Canada's birth rate is going down. The solution = more immigrants
- Thread starter Shannon Beth
- Start date
If cost of living wasn't so fucking expensive maybe Canadians would have more kids.
How would we increase our own birth rate? Force people to mate like horses? Cloning?
Migration has always been a part of history.
Ironically it’s immigration that’s making housing so expensive. Canada recieves older and wealthier immigrants than those that typically walk in or brave a trip across the Med in a sketchy boat. There are positives, bring skills and capital, and negatives, don’t work that long before they start getting benefits and sometimes they don’t stay at all just park money in real estate (Vancouver and Toronto).
How about a national $10/day daycare plan so young families can afford to have children.
When I was growing up in Quebec it was very common to see Catholic Irish and French families have enough kids to ice a hockey team.
La Revanche des berceaux - Wikipedia
La Revanche des berceaux - Wikipedia
If you're following Texas as an example, their low cost of living is a contributing factor in the rise of the multiple children families. If parents can afford it, they seem to have more kids.
Seriously?
You can't see how price controls can lead to a reduction in the supply of a good? Never mind the staggering evidence in terms of rent control,
Rent control is not the way to increase the amount of affordable housing, nor is it a solution to poverty, inequality, or segregation. Instead, it acts to restrict the supply of housing, transferring wealth to current tenants at the expense of future and market-rate tenants. Insiders—those living in rent-protected units—generally win at the expense of outsiders. In an effort to resist gentrification, rent control leads to the decay of the buildings, as owners have less revenue to spend on maintenance and improvements.
Regulating rents, in short, does more harm than good overall.
Rent Control Makes It Harder to Find an Apartment
- Cities that implement rent control see substantial declines in the availability of rental housing.
- Locking people in to existing rental units leaves many renters in apartments much larger or much smaller than they would prefer.
- In some cities, waitlists for rent-controlled housing are decades-long.
- Rent control benefits incumbent tenants at the expense of migrants hoping to relocate to a city. In New York City, white tenants have disproportionately benefited relative to black or Hispanic tenants, and landlords give preference to older and childless households.
- Many of rent control’s benefits typically flow to higher-income households even as rent control drives up rents for everyone else.
- Rent control reduces investment in a property’s quality and causes a city’s housing stock to decay.
- By suppressing property values, rent control also reduces tax revenue to municipalities, hindering their ability to provide essential services.
Government often does things that sound like a good idea with the best of intentions but it backfires in often predictable ways if you just look into the knock on effects a bit more.
In the case of rent control people are still pushing for it when they should know better.
The weaker the rent control, the weaker the effect and the less the benefit, the stronger the rent control, the more destructive it will be. Do it hard enough and you get New York in the 70s where it was cheaper to abandon or burn down a building than continue to pay the taxes and maintenance.
Last edited:
7% of Vancouver City homes are vacant, 2,100 in Toronto. Not as much of an issue in Toronto but 7% in a rental market with a vacancy rate under 2% is likely having an impact.
"Hey babe, wanna get together and have a tax break?"
I can't see that working on the women.
Don't they already give tax incentives for children and straight cash?
Wait, don't conservative make fun of people getting assistance for children? Saying if you can't afford them don't have them?
There are no new rental apartments being built even after DoFo killed rent control.
All that happened is rents went way, way up.
Even Montreal offered massive incentives and no rentals were built.
Developers wanna build it and sell it.
It is illegal to ask for it under the Landlord and Tenant Act but because leases are hard to come by and allow Landlords to be very selective (which you have to be) prospective tenants are offering one year in advance. Moreso with immigrants because they usually do not have valid credit reports.
Developers and Builders only build when there is a profit to be made. Considering the current market it's not in their best interest to build considering the cost of the build and the future sale price. This is why many are just banking the land. Dougie is going to run into a big roadblock insisting the builders build by 2025 in the Greenbelt shenanigans.
Besides the rent control debate, I read that decades ago when a purpose built rental building was bought and then sold, inflation was taken into consideration when paying the capital gains tax. So, if a building was bought for 500,000.00 and then sold 20 years later for 1,000,000.00, it was aknowledged that the gain was not 500,000.00 because part of that gain was inflation.
And yes, real incomes(and pension coverage) for renters grew during the post war boom years when 90% of the buildings were built in Toronto unlike the stagnation and even declines in incomes since the 1980s.
Last edited:
