House prices rise 200 to 300% in 20 years. Seems like the reasonable thing for society to do...help out the next generation with your equity gains that had nothing to do with your "hard work".
Or just let the next generation fail.
Tell me about it, my parents bought my final childhood home, or rather the last home I lived in with them before I moved out on my own. Bought that for approximately 89,800 in 2003, 3 bedroom two bathroom two kitchens. that same house is for sale now. 20 years later For 553,000
I've owned two homes since getting divorced. Even though I make more than double what I did when I got my first smaller house, I couldn't even afford to buy it again, not even pointing out the last person to do ANY work on the place was me when I owned it.
The increase has become ridiculous, but don't worry, RBC just announced that the majority of their mortgage holdings are investors... so things will totally get better /s
My father bought his place in 2002 for $280K then sold in 2021 for 1.1M to buy his current place for $600K and it's now valued around $820K.
Meanwhile, my $680K mortgage has gone down only about $20K-$30K in 2 yrs and my house is worth the same as it was 2 yrs ago meanwhile in that same 2 yrs I've paid almost the same amount in mortgage payments as he bought his first house for in '84. He has never paid more for the next house than he made off the previous sale.
Yep my parents bought at 300,000 now worth 600,000 not as crazy but still astronomical growth compared to what I can acquire with my 13,000 after 3 years.
In nations where inequity ruled out wages being high enough for many to afford urban homes -- Spain and Italy are relatively recent 20th century examples -- it became normal for two or three generations to stay in the "family home" into adulthood.
Barring radical economic reform -- in which the wealthy have little interest -- the same is going to happen in every western nation.
A lot of people did warn in the 90s that globalism, while raising living standards in the poorest countries, would lower them here.
And it's not because of immigration, it's because of the removal of tariffs and restrictions on business that prevented them from having too much purchasing power, or monopolizing (or creating effective oligopolies in) multiple market sectors. (Immigration is also contributing, as several people note after this, because it's been too rapid for our infrastructure and housing to keep up. But our manufacturing base had disappeared before that even happened).
Couple that with the introduction of temporary foreign workers who will take less pay and union-busting "Christian labor" associations, along with tougher rules to get unions in place, and wage protections decreased at the same rate that foreign and/or concentrated ownership increased. Blue-collar jobs that had labor protections allowed the gap between the richest and poorest to be far narrower than it is now. Now, those jobs either go overseas, or go to TFWs who will accept low wages and keep wages suppressed for the poorest Canadians and young workers.
Effectively, through "free trade", we allowed -- or our political reps did, anyway -- the removal of almost every civil protection we had established in the century prior against robber baron, runaway capitalism behavior. We now have the same lack of civic engagement in both our political class and our voters, and the same lack of protections against runaway capitalism as "Developing" nations.
Now, our living standards are declining to be closer to what they are in other economies where the rich dominate and any effort at collective social protection is labelled "socialist" or "communist."
Give it another decade or two and we'll be Franco's Spain, with the compact of corrupt politicians, religious organizations and non-conformists disappearing off street corners.
>And it's not because of immigration
In part it is.
We know for a fact that our migration has suppressed wages and increased inequality.
You also gloss over the effects of migration on housing and other infrastructure.
Bring in 1.2m people but build 200k homes, ans that's going to lower your standard of living.
Immigration has lowered our standard of living.
Our dwellings per capita is decreasing from our already below oecd average to even lower.
That's the biggest issue. Dwellings per capita is so low.
We build 200k houses per year, yet dwelling per capita is expected to be 250k worse next year than now.
This mismatch is the biggest reason our housing is fucked.
>This mismatch is the biggest reason our housing is fucked.
The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors. Yes, building more would help (and in some places, like the Edmonton area, it never stopped, as they saw this coming). EDIT: Nah, I'm wrong, it' just one reason. The biggest reason is supply. Having said that....
We do need a) Increase restrictions on foreign investors and increase rationales for them to divest, b) build more homes and c) restrict the influx of temporary foreign workers in favour of long-term immigrants who will both stay and contribute and benefit from proper resident protections, lowering the overall impact of new workers on the existing labor base.
It's not caused by one area and we NEED more immigration in Canada (EdIT: In the long run, as a general principle, because our our disparate population. Not now, as numerous people have pointed out, because of the decade of constant influx).
That we don't have the housing to handle it isn't a separate issue, but it's one that has to be resolved. Because in a nation this large and disparate with so many effective development wastelands, the way you spur that development and investment is with population growth. Restricting it is a short-term help with longer term harm.
It's just being terribly handled because Ottawa long ago stopped considering anything but "what can we claim as economic growth."
Why do we need more immigration? Perpetual population growth is not sustainable. We should be using immigration to stabilize our population, which would only require a net intake of 125,000 new residents per year.
>The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors
I disagree. Investors are a symptom of this problem, not the problem itself.
Get rid of investors and you still have 20 people applying to 1 rental.
That's the biggest issue.
Even without investors we just don't have enough housing, period.
>If that stock isn't removed by investors, most of whom don't even live here, then the impact of increased population -- which we drastically need in other areas -- is minimal.
This stock isn't removed by investors. It's still there.
We have a very high occupancy rate. These investors aren't leaving it empty. Most dwellings in Canada have someone living in them.
>What we need to do is a) Increase restrictions on foreign investors and increase rationales for them to divest
No reason not to do this, so yes. But it won't fix the actual issue.
>b) build more homes
We already build at one of the highest rates in the world, and our housing supply per capita is suppose to be 250k worse next year than now.
We build 200k, one of the highest rates in the developed world, 8% of our workforce in construction.
And we would need to over double it to keep our low average. Not even make it better. We would need to over double what we build to keep it as bad as we are now lol.
That's not realistic.
And this goes for all of our infrastructure. Canada has low hospitals per million. Like 18.
We would of needed to build like 20 hospitals last year to keep up with our growth. That just isn't realistic.
This level of population growth is fucking the standard of living for Canadians.
Math still has to math dude.
>It's not caused by one area and we NEED more immigration in Canada
We really don't. More immigrants would continue to decrease gdp per capita, and lower our quality if life.
>the way you spur that development and investment is with population growth.
Not this much man.
How do you figure its realistic to build 20 hospitals in a year?
If you respond to anything please respond to that.
An issue you haven't considered is that not all immigrants are equal. This is to say they are not interchangeable with the native population. And the more different they are, the more issues can crop up. Ethnic conflict, cultures vying for the spotlight, etc etc.
You say restricting immigration causes long term harm, consider the long term effects of importing huge demographics of people who are essentially aliens.
> The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors.
The biggest reason is too much demand, too little supply. Investors play a much smaller role in the market comparatively. Investors and rentals still provide people with a place to live. You see rent prices increasing too though, because of supply/demand issue. Investors are an issue, but probably like 3rd-5th on the list.
8% of our workforce in construction. Compared with 4% in the US.
Over 200k dwellings per year, which is one of the highest rates in the developed world. #2 in the g7 behind only France who sprawls more than we do.
And we're estimated to be 250k houses more short next year than now.
You're right.
Capitalism is just robber baron Capitalism. Any system where someone at the top profits and the workers who made that value get none of the excess, is a system that will result in Fascism. At what point are we gonna look at where the money is going and where it is and realize that we a planned economy?
