[Midtown Urbanist]

I'll cut the PM's regime some slack, between new leader, elections, world events, big direction shifts etc. It takes some time. But there needs to be more in the results file.

I think they really just flubbed the affordable grocery issue, by not taking a single definitive action to lower prices when there are a few tools. I don't want to bog this thread, down with those details...

Suffice to say, ....time to show achievement is running down.

The death of Carney's government will eventually be the Housing issues come 2030. There is probably no way out of that given the unrealistic election promises made and the way the issue will be exacerbated greatly in a few years (which is outside the control of any government at this point).

I just hope that everything else, including especially military procurement, come into place by then. We have both a simultaneous generational need and generational political capital in favour for signing procurement deals. Best not waste it.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The death of Carney's government will eventually be the Housing issues come 2030.

It’s a tricky one for sure. How do you initiate a rapid collapse of housing prices for the have nots without bankrupting or wiping out the retirement equity of the haves? The people like me, house paid off, no intention to ever sell it, with savings to fund retirement used to be the norm, but now housing is supposedly a retirement nest egg, and voters will rebel if values drop. How do we move “retirement security” away from housing?

Housing costs should have never been allowed to increase beyond inflation, with good governance instead throttling demand (immigration, investment and tax policies) to balance supply. Supply always follows demand, unless you bugger up the system with inflated prices, barriers to building, etc.

 

[afransen]

It’s a tricky one for sure. How do you initiate a rapid collapse of housing prices for the have nots without bankrupting or wiping out the retirement equity of the haves? The people like me, house paid off, no intention to ever sell it, with savings to fund retirement used to be the norm, but now housing is supposedly a retirement nest egg, and voters will rebel if values drop. How do we move “retirement security” away from housing?

Housing costs should have never been allowed to increase beyond inflation, with good governance instead throttling demand (immigration, investment and tax policies) to balance supply. Supply always follows demand, unless you bugger up the system with inflated prices, barriers to building, etc.

There has definitely been an inflection point, and house prices are falling. Grinding sideways or only gradually down is how you avoid a financial crisis. Essentially no price growth in 5 years at the moment.

 

[Admiral Beez]

There has definitely been an inflection point, and house prices are falling. Grinding sideways or only gradually down is how you avoid a financial crisis. Essentially no price growth in 5 years at the moment.

We need to return to where I was in 1998 when we bought our SFH. Cost was about $290k, with our combined after tax family income of about $60k, so that the house was about 5x our net income. With the average SFH in Toronto now costing over $1 million, a household would need to be making $200k net ($300k gross). We have long way to go before the average Torontonian can aspire to anything beyond a shoebox in a condo tower.

 

[afransen]

We need to return to where I was in 1998 when we bought our SFH. Cost was about $290k, with our combined after tax family income of about $60k, so that the house was about 5x our net income. With the average SFH in Toronto now costing over $1 million, a household would need to be making $200k net ($300k gross). We have long way to go before the average Torontonian can aspire to anything beyond a shoebox in a condo tower.

Then we need to return to 1998 level interest rates, I think. 5 year government bond yields were 5.3% then, vs 2.9% now.

 

[wopchop]

We need to return to where I was in 1998 when we bought our SFH. Cost was about $290k, with our combined after tax family income of about $60k, so that the house was about 5x our net income. With the average SFH in Toronto now costing over $1 million, a household would need to be making $200k net ($300k gross). We have long way to go before the average Torontonian can aspire to anything beyond a shoebox in a condo tower.

I believe the median household income in Toronto is $97k. To meet your requirements, salaries would need to either double, or housing process would need to fall by like 50%, which would cause a major economic crisis.

 

[kEiThZ]

I wish that Carney's government would just get on with it. The replacements for the Hornets, Victoria-class subs and Griffon helicopters should not take years to decide on.

It's not the government. It's the CAF. There's only so much institutional capacity to go around. And all of these things are double digit billions to absorb.

