Moonlight Graham Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 17 hours ago, impartialobserver said: housing affordability is a crisis everywhere except the midwestern US. Canada's housing prices per income has increased more than any other G7 country since 2005. https://betterdwelling.com/canada-has-the-biggest-gap-between-real-estate-prices-and-incomes-in-the-g7/ 1 Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said: Canada's housing prices per income has increased more than any other G7 country since 2005. https://betterdwelling.com/canada-has-the-biggest-gap-between-real-estate-prices-and-incomes-in-the-g7/ A 4 year old link. Things change LOL Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: A 4 year old link. Things change LOL The link is 3 years old. Show evidence the rankings have changed. Thanks Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 58 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said: The link is 3 years old. Show evidence the rankings have changed. Thanks Already did National home sales edged back 0.7% month-over-month in July. Actual (not seasonally adjusted) monthly activity came in 4.8% above July 2023. The number of newly listed properties ticked up 0.9% month-over-month. The MLS® Home Price Index (HPI) edged up 0.2% month-over-month but was down 3.9% year-over-year. The actual (not seasonally adjusted) national average sale price was almost unchanged (-0.2%) on a year-over-year basis in July." https://stats.crea.ca/en-CA/ 1 Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 12 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Its hard to feel sorry for one, when you look at the volume of people who had predatory landlords evict them without justifiable cause. Hard to feel sorry for them when you look at the volume of people who had predatory tenants cost them tens of thousands of dollars with no justifiable cause. I see this stuff every day and i'll guarantee you this - more landlords get screwed over by tenants and the gov't than the other way around by an order of magnitude. And when the landlord screws the tenants they have recourse, that is RARELY the case the other way around. Quote It being their property is irrelevant. Tenants have rights. So you think that anyone who owns property has a god imposed requirement to rent? F*ck that. Quote That is correct. You however, are in your best interest to lawfully evict me, or I can use the law to penalize you. Again. You own the space, I pay you for my space within it. This is a contract. Its' in my best interest to sell the home, you get booted out and you have no where to rent. Meanwhile prices go up daily and pretty quick every time a landlord sells you have a massive increase in rent at the new place. In fact honestly smaller landlords are buying, holding for a few years and pocketing as much rent as they can get, selling and buying a new place just to avoid that. as long as prices are going up (and they will while we don't build enough homes) that's viable and that means the tenant moves every few years and will pay the new market rates elsewhere. Quote This is housing, though. There should be laws making it hard to throw someone out of their homes (as long as they pay their rent and are lawful tenants), or landlords would abuse of it even more. A landlord has a responsibility to know who they are renting to. Like I said before. The rental system we have in Canada (regarding tribunals), is broken. Its a cut throat industry. I definitely will never be a landlord in Canada. We are landlords in the Philippines, where the law sides with us. That's the thing, though. If buying a rental property in Canada, you must do your homework and know what you're getting into. If you rent me a space, and didn't budget properly, and I cost you 300$ in water fees since you pay for it, that is a you issue. Not my problem. You bought an old property, and didn't budget constant repairs. Again, a you issue. Want to evict me because I pay too low, but are doing so with illegal tactics, then again. If the tenant fights smart (legally), it again remains a landlord issue if they find out they can't evict people easily. Read the fine print. Don't rent to others, until you have. To protect tenants from predatory practices. If you have a newer property, you may have a valid point, but if your property was built in 1957, I don't understand why you should be under the same umbrella. Renting is a contract. You knowingly rent, knowing you can only increase up to (insert each provincial percentage), every 12 months. Why would you take the financial risk, if you can't afford it. This isn't the tenant's issue. They can be mean or nice. If they follow the law, then there isn't an issue. If they don't I won't lie. I celebrate the tenant legally fighting back and financially sticking it to the landlord. People rent because they can't afford a house. Very few would willfully rent, if they could. My attitude, is if I pay you money to lease my space, I will look into my rights, and fight like hell for them. This isn't a free stay. Its a contractual agreement both parties must agree to. I feel zero sympathy for any of the parties trying to breach that contract, getting called on it legally and crying fowl. Don't know the rules. Don't rent to a tenant. I rent a property out in the Philippines