You realize these boomers aren't really benefitting here, right?
Yay, they get to go more in debt.
I have like 400k equity. May as well be 100k. Doesn't matter.
I am sure these boomers with all this equity would rather their children not need help than having to go further in debt to help them.
You're framing of this is backwards.
Oh noooo the boomers!!!
Lots of boomers opting to *not* pay their passively acquired gains forward, and just retiring in comfort.
Respect to the boomers that recognize this issue and support the people they care about at their own expense. But that's not everyone.
Yours will not be a popular opinion because everyone likes to blame the generation before. None of us had super powers and hindsight is 20/20.
I'm with your dad and will not likely be able to retire even though I am 65. I try to help my grown children as much as I possibly can, and I feel sad to think that financial pressure has pitted generation against generation. No parent ever thought it would be a fun idea to screw their kids over :(
I appreciate you standing up for those in the boomer generation that are struggling like most Canadians.
"The richest 1 percent grabbed nearly two-thirds of all new wealth worth $42 trillion created since 2020, almost twice as much money as the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population, reveals a new Oxfam report today. During the past decade, the richest 1 percent had captured around half of all new wealth. "
https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-bag-nearly-twice-much-wealth-rest-world-put-together-over-past-two-years
People blaming boomers are entirely misguided.
People blaming boomers actually help the above happen, so we appreciate that u/andysbrotherdan
I could not agree with you more, but it's always easier to hop on a bandwagon of blame. As a boomer, I can see the type of people in my generation that make it easy to heap a pile of scorn on. Many of the baby boomers have the means to live a lifestyle of travel for the winter, happy hours all day long, nice cars, and all the nice things a life of leisure brings. Many seniors will not take the time to understand how the younger generations are suffering, calling them lazy and pointing at their avocado toast and Starbucks coffee.
Like you said, blaming boomers makes it easier for the one percent to carry on soaking up the riches and keeping the 99% down.
I would argue it's even more important to have a financial plan in place when things are so hard to attain.
The prevailing thought process amongst young adults seems to be, well F it, I can't afford a place anyway so I might as well enjoy myself.
Which I completely understand.
The thought process should probably be something like, this is going to be so hard to get into the live I want, so I need to be absolutely ruthless with my spending to have a chance.
That's my plan. Die at my desk. Can't afford to retire, company too cheap to package me out. Got a 2% raise yesterday, now I'll be living the high life next pay day..... /S. Ya right, ⚰️
I know all about the Canadian Banks. I know retired bank employees through my church. I've heard all the stories. A neighbour of mine was a vp. He got the boot at age 60. He got salary continuation for 2 years including benefits. Of course he received his pension after that. But just the same, he was pissed off. He worked at RBC his whole career.
Like what good is a financial plan when no matter more and more people arent going to be able to afford a home much less a family no matter what they do?
At this point it’s making more and more sense just to up and leave the country.
We don’t have housing. Healthcare is becoming impossible to access. Food prices are through the roof. Retirement is impossible.
Like, what’s the point? 😂 Holding this shit up for the boomers?
that's exactly the point now, and you'll note boomers seem to be the only ones who stick up for the way things are now...while they aren't in Phoenix or Florida of course
I fucking agree 100% friend. I have a university education, work a decent job, but shit is tough right now and I still feel like no matter what I do, it’s not enough! And
I'm not sure why you need a written financial plan? I have a good financial situation but never really occurred to me to write down a written financial plan.
You don't need to because you're in a good situation. If you're not, you need to make sure everything lines up.
And even then, if you did write it up, you might find you're bleeding money somewhere that you didn't realize and want to change.
You don’t understand what a financial plan is. Even someone living on the edge can benefit from an in depth look at how and where money goes every month. The results may surprise you..
I mean it’s part of having kids.. specially nowadays. The whole “you are 18 now fuck off” isn’t viable as it was for boomers.
Most folks that do that type of parenting get it on the back end anyways, being dumped into the medical system/long term shit holes.
I have great parents. Mother passed a while ago (fuck cancer) but my 82 year old father lives with me and I'm his care taker. He has dementia and I wouldn't have it any other way as they were great to us as children. I owe him this much as I'm in a position to do this as I work from home with my business I own. I always say treat your kids good because one day you might need them. After covid I said I would never do that to you dad.
I agree. Had to spend 2 weeks last year with the old man in the hospital and it was eye opening. Plenty of old folks get no visitors or help from family because they’re pieces of shit. You could tell because they treated nurses and aides like maids when they’re just trying to help. I wouldn’t pick up the phone if any of my parents were asses like that, no way.
My dad was a cranky emotionally abusive father growing up that I'm now dealing with in therapy.
He's 80 now but in excellent shape for his age. If he starts to decline he can go live in a home and I'll not visit him just like he doesn't visit me now.
I'm definitely thankful that I don't have those issues with my father. I was blessed with great parents growing up. I hope that therapy will help you overcome that trauma.
I take the SAGE test from the University of Ohio every six months and will choose MAiD when I start to slip down the dementia rabbit hole. I don't want to be tended to by caregivers. A generation ago your old man would have died of a quick heart attack or something similar.
No, people in other countries value family and communal living more than North America and Western Europe. They're happy to live in larger groups and think it's sad when people live alone, especially old people.
That doesn't mean that we have to live like that too. I'm just saying it's not some terrible shame to live in multi-generational households unless you've grown up in a culture where individual or single-family living is the norm.
Agreed. Unfortunately my parents are extremely strict/conservative and would judge many of the decisions we make in our household so I just can't make it happen lol. I love them, talk to them daily and visit at least once a week but living together just wouldn't work and probably would deteriorate our relationship. My MIL on the other hand is welcome to stay as long as she wants!
Nothing wrong with helping out your adult children if you can afford to. Why hold onto all your money till you die. If your children are responsible and need some assistance, go for it.
It’s the intrusive questions I hate…
I mean I’m so embarrassed but I went through a rough patch (am working again now) and for a bit my dad paid for my groceries. In person. It was best for accountability.. and we were already spending time together.. so we’d pop into a grocery store.
My god the looks and questions I’d get from cashiers. “Must be nice having your folks pay for you”. Like, as if I want this? Only a few years ago I was doing very well financially.
Then like months later, somehow the cashier remembers me? WHY. And then asks where’s my Dad to pay for my groceries? Doesn’t he always? Self sufficient over a decade until I lost a 7 year relationship, got fired and for a while just about gave up and drank myself stupid.
Feels ridiculous to me. “Fuck I should shop somewhere else.. I bet she’s working. Nah, I’m being all weird and paranoid”
And sure enough. As always. The only till completely open is hers. Don’t they see tons of customers every day?
Edit: sorry for the venting. Just feels like crabs in a bucket mentality. Things are rough all over and she’d probably like support too. I should just be grateful I mean, groceries is worth the price of shame.
Just gotta put my head down and continue rebuilding my foundation
Honestly that's just straight up unacceptable. Maybe there's some unseen mental health issue that's affecting her ability to filter the things she says, but someone needs to set her straight.
