[SunriseChampion]

In any case, the single thing I "can't stand about Toronto" is the existence of Ford Nation.

Not even lying right now.

 

[SunriseChampion]

FWIW, I was very much an anti-Ford vote, and I would have voted for Chow or Tory or a lamp, depending on who was leading in the last polls.

I'm still gobsmacked by (a) right-leaning posters who call Ford 'centre-right' and have a scorched earth policy towards Chow and (b) left-leaning posters who wouldn't vote for the devil John Tory, 'cause, you know, horns. And he's just Ford in sheep's clothing.

I rather think it's the country club membership as opposed to any horns.

PS: I just noticed your location tag and um........not, going to lie here: I'm a bit jealous.

 

[WislaHD]

well, if that's pride then we're back in the 50s. don't talk about abuse at home, depression, the uncle that drinks too much, or that the priest touched you, etc. It's embarrassing! Sweep it under the rug.

Of course poverty is a relative term -- no one thinks Toronto is equal to Mumbai. But the attitude you described is one reason Chow's message is not resonating. People don't want to talk about hungry kids in Toronto; they don't want to believe that there are hungry kids in Toronto -- it makes them uncomfortable. Nervous laughter, "how about those Leafs, eh?" -- change the subject; "Are you getting the new iPhone? Did you watch Game Of Thrones?" everything is fine, no one is hungry here!

You can't solve problems if you're going to pretend they don't exist.

How about the fact that the city is becoming unlivable for working, lower-middle class people?

Poverty in Toronto is a serious issue, but also something that doesn't affect vast portions of this city and probably why Chow's message is not resonating well, not due to willful ignorance. Those social policies Chow admires so much have never done a single thing for my lower-middle class family, we've never received any benefits because we never qualified for them. All while throughout my childhood my parents struggled to maintain our standard of living. I am sure my story is something a large portion of the electorate can identify with more than the issue of poverty is.

 

[typezed]

I'm not inclined to be a Chow supporter, but I'm finding some of the response here to her statements strange. Some of the same people who express doubt that a family can live in Toronto on $60,000 annual income also want to dismiss the idea that poverty is a problem. If you believe it takes a hundred thousand or more a year for a family to live decently, shouldn't you also recognize that large swaths of people don't have the ability to make anywhere near that? Isn't that a problem? Or are you just willing to write all those people off? Do you think they should all be living elsewhere?

 

[nohostages]

How about the fact that the city is becoming unlivable for working, lower-middle class people?

Poverty in Toronto is a serious issue, but also something that doesn't affect vast portions of this city and probably why Chow's message is not resonating well, not due to willful ignorance. Those social policies Chow admires so much have never done a single thing for my lower-middle class family, we've never received any benefits because we never qualified for them. All while throughout my childhood my parents struggled to maintain our standard of living. I am sure my story is something a large portion of the electorate can identify with more than the issue of poverty is.

While the disappearance of the middle class is a problem of great concern to me I feel it is important to remember that easing the worst of poverties' burden helps society in general. A desperately poor populace causes myriad problems that trickle up through all. Health, crime, prisons, policing, foster care, mental health. All expensive issues that can be alleviated by increasing wealth across all spectrums.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Yeah, as a working class, low-middle income individual, I don't exactly feel bad for myself for barely being able to afford my 1300/month rent. I mean, it kind of sucks that I can barely live in areas of the city that I'd like to live in, but I don't in any way consider myself hard done by. Really, if I were to move in with a significant other (not happening!) who had even a half-decent job, I'd be rather well off. Real poverty is a much greater concern for me because I not only understand the socio-economic implications of poverty but have empathy for those who truly have a hard time with the necessities.

Really, I should have stayed in school, if anything.

 

[Admiral Beez]

While the disappearance of the middle class is a problem of great concern to me....

I'm not seeing the disappearance of the middle class, at least not in my neighbourhood in Cabbagetown. Sure, we have lawyers and doctors, but my next door neighbour is a school teacher, the other side is a hairdresser, across the street is a university prof, two houses down is a home renovator/contractor, two houses up is a small consulting biz owner. There's a police officer and school teacher couple up the road. Myself, I'm a marketing manager in CPGs, while my wife works as an office admin. In my area many own and many rent their homes.

I would consider a household income of about $100K as middle class, but that's just IMO, with no stats or demographic/economic info to back it up with. Sure, the days of the blue collar middle class person are likely gone from my area, as are the employers in that category, but if you've got marketable skills, and can pull in $100K or more as a household, you can certainly live in downtown east.

Here are some houses in the east part of the city a couple earning a combined $100-$120K could afford.

$499K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14938080
$679K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14284077
$699K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14647410

 

[kEiThZ]

How about the fact that the city is becoming unlivable for working, lower-middle class people?

