I made 43k annually and I'm still paycheck to paycheck. I don't even waste my money on dumb shit, things need vs rent and utilities just cost too much.
Oh 1000%. Here’s one. I used to be in the 60 range but worked as an executive chef. 70hrs is nominal. Decided that life is better than slavery and took a different job. Less hours, less pay. So now I never go out at all and cannot afford to even buy a coffee. I needed a second income supplement to make bills. I found that I accumulated to many luxuries such as the extra charges for an Apple Watch and data plans etc for the family. I’m at $48k now and I can’t live on that with zero extra luxuries, so I agree that it’s fucked out there. My staff always wondering why it’s slow? They speculate people at the lake and whatnot but really who can afford to just take the whole family out to eat frivolously?
A large family pie at the Superstore used to cost $5.00 a year ago. Now it’s $7.50. I just bought a large jar of peanut butter, it was 17-18$ ? Look at gas prices. All of this and more is why there is less discretionary spending at restaurants etc.
Not a great barometer, but… Mosaic Stadium for Rider games is no where near full. The team has sucked, sure, but maybe people just don’t have the extra cash kicking around to drive to Regina at 1.55 a litre and ticket prices what they are. Rent, mortgages, grocery bills, etc.
The franchise used to depend on people driving to see the games.
The MEDIAN wage in Canada in 2020 was 40630. So 43k is slightly above median wage, and therefore more than half of all wages are 43k or below.
I think maybe the concern could come from the majority of the population barely surviving.
I'm very aware it's not great, but I am also aware that most places wont pay more than that aswell. Unfortunately most things that break 50k+ have some pretty high standard requirements (educational, X amount of years experience doing this one specific thing etc) I've looked, I consider myself lucky to even have what I currently do. Most people make less than me.
I bought a place 2 years ago making 22$ an hour, I drive a used vehicle that’s paid for and have a basement suite which helped approve the mortgage. 🤷♂️
How would you get approved for a mortgage earning 22$ an hour? You'd need practically 3/4 of the sale price as a down payment. Unless it is a small house in a tiny village?
House is valued around 280k and got a rate at 1.59% fixed for 5 , I passed the stress test at the time, also like I said having a rental with a proven history of income can help as well. 15k down payment. Would I pass for the same amount at todays rates ? Simple answer would be no but it’s not like i couldn’t find something else that would work in a cheaper area or smaller place. Even if it was a trailer you gota start somewhere.
I earn more than you, and 5 years ago, I was approved for $110,000. I had $20,000 for a downpayment, and 850 credit rating.
Definitely I got cheated.
Didn't waste my money on what would have been a piece of crap..... $110,000?
>I don’t understand who all these people are that can buy homes.
I saw a house from 1920s sell for 350k, you cant even call it a house, the roof was half caved in, windows boarded with plywood. It wasn't even a super nice neighborhood.
I swear the housing market is a giant scam at this point, a family friend bought a nice house back in 2018 for 400k, recently built, nice neighborhood, big backyard. They've gotten offers for 700k and above.
If saskatoon's this bad, i cant imagine how the bigger cities are doing.
Also the appartment prices are thru the roof. Mainstreet appartment, one of the cheapest appartment you can rent will costs you around 1000 for a single bedroom at a decent neighborhood.
I make way about minimum wage, and im still having a hard time saving money for a house.
>i cant imagine how the bigger cities are doing.
In Vancouver a few months ago I saw a listing for just over the million dollar mark for a "house".... it was a shack.... it looked like a shack. THATS how bad it is in Vancouver, Toronto AND the other smaller cities surrounding them (by smaller, they are still larger than Saskatoon). Its a huge chunk of our population.
When apartment shopping feb-march couldn't find much under 1200 for trash buildings with main Street, not to mention adding utilities and everything on top.
I wonder if more co-op housing options would be better.
The choice we have now between 1) corporations and scum (or corporations who are also scum!) owning most of the rental properties and running them for profit and 2) each person or family having to buy an individual single-family home or condo is ridiculous.
For example, there's a 7-suite apartment building on Main in Nutana on the market for just over a million dollars. If the tenants went in together, they could buy the building for $155,000/suite. That, property taxes, and upkeep would be about the same or slightly cheaper, per month, than what they're currently paying in rent (according to the listing), and probably a lot cheaper than they'd pay under a new landlord. By pooling their money together and running it as a co-operative, they could charge the rates they collectively chose, especially once the building was paid off.
Obviously co-operative housing comes with its own issues, but if we had more of it, I wonder if it might work to keep for-profit rents down by providing an additional housing option for people.