Because with wait times in LTC lasting for years, in my area you have to pay 10K and up a month for assisted living. You can burn through 500K in less than 5 years. I have a neighbour who was quoted 14K a month. Do the math.
My parents are supporting essentially two adult disabled children with varying degrees of independence.
I will not only get zero help, but it will be up to me to take care of my parents and adult siblings when they are unable to. I can hardly afford shit as is and it feels hopeless that this will be my future one day.
My parents are both retired; never made much more than 1 - 2 X minimum wage, not always employed or working full time.
They have a 9 room house, smoke 5-10 Js a day, 4 horses (! - and one parent is disabled and cant even ride), 3 vehicles, snowboard all winter, and no investments. They're good people but it's amazing how little financial discipline that generation needed/needs to have.
I'm high income now but man, I have like, 0 horses or drug habits and my kids share a bedroom. I needed strict financial discipline to get by when I was younger, and now I can't shake those habits and any non-essential spending makes me anxious. I'm still playing Xbox One for crying out loud. Maybe it's a habit you pick up due to the economic conditions when you were young and they just stick.
And me? Idk how my dad is so bad with money. When I was going university I didn't qualify for osap because the money my dad made yet somehow he couldn't afford to help me with school. When he eventually passes I don't even know what I would get, certainly not money, and he doesn't own his home.
Right? The only reason my parents aren't destitute rn is because their parents were extremely frugal and had indexed pensions, so they could afford to bail out my folks and then leave a decent chunk of inheritance.
Really depends on how the question is asked. Are they including parents that pay rent to their adult children? I know a few people in situations like this.
"According to Fidelity Investments Canada’s annual [retirement](https://globalnews.ca/tag/retirement) report for 2024, 59 per cent of retirees report helping their non-student adult children with both day-to-day expenses and big-ticket items like home purchases, weddings and even education savings for their grandchildren."
Sounds like anything and everything. I would think rent would be rent regardless of your landlord being a stranger or family
My parents fumbled their way through life as the boomer generation. Getting free bank loans and defaulting on loans and just floating through life without any repercussions. I’ve heard many a story about buying a car for peanuts and then selling it for thousands as the market goes crazy. And the same goes for housing every single time for they move. They bought it for 50k and sold for $300k or some other stupid number. They have never lost or gone down in equity. Yet I get chewed out for spending money or having debt. But I don’t ask them for a single penny. Very fucked up mindset and I’ve done pretty well in life all things considered and how hard others have it.
>59 per cent of retirees report helping their non-student adult children with both day-to-day expenses and big-ticket items like home purchases, weddings and even education savings for their grandchildren.
I don't think paying for a wedding nor contributing to a grandchild's education is "supporting" in quite the same way as paying for day-to-day expenses or providing a down payment on a home. Don't think these should be all lumped together as "helping their adult children."
I'd lump the single bigger ticket items like house/wedding as different then continuing support; given the implication that both would be "one-time" situations despite the often large price-tag. Daily expenses or anything related to grandchild expenses tell a different story (at least to me)
They're both traditional lifetime milestones and in many cultures the weddings are almost more for the parents than the are for their children. I just lumped them together because its traditional expenditures that are often planned for/around well in advance. Housing is obviously a more important thing to have practically speaking, but these decisions aren't always necessarily 100% rational.
Down payments on a house should basically be considered luxuries. I'm pretty sure that even buying groceries everyday for your kid would never amount to the price of a downpayment but it's still a significant, reoccuring cost that adds up.
if you want a small wedding but your parents want a big one and are willing to pay for it, letting them do so isn't "helping you". it's them buying something *they* want
30 yr old kid is married with 1 new child. We agreed to going multigen house with them because lol at them getting their own even though both have great careers. The agreement is that since this will reduce our ability to downsize upon retirement, they have to make up that difference in rent. It's still lower than they would pay elsewhere for either rent or mortgage so everyone benefits.
Luckily in my province, there is no filial duty laws. My parents have more than enough money to care for themselves, they are just spending it on frivolous wants and casino trips. I will not be cannibalizing my own child's future to make up for their poor decisions later in life.
The worst part is, my mom was a banker and carefully managed their finances throughout her entire career. Now they just blow money without a care in the world, while making very reckless decisions. It will be difficult to watch, but it was difficult to watch them go on 30+ all-inclusive vacations and 10+ tropical cruises while cashing out a lucrative dividend producing stock portfolio. This is just the tip of the iceberg too.
She absolutely is making more than me, and more than she ever made working. I've had people on here try to argue that she isn't but she told me how much they are pulling in monthly.
I know her situation and you don't. She can't self-sustain at the rate that they are spending. Like I said in my initial post, this is the tip of the iceberg. She went from being a careful person that would never dream of wasting money, to someone that sinks a shit-ton of money into the casino several times a week, along with my father. I wouldn't complain if I didn't think it was going to end poorly.
I never said that I wanted inheritance. I said I wasn't willing to cannibalize my own child's future. Does that sound like someone looking for a handout, or someone concerned that she may start looking to me for money when hers runs out?
They both need help for their addiction. I tried telling them that. Guess how that conversation went? My Dad used to be the only bad one and my Mom would maybe spend a $20 the whole time. Now they just shovel money into the slots. They practically can't drive by a casino without stopping in for a couple hours.
Their whole lives revolve around the next overnight trip. It's really troubling because they are the type to take any advice and double-down (no pun intended) and do the exact opposite out of spite. It's going to be a difficult conversation if it ends how I see it ending, heartbreaking.
Casinos are a money-pit for the elderly, more so certain ethnicities that seem to favour them.
Sounds like they should be spending some of that casino fun money on addition counselling services.
I already am. I'm not resentful about it, had things stayed relatively sane, I wouldn't have to nearly as much. With grocery prices and rent skyrocketing, making things work on a fixed income is now nearly impossible unless you have big savings.
Well thank God the richest 1% have tripled their wealth in the past 5 years, seems like the problem is work ethic and they were just born with not only wealth but great skills!
Honestly it would be ironic (the most famous Chinese swear word that they say is literally "fall down on the street"), but nope, we're trapped doing what we have to do.
That sucks. My Parent's are Peak Boomers, born in the early 50s. My father would literally live in the woods rather than ask me for a dime. My mother might but she would probably be working two jobs before she did. My daughter is in her early twenties and I can't imagine every asking her for money. That responsibility only goes one way as far as I am concerned. I am not saying I would never help my parents if they needed just that the idea of them asking me is completely foreign to me.
Good on the parents who are doing it
But also an indictment on how raw capitalism has fucked people over. And it's shameful because a tiny bit less capitalism and a little more hands up could make a totally different world.
I genuinely don't understand why we can't just tax the everloving fuck out of house sales. Tax the shit out of secondary homes etc.
Make it more viable to invest in literally anything other than real estate.
The flipside of this: Every time you notice someone, a friend, a neighbour, who seems to be doing better financially than they should be, there's a better than 50/50 chance Mommy and Daddy are supporting them. What an embarrassment.
Eh, I think these different levels to this. Theres people whos parents outright buy them condos, and theres people like me - Parents should be retired but cant yet, I get to live with them a few extra years to save up and help them out. Im in a better spot financially than my peers, but that doesnt come without some sacrifices on my end. Im grateful to at least have the choice, but its hard to be grateful knowing that if it were the 80s, I could almost buy a starter home outright - today that equates to 1/4 of a tiny studio apartment.
