What The Liberals Did To Canada

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

It took him a year to figure out Trudeau was no longer in power and then another year to figure out we have a trade problem with the US tariffs.  It was great to see him have this epiphany and champion free trade with the US, albeit a year late.  Enjoy him, because he'll be gone soon.

Both of those are lies of course to try and make yourself feel better.

The reality is that Trudeau is gone but his policies and the disaster he left behind are still with us to this very day.

And Poilievre said he had a strong response to deal with the tariffs, carney said he could deal directly with trump and win that way and we now know that that was a lie

Carney has been able to bribe a lot of people to cross the floor. And even offered one MP of judge position to abandon his riding. And whatever you do that it's going to be effective. And that might well be the death of PP,   But the rest of your commentary is just a lie,  which tells us you know he was actually a good leader and you had to lie to pretend otherwise. 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

He couldn't beat Trump without Trudeau.

well sure he could, but as even i've admitted he was so focused on trudeau and the carbon tax  that it left him completely off base when trudeau suddenly stepped down and proroged parliament and 'installed' carney.  That was a tactical mistake on his part. 

But he was closing the gap. It was a short election but Nik Nanos (No friend of PP's) stated publicly that if the election had gone on another 2 weeks PP would likely have won a minority. 

As it is he got almost as many votes as carney did. He lost by a thin margin in a lot of ridings. 

He didn't win. But he could have. 

 

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Well that's sort of true, there's nothing to win. The facts are right there.  A couple could buy a home with an average income and live in it in 2015 well within what the banks consider 'affordable'.   That's a simple fact. 

 

The price of a nice starter home suitable for a family of 4 in vancouver at that time was just over 300 thosuand 

And i posted the average wage. I posted the proof.

 

LOL - what impresses me about you is that despite your stupid being pointed out to you you are never afraid to double down on the stupid  

in 2015 and even 2016 you could buy a nice home in most parts of the GVRD for less than 33 percent of the average household income and it would be big enough to raise a family.   Simple fact. 

You're not only are you a shameless hack, but a lazy one at that.  It took literally 10 seconds to find this, but it's easier for you to pull stuff out of your biased little mind. If the benchmark price was $1,248M whatever was selling for $300K must have been a small lot, if that. The fact is that just like today, metro Vancouver home pricing was also unaffordable for many in 2015.  We're done 🤡

• Detached Bungalows: For those purchasing a benchmark detached bungalow, the cost reached 88.6% of the median pre-tax household income by mid-2015.
• Standard Two-Storey Homes: The cost to service a standard two-storey home was even higher, estimated at 90.6% of median income.
• Condominium Apartments: Condos remained the most affordable option for owners, requiring approximately 40.1% of median income

 

[Goddess]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

As it is he got almost as many votes as carney did. He lost by a thin margin in a lot of ridings. 

Canada doesn't provide actual vote numbers, only percentages, but AI estimates, based on total number of voters (19,813,211 ballots cast):

Carney:  8,595,488

Poilievre:  8,113,484

NDP:  2,215,000

Bloc:  1,355,000

Greens:  522,000

PPC:  202,000

More people in Canada did NOT vote for Carney than did.

Voter turnout was about 69%, so 30% of Canadians didn't care to vote at all, let alone for Carney.

Edited April 17 by Goddess

[LinkSoul60]

54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

he spent 10 years as part of the governing body and 10 years as part of the opposition overseeing the government body

That's a hell of a lot of experience.

I'd brush up the wording a bit better for the resume though. 

57 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

As to not being able to lead his party when he took over conservatives were at about 32% and had been for a while. He raised them up to about 42% in the polls and finished at about 41.5. Stronger than any conservative leader going back to Mulroney and stronger than almost any other liberal leader managed to pull off in that same time frame

Trudeau raised the party to 42%. 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

If it wasn't for trump in the NDP he'd have won that election and if Trudeau hadn't left he would have won that election.

If it hadn't been for the other teams, the Leafs would have a cup by now.  What's your point... he lost.

 

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The reality is that Trudeau is gone but his policies and the disaster he left behind are still with us to this very day.

I know. You and a handful of others remind everyone every day, multiple times.