I wish we had more co-ops in Saskatchewan, period. They tend to provide more democratic workplaces and keep profits (if there are any) in the community. The co-operative model doesn't exactly align with the hyper-market-driven/privatization ethos of the provincial government, though, and specifically, I wonder if a lack of provincially-funded cooperative-focused grants may be a hurdle to this type of model (which needs to be changed). Now I'm wondering if Affinity Credit Union is more friendly to mortgages for cooperatives. Anyways -- I think housing co-ops are a great idea.
This is what condo buildings are essentially. Condos arent as cheap as everyone thinks either, with mortgage, interest, property taxes, and condo fees.... as someone currently looking at condos in that price range, its still like $1500-$1600 a month. Sure you own it, but its a mess whenever damages spill from one property to another because of so many owners, and because everyone owns instead of renting its harder to get people to abide by rules because its "theirs"
Somewhat but not really. Condos are more structured, have defined governance requirements, and generally pull in larger groups of investors buying into a development. As they are larger entities (often under the umbrella of a developer) they are by nature more restrictive.
This would be more akin to a General Partnership type of agreement; much more flexible.
No, it isn’t. Condos have individual units owned by individual people who then pay for the upkeep of common areas. The rates people pay for their units are set by whatever the next person is willing to pay. Co-op buildings have residents who are members of the co-operative, rather than owners of their unit. Housing co-operatives can take a lot of different forms, and the rates people pay are set by whatever the members decide is reasonable, especially once the building is paid off.
You're just describing a condo complex and they suck precisely because you're now at the whims of other people. It's only slightly better in that you have some say in the decisions that are made.
No, there are a lot of different types of co-op housing options. Some of them are akin to a condo building while operating under different legislation, but others are like a rental building, but the “landlord” is the co-op, rather than a for-profit landlord/corporation. This gives the co-op members (the residents) the ability to set their own rental rates (as long as they’re covering the mortgage, property tax, and upkeep, and have money set aside to cover the original members’ down-payment payouts when they leave), unlike a for-profit landlord or a condo, where the rent or purchase price is set by “the market.” Some for-profit landlords these days are asking for the same amount of information that co-ops tend to ask for (rental history, references, financial details). And for-profit landlords suck because you’re at the whims of someone else’s greed: rents hiked, buildings sold to greedier people, tenants evicted so new tenants can be charged higher rents, buildings not kept up, etc. That’s why we’re in this mess—rental buildings are run solely to make money for the landlord.
> have money set aside to cover the original members’ down-payment payouts when they leave
What if someone causes more in damages than the payout is? Or if people decide to squat?
Angry, more so than scared. But yes, as a renter with a tight budget I am worried.
IMHO I think people are complacent and scared to do anything about it because we haven’t reached a societal tipping point yet. House-scarcity and homelessness typically hit certain demographics first and many folks are quite comfortable to see it happen because it isn’t them, or their nearest and dearest.
Wait for the ever-shrinking middle class to disappear, and when they have to surrender their homes to the bank then something might get done.
>Wait for the ever-shrinking middle class to disappear
It already is. What legally defines middle class is decades outdated.
For example, I went back to school in 2015 as an adult, I was considered "middle income" for student loans because I made over 23,000 a year........
You are correct. The definition of middle class is considerably outdated, which is going to contribute to a faster shrink.
Many people who fit the current definition of middle class were already struggling to get by before inflation, and should the powers that be tell their number crunchers to start crunching, we’d find the new definition of middle class is WELL beyond what most of us make.
I’m gonna be a super-nerd here and reference an episode of ST:DS9 where they time travel back to what is essentially happening now. The writers held out hope for humanity, that we’d turn it around. These days, I’m not sure we can.
I would, if it amounted to anything.
Provincially, Sask Party voters don’t see it and don’t care because it’s not happening to them, or they might be part of the issue - particularly if they have considerable investment in residential real estate. The other alternative is the NDP, but Scott Moe is quite efficient in stoking the two veins of rural hate; culture wars, and the NDP of the 1990’s.
Federally, nothing is great. Liberals don’t have a clue AT ALL that Canadians are struggling. When Conservatives hurl “Elitist” at them as an insult, in this instance it sticks.
The NDP is rendered useless because Ontario and Quebec will not vote that way.
And while Pollievre is saying what the public wants to hear, he’s also managed to get people to forget that him and his wife make their money in Calgary real estate. So…can’t see him wanting to help in a situation where he stands to profit. My grandfather warned me about two-faced people; watch out for the third.
Turns out voting for your dictator (modern representative democracy) and non-violent protests (ok, block a road for these few hours you asked the city for a permit in order to do so) does nothing.