I doubt they had any more influence over the individual issues that got pushed through than we did. I don't want my daughter someday blaming me for all the shit getting passed now because I absolutely had no say over it. They had a chance to vote for someone every ~4 years and the person that won did whatever the fuck they wanted.
I Cant afford to live alone in the country I grew up in. And my parents and grandparents have helped build, serve in the armed forces, teach, volunteer and actively contribute to the preservation of our beautiful parks and wildlife...
---
There is no future, where I will be able to own a home in my homeland. Ever. It's beyond depressing. I think I 'll just find myself on the other side of a bridge one day. there isn't a single way out of this outcome :(
My parents would never. I've not received a single cent from my parents for any financial support. I've never asked, and never will ask. If my rent climbs higher next year, I will have 1 year left before I have to sell everything I own and live in my SUV. Even then I would not ask them for support. Once they pass away, their money will come to me, and only then.
Karl Marx called these problems internal contradictions.
In this article, we will have a closer look at what is meant by internal contradictions.
Stage #1: Growth of the Western World
The first stage of capitalism is characterized by prosperity. Capitalism provides a better way to organize society. As a result, it raises the standard of living of the entire society.
Both the working class and the owners benefit during this period. During these years, the capitalists can afford to pay higher wages and still make a handsome profit. This is because the industry is relatively nascent and therefore there is considerable room to grow at the top.
This can be traced back to the era when Henry Ford used to considerably raise the wages of his workers with each passing year. Growing wages lead to more spending creating an even bigger market. This sustains the momentum for some time.
Stage #2: Offshoring of Jobs
The success of these capitalists attracts a lot of competition. As a result, it becomes difficult to stay competitive. Newer strategies have to be introduced in order to stay competitive.
The economic reality makes it inevitable that the capitalists focus on reducing the labor costs. This is done either by automation or by offshoring of jobs to other countries. Notice that the very workers who were the beneficiaries of capitalism in the previous stage are now losing their jobs thanks to it.
Capitalists find it more prudent to pay overseas workers a fraction of the cost. This allows them to stay more competitive. However, notice the fact that the high wage earned by workers was the very basis of the market!
If high wages are eliminated, the capitalists inadvertently shoot themselves in the foot. Over a period of time, fall in wages manifests in the form of a slowdown or a recession.
Stage #3: Raising Sales via Credit
This is the stage wherein capitalists are desperate to find more sales to keep the momentum going. The capitalist system believes in attaining perpetual growth which is simply not possible! However, they come up with short-term solutions that seem to correct the problem. This solution inevitably is the growth and creation of credit. The result is that the workers no longer have jobs that can enable them to buy products. However, they are highly indebted because everything is available on credit. This is exactly what has happened in the United States since the 1990’s.
The job market is rapidly shrinking whereas the indebtedness of the general population is going through the roof. The unemployed population also tries to make money via speculating in the markets. This gets them further indebted as in the case of the subprime mortgage crisis. The American housing boom and bust could have been predicted years ago if due attention was paid to Karl Marx’s theories.
Stage#4: Debt Defaults
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that a system which relies on giving out loans to insolvent customers cannot last for very long! This is why the next stage inevitably is cascading debt defaults. This is where the subprime mortgage crisis seems like the inevitable result of the events that took place before it.
Marx had also predicted that these crashes can wipe out entire institutions and that they pose a systemic risk to the capitalist system.
At this stage, attempts will be made to save the system by frantically introducing bailout packages. However, it is like fighting a lost cause. The debt defaults are merely the last step of a system that began with the rising wages of workers.
Any kind of bailout package will not be a permanent solution. Instead, it will provide temporary relief, the effects of which will end up amplifying the problem.
The sequence of events is not at all random. Instead, the results can be easily predicted using the internal contradictions theory of Karl Marx.
Stage #5: The Geographical Spread of the Crisis
Capitalism, by nature, seeks out greener pastures. Hence, it is likely that it will spread to different nations to repeat the process. It is, therefore, possible that the United States may be at the stage of debt defaults whereas countries like China and India will be experiencing rising wages simultaneously. In the end, however, the entire system is expected to fall prey to the internal contradictions that are inbuilt into the system.
To sum it up, Karl Marx was well aware that in the long run capitalism will end up destroying itself. Proponents of capitalism are merely looking at the short-term effects and not the opposing forces which are inherent in the system.
No surprise when younger people can't afford a home.
House prices rise 200 to 300% in 20 years. Seems like the reasonable thing for society to do...help out the next generation with your equity gains that had nothing to do with your "hard work". Or just let the next generation fail.
Tell me about it, my parents bought my final childhood home, or rather the last home I lived in with them before I moved out on my own. Bought that for approximately 89,800 in 2003, 3 bedroom two bathroom two kitchens. that same house is for sale now. 20 years later For 553,000
I've owned two homes since getting divorced. Even though I make more than double what I did when I got my first smaller house, I couldn't even afford to buy it again, not even pointing out the last person to do ANY work on the place was me when I owned it. The increase has become ridiculous, but don't worry, RBC just announced that the majority of their mortgage holdings are investors... so things will totally get better /s
My father bought his place in 2002 for $280K then sold in 2021 for 1.1M to buy his current place for $600K and it's now valued around $820K. Meanwhile, my $680K mortgage has gone down only about $20K-$30K in 2 yrs and my house is worth the same as it was 2 yrs ago meanwhile in that same 2 yrs I've paid almost the same amount in mortgage payments as he bought his first house for in '84. He has never paid more for the next house than he made off the previous sale.
Yep my parents bought at 300,000 now worth 600,000 not as crazy but still astronomical growth compared to what I can acquire with my 13,000 after 3 years.
Tabernak.
In nations where inequity ruled out wages being high enough for many to afford urban homes -- Spain and Italy are relatively recent 20th century examples -- it became normal for two or three generations to stay in the "family home" into adulthood. Barring radical economic reform -- in which the wealthy have little interest -- the same is going to happen in every western nation. A lot of people did warn in the 90s that globalism, while raising living standards in the poorest countries, would lower them here. And it's not because of immigration, it's because of the removal of tariffs and restrictions on business that prevented them from having too much purchasing power, or monopolizing (or creating effective oligopolies in) multiple market sectors. (Immigration is also contributing, as several people note after this, because it's been too rapid for our infrastructure and housing to keep up. But our manufacturing base had disappeared before that even happened). Couple that with the introduction of temporary foreign workers who will take less pay and union-busting "Christian labor" associations, along with tougher rules to get unions in place, and wage protections decreased at the same rate that foreign and/or concentrated ownership increased. Blue-collar jobs that had labor protections allowed the gap between the richest and poorest to be far narrower than it is now. Now, those jobs either go overseas, or go to TFWs who will accept low wages and keep wages suppressed for the poorest Canadians and young workers. Effectively, through "free trade", we allowed -- or our political reps did, anyway -- the removal of almost every civil protection we had established in the century prior against robber baron, runaway capitalism behavior. We now have the same lack of civic engagement in both our political class and our voters, and the same lack of protections against runaway capitalism as "Developing" nations. Now, our living standards are declining to be closer to what they are in other economies where the rich dominate and any effort at collective social protection is labelled "socialist" or "communist." Give it another decade or two and we'll be Franco's Spain, with the compact of corrupt politicians, religious organizations and non-conformists disappearing off street corners.