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

And Poilievre said he had a strong response to deal with the tariffs, carney said he could deal directly with trump and win that way and we now know that that was a lie

Debatable, and people say a lot of things sometimes but pretty hard to see 25%/35%/50% tariffs coming your way.  It is what it is... only sign a deal when it's a good deal us and them.  

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Carney has been able to bribe a lot of people to cross the floor. And even offered one MP of judge position to abandon his riding. And whatever you do that it's going to be effective. And that might well be the death of PP,   But the rest of your commentary is just a lie,  which tells us you know he was actually a good leader and you had to lie to pretend otherwise. 

There is no proof of that, or even a mention. Another outta the àss thing?  Don't sweat it kiddo.... it will play out as it will. Until then, do what you do.

[CdnFox]

13 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

You're right,

I'm always right      At least you're learning  

 

13 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I won't argue this...   A grade 7 dropout walking me through calculations gives me little incentive to argue with an id1ot.

Funny, that's what the grade seven student said about you! Also stop hanging around with grade seven students, it's creepy 

 

13 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The fact is that housing was also unaffordable in Metro Vancouver when your hero was PM in 2015.

 

No.  That is simply not true. 
 

The average price of a townhouse was 300 k or so.  That is less than 30 percent of the average income. That is by definition affordable.  

Sowweee, you're just making yourself look stupid. 

[CdnFox]

40 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I know. You and a handful of others remind everyone every day, multiple times.

I don't think I've actually said that on this forum in the entire time you've been here. Sometimes I wonder if that empty head of yours has an echo issue   

41 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Debatable, and people say a lot of things sometimes

You mean like that they can negotiate it deal with Trump by July?

41 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

There is no proof of that, or even a mention. Another outta the àss thing?

It was in the news. I don't know what you would want for proof, I doubt the guy recorded the phone call. And to be honest it's not exactly illegal if you say it right so it's not like proving it would actually achieve much.

But yeah, that's the claim it is pretty believable considering with other people from multiple parties have said about when they get approached

You sure are awfully embarrassed about your guy. You have to deny everything even when it's fairly obviously true. You're being very culty

[LinkSoul60]

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I'm always right      At least you're learning  

 

Funny, that's what the grade seven student said about you! Also stop hanging around with grade seven students, it's creepy 

 

No.  That is simply not true. 
 

The average price of a townhouse was 300 k or so.  That is less than 30 percent of the average income. That is by definition affordable.  

Sowweee, you're just making yourself look stupid. 

Obviously facts don't work for you when they go against your political bias.  Bury your head and keep cheering on the team kiddo... you'll get the blue participation ribbon sooner or later.

[LinkSoul60]

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You sure are awfully embarrassed about your guy. You have to deny everything even when it's fairly obviously true. You're being very culty

You can't cite, you doubt the guy recorded the call but you've convinced yourself it's true... because you want it to be.

BTW... your validation that 'it's fairly obviously' makes zero sense. That's a contradiction, or oxymoron...  Let's just keep it as you're a mor0n, which we can all agree on.

You're an absolute fool...

[CdnFox]

14 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

You're not only are you a shameless hack, but a lazy one at that.  It took literally 10 seconds to find this, but it's easier for you to pull stuff out of your biased little mind. If the benchmark price was $1,248M whatever was selling for $300K must have been a small lot,

 

Your figures are for today not then.  I guess that's why you didn't provide a link   

 

What was selling for 300 k, as i wrote every single time i posted the number, was a townhouse. 

You're including multi million dollar luxury mansions in your numbers.  That's why you come out looking stupid. 

The price of a 3 br townhouse in 2015 was about 306 thousand on average. For that you'd get, as i said, a small yard, often a play area for kids and a bunch of greenspace, a sizeable 3 br lr 'basement' home perfect for raising two kids. 

So if you were in greater vancouver in 2015 you could buy a nice place for your wife and to start your family for about 1600 a month (actual figure posted above). 

At the time that was quite affordable. That was 30 percent of the average household income. MOST people in 2015 earned that much THEMSELVES, so it was very affordable. 

Now.... even if the price goes up to 600 grand as it would fairly quickly by 2016,  the average wage for full time work was 66k. So  that's 132 k per month and that means they can afford about 1900  each or about 3800 in mortgage payments. 