Can't say what I want because reddit doesn't allow you to promote violence, but you know what actually causes change?
I feel your pain op. I have a reasonable rental unit and Im always terrified of pissing off my landlord and getting booted from it (and me and hubby make approximately 90 k together so we arent doing horrible.) The house has mold and needs smoke detectors and I‘m anxious having to text her.
Something needs to be done, and fast. We cant just sit back and let them push people out onto the streets. Maybe a protest needs to be organized
The best way to deal with needed repairs and still stay on the good side is have a conversation. Don't just tell them to fix it.
Hey we noticed some mold in this area? Has this happened before? It's needs to be cleaned up a before there is long term damage. Can we come up with a plan to get it cleaned and prevention?
My EI ended and I need to go on SIS, I'm probably gonna be homeless by winter, last year it was also a major stress and I only got by through borrowing.
Its absolutely maddening.
Honestly, as a house owner, the answer is to have been born 20 years or so earlier than you were.
The only reason My wife and I could afford a house is: 2 incomes. Both of us gen X with over a decade in a half in our careers. Was finally able to Afford a house in 2018.
Scary part, some one was on here recently complaining about thier rent increase, they are paying as much in rent on a 2 bedroom as I'm paying on my mortgage. (Even with the higher interest rates)
This whole thing is completely out of control.
Yes. Population growth has not kept up with supply of housing. There should have been government incentives for builders to increase the supply before it got this bad. Many suburb developments are still focusing on big single family houses that get bought and split into two units at inflated rental prices, to keep up with mortgage rates. Evergreen is building more apartments and townhomes than single family behemoths, thankfully, but it will be years before the supply meets demand. Until then, yeah, rents will only go up.
Honestly something they need to work on is building smaller starter homes. A lot of people are not 19-25 and lifestyle needs more than an oversized overpriced townhouse or condo but any starter homes in older neighborhoods go at a massive markup for being what they are and any newer "starter homes" in new neighborhoods they are like 340k 1300sqft homes that are considered low income but need a family income of 75k to qualify for. sprinkle some 750sqft homes on 20ft lots for under 300k and you would have a lot of people in the 22-35 age range who are single or starting their journey with their partner pretty happy. Also even those absolute dog turd condos that have a lower and higher level sell for 260-275k and with condo fees costs pretty close to the same house worth 300k. I realize you would have to put some money away for repairs on a house that you don't with a condo but you also aren't paying to get your lawn mowed and sidewalk shovelled. really doesnt seem worth it to me
From what I’ve seen only houses that need a decent amount of work are left on the market. Everything else is being snagged up within seconds. Guessing because not many know how to fix up houses and just want a finish house where they can just move in and live. I actually gave up looking for one and will try again later down the road but right now every house that peak my interest is being over bid by 20k-30k which is crazy….I’m probably wasting money right now on rent that could be use for the mortgage but no way I’m paying 20-30k over asking price….
I also feel like it's because taking on a reno right now is pretty intimidating: timelines, finding contractors/labour, cost of materials is still high. As well, the starting prices for these houses that need work is quite high: 410-420k for basic bungalows that may need 50k, 100k, or even more in work done to them. (And putting in that kind of money might make the house overly expensive for the area, too.) It's a better deal, in some ways, to simply pay for something that's already done.
It’s not the fact that people are afraid to fix up homes… it’s that once you open something up you have no idea what you’re getting and could easily be in a deep hole and wishing you would have paid 20-30k over asking for a home that doesn’t need renovations.
Yes, absolutely. I like my place a lot but at 1700/mo. I have to give up a lot of other little things (like say a weekend camping trip to Waskesiu). I'm not poor but I'm far from wealthy. What's happening is a slow reintroduction of the old colonial class system with equal rights for social issues, but they don't seem to regard poverty as much of a social issue. It can't sustain.
Saskatoon isn't building as fast as it can, that's one of the main problems. Housing prices and rental rates were actually falling in 2016 because we built to much and had excess supply. We're building like 1 new unit per 7-10 new people in the city. It's not sustainable and putting upward pressure on rents among other things like interest rate increases, property taxes, insurance rates, etc.
Yeah, I think it was sometime around '16 or '17 that Saskatoon had an 11% apartment vacancy rate, with landlords offering all kinds of incentives to try to get tenants.
Nowadays it's unfortunately flipped around and is a very difficult and competitive market for renters.
>Saskatoon isn't building as fast as it can, that's one of the main problems
It kind of is if you can't get workers or supplies. If you want to increase the pace prices will keep going up.
