a Gen X classic "Office Space". It tells the narrative of the plight of the worker and the system If you haven't seen it watch it. It makes a lot of commentary on corporate culture which still remains relevant to this day.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

KaeJS said:


> This is assumptive and not true.
> 
> I love challenges and I love conquering them. But only if it revolves around things I care about. I don't really care to solve a challenge for a company I don't care about in the same way that I don't really care to solve climate change or pollution.
> 
> ...


Maybe this is your problem. You don't get ahead because you think doing well at work doesn't benefit you. Doing well at work builds your skillset and track record, and that opens doors to jobs with greater pay and responsibility.

Now, it could be the case that you're at a job where hard work and effectiveness is not recognized or rewarded, but that's on you to find a different job. Or, you should look into going into business for yourself if that is the only way you can motivate yourself to excel.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> This is assumptive and not true.
> 
> I love challenges and I love conquering them. But only if it revolves around things I care about. I don't really care to solve a challenge for a company I don't care about in the same way that I don't really care to solve climate change or pollution.
> 
> ...


I enjoy solving hard challenges, particularly when others have no idea how, or they think it's impossible.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Now, it could be the case that you're at a job where hard work and effectiveness is not recognized or rewarded, but that's on you to find a different job. Or, you should look into going into business for yourself if that is the only way you can motivate yourself to excel.


This. =)


----------



## afulldeck (Mar 28, 2012)

londoncalling said:


> Growth of wealth is not linear it is exponential.


......and that growth does not necessarily reflect the amount of work required to create the snowball (no immediate rewards). You might have to bath in muddy waters for long time, and sacrifice much before you see the real efforts of your work. Normally the creation of wealth is a marathon of a score(s) of years rather than a sprint of of few years. The population loses sight of that fact because NA MSM plays up the young who are extremely successful at the cost of normal life cycles. And many, dare I say "most", people are just not that patience or willing to sacrifice for the future. They eat the marshmallows right away and drive expensive sports cars in their 30s.

If your willing to forgo spending on vacations, cars, houses and spend the time developing your vocation and life skills you have stacked the probability of the likelihood of becoming wealthy in the fullness of time in your favour. Yes it might not happen even in the fullness of time, but at least your trying to be a fully functional adult taking responsibilities for your actions who has lived and experienced life on your terms; rather than sucking at the teats of government or debit providers.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

The thread seems to have gone off on a different track, but i wanted to give my two cents. While i have sympathy about the housing market, I don’t necessarily see the millennials as worse off then the genxers when it comes to the job market. I didn’t have a decent paying job until i was 35. Rather then complaininG
about my poor pay, i went back to school and got a technical diploma which helped me find a new job. However as i said i do have sympathy with the housing market as i feel like at least early genx have benefitted from the housing boom.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

One could also argue its a lot easier to invest for the millennials then gen x or boomers. There didn’t used to be easy access to cheap trade commissions and cheap etfs.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

latebuyer said:


> The thread seems to have gone off on a different track, but i wanted to give my two cents. While i have sympathy about the housing market, I don’t necessarily see the millennials as worse off then the genxers when it comes to the job market. I didn’t have a decent paying job until i was 35. Rather then complaininG
> about my poor pay, i went back to school and got a technical diploma which helped me find a new job. However as i said i do have sympathy with the housing market as i feel like at least early genx have benefitted from the housing boom.


Going to school has gotten quite expensive. Post-secondary education costs have ballooned far faster than inflation. I remember telling older people what I was paying for tuition in the mid 2000s and seeing jaws drop. Just checked what my school is charging for tuition nowadays and it has doubled again. I was able to pay tuition and live a pretty basic existence for around $18k-$20k/year then. Equivalent today would cost I'd say $35k-$40k given what has happened with tuition and rents.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Going to school has gotten quite expensive. Post-secondary education costs have ballooned far faster than inflation. I remember telling older people what I was paying for tuition in the mid 2000s and seeing jaws drop. Just checked what my school is charging for tuition nowadays and it has doubled again. I was able to pay tuition and live a pretty basic existence for around $18k-$20k/year then. Equivalent today would cost I'd say $35k-$40k given what has happened with tuition and rents.


Yeah that sounds right. In ~2009 used to be rent was $400/month and tuition + school fees about $8-10k/yr. Last update I got from co-op students, 2-3 years ago, was $700 rent and $15k school.

