No. But it’s hard not to think that those personal interests don’t have an effect on government housing policy. Then add the generous housing allowances that allow MPs to have an advantage of getting into the rental business game in the first place.
Cost of housing in Canada
- Thread starter mariomike
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 13,428
- Points
- 1,010
Sorry- maybe I should not have quoted you.
My point stands- is the implication of being landlord in Canada now considered evil?
I kind of wondering what should be the only “proper“ source of income for a prospective MP? Should they be prohibited from owning stocks and bonds, too?
My position is that I am entirely unconcerned what legal means of income generation MPs had/have. If they are found to be in legitimate conflict of interest- hammer them. Otherwise, this is stupid and smacks of the usual Canadian hobby of envy…
I agree with your argument. We should wait until either a prospective solution is presented and voted down or until it is obvious that no action will be taken. But how will you discriminate between inaction and irrelevancy? It has been suggested that our immigration and student visa policies have had a direct influence on the availability and thus the price of housing: particularly rental. So if Trudeau and co. don't take steps to curtail immigration does that mean they are in conflict? Other arguments could be made on other issues as well. It is a very slippery road to follow
- Reaction score
- 7,507
- Points
- 1,160
In truth I think it is probably fair to say that a plurality if not a majority of Canadian politicians always have been developers and realtors. Their wealth was always predicated on their holdings.
Stanley Park was created to dry up land in Vancouver to force the value of the rest of the land to rise. And then there were the railways.
There is nothing evil about holding property, real or otherwise. Now if only everybody had a right to own property.... The advantages of holding property would be universal.
- Reaction score
- 6,511
- Points
- 1,310
Ack. No harm no foul.
Depends on which side of the line you fall on. Most people who are stuck renting at exorbitant rates from folks who provide the bear minimum or worse... yep.
Mom and Pop landlords? Not so much.
Major property corporations that gouge renters...yep.
If they are setting financial policy that can impact those stocks and bond growing exponentially? Maybe. I view it the same as insider trading, but that's just me.
When does that conflict start and is it mainly the impact of the decisions or the possibility of avoiding certain options off the hop?
If you ignore certain COAs based on your own personal interests, you're situating the estimate.
- Reaction score
- 7,507
- Points
- 1,160
The whole point of parliamentarians is that they are representative of the population. They are not monks and eunuchs living in splendid isolation. They are supposed to be the community and share the same interests as the community. That means that their biases are supposed to be those of the community.
I think the better question is how does the percentage of landlords in legislatures compare to the percentage of the population that are landlords.
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/SC7RE4Y4DNOO7D7MVALDKDKSFU.JPG)
More than one in 10 Canadians own an investment property, total set to grow over next five years: survey
The online survey shows 11% or about 4.4 million Canadians are investment property owners and at least half have a plan to add to their housing portfolio in the next five years
www.theglobeandmail.com
It compares somewhat higher.
From the two links I posted.
Federal level is 38% so more than 3x the national average.
There is also a provincial break down for MLAs as well. Ranges from 2x the average to 5x the average depending on the province. In Ontario it’s about 34% (The Ford Cabinet has a 40% rate) .
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,152
- Points
- 1,040
Landlords are one of the providers people like to hate, and whose profit margins governments like to squeeze to buy renters' votes - governments set the rules (usually some kind of price control or subsidy), landlords pay the costs.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,152
- Points
- 1,040
Insider trading would be if they act on a policy change before it becomes public knowledge. I suppose there's a small grey area in which they could act more quickly than any outsider by having transactions primed to fire at the moment of the announcement. Even that isn't really an abuse - most external big players awaiting a policy announcement are perfectly capable of having contingency plans ready to execute depending which way a decision goes.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,152
- Points
- 1,040
Without a breakdown of their outside-politics occupations, a look at fractions of politicians invested in real estate doesn't mean much. People with high incomes - doctors, lawyers, engineers, upper management, etc - inevitably end up looking at real estate opportunities. If there are a lot of people in politics with high incomes, I'd expect to see a lot of politicians holding real estate.
- Reaction score
- 7,507
- Points
- 1,160
Brother-in-law that worked on the pipelines bought 80 acres of farm land with a homestead. Lives on the 7 acres of homestead and leases back the other 73 to the farmer he bought it from. He is a landlord.
I was a landlord for a few years myself.
- Reaction score
- 7,507
- Points
- 1,160
So are most of my wife's other brothers and sisters.
As I mentioned, MPs get generous housing subsidies that a lot of them end up using for real estate ventures. That likely explains the higher percentage than anything else.
Douglas Todd: Many Canadian politicians belong to the landlord class. We should question their motivations
It's relevant to ask about conflict of interest when so many cabinet ministers, MPs make serious money through their real estate investments
vancouversun.com
This column from the sun détails why this might be a problem.
- Reaction score
- 5,450
- Points
- 1,140
That, and pay that is it 3x higher than the average Canadian's pay... When you're making $150K+ it's far easier to afford a second or third mortgage than if you're making $50-60K.
lenaitch
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,065
- Points
- 1,160
Everybody does have the right to own property. Whether they have the means is another matter. This is the 'equity of opportunity vs equity of outcome' argument. There is no legislation that prevents any adult from having title in their name, with the notable exception of residents of a FNT, where land is owned by the Crown in most cases.
- Reaction score
- 7,507
- Points
- 1,160
I am not saying that there is a positive right to property in the sense that everybody should have property. I am saying that any individual has the right not to be deprived of any property that that individual amasses.
It would have been nice if the provinces had stepped out of the way and allowed its inclusion in the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But I suppose that would have complicated their Greenbelt transactions.
lenaitch
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,065
- Points
- 1,160
That would negate the power of expropriation that the State reserves for public works. Otherwise, you get this:
It also might mean that your neighbour could open a metal fabrication shop in a residential area. Zoning rules don't deprive people of property, but they do limit what they can do on it. If it is a legitimate use that gets changed by new rules, it is typically grandfathered.
Similar threads