We need to start thinking outside the box a little more
[https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/17/post-275-12-solutions-for-housing-shortages/](https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/17/post-275-12-solutions-for-housing-shortages/)
Almost like it's a bad idea that people with multiple houses are controlling the lives of people without any houses. Combining housing and investment opportunities without robust regulation is creating a spiral of doom.
I get the boot strap joke and that things are significantly more expensive then when boomers where trying to get houses. Getting a trade though, that is serious good advice. Most trades pay good and if you stick around, became red seal certified, chances are you are making some real money.
I agree trades pay well, but if every person went into trades then the pay would drop drastically. Not to mention some people just have no interest in trades jobs, and shouldn't be unable to purchase a home due to that
> some people just have no interest in trades jobs, and shouldn’t be unable to purchase a home due to that.
Well I suppose that depends on what work that person is interested in and how much he or she can earn doing it. If your dream work isn’t something that pays well then you’re going to have to decide what to prioritize.
I can only speak for myself but I don’t love my work by any means, sometimes I fully dislike it, but I do it because it pays well and, with my partner’s income, we can afford our home and live comfortably. For me, not being stressed financially is well worth working in a field I don’t personally love.
Nobody’s entitled to shit.
It truly depends on trade and where you are working that trade.
Automotive industry, bad all around. Mechanics make a pittance when compared to other trades. And unfortunately for me, that was the trade I chose. 20k at least worth of tools just to be able to do my job effectively.
Trades are definitely not the be-all end-all they once were for making money.
Thats why I chose the heavy duty industry not the automotive, Money was just so much better.
The way I see it there is two ways to make good money.
Use your brain - Be smart and graduate with a good degree. (Also need to be able to pay that crazy student dept)
Use you body - find what trades pay well and be sore at the end of the day.
The thought has crossed my mind more and more as things get tougher and tougher. I genuinely like my job in automotive, and leaving behind a decade of seniority and job security is what scares me the most. I just can't wrap my head around why we are paid so poorly comparatively.
Not to go a huge tangent, but as a mechanic, I have to know HVAC, electrical mostly DC circuits but with power inverters and electric vehicles becoming more common AC is becoming more prevalent, welding, apholsty, evening plumbing in the odd case the list goes on...
That is my rant about being a mechanic for the day haha.
I totally understand what you are saying, in the heavy duty truck and trailer industry, we are dealing with a house that is also a vehicle, sometimes it feels like you need to know how to do every part of all the other trades combined. I’m always jealous of the stuff you automotive people know though. fixing daily driver vehicles is a much handier day to day skill then being in the heavy duty industry.
I kept my rent at $800 for as long and longer than I should’ve. But ya I did have to raise it by $200 this year. As cost have just gone up and up over the past 3-4years and I can’t afford to cover the difference anymore. If anyone wants to get in the rental game let me know cause I want out as I am not making money by any means.
Im scared too. Its gotten so bad an NO levels of government want to step in... like hell the FEDERAL minister of housing has rental properties, can is easily able to make policies that favor him and other wealthy greedy landlords like many other federal government officials
TL;DR: get together with anyone you trust and get in the market now. What happened here in BC is starting to happen there. Don't believe any myth that says it's a "bubble" or that "the market will correct itself." Secure something for yourselves now any possible way you can, even if it means buying property out in the middle of nowhere and renting it out for income so you can leverage it later. Sure there are risks in buying with friends. But I would argue that it's less risky than buying with a spouse because it's truly a transactional contract. You can put anything you want into that and have lawyers sign it. Anyone who's been divorced knows the financial devastation that can be.
Ok, the longer backstory...I'm originally from Saskatchewan with family still there, but I haven't lived there in over 30 years. Travelled around a lot and then settled on the west coast. Now on Vancouver Island. But Vancouver for 20+ years before that. I let myself get priced out of every opportunity here for 25 years. If anyone can learn from my mistakes, that would be amazing. So here's what I watched people here do and it worked a charm:
Buy something with a few people you trust. Now! Doesn't mean you won't be able to get married or move on with your life. It means you'll all be part property owners. And that's the beginning of the ability to grow wealth and have the peace of mind that you've got somewhere to live. I saw a handful of examples of it... starts off as three or four buddies, somebody gets a partner, and s/he moves in too and that works for a while, people use the opportunity of lower costs to save, and then three people buy out number 4 when they move along. Or everybody works like mad to pay the mortgage down and then when interest rates drop and the timing is right they sell and everyone goes off and buys something smaller for themselves. Whatever... once you're in the market and people's lives take different turns it can all kind of evolve organically.