Not sure what exactly goes into that inflation calculation... or why there are so many who insist that "inflation has been low for decades" I guess if you don't count: rent, produce and meat, house prices, tuition, cellphones, cars, furniture, transit fees, house insurance, car insurance, fast food, pets, baby essentials, community memberships, and home utilities then maybe it's hasn't gone up??

The real list to get 2% must be something like: dried pasta, gasoline, LCD TVs, laptops, fine dining, patio furniture, and sports equipment - you know, the key everyday things lol


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

peterk said:


> Yeah that sounds right. In ~2009 used to be rent was $400/month and tuition + school fees about $8-10k/yr. Last update I got from co-op students, 2-3 years ago, was $700 rent and $15k school.
> 
> Not sure what exactly goes into that inflation calculation... or why there are so many who insist that "inflation has been low for decades" I guess if you don't count: rent, produce and meat, house prices, tuition, cellphones, cars, furniture, transit fees, house insurance, car insurance, fast food, pets, baby essentials, community memberships, and home utilities then maybe it's hasn't gone up??
> 
> The real list to get 2% must be something like: dried pasta, gasoline, LCD TVs, laptops, fine dining, patio furniture, and sports equipment - you know, the key everyday things lol


In the 90's early 2000's it was more like yours, because I was having these discussions with people constantly.

It seems in the last 5-10 years things went really crazy.
Actual inflation is really high, also things like cell phones and internet have gone from a novelty to a necessity.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

All you can really do is what's in your circle of control. I really wish millenials would understand that other than continually focus on what can't be changed. You look at something like a phone i am only paying 20.00 a month with public mobile when it wouldn't surprise me if most millennial s are paying 3 times that. Same with internet. Cheaper plans can be had. The only other thing i can say is get political. I'm single and there is a woman who started a campaign called fairness for singles (in relation to taxation) and i supported that. As for housing i bought my condo solo and i feel if i can do it anyone can. Just do something instead of complaining.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

*Just to add the OP has done something by posting in this thread and kudos to him. On reflection I would say getting political about the housing situation may be the best bet at this point. OP would have to do more research on this.*


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

There are protests being organized in cities across Canada for Aug 14th.









The Canadian National Housing Protest — We’re fighting for better housing


Protesting for a fairer housing market for all Canadians.



www.canadahousingcrisis.com


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

latebuyer said:


> Just to add the OP has done something by posting in this thread and kudos to him. On reflection I would say getting political about the housing situation may be the best bet at this point. OP would have to do more research on this


Notice that any time unaffordable housing enters politics, the financial industry's lobbyists get in there and push politicians to further stimulate the housing market with credits for new buyers, and low interest rates.

Which keeps pushing the prices up and enriching the banks and real estate industry.

Low interest rates are the main problem. Every time I log into my online bank, they tell me that I can get a 1.4% mortgage. It's this kind of nonsense that pushes the prices of houses up to ludicrous levels.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

james4beach said:


> Notice that any time unaffordable housing enters politics, the financial industry's lobbyists get in there and push politicians to further stimulate the housing market with credits for new buyers, and low interest rates.


Just look at what the wicked witch Janet Yellen disclosed as $7.2M "speaking fees" from the banks and hedge funds last year. Just look at how corporate owned media demonizes things like occupy wall street and crypto currency - and you believe it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

nathan79 said:


> There are protests being organized in cities across Canada for Aug 14th.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They're protesting a problem everyone knows about.
But they're not proposing any solutions.

If they put 1% of this energy into developing solutions, maybe they could accomplish something.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

I think this sums it up.

Would you rather starve or hate life? Meaning you either find a job you like but that doesn't pay enough so you starve while you wait for the compounding to kick in - and it kicks in only after many years - OR - hate your life because you're aiming for the high-paying jobs that you hate but you still do overtime.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrBlackhill said:


> I think this sums it up.
> 
> Would you rather starve or hate life? Meaning you either find a job you like but that doesn't pay enough so you starve while you wait for the compounding to kick in - and it kicks in only after many years - OR - hate your life because you're aiming for the high-paying jobs that you hate but you still do overtime.


Geez, I must be a lucky charm or something. Almost nobody I know is in either category spanning multiple generations.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^ I think most people come to some reasonable compromise. My job pays reasonably well, and I don't hate it. I could earn more and like my job less, or vice versa. There's an efficient frontier, and I don't think I'm too far off it.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

cainvest said:


> Geez, I must be a lucky charm or something. Almost nobody I know is in either category spanning multiple generations.





andrewf said:


> ^ I think most people come to some reasonable compromise. My job pays reasonably well, and I don't hate it. I could earn more and like my job less, or vice versa. There's an efficient frontier, and I don't think I'm too far off it.