Forget the industrial side. Just on the military side. You don't just buy a fighter/submarine/tank, etc. We have to make sure the infrastructure is built, the IT systems are updated, training is developed, doctrine is developed to employ the new system effectively, logistics in planned out, etc. And all of that before the first tech or operator or logistitician is event trained or allowed to touch the platform. Not a small thing.

And just on the RCAF, over the next 3 years, the tanker fleet is being replaced, the maritime patrol fleet is being replaced, the first full of F-35 squadron is being stood up (at Luke AFB in the US), our first two drone squadrons are being stood up along with a centralized ops centre, and the first phase of our space surveillance system with Ground Based Optics is being operationalized. This is exactly why the RCAF is so opposed to the Gripen purchase. It's ridiculous to pile on. But if ordered to do so, I guess we can find parking spots to put the aircraft in, while digesting everything else.

We need to return to where I was in 1998 when we bought our SFH. Cost was about $290k, with our combined after tax family income of about $60k, so that the house was about 5x our net income. With the average SFH in Toronto now costing over $1 million, a household would need to be making $200k net ($300k gross). We have long way to go before the average Torontonian can aspire to anything beyond a shoebox in a condo tower.

Get interest rates back to that level (and keep them there) and prices will come down. Also have to start taxing land wealth to discourage it from becoming a major investment class.

 

[guavadelic]

National Post is reporting (and speculating) that Ottawa is leaning towards a mixed fighter jet fleet:

Regardless, all the signs point to Ottawa buying fewer F-35s than it said it would.

Sources have told National Post that half of the jet-fighter fleet Canada ends up buying (by value) could be Swedish. David McGuinty, the minister of defence, told the Post on Tuesday, “No decision has been reached.”

Carney ordered a review of the fighter jet purchase last March, to find out if buying the fifth-generation F-35s was really the best investment for Canada. Ottawa is already committed to purchasing at least 16 jets and is in the process of building the infrastructure to accommodate them. Cancelling the F-35 deal is not a feasible option. The first planes are due to be delivered this year, with the first eight going to Luke Air Force base in Arizona for pilot training.

But building a mixed fleet, as the Germans have done, is a realistic option (the German air force has around 138 Eurofighter Typhoons and has ordered 35 F-35s).

The most likely scenario seems to be that Canada will buy around 40 F-35s and complement them with up to 80 Saab Gripens, which would be made in Quebec.

While the Gripen may not have the F-35’s stealth capability, it is half the price, more flexible, and can land and take off more easily on short, northern runways.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jo...ing-swedish-jets-over-f-35s-for-half-of-fleet

 

[EBT]

The below cartoon says it all:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2016985669956989134

Would you buy a home security system from a guy bent on robbing your home? Would you?

 

[kEiThZ]

National Post is reporting (and speculating) that Ottawa is leaning towards a mixed fighter jet fleet:

We're probably leaning mixed fleet. And it's going to absolutely suck for the RCAF. But the rumours in this article are a bit strange. If true, it would basically make the RCAF non-functional beyond 2030. Actually increases the likelihood of having US fighters in our airspace. The RCAF is already massively short of fighter pilots and techs and engineers. So the time period where the RCAF is operating both the F-35 and the CF-18 is a high risk period as it is. Based on the article, the government won't buy enough F-35s (need 50-60) to finish that transition and will buy more Gripens. So the the RCAF could be forced to operate three fighter fleets after 2030. Utter madness. If that happens, jets will be parked, there will be holes in coverage. And the Americans will fill them. I know for a fact the Minister is being briefed regularly on the fighter project. So for all the politicking (the Gripen bid was originally about jobs not sovereignty which would be impossible with ITAR'd parts), I sincerely hope they are aware of the risk they are about to impose on the country with this decision. If they want a dual fleet, there's only one safe path here. Buy 60 F35s. Finish the transition from the Hornet. Then start taking delivery of the Gripens in 2032 after the Hornet has been retired.