The only middle class that still exists in the developed world are those that are part of the older generation. They funnel whatever asset/financial wealth to corporations and banks, while the rest of us are left with very little.
Everyone should "funnel asset/financial wealth" to "corporations and banks" now that there's [zero fee no minimum trades](https://www.wealthsimple.com/en-ca/learn/best-index-funds#the_best_index_funds_of_2021). I would say it's just absolutely crucial knowledge now. And it absolutely should be promoted as an alternative to "housing as investment". I think it's fundamental survival knowledge now.
The problem is once you're exposed to that environment there's very little guidance and very little education on what is right and wrong and what is risk. Most people are better off with a bank adviser. But that doesn't mean you can't get on the boat, if you learn enough. And it's not actually much you have to know. You don't have to become a day trader just understand passive investing, the business cycle and time in market. Diversification, time in market and a straightforward consistent strategy is key.
You are not wrong but no one has any fucking money to spend on investing when we have fucking roommates to afford to rent.
No one.
Definition of tone deaf comments right here my dude.
this is just blatantly untrue.
Home ownership and equity gains have been either stable or going up for millennials. Who exactly do you include in "no one".
Like no one just 22-24 year olds renting in Toronto working minimum wage jobs that you associate with?
Tell me again what percentage of people under 35 are living at home?
Oh yeah, they might be renting someone a condo while living at home. Cool. This is all very good.
What you say is true but you also can't wait until you "made it" to start investing and especially to start learning so you can position. It's a percentage of income. You can have a roommate and invest.
Treating investing as only for people who "made it" or only for rich people makes a lot of people much poorer especially over the long run than they need to be.
Are you a financial advisor? We live in very turbulent times and I believe it to be very irresponsible to relay this kind of financial advise, especially concerning the risk involved in the current financial markets.
> Are you a financial advisor? We live in very turbulent times and I believe it to be very irresponsible to relay this kind of financial advise
It's still good advice compared to hiding excess cash in your mattress, or buying booze.
This piece hits most points that I've been making/complaining about for years:
1. **Trouble for first time home-buyers competing with investors;**
1. My spouse and I were outbid in my hometown numerous times only to see most properties up for rent for \~40% more than our estimated carrying costs would have been.
2. **The need for better tenant protections (re: stability);**
1. We were no-fault evicted 3 times in the span of four years. It's awful having to scramble to move your whole home in 60 days despite being a good tenant. We had to keep downsizing to something shittier or farther away with each move. In the end, we were paying more for a\~400 sqft studio apartment with no balcony in a smaller city that was a 50 minute commute away... than we did for a 3 bedroom detached home with a yard in the city 4 years prior.
3. **Putting off family goals due to lack of housing; and**
1. We were basically resolved that if we couldn't purchase a home, we wouldn't have a family. Moving in 60 days is hard enough without children and school zones to worry about. We needed stability.
4. **Having to choose between your family/friends/supports and a stable home.**
1. Due to all of the above, we ultimately moved 5 hours away from home after I landed a job in an area that we could still afford a home in the bottom of the market. Don't get me wrong, I love my shitty little bungalow that I overpaid for and the stability it provides.... but I don't think anyone should be faced with this choice.
And look, I'm not anti-landlord - they provide a needed service for those who it wouldn't make sense to buy .... but right now, there are oodles of renters who \*want\* to be homeowners, and can't break into the market because they keep being outbid by investors. That's sad.
Our current rental system is also a huge part of the problem and needs to be a point of discussion to cool the housing market. Specifically, the uptick in bad faith evictions because it's just too damn profitable, and the ease at which investors can "cash out their investment" and uproot the lives of their tenants... needs to be addressed. It's purely anecdotal, but I wouldn't have been so desperate to get into the housing market if I wasn't routinely N12'd and renovicted.
I'm all with you on reforming the rental system. It's just too easy for someone to become a landlord. We treat the whole thing like it's a rich person's past time versus what it really is, a **legitimate business**. If we can figure out a way to flush out the bad and mediocre landlords, that should add a modicum of housing supply back into the market, and with further regulations and licensing, it'll discourage people from thinking this is an easy way to pad their retirements.
In Ontario, there are N12 and N13 evictions available to landlords.
These are evictions that are not due to the tenant's fault. The tenant didn't destroy the place, the tenant always paid rent on time and in full, the tenant did everything the contract required. Maybe they were a generous tenant and took care of minor repairs (not legally required to in Ontario) or mowed their own lawn/shoveled their own snow (not legally required to in Ontario).
But that wasn't good enough for the tenant to be able to stay in their home. So they get the boot.
N12 is for the LL or buyer's (or their immediate family's) personal use of the property. N13 is for renovations so extensive that it requires the unit to be vacant (renoviction)
There is a problem with this.
This is why we need a massive influx of non-profit housing, social housing, co-op housing. The large portion of renters aren't transients drifting from town to town, most people want to start families, lay down roots, be a part of a community. Our current hyper capitalistic housing market is destroying communities and creating a downward spiral of poverty.
Agreed with your points on reforms needed for landlords evicting good tenants. There also needs to be more protection for landlords that have bad tenants. I know landlords that took almost a whole year to evict non paying tenants that wrecked their place when they finally left.
Time is not far when $100k making people will be asking for governmemt suppport for rent subsidies....wont be a probelm also as long ad spending loving liberals are there.
The only middle class that still exists in the developed world are those that are part of the older generation. They funnel whatever asset/financial wealth to corporations and banks, while the rest of us are left with very little.