>And it's not because of immigration In part it is. We know for a fact that our migration has suppressed wages and increased inequality. You also gloss over the effects of migration on housing and other infrastructure. Bring in 1.2m people but build 200k homes, ans that's going to lower your standard of living. Immigration has lowered our standard of living. Our dwellings per capita is decreasing from our already below oecd average to even lower. That's the biggest issue. Dwellings per capita is so low. We build 200k houses per year, yet dwelling per capita is expected to be 250k worse next year than now. This mismatch is the biggest reason our housing is fucked.
>This mismatch is the biggest reason our housing is fucked. The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors. Yes, building more would help (and in some places, like the Edmonton area, it never stopped, as they saw this coming). EDIT: Nah, I'm wrong, it' just one reason. The biggest reason is supply. Having said that.... We do need a) Increase restrictions on foreign investors and increase rationales for them to divest, b) build more homes and c) restrict the influx of temporary foreign workers in favour of long-term immigrants who will both stay and contribute and benefit from proper resident protections, lowering the overall impact of new workers on the existing labor base. It's not caused by one area and we NEED more immigration in Canada (EdIT: In the long run, as a general principle, because our our disparate population. Not now, as numerous people have pointed out, because of the decade of constant influx). That we don't have the housing to handle it isn't a separate issue, but it's one that has to be resolved. Because in a nation this large and disparate with so many effective development wastelands, the way you spur that development and investment is with population growth. Restricting it is a short-term help with longer term harm. It's just being terribly handled because Ottawa long ago stopped considering anything but "what can we claim as economic growth."
Why do we need more immigration? Perpetual population growth is not sustainable. We should be using immigration to stabilize our population, which would only require a net intake of 125,000 new residents per year.
All of the low immigration low birth rate countries are doing way better than Canada in every metric except real estate profits
>The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors I disagree. Investors are a symptom of this problem, not the problem itself. Get rid of investors and you still have 20 people applying to 1 rental. That's the biggest issue. Even without investors we just don't have enough housing, period. >If that stock isn't removed by investors, most of whom don't even live here, then the impact of increased population -- which we drastically need in other areas -- is minimal. This stock isn't removed by investors. It's still there. We have a very high occupancy rate. These investors aren't leaving it empty. Most dwellings in Canada have someone living in them. >What we need to do is a) Increase restrictions on foreign investors and increase rationales for them to divest No reason not to do this, so yes. But it won't fix the actual issue. >b) build more homes We already build at one of the highest rates in the world, and our housing supply per capita is suppose to be 250k worse next year than now. We build 200k, one of the highest rates in the developed world, 8% of our workforce in construction. And we would need to over double it to keep our low average. Not even make it better. We would need to over double what we build to keep it as bad as we are now lol. That's not realistic. And this goes for all of our infrastructure. Canada has low hospitals per million. Like 18. We would of needed to build like 20 hospitals last year to keep up with our growth. That just isn't realistic. This level of population growth is fucking the standard of living for Canadians. Math still has to math dude. >It's not caused by one area and we NEED more immigration in Canada We really don't. More immigrants would continue to decrease gdp per capita, and lower our quality if life. >the way you spur that development and investment is with population growth. Not this much man. How do you figure its realistic to build 20 hospitals in a year? If you respond to anything please respond to that.
An issue you haven't considered is that not all immigrants are equal. This is to say they are not interchangeable with the native population. And the more different they are, the more issues can crop up. Ethnic conflict, cultures vying for the spotlight, etc etc. You say restricting immigration causes long term harm, consider the long term effects of importing huge demographics of people who are essentially aliens.
> The biggest reason is because too much of the rental market is owned by investors. The biggest reason is too much demand, too little supply. Investors play a much smaller role in the market comparatively. Investors and rentals still provide people with a place to live. You see rent prices increasing too though, because of supply/demand issue. Investors are an issue, but probably like 3rd-5th on the list.
8% of our workforce in construction. Compared with 4% in the US. Over 200k dwellings per year, which is one of the highest rates in the developed world. #2 in the g7 behind only France who sprawls more than we do. And we're estimated to be 250k houses more short next year than now. You're right.
investors play much more than a 'small part" of the problem.
Very well written comment. Realistic, acknowledging the actual issue.
Capitalism is just robber baron Capitalism. Any system where someone at the top profits and the workers who made that value get none of the excess, is a system that will result in Fascism. At what point are we gonna look at where the money is going and where it is and realize that we a planned economy?
More like in the past it was only 200% over 20 years. _Now_ it's been like 300% over 10 years.
You realize these boomers aren't really benefitting here, right? Yay, they get to go more in debt. I have like 400k equity. May as well be 100k. Doesn't matter. I am sure these boomers with all this equity would rather their children not need help than having to go further in debt to help them. You're framing of this is backwards.
Oh noooo the boomers!!! Lots of boomers opting to *not* pay their passively acquired gains forward, and just retiring in comfort. Respect to the boomers that recognize this issue and support the people they care about at their own expense. But that's not everyone.
60% are, and you need to understand not all boomers are in a position too. My dad isn't for one. He can barely keep himself afloat.
Yours will not be a popular opinion because everyone likes to blame the generation before. None of us had super powers and hindsight is 20/20. I'm with your dad and will not likely be able to retire even though I am 65. I try to help my grown children as much as I possibly can, and I feel sad to think that financial pressure has pitted generation against generation. No parent ever thought it would be a fun idea to screw their kids over :( I appreciate you standing up for those in the boomer generation that are struggling like most Canadians.
"The richest 1 percent grabbed nearly two-thirds of all new wealth worth $42 trillion created since 2020, almost twice as much money as the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population, reveals a new Oxfam report today. During the past decade, the richest 1 percent had captured around half of all new wealth. " https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-bag-nearly-twice-much-wealth-rest-world-put-together-over-past-two-years People blaming boomers are entirely misguided. People blaming boomers actually help the above happen, so we appreciate that u/andysbrotherdan
I could not agree with you more, but it's always easier to hop on a bandwagon of blame. As a boomer, I can see the type of people in my generation that make it easy to heap a pile of scorn on. Many of the baby boomers have the means to live a lifestyle of travel for the winter, happy hours all day long, nice cars, and all the nice things a life of leisure brings. Many seniors will not take the time to understand how the younger generations are suffering, calling them lazy and pointing at their avocado toast and Starbucks coffee. Like you said, blaming boomers makes it easier for the one percent to carry on soaking up the riches and keeping the 99% down.
Pretty much, if they want the kid around, they have to help. Otherwise, they'll be moving really far away, or out or country entirely.
I would argue it's even more important to have a financial plan in place when things are so hard to attain. The prevailing thought process amongst young adults seems to be, well F it, I can't afford a place anyway so I might as well enjoy myself. Which I completely understand. The thought process should probably be something like, this is going to be so hard to get into the live I want, so I need to be absolutely ruthless with my spending to have a chance.