I've been searching for the right balance for the past decade. Never found it. And it's very frustrating. I wish I could be passionate about my job. I've already been. It lasted 2 years then I had to change job. Since then, I've changed job every 2 years.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> Would you rather starve or hate life? Meaning you either find a job you like but that doesn't pay enough so you starve while you wait for the compounding to kick in - and it kicks in only after many years - OR - hate your life because you're aiming for the high-paying jobs that you hate but you still do overtime.


I met up yesterday with a friend, a young lady who works in a high pace professional career.

She told me that she has been under so much stress at work that she frequently throws up before meetings. Her bosses have also off loaded unpleasant management responsibilities to her, including firing people. She's always stressed out.

And it's not just this current job. I've seen her change jobs twice over the last 12 months. Each time she switches, her salary goes up and responsibilities go up.

She makes more money than almost all of us around here and can get very rich doing this.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

latebuyer said:


> All you can really do is what's in your circle of control. I really wish millenials would understand that other than continually focus on what can't be changed. You look at something like a phone i am only paying 20.00 a month with public mobile when it wouldn't surprise me if most millennial s are paying 3 times that. Same with internet. Cheaper plans can be had. The only other thing i can say is get political. I'm single and there is a woman who started a campaign called fairness for singles (in relation to taxation) and i supported that. As for housing i bought my condo solo and i feel if i can do it anyone can. Just do something instead of complaining.


Agreed that you should focus on what you can control, and not make excuses for being a failure in life due to circumstances if you can prevent it for yourself my making good choices... but get political? Lol - James and M3S got it right.

There is no political solution that we can influence regarding things like housing, jobs, environmental, city planning, debt, etc.... The rulers - bankers, corporate, and government - have it all under wraps, and can use any political motivation from any direction to be contorted to suit their needs. Doesn't matter if you're a communist, anarchist, alt-right, hardcore left, or die-hard moderate. All avenues are used effectively by corporate lobbying and by socialist media organisations to continue the march forward of increased centralization and productivity, and reduced wages and freedoms for the people.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> ^ I think most people come to some reasonable compromise. My job pays reasonably well, and I don't hate it. I could earn more and like my job less, or vice versa. There's an efficient frontier, and I don't think I'm too far off it.


Yeah, this is very important. Personally I am trying to optimize my *quality of life*, not my level of pay.

The highest paying job I had (in inflation-adjusted terms) back in Toronto really could have made me rich, but it was too stressful. I ended up with high blood pressure in my early 30s and generally hated every day.

A couple years later, I landed a much nicer job in the US which was a breath of fresh air. I actually took a pay cut for that job, but it was more than worth it. The people were pleasant, the company was awfully nice to me, and the work was interesting. Blood pressure was no longer a problem (and hasn't been since).


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

james4beach said:


> I met up yesterday with a friend, a young lady who works in a high pace professional career.
> 
> She told me that she has been under so much stress at work that she frequently throws up before meetings. Her bosses have also off loaded unpleasant management responsibilities to her, including firing people. She's always stressed out.
> 
> ...


My problem is on the opposite.

I've got a job that pays well in my opinion. But I work on stuff that I don't care about. Therefore, I don't stress about it. While everybody is stressed out about the next release, I'm telling myself "why is everybody so stressed, no one is gonna die". And since I don't care, I don't stress, but I'm bored and underperforming. The good side of my lack of stress is that I can go and talk with anyone, no matter your status in the company, no matter the size of the meeting, no matter if you're the billionaire CEO.

I need to work on something truly meaningful, that has a true purpose. Not entertainment, not financial optimization, not insurance product, not...

Now I recall I've tried to get a job for the healthcare industry, but I didn't get it. Maybe I should continue screening for such opportunities.

After all, I change job every 2 years. From this trend, I should be changing job again in 1 year 3 months. And I should be actively searching for a new job in about 1 year. Ha!


----------



## afulldeck (Mar 28, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> I've been searching for the right balance for the past decade. Never found it. And it's very frustrating. I wish I could be passionate about my job. I've already been. It lasted 2 years then I had to change job. Since then, I've changed job every 2 years.


“He who has a *why* to live for can bear almost any how.” - Man Search for Meaning Victor Frankl One of the best books I've read multiple times. 