Which means that two people working could still easily afford a larger home in greater vancouver in  2016. Life was still "affordable".  If you were a single person you could get an apartment in greater vancouver for about 377. That's starting to get tight, but is still doabile with the average wage

After that.... suddenly it's not affordable in 2017.  You have to scrape and push the limits to buy a place on an average income. 

By 2021 it was out of reach for the average wage earner or average household entirely

 

 

You're an embarrassment. You can't get a single fact or figure correct and it never even occurred to you but trying to suggest that a price is unaffordable also would require you to post how much money people had. Something I've been doing all along with something that you completely missed

You can't even figure out that determining if something is Affordable or not requires taking a look at how much money people would have had at the time. That's how blinded you are by your partisanship and stupidity

As I have proven conclusively numerous times now it was quite affordable in 2015 to have somewhere to live, and food prices were much lower in comparison to wages and somewhere most other things. Life was affordable

By 2016 that was getting strained but it was still not out of reach

By 2017 we started to leave people behind

The longer we had the liberals the worst it got and the more they promised to fix it and didn't

 

The liberals made it impossible for average families to be able to live in their own home. This is greatly contributed to the decline in birth rate because the only way to get by now is for both people to be working constantly

 

 

[LinkSoul60]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The liberals made it impossible for average families to be able to live in their own home. This is greatly contributed to the decline in birth rate because the only way to get by now is for both people to be working constantly

 

 

There are any number of words I can use to describe you but the most fitting is...idi0t

• Detached Bungalows: For those purchasing a benchmark detached bungalow, the cost reached 88.6% of the median pre-tax household income by mid-2015.
• Standard Two-Storey Homes: The cost to service a standard two-storey home was even higher, estimated at 90.6% of median income.

Housing in Vancouver was unaffordable for many under Harper, just as it's unaffordable for many today.  

You're an idi0t...

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

There are any number of words I can use to describe you but the most fitting is...idi0t

 

• Detached Bungalows: For those purchasing a benchmark detached bungalow, the cost reached 88.6% of the median pre-tax household income by mid-2015.
• Standard Two-Storey Homes: The cost to service a standard two-storey home was even higher, estimated at 90.6% of median income.

Housing in Vancouver was unaffordable for many under Harper, just as it's unaffordable for many today.  

You're an idi0t...

 

A detached house is not a townhouse.

DERP!!! UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD A MANSION YOU POOR!! DERP!!!    LOL

There is no law that says you have to live in a detached house   But people could buy a nice townhouse in a nice community for 30 percent of their income or less and that was very affordable  

LOL  dude you're looking more and more pathetic and desperate with each post,  You're uttelry wrong here and that's been proven.  Nobody has to have a detached home to be able to live affordably. 

They might well sell their 'starter home' and buy something bigger later and those who did would benefit from increased pricing.  But a young person or family could COMFORTABLY afford a nice little home with bedrooms and space for all even in 2015. 

Townhomes in greater vancouver cost about 300 400 for a nice one and that would be very affordable. 

Housing in vancouver was ENTIRELY affordable under harper and you're blinded by your hatred and cultism. 

[LinkSoul60]

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

A detached house is not a townhouse.

DERP!!! UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD A MANSION YOU POOR!! DERP!!!    LOL

There is no law that says you have to live in a detached house   But people could buy a nice townhouse in a nice community for 30 percent of their income or less and that was very affordable  

LOL  dude you're looking more and more pathetic and desperate with each post,  You're uttelry wrong here and that's been proven.  Nobody has to have a detached home to be able to live affordably. 

They might well sell their 'starter home' and buy something bigger later and those who did would benefit from increased pricing.  But a young person or family could COMFORTABLY afford a nice little home with bedrooms and space for all even in 2015. 

Townhomes in greater vancouver cost about 300 400 for a nice one and that would be very affordable. 

Housing in vancouver was ENTIRELY affordable under harper and you're blinded by your hatred and cultism. 

What's the difference whether it's a detached home, attached, or a condo. If it the price of either has a high price to income ratio it's all the same...your dollars are stretched.  If you want to change it from a $1.25M detached to attached/townhomes that benchmark price was $493K which also stretched the buyers dollars, or was purchased as a lower priced more affordable alternative to a detached home.  