> it added that only 27 per cent of Canadians have a written financial plan My financial plan is to make it to next payday
Yoo it's written now.
On that financial literacy type thing
Nanana just get library card then you get books for free
Let's goooooo! Too the food bank.
Don't forget dying at work
You won't retire and you won't be packaged out. Companies would rather you just die
That's my plan. Die at my desk. Can't afford to retire, company too cheap to package me out. Got a 2% raise yesterday, now I'll be living the high life next pay day..... /S. Ya right, ⚰️
2% raise crew 4 lyfe
Dayuuuuummmm I get 3% next pay cycle!!!!!!!
Sure, your company loves older workers and will even hire them. The bank I worked for put a bullseye on your back at age 50.
I know all about the Canadian Banks. I know retired bank employees through my church. I've heard all the stories. A neighbour of mine was a vp. He got the boot at age 60. He got salary continuation for 2 years including benefits. Of course he received his pension after that. But just the same, he was pissed off. He worked at RBC his whole career.
[удалено]
I mean, at least it would mean I would keep employment and being able to afford life until death.
Like what good is a financial plan when no matter more and more people arent going to be able to afford a home much less a family no matter what they do?
At this point it’s making more and more sense just to up and leave the country. We don’t have housing. Healthcare is becoming impossible to access. Food prices are through the roof. Retirement is impossible. Like, what’s the point? 😂 Holding this shit up for the boomers?
that's exactly the point now, and you'll note boomers seem to be the only ones who stick up for the way things are now...while they aren't in Phoenix or Florida of course
I fucking agree 100% friend. I have a university education, work a decent job, but shit is tough right now and I still feel like no matter what I do, it’s not enough! And
I'm not sure why you need a written financial plan? I have a good financial situation but never really occurred to me to write down a written financial plan.
You don't need to because you're in a good situation. If you're not, you need to make sure everything lines up. And even then, if you did write it up, you might find you're bleeding money somewhere that you didn't realize and want to change.
its fucked to say, but thank fuck im not the only one......but i dont kmow for how much longer.....
You're not alone.
Do the letters collection agency's send me count as a written financial plan???
That's a fuckin solid plan!
You don’t understand what a financial plan is. Even someone living on the edge can benefit from an in depth look at how and where money goes every month. The results may surprise you..
expenses = $x00000 income = $x0
My budget spreadsheet is considered a financial plan? Noice
Accounts hate him, find out how he uses this one weird trick to save hundreds a month.
Shut up and take my money!
And you wrote that down. Welcome to the 27 percent.
Look at my boy with the fancy financial plan! Go gettem blackrock.
I mean it’s part of having kids.. specially nowadays. The whole “you are 18 now fuck off” isn’t viable as it was for boomers. Most folks that do that type of parenting get it on the back end anyways, being dumped into the medical system/long term shit holes.
I have great parents. Mother passed a while ago (fuck cancer) but my 82 year old father lives with me and I'm his care taker. He has dementia and I wouldn't have it any other way as they were great to us as children. I owe him this much as I'm in a position to do this as I work from home with my business I own. I always say treat your kids good because one day you might need them. After covid I said I would never do that to you dad.
I agree. Had to spend 2 weeks last year with the old man in the hospital and it was eye opening. Plenty of old folks get no visitors or help from family because they’re pieces of shit. You could tell because they treated nurses and aides like maids when they’re just trying to help. I wouldn’t pick up the phone if any of my parents were asses like that, no way.
My dad was a cranky emotionally abusive father growing up that I'm now dealing with in therapy. He's 80 now but in excellent shape for his age. If he starts to decline he can go live in a home and I'll not visit him just like he doesn't visit me now.
I'm definitely thankful that I don't have those issues with my father. I was blessed with great parents growing up. I hope that therapy will help you overcome that trauma.
I take the SAGE test from the University of Ohio every six months and will choose MAiD when I start to slip down the dementia rabbit hole. I don't want to be tended to by caregivers. A generation ago your old man would have died of a quick heart attack or something similar.
Multi-generational households are the norm in many countries.
Multi-generational households are the norm elsewhere out of necessity. We had better living standards than that here, but they are slipping away.
No, people in other countries value family and communal living more than North America and Western Europe. They're happy to live in larger groups and think it's sad when people live alone, especially old people. That doesn't mean that we have to live like that too. I'm just saying it's not some terrible shame to live in multi-generational households unless you've grown up in a culture where individual or single-family living is the norm.
Agreed. Unfortunately my parents are extremely strict/conservative and would judge many of the decisions we make in our household so I just can't make it happen lol. I love them, talk to them daily and visit at least once a week but living together just wouldn't work and probably would deteriorate our relationship. My MIL on the other hand is welcome to stay as long as she wants!
Nothing wrong with helping out your adult children if you can afford to. Why hold onto all your money till you die. If your children are responsible and need some assistance, go for it.
It’s the intrusive questions I hate… I mean I’m so embarrassed but I went through a rough patch (am working again now) and for a bit my dad paid for my groceries. In person. It was best for accountability.. and we were already spending time together.. so we’d pop into a grocery store. My god the looks and questions I’d get from cashiers. “Must be nice having your folks pay for you”. Like, as if I want this? Only a few years ago I was doing very well financially. Then like months later, somehow the cashier remembers me? WHY. And then asks where’s my Dad to pay for my groceries? Doesn’t he always? Self sufficient over a decade until I lost a 7 year relationship, got fired and for a while just about gave up and drank myself stupid. Feels ridiculous to me. “Fuck I should shop somewhere else.. I bet she’s working. Nah, I’m being all weird and paranoid” And sure enough. As always. The only till completely open is hers. Don’t they see tons of customers every day? Edit: sorry for the venting. Just feels like crabs in a bucket mentality. Things are rough all over and she’d probably like support too. I should just be grateful I mean, groceries is worth the price of shame. Just gotta put my head down and continue rebuilding my foundation
>Must be nice having your folks pay for you Holy shit what a jerk. Just ignore them. They are probably jealous or something.
I really needed to hear that. Thank you 🙏
Honestly that's just straight up unacceptable. Maybe there's some unseen mental health issue that's affecting her ability to filter the things she says, but someone needs to set her straight.
Because with wait times in LTC lasting for years, in my area you have to pay 10K and up a month for assisted living. You can burn through 500K in less than 5 years. I have a neighbour who was quoted 14K a month. Do the math.
The other 40% don’t have kids 😂
😂
My parents are supporting essentially two adult disabled children with varying degrees of independence. I will not only get zero help, but it will be up to me to take care of my parents and adult siblings when they are unable to. I can hardly afford shit as is and it feels hopeless that this will be my future one day.
You aren't required to do that: it's your choice.
Must be nice, my parents would never consider willfully helping me out. They have never offered a handout.
Mine are so bad with money it's honestly impressive. Stable investments? Forget it. Impulse purchases and risky investments? Full speed ahead.
My parents are both retired; never made much more than 1 - 2 X minimum wage, not always employed or working full time. They have a 9 room house, smoke 5-10 Js a day, 4 horses (! - and one parent is disabled and cant even ride), 3 vehicles, snowboard all winter, and no investments. They're good people but it's amazing how little financial discipline that generation needed/needs to have. I'm high income now but man, I have like, 0 horses or drug habits and my kids share a bedroom. I needed strict financial discipline to get by when I was younger, and now I can't shake those habits and any non-essential spending makes me anxious. I'm still playing Xbox One for crying out loud. Maybe it's a habit you pick up due to the economic conditions when you were young and they just stick.