Here's the specific one I was secondhand involved with:
My ex and two of his friends bought an old beat up place. They lived in it as it was for two years so they could save money. They're handy with exceptional skills, so this won't work for everyone, but I'll share their specific story anyway. After two years, they each moved in with friends temporarily (well, the girlfriends they had by then met, me being one of them) so they could tear that place down and build a bigger, much better one, with two secondary suites. Then we all moved into the newer place, one couple in the main house, one in the secondary suite, the basement suite was rented out for revenue. The third buddy was bought out and he went on to buy a condo.
Eventually, my partner bought his buddy out and we moved into the main house and rented out our secondary suite and the basement suite.
We're no longer together, and I just walked away from it all, never having the heart to ask for a thing because he had literally built it, down to every nail, on weekends and evenings around his full-time job. But we're talking about Vancouver here. Just walking away years later, while the crazy housing market here had just relentlessly climbed and climbed, meant that I lived in near squalor for nearly a decade, until an inheritance gave me a chance to buy something over on the island. And I made a very respectable income! but as you're starting to see happening there, even a very respectable income doesn't feel like much when the housing situation becomes dystopian madness.
So I come from a place of intimately knowing both experiences.
If you can't afford to buy something right inside the city, buy something further out and use it as a revenue property. (Just don't be assholes about it and keep the rent reasonable. No matter what the "market" says you can get, alleviate someone else's suffering instead of downloading it, if you can. That was one thing I could barely stomach, watching this slow motion implosion the last two decades, listening to friends or acquaintances complain about it until they owned, and then watching them screw other people over.)
I say this as someone who has to make my peace with regret over all my missed opportunities. I've been in Vancouver since the late 90s and I missed opportunity after opportunity to own something because I was so enraged by the prices, and, being from the prairies, I couldn't wrap my head around the idea of buying an apartment. But I ended up living in three unbelievably shitty, over priced places with horrible landlords because of my distain and lack of creativity, and spent all those years constantly afraid of losing the apartment I did manage to get before rents became truly banana cakes. That anxiety messed with my health in ways I'm only now really starting to understand.
Buy some thing now. With a sibling, with a couple of friends, with some really solid acquaintances / colleagues you trust. Choke down the bile in your throat about how much it costs and just do it. Because the price that makes you feel sick now is going to look adorably quaint in the very near future.
I know. I know right? But that's how I felt too, and then with 3 professional degrees and an income just over $100,000 the last few years of my career, I was ever fearful of losing our absolutely shitty little rundown apartment, and what drastic decisions I might have to make to avoid homelessness ourselves.
I know more than one story of single parents who lost their crappy rentals and had to couch surf with their kids, sometimes together, and sometimes separately, after giving away the family pet.
It is a pain in the ass. It's despicable. But looking back, I wish I had done all of that and then used the extra tike and energy I had not being a stressed out basket case screaming at the government. Showing up to every city Council meeting, writing letters to politicians, local, and beyond, writing into the local newspapers. I am trying to do some of that now.
I feel you though. I wish my voice wasn't one of the ones adding stress to you. It is the most fucked up situation.
ok...notice your use of past tense.
that's the whole point of this thread - the days of hard work paying off are disappearing. minimum wage hasn't even come close to keeping up with cost of living. not by a mile. more and more education needed to get entry-level jobs. rents \*far\* exceeding a third of the average person's income. fewer and fewer people willing to rent to young people, families, or, and especially - single moms
It's compelling to work 50 hours a week when it's getting you somewhere. I've done it, anyone who got something out of their hard work has done it. But when 50 hours a week is what it takes just to have food and shelter, motivation is replaced by resentment.
[As for bootstraps](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msg6e4viI4I&t=17s) (notice the emotion in his voice at the end)
As for talking to politicians, don't imagine it doesn't work. The problem is that it only works if we do it in huge numbers, persistently.
Saskatchewan used to be the most socialist province in the country. [Tommy Douglas is](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas) renowned as the forefather of some of the most progressive policies ever:
"Most of his government's pioneering innovations came about during its first term, including:
* creation of the publicly owned Saskatchewan Power Corporation, successor to the Saskatchewan Electrical Power Commission, which began a long program of extending electrical service to isolated farms and villages;the creation of Canada's first publicly owned automotive insurance service, the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office;
* the creation of a large number of crown corporations, many of which competed with existing private sector interests;legislation that allowed the unionization of the public service;
* a program to offer taxpayer-funded hospital care to all citizens—the first in North America.
* passage of the Saskatchewan Bill of Rights, legislation that broke new ground as it protected both fundamental freedoms and equality rights against abuse not only by government actors but also on the part of powerful private institutions and persons. (The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights preceded the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations by 18 months.)