where the law favors us. We still were meticulous reading about our responsibilities, regulations, laws etc. The need for this is even tenfold, in Canada. Kudos for you wanting to make an investment and wanting returns on it. Do your homework before you buy. Literally all of this is "don't be a landlord because you have no rights and you are a terrible person if you even try it and it's all your fault for wanting to be a landlord in the first place". Well a lot of people have reached the same conclusion. So now the landlords will all have their prices as high as possible and most of them will be big corporations looking to screw over tenants, and many will play games buying and selling to kick out tenants regularly. Tell me - what's to stop me from starting up company "a" that owns 10 homes and my buddy starting up company "b" that owns 10, and every year or three i sell all my properties to him which means all my tenants have to leave and he sells them all to me and all his have to leave, then we can both rent them out at higher rates? You think people aren't already moving in that direction? By pretending landlords have no rights, which is what you are doing, you're creating an environment where tenants will suffer terribly and it will only get worse. You notice the huge increase in teh number of tent cities and trudeau towns full of rvs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 Again, your entire argument is landlords are bad and it's really too terrible that some of them suffer horribly but if they lose money in order to guarantee that people have a place to live that they didn't pay for then so be it. The fact that as you say tenants can screw the landlord around and not return keys or whatever is a perfect example of why they should do things like renovictions. Get rid of them before they interfere with the sale. And basically you say that you can't only point it one side while simultaneously only pointing at one side. You suggest that it should be just expected that businesses should suck up the loss of income, even though a lot of those businesses are single people who are just trying to invest their money wisely and provide someone with a home. Landlords have very few rights. And as a result there will be fewer and fewer landlords. Which means it gets more and more expensive for tenants. And when suddenly people don't have a place to live in their living on the streets They will discover that in fact they do not have any right to have a home in Canada. You have to pay for it, and it has to be fair, and right now the system is radically unfair for those who wish to provide homes compared to those who wish to take homes. And those people can take their money and go somewhere else which is exactly what they're doing which is exactly why home starts are down again . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 8 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Already did National home sales edged back 0.7% month-over-month in July. Actual (not seasonally adjusted) monthly activity came in 4.8% above July 2023. The number of newly listed properties ticked up 0.9% month-over-month. The MLS® Home Price Index (HPI) edged up 0.2% month-over-month but was down 3.9% year-over-year. The actual (not seasonally adjusted) national average sale price was almost unchanged (-0.2%) on a year-over-year basis in July." https://stats.crea.ca/en-CA/ This has nothing to do with international rankings. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 3 hours ago, Perspektiv said: You're playing politics. My point is, when you choose to rent your property out to tenants long term, you have a responsibility you lawfully must abide to. Your rights should matter, but your responsibilities matter just as much. Their rights don't matter. And that's the point and you keep dancing around that. ANd they really have none right now. Tenants do NOT have "rights". They have a legal contract and so does the landlord and the terms of that contract should be the only binding thing. The gov't may mandate some terms be included and that's fine to a point but then they FREQUENTLY just make up other rules on the fly that landlords must obey . This isn't "politics". This is the reality. And no matter how you slice it - it's the tenant who's going to pay for this. You think they're being treated unfairly right now, wait and see. Currently we're adding new rental units both purpose built and privately owned (condos or basements) at a small fraction of our population growth. It's not NEARLY enough or remotely close to it and it's slowing down. You think that's going to slow down the increases in prices? You think that will make the bad landlords LESS bold? You think the corporations won't take advantage? You keep blowing off owners' rights and dismissing them. "Oh of course they've got rights but NOTHING like the GOD GIVEN SACRED RIGHTS of the tenants". Or some such thing. The rental of a property is just a rental agreement. Nothing more. It's a legal agreement for the use and enjoyment of a property, it's not some sort of human rights issue. While the law can (and does) step in with regards to legal contracts and place stipulatons and requirements to make it fair they are way way way way over the line right now and as long as people like you blow that off there will be less and less rental and tenants will have to pay more and more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 8 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said: This has nothing to do with international rankings. http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 10 hours ago, CdnFox said: Tenants do NOT have "rights". https://www.ontario.ca/page/renting-ontario-your-rights What are you even talking about? 