The major, sustained exodus from Metro Vancouver to the Fraser Valley intensified around 2016, driven by peak housing price-to-income ratios and foreign buyer taxes. A significant secondary surge occurred in 2020-2021, when pandemic-driven remote work and record-low mortgage rates led to the busiest sales year in Fraser Valley history. 

Don't worry little fella I'm not taking shots at your beloved Harper.  My point was that Metro Vancouver was unaffordable for many in 2015 and prior, just like it is today, and not entirely Trudeau's fault as you'd believe.  

 

 

Edited April 18 by LinkSoul60

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

What's the difference whether it's a detached home, attached, or a condo.

Quite a bit.

Townhouses is what they were building at that time, along with apartments. They are far less expensive to build, and yet they offer an extremely comfortable living experience. And they're big enough to raise a family

The idea of affordability is not that day one you can afford the best of the best. The idea of being affordable is that you can enjoy a high quality of life of a standard that's considered normal for the times and be able to afford it within a modest income

As I've shown people at the time could buy a nice place to live that was plenty big enough for a family of four and the dog at a price that meets the official definition of affordable, being 30% of pre-tax income.

I don't know why that's hard for you to understand

To put it in perspective your argument is cars are unaffordable because some people couldn't afford a Bentley or high-end mercedes. That's true, but they could afford a ford focus or a toyota corolla. And really those are quite functional vehicles that would suit people's needs just fine

Hopefully that makes it more clear. People were able to buy a good home right off the bat to start a family with fairly minimal savings, so in their twenties a young couple would still be able to buy a home with a yard and green space within their budget

 

It's so easy. That's literally the definition of affordable.

That was a tail end of harper. Things got worse in 2016, they got worse than 2017 and by the end of 2017 it was starting to get to the point where people were starting to say it's not affordable even for average Canadians. And of course it got worse from there as we well know

Life was affordable under harper. Even in the middle of the worst recession in 100 years people were able to get by and did well. Cost for climbing but to a degree that's to be expected in the course of a recovery. But things were still affordable

Trudeau ran on making sure that they would stay affordable and the people will be able to afford a home and then he completely abandoned that and now you have to be substantially above the average income to be able to reasonably afford a home unless you're gifted one by a parent

[LinkSoul60]

51 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Quite a bit.

Townhouses is what they were building at that time, along with apartments. They are far less expensive to build, and yet they offer an extremely comfortable living experience. And they're big enough to raise a family

The idea of affordability is not that day one you can afford the best of the best. The idea of being affordable is that you can enjoy a high quality of life of a standard that's considered normal for the times and be able to afford it within a modest income

As I've shown people at the time could buy a nice place to live that was plenty big enough for a family of four and the dog at a price that meets the official definition of affordable, being 30% of pre-tax income.

I don't know why that's hard for you to understand

To put it in perspective your argument is cars are unaffordable because some people couldn't afford a Bentley or high-end mercedes. That's true, but they could afford a ford focus or a toyota corolla. And really those are quite functional vehicles that would suit people's needs just fine

Hopefully that makes it more clear. People were able to buy a good home right off the bat to start a family with fairly minimal savings, so in their twenties a young couple would still be able to buy a home with a yard and green space within their budget

 

It's so easy. That's literally the definition of affordable.

That was a tail end of harper. Things got worse in 2016, they got worse than 2017 and by the end of 2017 it was starting to get to the point where people were starting to say it's not affordable even for average Canadians. And of course it got worse from there as we well know

Life was affordable under harper. Even in the middle of the worst recession in 100 years people were able to get by and did well. Cost for climbing but to a degree that's to be expected in the course of a recovery. But things were still affordable

Trudeau ran on making sure that they would stay affordable and the people will be able to afford a home and then he completely abandoned that and now you have to be substantially above the average income to be able to reasonably afford a home unless you're gifted one by a parent

Give it up kiddo... you're embarrassing yourself.  

Spin it anyway you want but you see the facts. If you want to pull anecdotal things out of your backend and believe that while the facts say otherwise, have at it.  