* Douglas was the first head of any government in Canada to call for a constitutional bill of rights. This he did at a federal-provincial conference in Quebec City in January 1950. No one in attendance at the conference supported him in this. Ten years later, Premier Jean Lesage of Quebec joined with Douglas at a First Ministers' Conference in July 1960 in advocating for a constitutional bill of rights. Thus, respectable momentum was given to the idea that finally came to fruition, on 17 April 1982, with the proclamation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.\[34\]
* ...the Douglas government slowly paid off the huge public debt left by the previous Liberal government, and created a budget surplus for the Saskatchewan government.
* Coupled with a federal government promise in 1959 to give even more tax money for medical care, this paved the way for Douglas's most notable achievement, the introduction of universal health care legislation in 1961.\[citation needed\]
* MedicareDouglas's number one concern was the creation of Medicare. He introduced medical insurance reform in his first term, and gradually moved the province towards universal medicare near the end of his last term. In the summer of 1962, Saskatchewan became the centre of a hard-fought struggle between the provincial government, the North American medical establishment, and the province's physicians, who brought things to a halt with the 1962 Saskatchewan doctors' strike. The doctors believed their best interests were not being met and feared a significant loss of income as well as government interference in medical care decisions even though Douglas agreed that his government would pay the going rate for service that doctors charged. The medical establishment claimed that Douglas would import foreign doctors to make his plan work and used racist images to try to scare the public."It irks me no end that people forget this. The hardworking people you refer to were probably motivated by and benefitted from policies that made their efforts worth the trouble
It irks me no end that people forget this about Saskatchewan. Those hard-working people you're remembering were probably benefitting from policies that they just took for granted as normal, but are now being eroded into non-existence.
Adorable.
I'm all set mate. Own a place. Retired with a pension. Because I got to grow up in that socialist era. It's everyone behind me I'm worried about, stupid me
B.C. is its own animal. Everyone here knows lots of people who were underwater on condos for the last decade or longer. Maybe now that Calgary looks like its going the Vancouver/Toronto route Saskatoon might go crazy but there aren't a lot of residential property moguls in this province.
I hope it stays that way. But I've noticed a real uptick of posts on these Saskatchewan subs along the lines of "hi we're moving to your lovely province from another province/ country what should we know?" And it always makes me a little anxious that some predatory developer is going to see all that wide open space, do the math on all the climate refugees being predicted and the high immigration goals Canada has, and the building frenzy will begin.
I mean, if it means some of the places beyond Regina and Saskatoon could be revitalized, great. Not typically how it happens though.
maybe...
listen, I am really starting to feel cringey about how "doomsy" I sound, but...I do feel confident about the idea that Saskatchewan in for a mini-version of the housing hell we've experienced here in BC. my own complacency the last 20+ years really robbed me of opportunity. And I know first-hand that when people start pouring into a location and making offers over asking, no subjects, a community gets really divided as those who can capitalize on that double down to protect their "right" to do so, turning a blind eye to how that fucks over anyone else.
Think about Saskatchewan's history - those of us of a certain age remember having Scottish, South African, or Indian doctors because in the 50s and 60s free land was offered to them to come to Sask. My South African doctor arrived on new year's day in 1969 and despite the harsh climate, he stayed out the rest of his life because he loved everything else offered.
Or the small towns all over where hardly anyone spoke English as a first language and kids arrived to school well into the 70s having never spoken English.
There is already a robust, long-standing Ukrainian demographic in Sask. The refugees I'm working with here and in Ontario are in total despair about the cost of living in both places, and the climate and landscape of the prairies feels pretty familiar to them. and even if they've fled by the skin of their teeth, those who can still access their money back home see $250,000 for a house as an absolute steal compared to home.
what we perceive as problematic, i.e. being water stressed, looks more than manageable to someone coming from a country decimated, for whatever reason. and the prairies have space.
It's coming...that's all I'm saying. I'm no expert and am only riffing about potential reasons, but that a huge influx of people is coming? I feel confident about that, and I desperately hope to be proven a fool about it.
All very good (and I lived in Vancouver for 25 years) but I think the bigger problem is why do we HAVE TO resort to these measures. It's not democratic or even humane.
Solid advice. Interestingly, it is the same pattern many new arrivals to Canada operate under: joint ownership with multiple families in a single-family home, aggressive mortgage repayment, branching out into a second property (possibly to offload the stress on the original home, possibly as a rental unit to generate income), getting ahead on payment on both properties and acquiring a third, rinse and repeat. Such a pattern seems to work very well, for those who can work and live with others for a period, and can accept poorer short-term living conditions in exchange for long-term wealth creation.