You have freedom of choice in all decisions in life, but what is your *why *wrt to work? Is it for personal gain, career honour's, interest, money or perhaps family? Some motivational pursuits only lead to delusional 'ends'.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

afulldeck said:


> You have freedom of choice in all decisions in life, but what is your *why *wrt to work?


I want my *why* to be a higher purpose than my ego (not self-centred reasons like "career", "money", "travel", etc.). Even "family" is self-centred in my opinion.

I want to be working on sometime that directly helps someone else or a community or the society or any higher purpose.

See this image below - which many of you will find esoteric but I don't care. Most people are at level 4 or below and happy. I'm at level 5 and won't be happy until level 7.


----------



## afulldeck (Mar 28, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> I want my *why* to be a higher purpose than my ego (not self-centred reasons like "career", "money", "travel", etc.). Even "family" is self-centred in my opinion.
> 
> I want to be working on sometime that directly helps someone else or a community or the society or any higher purpose.
> 
> See this image below - which many of you will find esoteric but I don't care. Most people are at level 4 or below and happy. I'm at level 5 and won't be happy until level 7.



Become a nurse, psw, firefighter, kumon educator...plenty of these jobs are true service level 7....


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> I need to work on something truly meaningful, that has a true purpose. Not entertainment, not financial optimization, not insurance product, not...


Why not just go to work and get your paycheque, and then do meaningful work in other life pursuits?

You can help the needy, work at a soup kitchen, help organize and improve your community, go into artistic pursuits, write, educate others...

But I think it's too much to expect a job to be deeply meaningful. These are just jobs. We show up and do useful things and they pay us. It's a pretty good deal overall. Much better than what others in human history have endured, like slavery or servitude.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

afulldeck said:


> Become a nurse, psw, firefighter, kumon educator...plenty of these jobs are true service level 7....


Yes good ideas, I wish, but then my salary will be almost halved. I'll do this when my portfolio will be able to provide an income of half my current salary, and I'll get a lower-paying job at something that I truly enjoy.

Maybe lawyer?

I'm currently making a career move to becoming a coach/mentor.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

james4beach said:


> Why not just go to work and get your paycheque, and then do meaningful work in other life pursuits?


I just can't. 40h is more than a third of our awaken hours. I can't spend that time on auto-pilot like a zombie. Feels like I'm wasting my time. That time should also be spent somewhere meaningful.


----------



## afulldeck (Mar 28, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> Yes good ideas, I wish, but then my salary will be almost halved. I'll do this when my portfolio will be able to provide an income of half my current salary, and I'll get a lower-paying job at something that I truly enjoy.
> 
> Maybe lawyer?
> 
> I'm currently making a career move to becoming a coach/mentor.


So to state the obvious --- your why is more money above all other choices.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

afulldeck said:


> So to state the obvious --- your why is more money above all other choices.


But what's frustrating is that there's no high paying job which are about helping other people.

High paying jobs are found only in capitalist jobs.

My calculation is that for instance I could have a job that I hate at $70,000 net or a job that I love at $35,000 net.

With the job at $35k, let's say I can live a decent life and save $5k a year.
That means with the job at $70k, I could live the same decent life and save $40k a year.

With the job at $35k net, saving $5k a year, +2% every year, it'll take 40 years at 9% to reach $2M for financial freedom and do whatever I want with all of my time. But I did 40 years of a job I liked.
With the job at $70k net, saving $40k a year, +2% every year, it'll take 18 years at 9% to reach $2M for financial freedom and do whatever I want with all of my time. But I did 18 years of a job I hated.

In one case, I have 40 years without freedom but doing what I like but on tight finances.
In the other case, I have 22 years of full freedom doing what I like, but I had to sacrifice 18 years at something I hate because there's no such high paying jobs that I like.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I worked a career in factories and warehousing. The job was mundane and there wasn't much "satisfaction" out of it, unless you find closing the door on a trailer you loaded satisfying, or finishing up a picking order thrilling.

What I did love was the people I worked with. There were over 600 of us and we knew each other well. We hung around after work and were good friends.

We fished, golfed, traveled, played sports, partied, with each other. We chatted with each as we worked. It passed the time and the years rolled on by.

Everyone who retired said the same thing. I don't miss the job but I really miss the people. It was like leaving home.

Today, I really miss some of my buddies as we all went in different directions after retirement. They were not only my co-workers but also my friends.

Some went east, some went west,...... some went where God knows best. Bottom line I think.........it is what you make of it.