🙄 10 hours ago, CdnFox said: They have a legal contract and so does the landlord and the terms of that contract should be the only binding thing. The only parts of the contract that are legal are the ones that comply with statutes and contract law. You can put whatever bullshit you want in a contract, but the only parts that will hold up are the ones that the Courts will recognize. 10 hours ago, CdnFox said: The gov't may mandate some terms be included and that's fine to a point but then they FREQUENTLY just make up other rules on the fly that landlords must obey. They don't just make up rules on the fly. I know from current experience how shitty it is to be a landlord, but I also know from past experience how shitty it can be to be a tenant with a predatory/useless landlord. Most of the problems with being a landlord aren't really about the statutes or regulations, but rather how glacially slow everything plays out when you have a problem tenant. That's more a problem with an overbearing, underperforming bureaucracy and an overloaded court system than it is with the actual rules. Cash for keys is a thing now because it can take the better part of a year to get rid of a non-paying tenant, and that's only IF you fill out all of your paperwork perfectly and there are no hiccups. It works the same the other way though too. Tenants get bullied, ripped off an abused, and it's very difficult for them to get any sort of timely response. The only recourse they usually have is to withhold rent if the landlord is being a scumbag. The sorts of stuff my landlords tried to get away with when I was in university were comical. Fortunately I grew up in a family of landlords and knew how not to get f*cked around. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: The only sad part, is those d*** landlords tend to get away with things, and its the honest small landlord that gets shafted. Yes, so feel sympathy for them. 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: Only way to rent (or buy to rent out) to me, is be smart, know your rights and responsibilities, and know where and how to fight for them. Landlord or tenant. Like I said, the problem is that fighting for your rights is difficult. It takes forever. The bureaucracy is oppressive, generally unhelpful and proceeds glacially to sort out any disputes, if they bother at all. The whole scheme of renovictions is something that could shut down with proper enforcement, but like so much else in Canada, is left to fester by mostly worthless regulators and public service bureaucracies. Edited September 12 by Moonbox Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 7 hours ago, Perspektiv said: I can't say the same for all provinces, but for all I have lived in--there are quite a few laws protecting the tenant and landlord.bused. well lets start with landlord. Like what? Quote There are also a few responsibilities for both to follow. Of course, more for the landlord, since it is them, providing you with the space. Why in gods name would the fact that they are providing a much needed service at their own cost and risk mean that THEY should have more responsibilities? Woudn't that mean they should have FEWER? Their responsiblity should be to provide the home as advertised and to keep it in running order and that's it. That's why we have contracts. Quote Am not aware of any made up rules. It is written regards to what rights one has. The tribunals I am aware of, outline all of your collective rights. Reaaaallly. Well lets go over a few. You had the right to evict people if they didn't pay rent right? That's pretty fair right, if they're not paying for the space they shouldn't get to use it. Then suddenly POOOF! the gov't makes up a rule that says "gosh, for the next two year we've decided you can't evict for non payment and YOU have to pay the mortgage and live with the consequences". That's pretty made up out of the blue. Or how about this one, Years and years the law was you can only raise rents based on the inflation rate. Which wasn't always fair becuase the overall inflation rate is usually lower than the actual inflation rate affecting landlords. But.. fair is fair and that's what was agreed on. Then SUDDENLY - inflation goes through the roof. The landlords in bc also get hit with a sudden utterly unexplained 200 - 500 percent increase in insurance fees for condos (most of the rentals) Insurance is the biggest bill a condo has annually. So inflation shoots up like mad, actual costs go up like crazy. So the landlords were allowed to raise rents by the inflation rate as always right? I mean that was the deal, that's what they all knew the rules were when they bought and they'd all played along with it when it hurt them so fair is fair rihgt? Wrong. The gov't said it would be 'too cruel' to raise people's rents like that so they insisted on a much much lower than inflation