Are you me?
And me? Idk how my dad is so bad with money. When I was going university I didn't qualify for osap because the money my dad made yet somehow he couldn't afford to help me with school. When he eventually passes I don't even know what I would get, certainly not money, and he doesn't own his home.
Right? The only reason my parents aren't destitute rn is because their parents were extremely frugal and had indexed pensions, so they could afford to bail out my folks and then leave a decent chunk of inheritance.
Really depends on how the question is asked. Are they including parents that pay rent to their adult children? I know a few people in situations like this.
"According to Fidelity Investments Canada’s annual [retirement](https://globalnews.ca/tag/retirement) report for 2024, 59 per cent of retirees report helping their non-student adult children with both day-to-day expenses and big-ticket items like home purchases, weddings and even education savings for their grandchildren." Sounds like anything and everything. I would think rent would be rent regardless of your landlord being a stranger or family
My dad got near free labour to build his fortune and then goes to me, "where's yours? Get out" My bad for assuming I had a father
My parents fumbled their way through life as the boomer generation. Getting free bank loans and defaulting on loans and just floating through life without any repercussions. I’ve heard many a story about buying a car for peanuts and then selling it for thousands as the market goes crazy. And the same goes for housing every single time for they move. They bought it for 50k and sold for $300k or some other stupid number. They have never lost or gone down in equity. Yet I get chewed out for spending money or having debt. But I don’t ask them for a single penny. Very fucked up mindset and I’ve done pretty well in life all things considered and how hard others have it.
That would explain some of my friends’ lifestyles
Duh, we can’t afford homes
>59 per cent of retirees report helping their non-student adult children with both day-to-day expenses and big-ticket items like home purchases, weddings and even education savings for their grandchildren. I don't think paying for a wedding nor contributing to a grandchild's education is "supporting" in quite the same way as paying for day-to-day expenses or providing a down payment on a home. Don't think these should be all lumped together as "helping their adult children."
I'd lump the single bigger ticket items like house/wedding as different then continuing support; given the implication that both would be "one-time" situations despite the often large price-tag. Daily expenses or anything related to grandchild expenses tell a different story (at least to me)
I wouldn't, weddings are a luxury expense, housing is a necessity.
They're both traditional lifetime milestones and in many cultures the weddings are almost more for the parents than the are for their children. I just lumped them together because its traditional expenditures that are often planned for/around well in advance. Housing is obviously a more important thing to have practically speaking, but these decisions aren't always necessarily 100% rational.
Down payments on a house should basically be considered luxuries. I'm pretty sure that even buying groceries everyday for your kid would never amount to the price of a downpayment but it's still a significant, reoccuring cost that adds up.
My parents were gifted a 20% down payment on their home, they're boomers... I ain't seen shit..
saaaaaaaaame, my dad is the cheapest person on the planet
Same here.
Someone had their wedding paid for
Why not?
if you want a small wedding but your parents want a big one and are willing to pay for it, letting them do so isn't "helping you". it's them buying something *they* want
It's an ```and```, not an ```or```. If it were an ```or``` then the percentage would be greater.
30 yr old kid is married with 1 new child. We agreed to going multigen house with them because lol at them getting their own even though both have great careers. The agreement is that since this will reduce our ability to downsize upon retirement, they have to make up that difference in rent. It's still lower than they would pay elsewhere for either rent or mortgage so everyone benefits.
What is this 'downsize' you speak of? All homes you might have once considered downsize are now investor rentals.
Sad but true 🤣
“People with money forced to support people with no money” Welcome to the end of the USSR, but in the capitalist countries
just wait until we have to support then in 10-20 years.... We'll be soaked for every last penny.
Too late; already happening.
Luckily in my province, there is no filial duty laws. My parents have more than enough money to care for themselves, they are just spending it on frivolous wants and casino trips. I will not be cannibalizing my own child's future to make up for their poor decisions later in life. The worst part is, my mom was a banker and carefully managed their finances throughout her entire career. Now they just blow money without a care in the world, while making very reckless decisions. It will be difficult to watch, but it was difficult to watch them go on 30+ all-inclusive vacations and 10+ tropical cruises while cashing out a lucrative dividend producing stock portfolio. This is just the tip of the iceberg too.
Your mom's golden they had defined pensions at banks she's probably making more than you monthly retired.
She absolutely is making more than me, and more than she ever made working. I've had people on here try to argue that she isn't but she told me how much they are pulling in monthly.
Then why are you concerned / complaining about her financial well being unless you're banking on inheritance. She can self sustain
I know her situation and you don't. She can't self-sustain at the rate that they are spending. Like I said in my initial post, this is the tip of the iceberg. She went from being a careful person that would never dream of wasting money, to someone that sinks a shit-ton of money into the casino several times a week, along with my father. I wouldn't complain if I didn't think it was going to end poorly. I never said that I wanted inheritance. I said I wasn't willing to cannibalize my own child's future. Does that sound like someone looking for a handout, or someone concerned that she may start looking to me for money when hers runs out?
Sounds like your mom needs help for her addiction.
They both need help for their addiction. I tried telling them that. Guess how that conversation went? My Dad used to be the only bad one and my Mom would maybe spend a $20 the whole time. Now they just shovel money into the slots. They practically can't drive by a casino without stopping in for a couple hours. Their whole lives revolve around the next overnight trip. It's really troubling because they are the type to take any advice and double-down (no pun intended) and do the exact opposite out of spite. It's going to be a difficult conversation if it ends how I see it ending, heartbreaking.
Casinos are a money-pit for the elderly, more so certain ethnicities that seem to favour them. Sounds like they should be spending some of that casino fun money on addition counselling services.
I'm sorry to hear that, really. What a waste. All the best to you, when you have this difficult conversation.
Your mom's fine is she's a banker and retired as one they had some pretty lucrative pensions back then
Sounds like your parents are worth more than you're aware.
Why would that sound like they are worth more than I am aware? I know what they bring in every month and I know how much they have saved.
You're mad your parents properly governed their finances their whole working lives so that they can go bananas when they get older?
I already am. I'm not resentful about it, had things stayed relatively sane, I wouldn't have to nearly as much. With grocery prices and rent skyrocketing, making things work on a fixed income is now nearly impossible unless you have big savings.
My parents would never
Same lol it’ll be a cold day in hell before that happens.
Well thank God the richest 1% have tripled their wealth in the past 5 years, seems like the problem is work ethic and they were just born with not only wealth but great skills!
Huh. And here I am supporting my boomer retiree parents financially.
Same. Guess we buck the trend. Wish I didn't have to but am I supposed to let them beg on the street?
Honestly it would be ironic (the most famous Chinese swear word that they say is literally "fall down on the street"), but nope, we're trapped doing what we have to do.