One thing I can say for certain is that looking ahead may appear long and dreary, but it will pass in a flash. You will look back and wonder at the speed of it all.

And if you planned ahead and did it slow or did it quickly, you will be very happy you put money away for your retirement....be it investments or pensions.

There is still the nagging feeling that after working for our money for 40 years each, it feels weird to get money every month for free.

Of course, it isn't free. We earned it through all those steady years of work. It just doesn't feel that way sometimes.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

sags said:


> Everyone who retired said the same thing. I don't miss the job but I really miss the people. It was like leaving home.


At my first job, I've met colleagues who are now my group of friends. Most of us ended up leaving that job, but we're still friends 6 years later and we keep seeing each other multiple times per year.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> But what's frustrating is that there's no high paying job which are about helping other people.


Not True.


> High paying jobs are found only in capitalist jobs.


CEO of hospitals and Crown corps make big money.
MP's, judges all make good money.

Managers, Doctors, Vets, celebrities all make good money.



> My calculation is that for instance I could have a job that I hate at $70,000 net or a job that I love at $35,000 net.


Teachers make more than $70k, they should makea positive impact.
Throw in great hours, good benefits.

Yes I'm a bit regretful I didn't become a teacher.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As our son, who had 20 jobs by the time he was 34, you learn a lot of skills along the way that make you not only more valuable to an employer but also more self sufficient in your own life.

He can do almost anything related to construction and his skill set is in big demand by employers and everyone else who wants something built or done.

While we were lamenting that he didn't go to university, he was learning new "on the job" skills because he kept "trying" a new field of employment.

Sometimes going from job to job to job to job........can be a good thing. I wouldn't look down on it at all...........now that I know better.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Teachers make more than $70k, they should makea positive impact.


Definitely not in Quebec unfortunately. Otherwise I've wanted to become a teacher when I was a teenager.





__





Table C.3.1 Annual statutory teachers' salaries in public institutions, by level of education taught and teaching experience, Canadian dollars, Canada, provinces and territories, 2018/2019


This report is a product of the Pan-Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP). It is intended to facilitate the comparison of educational systems in Canada's provinces and territories with those of countries that belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...




www150.statcan.gc.ca
















MrMatt said:


> Managers, Doctors, Vets


My job is pretty much about management. There's a part of it which has a positive impact on people... on people stressed out because of their boring meaningless job where high management put pressure to create a feeling of urgency to deliver. My job is to try to change that work culture. It's positive. When upper management isn't too stubborn.

Yeah, maybe I should've gone for doctor instead of engineer. Nah, not doctor, too many dumb patients. Vet would be good. I wanted to be a vet when I was a teenager. I guess I missed my destiny. Because I hated everything that had to be learned by heart. I was better with logic and maths.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Yes good ideas, I wish, but then my salary will be almost halved. I'll do this when my portfolio will be able to provide an income of half my current salary, and I'll get a lower-paying job at something that I truly enjoy.
> 
> Maybe lawyer?
> 
> I'm currently making a career move to becoming a coach/mentor.


Interesting that before you can hit selfless pursuits, you feel that you need to have enough money to do so. Perhaps this is the problem, what you are looking for is in conflict. Level 7 is about service and being selfless. It moves away from materialism and money. You are looking for jobs that seem to be 'serving' as long as they pay well enough, which is the opposite of selfless. However, even if your 'passion' lands in your lap, you would only take it if it paid enough. That seems someone unlikely. This is just my observation.

I hover around a 6 (am working on it), but really have no desire to be a total 7. I do alot of good things, but because my resources (time, money) are not infinite, I still have to make choices. I won't quite my job just to volunteer full time because I have priorities such as my family that are more important and need to pay to bills. @james4beach has the right idea that do something that collects the pay check you want, and then find some time to do the things your are passionate about. This is about the best balance you will have for now until you are able to no longer need to work for money. Part of being happy is acceptance. I have stepped down from high payer position doing work I really enjoyed because it took me away from my kids and family and they need me. So I would look at it as reframing what it is you want. Instead of continually trying to find what you are missing to be happy, see what you have that makes you happy.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

What PA said.

My inlaws have been members of Rotary for decades now. Service above Self is the theme. There's also Kiwanis and Lions Club, plus many others. As an example, the inlaws and my wife spent 2 weeks in Guatemala last year running an opthamology clinic in a variety of mountain villages. A lot of work, but very rewarding.


----------