cap. Suddenly the rents people were paying didn't even cover the mortgages which had gone up or the strata fees which had gone up never mind maintaining the unit. I talked to dozens of small time landlords that were pretty much wiped out and had to sell. Gov't didn't care. People didn't care. One lady was older and had saved all her life so she could invest a little for her retirement which was a few years away and she'd only bought a couple of years earlier, between what she had to pay out and her lost revenues and the cost of the sale she lost a substantial part of her savings and she did not have enough working years to replace them. Due to the gov't making up rules on the fly. And by the way - landlords are SUPPOSED TO CASH IN. That's what INVESMENT MEANS. You MAKE PROFIT. If you DON"T want to live where people MAKE PROFIT find a nice little communist country to live in. Again. Some people don't have enough money to buy a home. Other people see this and agree to spend THEIR OWN money to provide a home to those people in the hopes of making a profit. And instead of any kind of appreciation or rules to protect htem, they get spat on by the gov't and the public and even people like you suggest that it's "EEEEEVVVVIILLLLLL" that they should make a profit for investing their own money. So now there's fewer landlords and renters will pay more and get treated worse and frankly i'm just fine with that. The ignorance and arrogance shown to honest hard working people who were just trying desperately to save for their retirement or make some money while providing a much needed service is insane and people deserve to live with the consequences of their actions. If you don't like the fact that the landlord can decide he dosen't want to rent - don't rent. Super simple. That's how it's going to wind up. Or you'll see the gov't take it over and "assign' you a place to live and you'll take it and you'll like it or else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 2 hours ago, Moonbox said: https://www.ontario.ca/page/renting-ontario-your-rights What are you even talking about? 🙄 The only parts of the contract that are legal are the ones that comply with statutes and contract law. You can put whatever bullshit you want in a contract, but the only parts that will hold up are the ones that the Courts will recognize. They don't just make up rules on the fly. I know from current experience how shitty it is to be a landlord, but I also know from past experience how shitty it can be to be a tenant with a predatory/useless landlord. Most of the problems with being a landlord aren't really about the statutes or regulations, but rather how glacially slow everything plays out when you have a problem tenant. That's more a problem with an overbearing, underperforming bureaucracy and an overloaded court system than it is with the actual rules. Cash for keys is a thing now because it can take the better part of a year to get rid of a non-paying tenant, and that's only IF you fill out all of your paperwork perfectly and there are no hiccups. It works the same the other way though too. Tenants get bullied, ripped off an abused, and it's very difficult for them to get any sort of timely response. The only recourse they usually have is to withhold rent if the landlord is being a scumbag. The sorts of stuff my landlords tried to get away with when I was in university were comical. Fortunately I grew up in a family of landlords and knew how not to get f*cked around. Go back to your lego kiddo. You screwed up the first line and you just get dumber after that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 (edited) 3 hours ago, CdnFox said: Go back to your lego kiddo. You screwed up the first line and you just get dumber after that Sorry, but you proved once again you're a clueless donkey in the plainest language possible: 16 hours ago, CdnFox said: Tenants do NOT have "rights". You explained, when we tenant "rights" are laid out in official Acts of the provincial parliament. Here's the brochure for you, genius: https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Brochures/A Guide to the Residential Tenancies Act.html 10/10 Dumb. Way to go, you absolute clown. 🤡 Edited September 12 by Moonbox Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: Like I said, there are quite a few. Like.... what. The fact you're challenged to name any is pretty indicitive. Quote Just because it takes jumping through hoops to obtain enforcement, does not negate the fact that the landlords have rights. Not many. Do you have the right to evict people? No, the gov't can take that away without notice at any time and did. Do you have the right to reclaim money for damages? no, you can try but if they walk out there's an excellent chance you won't get a nickle regardless of the hoops Do you have a right to fairly raise rents to keep up with inflation? Nope. gov't can axe that with a month's notice and did. Do you have a right to make profit from your unit? DEFINITELY not, no guarantee there and in fact if you're losing money due to a new gov't poilcy or law then that's just too bad for you. Do you even have a right to reclaim your property to live in? It's not looking that way, the gov't in bc anyway is now considering making it a requirement to give A YEAR"S NOTICE before you can move back into your own property. So if you lose your home somewhere else you're not allowed to even live in your own home for a year. So please, where are all these rights you were mentioning? Because in fact you don't mean 'Rights', you mean there are currently rules and laws which are changed at the drop of a hat without warning and even existing rentals which were signed and negotiated based on the old rules must comply. 