Why so defensive anyway, I'm talking about 11 years ago... things, and the world has changed since then. Like I said, this isn't about Harper. Homes in metro Vancouver (and elsewhere) has been expensive for the last 20 years....Harper and Trudeau.  Location may have something to do with it...

Take a deep breath, and go have a cookie...

[CdnFox]

On 4/16/2026 at 7:00 PM, LinkSoul60 said:

 

Trudeau raised the party to 42%. 

 

 

Justin? No,  the best he ever did was just under 40  2015 Canadian federal election - Wikipedia

32 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Give it up kiddo... you're embarrassing yourself.  

LOL dude everyone right now is laughing at you      I'm not the one who needs to be embarrassed   You made an ass of yourself and you clearly know it  

Quote

Spin it anyway you want but you see the facts.

Kid. The facts say that in 2015 a person with an average income could still buy a home affordably and have a family. 

Life was affordable in 2015. 

It is not today. That is the fact. 

Your ability to self delude is military grade. 

[CdnFox]

Some more fallout from "Liberal sound fiscal management"

Posthaste: Canada faces an entrepreneurial ‘drought’ as more businesses close than open

More small businesses closed than opened in Canada for the sixth consecutive quarter, according to research by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB).

Small-business exit rates hit 5.6 per cent in the second quarter of 2025, while the entry rate fell to 4.8 per cent in the fourth quarter. The ratio between business starts and closures is among the worst since the COVID-19 pandemic, CFIB said in a report.

Nor only was it affordable to live in 2015, you could open a business and keep it open if you worked hard'

[ExFlyer]

On 4/16/2026 at 9:31 PM, Goddess said:

Canada doesn't provide actual vote numbers, only percentages, but AI estimates, based on total number of voters (19,813,211 ballots cast):

Carney:  8,595,488

Poilievre:  8,113,484

NDP:  2,215,000

Bloc:  1,355,000

Greens:  522,000

PPC:  202,000

More people in Canada did NOT vote for Carney than did.

Voter turnout was about 69%, so 30% of Canadians didn't care to vote at all, let alone for Carney.

Most important thing is more people voted for Carney, a man 2 months into politics, over PP with over 20 years at the trough LOL

[LinkSoul60]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Justin? No,  the best he ever did was just under 40  2015 Canadian federal election - Wikipedia

LOL dude everyone right now is laughing at you      I'm not the one who needs to be embarrassed   You made an ass of yourself and you clearly know it  

Kid. The facts say that in 2015 a person with an average income could still buy a home affordably and have a family. 

Life was affordable in 2015. 

It is not today. That is the fact. 

Your ability to self delude is military grade. 

I'm done arguing this with you.  What I've showed you is fact.

What is not in debate....  is that you're an idi0t

[LinkSoul60]

10 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Nor only was it affordable to live in 2015, you could open a business and keep it open if you worked hard'

It was also very affordable in 1965 when small business was in a growth stage.  Ahhhh, the good old days...

But yes, surprisingly it was more affordable a decade ago....  except for housing in Vancouver and Toronto which cities accounted for ~24% of our population in 2015.

Edited April 18 by LinkSoul60

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I'm done arguing this with you.  What I've showed you is fact.

 

Sure, but it's also a fact the sun rises in the east in canada.  That doesn't mean the cost of living was high in 2015, and it's about as relevant as what you posted.  Life isn't "unaffordable" just because you can't afford a mansion in the british props which was your argument. 

The fact, and i've proved this several times, is that a person or couple earning an average wage could comfortably have purchased a home suitable for raising two kids with lots of space.  Life was affordable.  You could buy a home for 30 percent of your pre tax income or less, food was cheaper, so was most other thingis.  Very affordable. 

And you were never "arguing", you were whining and pooping your pants every post after the one where i showed you the facts. 

One thing that ISN"T argued is that after 11 years of liberals that isn't true any more.  Life today is Not affordable for the average person earning an average wage. Even two people earning better than average wages will have to overextend to get by.  25 percent of Canadians will use the food banks (in 2025, probably 2026).  

 Life was good under harper. IT's a disaster under the libs. 

 

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

It was also very affordable in 1965 when small business was in a growth stage.  Ahhhh, the good old days...

But yes, surprisingly it was more affordable a decade ago....  except for housing in Vancouver and Toronto which cities accounted for ~24% of our population in 2015.