Poverty in Toronto is a serious issue, but also something that doesn't affect vast portions of this city and probably why Chow's message is not resonating well, not due to willful ignorance. Those social policies Chow admires so much have never done a single thing for my lower-middle class family, we've never received any benefits because we never qualified for them. All while throughout my childhood my parents struggled to maintain our standard of living. I am sure my story is something a large portion of the electorate can identify with more than the issue of poverty is.

This. Exactly this. Worse still, that lower middle class family will pay higher user fees and taxes to support those who are benefitting with subsidised services, leaving them actually worse off than the families being helped. No where is this more apparent than with child care and subsidised housing. It actually helps to earn less in some circumstances.

 

[kEiThZ]

I'm not inclined to be a Chow supporter, but I'm finding some of the response here to her statements strange. Some of the same people who express doubt that a family can live in Toronto on $60,000 annual income also want to dismiss the idea that poverty is a problem. If you believe it takes a hundred thousand or more a year for a family to live decently, shouldn't you also recognize that large swaths of people don't have the ability to make anywhere near that? Isn't that a problem? Or are you just willing to write all those people off? Do you think they should all be living elsewhere?

Who said anybody is dismissing poverty? The question was, "what do you dislike about Toronto?"

I can think of many answers other than poverty. And I'll bet most average voters would not say poverty either. This is exactly why Chow is not resonating with voters.

By the way, every borough in the city has average family incomes $20 000 higher than what Chow thinks a family needs to comfortably live. If what she believes is true, how can she then claim that Toronto has a problem with poverty?

There's a real risk that she might be so compassionate about the downtrodden that she's risking becoming woefully out of touch with the average middle class voter.

 

[W. K. Lis]

$60,000 is just about right for a comfortable living style. You don't need two cars in Toronto, nor change the car model every one or two or three or four years. You don't need to eat out every day at a fast food restaurant. You don't need to smoke. You don't need new clothing every change of season, because the styles change. You don't need to go out of the country for a vacation every year.

 

[kEiThZ]

I'm not seeing the disappearance of the middle class, at least not in my neighbourhood in Cabbagetown. Sure, we have lawyers and doctors, but my next door neighbour is a school teacher, the other side is a hairdresser, across the street is a university prof, two houses down is a home renovator/contractor, two houses up is a small consulting biz owner. There's a police officer and school teacher couple up the road. Myself, I'm a marketing manager in CPGs, while my wife works as an office admin. In my area many own and many rent their homes.

I would consider a household income of about $100K as middle class, but that's just IMO, with no stats or demographic/economic info to back it up with. Sure, the days of the blue collar middle class person are likely gone from my area, as are the employers in that category, but if you've got marketable skills, and can pull in $100K or more as a household, you can certainly live in downtown east.

Here are some houses in the east part of the city a couple earning a combined $100-$120K could afford.

$499K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14938080
$679K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14284077
$699K - http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=14647410

$400k mortgage on $100k income is highly irresponsible. And that's your cheapest place with 20% down. Average downpayment is under 10% these days. That ratio is especially bad if you have kids. Would the bank even allow that debt-income ratio?

 

[kEiThZ]

$60,000 is just about right for a comfortable living style. You don't need two cars in Toronto, nor change the car model every one or two or three or four years. You don't need to eat out every day at a fast food restaurant. You don't need to smoke. You don't need new clothing every change of season, because the styles change. You don't need to go out of the country for a vacation every year.

The question he had posed to the candidates was "What level of income does a family of four with two teenagers need to live comfortably downtown?"

So you agree with Chow that a family of four could live comfortably in the core on $60k a year?

You do realise that is under $50k after tax. And you do realise that renting a two bedroom could easily cost over $2k per month? Never realised that living comfortably includes paying half of your net family income in rent. I was always told that was the very definition of poverty (more than 30% spent on housing). And that's before we get into this new definition of comfort which includes two teenagers sharing a bedroom and basically four adults living in 800 square feet.

Of course, by any conventional sense, Chow's answer was very wrong. Tory was spot on when he said, $100 000.

 

[SunriseChampion]

$400k mortgage on $100k income is highly irresponsible. And that's your cheapest place with 20% down. Average downpayment is under 10% these days. That ratio is especially bad if you have kids. Would the bank even allow that debt-income ratio?

Not to mention our current interest rates that are artifically low. What happens to those people when interest rates go up by as little as 3%?

 

[SunriseChampion]

$60,000 is just about right for a comfortable living style. You don't need two cars in Toronto, nor change the car model every one or two or three or four years. You don't need to eat out every day at a fast food restaurant. You don't need to smoke. You don't need new clothing every change of season, because the styles change. You don't need to go out of the country for a vacation every year.

First of all, some of us DO need to smoke.

Second of all, a having a life where your needs are met and having a life worth living aren't necessarily the same. This speaks to an experiential lifestyle as opposed to a materialistic one, granted, but having disposable income of any significant level can be important to living a well-rounded life.

 

[SunriseChampion]

kEiTHZ, I spend ~40-45% of my net income on rent and would find it hard to believe that anyone would find me to be living any sort of definition of "poor". So, I'm not exactly sure of that yardstick.