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: With your logic, a parent should have fewer responsibilities because they pay for the food, the bills and make sure all is taken care of. You must be insane. You're suggesting that a minor who is dependent on their parents for their survival and sustenance is the same as a grown ass adult renter? That your duty of care as a landlord to the tenant is the same as your duty of care to a child? You have lost your mind. 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: You are providing housing. SO... WHAT. There is nothing magical about housing. There is nothing holy or religious or sacred about it. It's a house. That's it. And it's not a house that they own it's a house that YOU own. So if you wish to let them have use of YOUR property then it has to be on terms agreeable to both. And at the end of the day the fact you will not address is there's fewer and fewer landlords per captia each year and more and more of hte ones remaining are cutthroats who will always find a way around teh laws to screw tenants if they have to. And pretty quick the only people who will be able to get rental places will be people with perfect credit ratings, long ties in the community, very high incomes and long employment records with their company and preferably no children. because what you're really saying is that anyone who wants to be a landlord should be punished and it's their job to provide the social safety net for others at their own expense, so the only way they can make money is cheat the system. And that means that the only people left in the rental game will be the cheats. Edited September 12 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 8 hours ago, Perspektiv said: They vary by province, but all of the tenant boards clearly outlined the bulk of the rights and responsibilities of the landlords and tenants. Then why are you having so much trouble naming even one. And no, the tenancy boards outline the law. That is not the same thing. Civil rights tribunals outline rights, plenty of cases of tenants holding landlords to account there but.. not a single one the other way around. 8 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Unless you're trying to insinuate that what am saying is false and that no rights and responsibilities are listed there, am confused as to the point you're trying to make. it was a simple question. You claimed that landlords had lots of rights. I've asked you numerous times now to name even one. And you can't. Which strongly suggests that there aren't any or at least there's so few that you can't think of any. Which would probably be correct. Landlords have virtually no rights. ANY element of their agreement or the laws they work under can be changed without notice and have been many times, and even if they are not many are completely unenforceable in practical terms If they really had rights, you'd have been able to say at least one. 8 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Doesn't matter. Ownership doesn't matter. Disappointing to hear you've embraced communism, but that's your choice Quote If I pay you for my space in that home, so am entitled to some rights and protections as a long term tenant. Ah yes, you're entitled to your entitlements. What you are entitled to is the use of the space which shall be kept in good condition for the term laid out in the contract provided that you provide the compensation required in the contract and you are entitled to that for the length of the contract. When there is an agreement between two people that is all you were ever supposed to be entitled to. But with homes it is creeped up more and more and more so that the landlords have no rights whatsoever. And that is a fact. And unless you can point to me in the charter of rights where it says that people shall be guaranteed a home there is no Canadian right to hold and use someone else's property beyond the terms of an agreement. So what we get is fewer and fewer landlords and the ones we have remaining are more and more arseholes. Which means a younger generation is going to get screwed and honestly i've got zero sympathy. The current situation isn't even remotely fair but everyone thinks landlords are evil people who don't deserve to make profit or have any rights to their own property. And that's simply not sustainable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 3 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: They are listed there. Am not sure what your end game is. Me naming you 5, and you dismissing the written laws as being sham laws? Whats your end game here, would cut a lot of back and forth out. He's just digging his heels in. To say landlords and/or tenants don't have rights when those rights are enshrined in the Residential Tenancies Act (in Ontario) is absurd, but he'll never admit it. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: They are listed there. Then pick one and tell me if it's a right. Bottom line is you know you're wrong. Otherwise you'd answer. Quote Tenants and landlords have rights. Its not a claim, its a fact. Well then what are their rights? I know what the laws are - what are their 'rights'? I know as a person i have a right to not be discriminated against under the charter and i can cite the sections. Where are these tenant and landlord 'rights'? Name a 'right' they have. 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: Or as pointed by multiple posters, its not a rights issue. Its an enforcement issue. You still haven't named one right. And if a right cannot be enforced then it's not a right is it. Quote Nobody is guaranteed a home. But you insist they are and should be. If someone rents a place they should be guaranteed that place for the rest of time. That's your whole argument. 1 hour ago, Perspektiv said: Corporations tend to be by the book, regarding renting. They also have deeper pockets to absorb losses as part of doing business. If more mom and pop landlords get squeezed out, so be it. They tend to push the limits of the book far more than most. And they have deeper pockets to have their lawyers argue bylaw and municipal issues, lobby for changes to the rules, etc etc etc. They have a much easier time doing renovictions and getting away with it. If you look into it youll see that they tend to be the groups who do it the most and are penalized the least. I have no problem with landlords pushing the boundaries of the law to kick people out, and it's going to get worse. As long as people treat landlords like scum and the law won't protect their so called 'rights' then they should and will look for other ways to protect their own interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 14 Report Share Posted September 14 5 hours ago, Perspektiv said: "Actually a right", by you is you essentially conflating your opinion with fact. What fact? You haven't' presented a one. Despite being asked a dozen times you coudn't even come up with ONE example of an actual right that applies to landlords. Not one. So we both know you're in the wrong. The person who's presenting opinion here is you. 5 hours ago, Perspektiv said: You're telling me they don't. Its on you to prove my point is a lie No, you're the one who's insisting they do. The proof is YOUR burden. And the fact you can't shows you know you're lying. 5 hours ago, Perspektiv said: And won't. You're not debating in good faith. It is 100 percent good faith. You have insisted again and again and again that landlords have rights. All i've said is name one. Not name them all, just one. And you can't. Because they don't have any. 5 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Not what I said. I said a tenant should have their rights protected. Circular argument. Tenants should have the right to the place in perpetuity and not be evicted and they should have those rights because they're rights should be protected. Nope. 5 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Why do you care if it does? There's lots of yongsters in the family, it'd be nice for them to at least have a chance in life without needing to wait for us older gen to die to get an inheretance. And i disapprove of socialist thinking such as what you've shared, it always ends very badly and i'd like to see the country grow and thrive. Where i was raised, good men always wanted to do what they could to leave the country better not worse. And this is where i was raised. So there you go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted September 14 Report Share Posted September 14 Housing affordability is a worldwide issue. "Housing is a basic human need. But a lack of affordable housing to buy or rent is fuelling a global housing crisis. By 2025, 1.6 billion people are expected to be affected by the global housing shortage, according to the World Bank." https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/06/how-to-fix-global-housing-crisis/ Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted September 14 Report Share Posted September 14 29 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: That is correct, but not all countries and cities are created the same. Hong Kong, is incredibly dense, in terms of the urban area. New York city. The only solution for places like this, is to build up. The lack of available and nearby land to build on, makes lots that are available, insanely expensive. Hong Kong is a bad example, as the government owns the mountainous land, but only allows about 20% of the available land to be built on, skyrocketing costs. Actually, I retract my statement. Its a great example. Canada has no business having issues finding land to build on. The issues here, are often due to bureaucratic sludge, making it take years to get a building permit. Canada's issue is self-inflicted for a significant portion. Point was not be narrow minded and think we are the only ones that have this issue. Hong Kong is a bad example. They built up but really Hong Kong has had a housing issue for hundreds, if not thousands of years. There used to be over 150k that lived on boats and since then "Hong Kong public rental housing is ubiquitous, providing homes for more than 40 per cent of the city's 7.5 million residents. " Yes, Canada