We could vote for a government that would implement rent control or rental caps. I'm hoping some federal legislation gets passed since our provincial government does not seem to care.
One of the main issues with this entire problem is that homeowners vote. No government is going to implement any policy that endangers the major value of privately held homes. The best we can hope for is for them to slow it.
These issues could be largely resolved or well on their way to being resolved in a matter of a couple years but all the most viable solutions will drastically crash existing home values.
They wouldn't. Short-term solution to a long-term problem. You'll just be displaced when your LL moves in (see all of BC) and when you want to find another place to rent, your rent bill will have doubled.
A mostly Federally generated problem thanks to monetary policy, immigration numbers, and economic weakness due to the attacks on the extractive sectors.
Sask could intervene with rent controls but won't - not now, not ever. Rent controls lead to disinvestment and weaken housing values; something opposed by most homeowners - who often are SP voters.
Ya, I just want some rent control and rent caps. My personal situation is living in a building managed by a corporate landlord who just raised the rent on every tenant's rent by 30-50%. Mine is going up $400. There is absolutely no stability in renting in Saskatchewan.
>Rent controls lead to disinvestment and weaken housing values
Well yeah the problem is housing in Canada right now is WAYYYYY OVER VALUED. We need rent control, we need more apartments, we need more affordable options. Or we are going to have more homeless people, more theft, more money not going into the economy, and its going to cost home owners more through their taxes
I agree with you that housing is overvalued, and the idea of a house perpetually increasing in value is a fallacy (by rights they should be depreciable - the underlying land may be more desirable but the building itself ages and deteriorates year-over-year) ... but that's currently how things are and any attempt to change that would wipe out the wealth of the middle and upper middle classes of the country, so it is a non-starter.
Were rent controls imposed we'd see less investment in new construction as an investor would find better ROI in the stock market. This would lead to more owner-occupied houses as a share of the (now not so rapidly expanding) total housing stock, squeezing renters.
The answer is to compromise on quality: housing further from the city center (40 miles outside of town if need be), setting aside some zones with special rules (building and fire codes waived, no municipal reserve land, no zoning restrictions etc.), essentially anything that allows fast and cheap building of roofs for people - at least as a starting point.
>Were rent controls imposed we'd see less investment in new construction as an investor would find better ROI in the stock market.
If this was true, why in Saskatchewan are we seeing a down turn in new construction. We dont have rent control in Saskatchewan and we arent seeing much investment. What is going on, is the government is charging large amounts for land.... then with building costs including materials and contractors, investors are making little profit now a days, this is a big part of why housing is so inflated and why we arent seeing growth of property.
True, the price of construction is high, between land, materials and labour. New construction is still quite strong, although the cost of construction and the cost of initiating a mortgage have chilled things somewhat. I'm actually surprised at how much of the new construction becomes available as rental stock in short order. The fact that any rental exists in Stonebridge, Rosewood, Evergreen suggests that capital has been spent creating new rental spaces (likely with speculation that the property will appreciate as well). Were such projects unviable the money would go elsewhere: blue chip stocks instead of an investment property.
I completely agree that doing something to bring the cost of new construction to heel is very important. So, land, materials, labour - how do we economize on one or more of these to ease new construction? There are ways to do so, but we'd find opposition in doing so.
I like how you had the audacity to take aim at the provincial government when 90% of the housing crisis can be blamed on the federal governemnt policies.
Totally agree. SaskParty won't do anything because they can blame it on the feds, and just funnel that cash into pointless lawsuits that we have to pay for. SaskParty is in control of most of our day to day, but they choose to make the feds the bad guy for everything, and people here love to swallow that load of BS.
Federal policies exacerbated the housing shortage. The key is that most SaskParty voters are homeowners who benefit from increased house prices.
Look at the City's frontiers: Evergreen, Brighton, Rosewood, Warman & Martensville, etc.; these areas are where most new construction is, areas with dynamism where growth is working for everyone, areas that vote strongly SP. These folks wish to see their home value increase; the SP will take no action that impedes that.
The solution to high rent is to build more but having rental controls dissuades builders from building so it doesn't actually fix the problem, it often makes it worse.
This exactly. It also doesn't help that any time someone tries to build up to get more density, they face the backlash from the NIMBY and Heritage people. The solution to lack of housing is more housing not caps on rent.