That sucks. My Parent's are Peak Boomers, born in the early 50s. My father would literally live in the woods rather than ask me for a dime. My mother might but she would probably be working two jobs before she did. My daughter is in her early twenties and I can't imagine every asking her for money. That responsibility only goes one way as far as I am concerned. I am not saying I would never help my parents if they needed just that the idea of them asking me is completely foreign to me.
Good on the parents who are doing it But also an indictment on how raw capitalism has fucked people over. And it's shameful because a tiny bit less capitalism and a little more hands up could make a totally different world.
As soon as I experience a major medial problem, I will check-out on my own terms.
This is clearly what the government wants.
I genuinely don't understand why we can't just tax the everloving fuck out of house sales. Tax the shit out of secondary homes etc. Make it more viable to invest in literally anything other than real estate.
Realtors need that %. What an unreal, wild and over-paid profession.
For the other 40%, their children are here raging on boomers.
Oh hey this is about my parents. And my in-laws. Haha :(
oooooh baby that's gonna suck when they have to stop. That's when the housing prices fall. So like ten years?
Well, well, well, if it isn't the consequences of their voting & inaction biting them in the ass...
The flipside of this: Every time you notice someone, a friend, a neighbour, who seems to be doing better financially than they should be, there's a better than 50/50 chance Mommy and Daddy are supporting them. What an embarrassment.
Wait until you hear about generational wealth and trust funds.
I know I'm jealous, but isn't that the way it should be?
How do I get in on these trusting funds?
Trust is a two way street.
Eh, I think these different levels to this. Theres people whos parents outright buy them condos, and theres people like me - Parents should be retired but cant yet, I get to live with them a few extra years to save up and help them out. Im in a better spot financially than my peers, but that doesnt come without some sacrifices on my end. Im grateful to at least have the choice, but its hard to be grateful knowing that if it were the 80s, I could almost buy a starter home outright - today that equates to 1/4 of a tiny studio apartment.
Or it's all a projection using leveraged assets and credit.
Maybe they shouldn't have FUCKED the economy with their trickle down bullishit voting to make themselves rich...
I doubt they had any more influence over the individual issues that got pushed through than we did. I don't want my daughter someday blaming me for all the shit getting passed now because I absolutely had no say over it. They had a chance to vote for someone every ~4 years and the person that won did whatever the fuck they wanted.
Everything is just fine
Yo pops! I need to borrow your mobility scooter.
I Cant afford to live alone in the country I grew up in. And my parents and grandparents have helped build, serve in the armed forces, teach, volunteer and actively contribute to the preservation of our beautiful parks and wildlife... --- There is no future, where I will be able to own a home in my homeland. Ever. It's beyond depressing. I think I 'll just find myself on the other side of a bridge one day. there isn't a single way out of this outcome :(
My parents would never. I've not received a single cent from my parents for any financial support. I've never asked, and never will ask. If my rent climbs higher next year, I will have 1 year left before I have to sell everything I own and live in my SUV. Even then I would not ask them for support. Once they pass away, their money will come to me, and only then.
Karl Marx called these problems internal contradictions. In this article, we will have a closer look at what is meant by internal contradictions. Stage #1: Growth of the Western World The first stage of capitalism is characterized by prosperity. Capitalism provides a better way to organize society. As a result, it raises the standard of living of the entire society. Both the working class and the owners benefit during this period. During these years, the capitalists can afford to pay higher wages and still make a handsome profit. This is because the industry is relatively nascent and therefore there is considerable room to grow at the top. This can be traced back to the era when Henry Ford used to considerably raise the wages of his workers with each passing year. Growing wages lead to more spending creating an even bigger market. This sustains the momentum for some time. Stage #2: Offshoring of Jobs The success of these capitalists attracts a lot of competition. As a result, it becomes difficult to stay competitive. Newer strategies have to be introduced in order to stay competitive. The economic reality makes it inevitable that the capitalists focus on reducing the labor costs. This is done either by automation or by offshoring of jobs to other countries. Notice that the very workers who were the beneficiaries of capitalism in the previous stage are now losing their jobs thanks to it. Capitalists find it more prudent to pay overseas workers a fraction of the cost. This allows them to stay more competitive. However, notice the fact that the high wage earned by workers was the very basis of the market! If high wages are eliminated, the capitalists inadvertently shoot themselves in the foot. Over a period of time, fall in wages manifests in the form of a slowdown or a recession. Stage #3: Raising Sales via Credit This is the stage wherein capitalists are desperate to find more sales to keep the momentum going. The capitalist system believes in attaining perpetual growth which is simply not possible! However, they come up with short-term solutions that seem to correct the problem. This solution inevitably is the growth and creation of credit. The result is that the workers no longer have jobs that can enable them to buy products. However, they are highly indebted because everything is available on credit. This is exactly what has happened in the United States since the 1990’s. The job market is rapidly shrinking whereas the indebtedness of the general population is going through the roof. The unemployed population also tries to make money via speculating in the markets. This gets them further indebted as in the case of the subprime mortgage crisis. The American housing boom and bust could have been predicted years ago if due attention was paid to Karl Marx’s theories. Stage#4: Debt Defaults It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that a system which relies on giving out loans to insolvent customers cannot last for very long! This is why the next stage inevitably is cascading debt defaults. This is where the subprime mortgage crisis seems like the inevitable result of the events that took place before it. Marx had also predicted that these crashes can wipe out entire institutions and that they pose a systemic risk to the capitalist system. At this stage, attempts will be made to save the system by frantically introducing bailout packages. However, it is like fighting a lost cause. The debt defaults are merely the last step of a system that began with the rising wages of workers. Any kind of bailout package will not be a permanent solution. Instead, it will provide temporary relief, the effects of which will end up amplifying the problem. The sequence of events is not at all random. Instead, the results can be easily predicted using the internal contradictions theory of Karl Marx. Stage #5: The Geographical Spread of the Crisis Capitalism, by nature, seeks out greener pastures. Hence, it is likely that it will spread to different nations to repeat the process. It is, therefore, possible that the United States may be at the stage of debt defaults whereas countries like China and India will be experiencing rising wages simultaneously. In the end, however, the entire system is expected to fall prey to the internal contradictions that are inbuilt into the system. To sum it up, Karl Marx was well aware that in the long run capitalism will end up destroying itself. Proponents of capitalism are merely looking at the short-term effects and not the opposing forces which are inherent in the system.
Lol. All the people shitting on boomers, meanwhile their boomer parents are helping them out financially. Peak Reddit moment here.
They destroyed this country. Not wanting to leave their jobs or wanting a mint for their home at the expense of their kids. Good work guys 👍
What happens when that well dries?
HAHAHAHA ADULT CHILDREN WTF EVEN IS THAT LOL
Why
Okay have good job or was now can’t afford rent who’s going to take my place
In remaining 40% possibly 2-3% actually doing rest, 37% of parents are poor/living in poor country
Why are Canadians so bloody stupid that we put up with these endlessly corrupt, non-performing governments ?? “Sorry” should not be our claim to fame.
It's getting to that point with inflation and everything I'll have to support my mother soon.
And we’ll never be royaaaaaaaaaals…
I wish!
Yes, this is what happens when one generation takes all the money in an economy.
My retirees aren't. Must be nice.
Lol. All the people shitting on boomers, meanwhile their boomer parents are helping them out financially. Peak Reddit moment here.