has lots and lots of land. The problem is not bureaucratic sludge, it has everything to do where people want to be and live. Go ahead, build thousands of houses in NWT or between Barndon and Saskatoon....thing is who will live there and what will they do? LOL Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 14 Report Share Posted September 14 4 hours ago, Perspektiv said: I'll play your predictable game. A landlord has the right to evict a tenant for just cause. I will lob you a softball example. Failure to pay their rent, or outright refusal. I've already shot that one down. Landlords may sometimes have the ability to do that but not always, the gov't can step in and say 'no' anytime they like and have done so. So no that's NOT a right they have. And you knew that. So you deliberately chose to post something that you know to be untrue. 4 hours ago, Perspektiv said: You can't prove where it states a landlord has no rights, because this doesn't exist. Do you need me to explain how dumb that is. or have you worked that out. For a right to exist it must be documented, either in the charter or constitution or be recognized as a right under common law. If it is NOT in those places, then by definition it does not exist. It's not in those places. The very fact it doesn't exist proves it doesn't exist Well done. As to the rest, blah blah socialism good capitalism bad landlords evil yeah yeah. Quote I think making those who can't afford a 40% increase in living homeless (but who's only crime, is making less money--not less hustle or not paying their bills), is the way to do it in your books. You would be the one doing that. You're driving landlords out of the market because you feel they do not deserve to have rights while playing a weird little game claiming they do. Which you know to be false and admit as much. Why do you think rents are so high? Because nobody wants to be a landlord and there's no places to rent. And the ones who are willing to be a landlord are in it to scrape every nickle out of the barrel. And this is happening when we don't have enough rental or housing prices to begin with. You figuring this out yet? It's YOUR stance that's causing people to pay 40 percent. Remember you were real happy the smaller guys were being driven out of the market? Yeah - you were literally 'being happy' about this kind of increase. And it gets worse from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14 Report Share Posted September 14 2 hours ago, CdnFox said: So no that's NOT a right they have. How so? Is it a right, or they don't have the right at all? Sounds like a right to me, that you just don't like how it is applied at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 15 Report Share Posted September 15 2 hours ago, Perspektiv said: How so? Is it a right, or they don't have the right at all? It is not a right, and they don't have the right. I thought i was very clear. It's "allowed" by the gov't from time to time. If it was a 'right' then the gov't could not take that away without using the notwithstanding clause or the like. BUt no, the gov't can just decide "Oh - you can't actually do that for a few years till we say otherwise starting today" and that's that. So it's a privilege the gov't sometimes allows them to have. Unless they don't feel like it. This just happened so lets not pretend they have any sort of 'right'. 2 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Sounds like a right to me, that you just don't like how it is applied at times. Well then you're very very misinformed as to what a 'right' is. If that's how you feel, then we should allow evictions without question. I mean, they'd still have the 'right' to rent, you just wouldn't like the 'application' right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 15 Report Share Posted September 15 10 hours ago, CdnFox said: It is not a right So you're saying that it is impossible to evict a tenant, correct? Nobody in rental history as a landlord has been able to. Are currently able to. That would be the definition of it not being a right. Women in Afghanistan have no rights. There isn't even a loophole for them. Just because it is tedious to fight for does not refute it being a right. What you're pointing to is an overwhelmed and antiquated legal system. Not one where rights are revoked. Both tenants and landlords must fight for insane periods of time for their rights. You feel it isn't a right, vs it not being one, and your failure to provide any cites to support your opinion speaks for itself. I have proposed you links. Provided you with a basic right. You're blustering, and can't gaslight your way out of it. 10 hours ago, CdnFox said: Well then you're very very misinformed as to what a 'right' is. When a poster is pointing to redefining words or bringing into question their definition. Or in your case, questioning one's understanding of common terms, they truly have nothing left to bring to the debate. Your argument is the debate equivalent of holding on a ledge, with someone stepping on your fingers, and bragging that you still have the other hand, as if your fall isn't imminent. You have no argument, and your refusal to point to anything proving you can't evict a tenant or have any rights in your reply, closes our argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.