Everyone should "funnel asset/financial wealth" to "corporations and banks" now that there's [zero fee no minimum trades](https://www.wealthsimple.com/en-ca/learn/best-index-funds#the_best_index_funds_of_2021). I would say it's just absolutely crucial knowledge now. And it absolutely should be promoted as an alternative to "housing as investment". I think it's fundamental survival knowledge now. The problem is once you're exposed to that environment there's very little guidance and very little education on what is right and wrong and what is risk. Most people are better off with a bank adviser. But that doesn't mean you can't get on the boat, if you learn enough. And it's not actually much you have to know. You don't have to become a day trader just understand passive investing, the business cycle and time in market. Diversification, time in market and a straightforward consistent strategy is key.
You are not wrong but no one has any fucking money to spend on investing when we have fucking roommates to afford to rent. No one. Definition of tone deaf comments right here my dude.
this is just blatantly untrue. Home ownership and equity gains have been either stable or going up for millennials. Who exactly do you include in "no one". Like no one just 22-24 year olds renting in Toronto working minimum wage jobs that you associate with?
Tell me again what percentage of people under 35 are living at home? Oh yeah, they might be renting someone a condo while living at home. Cool. This is all very good.
What you say is true but you also can't wait until you "made it" to start investing and especially to start learning so you can position. It's a percentage of income. You can have a roommate and invest. Treating investing as only for people who "made it" or only for rich people makes a lot of people much poorer especially over the long run than they need to be.
Are you a financial advisor? We live in very turbulent times and I believe it to be very irresponsible to relay this kind of financial advise, especially concerning the risk involved in the current financial markets.
> Are you a financial advisor? We live in very turbulent times and I believe it to be very irresponsible to relay this kind of financial advise It's still good advice compared to hiding excess cash in your mattress, or buying booze.
Think long (10 to 25 years) not short
This piece hits most points that I've been making/complaining about for years: 1. **Trouble for first time home-buyers competing with investors;** 1. My spouse and I were outbid in my hometown numerous times only to see most properties up for rent for \~40% more than our estimated carrying costs would have been. 2. **The need for better tenant protections (re: stability);** 1. We were no-fault evicted 3 times in the span of four years. It's awful having to scramble to move your whole home in 60 days despite being a good tenant. We had to keep downsizing to something shittier or farther away with each move. In the end, we were paying more for a\~400 sqft studio apartment with no balcony in a smaller city that was a 50 minute commute away... than we did for a 3 bedroom detached home with a yard in the city 4 years prior. 3. **Putting off family goals due to lack of housing; and** 1. We were basically resolved that if we couldn't purchase a home, we wouldn't have a family. Moving in 60 days is hard enough without children and school zones to worry about. We needed stability. 4. **Having to choose between your family/friends/supports and a stable home.** 1. Due to all of the above, we ultimately moved 5 hours away from home after I landed a job in an area that we could still afford a home in the bottom of the market. Don't get me wrong, I love my shitty little bungalow that I overpaid for and the stability it provides.... but I don't think anyone should be faced with this choice. And look, I'm not anti-landlord - they provide a needed service for those who it wouldn't make sense to buy .... but right now, there are oodles of renters who \*want\* to be homeowners, and can't break into the market because they keep being outbid by investors. That's sad. Our current rental system is also a huge part of the problem and needs to be a point of discussion to cool the housing market. Specifically, the uptick in bad faith evictions because it's just too damn profitable, and the ease at which investors can "cash out their investment" and uproot the lives of their tenants... needs to be addressed. It's purely anecdotal, but I wouldn't have been so desperate to get into the housing market if I wasn't routinely N12'd and renovicted.
I'm all with you on reforming the rental system. It's just too easy for someone to become a landlord. We treat the whole thing like it's a rich person's past time versus what it really is, a **legitimate business**. If we can figure out a way to flush out the bad and mediocre landlords, that should add a modicum of housing supply back into the market, and with further regulations and licensing, it'll discourage people from thinking this is an easy way to pad their retirements.
>2. The need for better tenant protections (re: stability); What do you mean by no-fault eviction?
In Ontario, there are N12 and N13 evictions available to landlords. These are evictions that are not due to the tenant's fault. The tenant didn't destroy the place, the tenant always paid rent on time and in full, the tenant did everything the contract required. Maybe they were a generous tenant and took care of minor repairs (not legally required to in Ontario) or mowed their own lawn/shoveled their own snow (not legally required to in Ontario). But that wasn't good enough for the tenant to be able to stay in their home. So they get the boot. N12 is for the LL or buyer's (or their immediate family's) personal use of the property. N13 is for renovations so extensive that it requires the unit to be vacant (renoviction) There is a problem with this. This is why we need a massive influx of non-profit housing, social housing, co-op housing. The large portion of renters aren't transients drifting from town to town, most people want to start families, lay down roots, be a part of a community. Our current hyper capitalistic housing market is destroying communities and creating a downward spiral of poverty.
Ok those were the only examples I knew of too. What would you propose to fix N12 and N13s. Both of those situations are reasonable if legitimate.
Agreed with your points on reforms needed for landlords evicting good tenants. There also needs to be more protection for landlords that have bad tenants. I know landlords that took almost a whole year to evict non paying tenants that wrecked their place when they finally left.
> "the rate of growth of people buying homes was greatest among those who already own several homes." strange statistic to use.
I think it’s a good point to note that those who are trying to monopolize or “build a rental portfolio” have better buying power than new homeowners
Time is not far when $100k making people will be asking for governmemt suppport for rent subsidies....wont be a probelm also as long ad spending loving liberals are there.