Nope  still affordable. 

I'mma just leave this here:

Affordability gains become weaker and sparser in Canada - RBC Economics

 

Wah wah waaaaaahhhh... housing got more affordable under harper and was still extremely affordable for townhomes and apartments even at the end of his term.

And it went up precisely as i said under the libs 

Vancouver was affordable, canada was generally even more affordable, and that's according to statcan and now the royal bank. 

Hard fail on your part kiddo 

 

[LinkSoul60]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Nope  still affordable. 

I'mma just leave this here:

Affordability gains become weaker and sparser in Canada - RBC Economics

 

Wah wah waaaaaahhhh... housing got more affordable under harper and was still extremely affordable for townhomes and apartments even at the end of his term.

And it went up precisely as i said under the libs 

Vancouver was affordable, canada was generally even more affordable, and that's according to statcan and now the royal bank. 

Hard fail on your part kiddo 

 

Keep trying kiddo...  and try not to take it personally that housing in some regions was becoming unaffordable in the early 2010's under Harper.

Housing affordability rift widened across Canadian markets in Q2 2015: RBC Economics

• Stretched affordability conditions continued to deteriorate in Toronto and Vancouver, while the rest of the country remained stable at fairly neutral levels
• Home resales in Canada poised for one of their strongest years on record in 2015

TORONTO, Aug. 31, 2015 - With the exception of Toronto and Vancouver, where the bar to own a home at current prices was set to multi-year highs, housing affordability remained fairly stable across Canada in the second quarter of 2015, according to the latest Housing Trends and Affordability Report issued today by RBC Economics Research.

While trends in the national affordability measures have been fairly flat since 2010, RBC reports that Toronto and Vancouver continued to experience strong housing price increases - particularly for single detached homes - in the second quarter, further widening the rift between these two markets and the rest of Canada.

"The Toronto and Vancouver markets really stand out because of their elevated and rapidly rising prices, and they are the main factors contributing to further modest erosion in affordability overall in Canada," said Craig Wright, senior vice-president and chief economist, RBC. "Outside of Toronto and Vancouver, affordability levels are close to, or slightly better than, long-term averages, which suggests that housing affordability remains fairly neutral in most of Canada with limited signs of undue stress being exerted on homebuyers."

Contrasting regional affordability trends are expected to continue in the near term. RBC says that affordability is likely to deteriorate further in Toronto and Vancouver in the period ahead due to upward price pressure being sustained by tight demand-supply conditions. As for the rest of the country, generally balanced supply demand conditions point to comparatively slower-rising home prices and steadier affordability.

 

Highlights from across Canada: 

British Columbia: Vancouver skews provincial affordability

• Rapid home price increases in Vancouver significantly impacted housing affordability in British Colombia in the second quarter. RBC's measures for the province rose more than any other province, up 2.5 percentage points for two-storey homes, 2.1 percentage points for bungalows, and 0.4 percentage points for condominiums.

• Ontario: Affordability picture continues to be split

• Owning a single-detached home at market prices in the province has become less and less affordable, while owning a condominium appears to be within reach. RBC's measures showed further deterioration for bungalows (rising by 1.1 percentage points) and two-storey homes (up 0.7 percentage points), while condominiums remain fairly steady (down only 0.1 percentage points).
•  
• https://www.rbc.com/newsroom/news/article.html?article=124107

[LinkSoul60]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Nope  still affordable. 

I'mma just leave this here:

Affordability gains become weaker and sparser in Canada - RBC Economics

 

Wah wah waaaaaahhhh... housing got more affordable under harper and was still extremely affordable for townhomes and apartments even at the end of his term.

And it went up precisely as i said under the libs 

Vancouver was affordable, canada was generally even more affordable, and that's according to statcan and now the royal bank. 

Hard fail on your part kiddo 

 

You're really digging deep now aren't you... 😂   If you recall, we were talking affordability in Vancouver...so why the Canada stats...  did you want to show the impact that the pandemic had because of interest rates and accelerated buying, or....?   The pandemic changed the affordability in the housing market, increased costs in all sectors, changed the labour market, created materials shortages, etc, etc... and surprisingly none of that was the Liberals fault.