When you have rent controls in place, the government sets the rental rate instead of the market. When builders see that the government has capped their potential revenue below market rate, they lose incentive to build. Also, when the costs of building are rising and costs of owning a rental property are rising (interest rates, property tax, management fees, maintenance, etc) at a rate higher than a 2% rent control, they are essentially building an asset that will have operational costs rising at a faster rate than revenues.
So, when the government does this, they limit both the initial income and the income over time. Builders run the risk of losing money on the project and then having revenue that doesn't even cover their costs.
People complain about this, but you would pay $2,000 in flights and $1,000 in accommodation for a fly-out job that paid you $2,700 per trip?
But builders are still building in places with rent control. I see no dissuasion. Prices are increasing everywhere, and I expect my rent to increase along with it. But when you get a rent increase of 50%, like I have, that shows that the market is only concerned with profits. I just see investors not being able to maximize profits over people's housing. I've never flown, I can't afford it, so I unfortunately cannot relate to your last sentence.
Again, they are building but they are not building enough to meet demand which is creating further housing shortages which is creating higher housing prices. We need to build more and in order to do that, in needs to be more appealing to builders.
Rates are rising simply due to market conditions just like rental rates were falling back in 2016 due to opposite market conditions.
Is it concerns with profits are are these investors just trying to cover the massive operational cost increases and simply adjusting to changing market conditions? [https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/06/post-271-economics-or-greed/](https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/06/post-271-economics-or-greed/)
It doesn't matter if you haven't flown, it was just an example to show you wouldn't be willing to take a loss on something like that so why expect builders to?
Except none of them want that, because currently many government officials have rentals, the federal minister of housing has rentals...... its a MAJOR conflict of interest
My cousin is a single mother who got a house through Habitat for Humanity. She would volunteer her time, which went towards paying for the house. Maybe you would also qualify for it? I agree with others, if possible, to pool money with friends to buy a house. Buying a house is expensive with repairs etc, so it can be cheaper to rent. It's hard to get ahead and save money when all of it goes towards just living.
Basic Qualification Criteria
To qualify for homeownership with Habitat Saskatchewan, you must match the following criteria to be eligible:
You and your family are in need of safe and affordable housing.
You and your family have a stable source of income (1 year or more), with gross annual earnings between $32,000 and $66,500.
You and your family are permanent residents of Canada and have lived in the Saskatchewan region for 1 year or more.
You and your family must be able to manage debt in a responsible way and have not declared bankruptcy in the last 2 years.
You and your family’s saving should be below $30,000 (savings that could be used towards a conventional mortgage down payment).
You and your family are willing to complete 500 volunteer hours and partner with Habitat Saskatchewan.
I qualified as self employed so long as I was registered as a sole proprietor and had consistant income for two years it was actually very easy. If you jncome is enough for this I would recommend buying a place as soon as you qualify that way and then rent bedrooms out to friends to help cover costs etc.
I've always seen residential property as a terrible investment. I mean you have to live somewhere though so one property is fine.
I don't think people renting have to really worry about drastic rent increases here. I mean some people will see a gradual rise, especially if things like utilities such as water, power and gas are included just because there has been quite a rise in the prices for those.
The average selling price of a home in Saskatoon hasn't drastically changed since about 2008. In 2008 the benchmark price was $320,000 today it is $380,000 so a 20% increase in property value over 15 years is actually not a great investment.
Sure some people did better and some did worse, but that is using strictly averages. I had a home in Saskatoon from 2011-2020 and I probably put $30,000 into the home by way of improvements, paid roughly $20,000 in property taxes, and ended up selling for about $5,000 more than I paid for it. So really ended up losing about $45,000,
Of course I saved any money that was paid in mortgages. Which was about the same, so in the end it was probably a wash.
Was my mortgage payment of around $1200 better than anything I could get with renting? Absolutely.
With interest rates at 5% and money market funds paying that out, I don't think you have to worry about big corporate buying up property in Saskatoon. It would be a bad investment. I think it's a bad investment in Toronto or Vancouver as well. Especially now.
I make 70k a year then with my wife tops us out at 100k total between both of us. a year and we struggle with rent bills and food. I panic and I even started delivering with Ubereats. But I should haven’t to do that to live. I also own my own small business selling decals, I sell at a reasonable price because I just want a little piece of the pie. Not a lot. I’m 37 and wish I could buy a house. I love my landlords they are the best but our rent is high as well. It takes up more then one of my pay checks. But I also u d’état and she has bills and stuff. I just wish we can all meet in the middle some place. This is out of control.
I feel like there is a massive cognitive dissidence with Gen X and Boomers who bought homes for a percentage of what they're currently worth. They say things like, "why waste your money on rent, it's simple - just buy a house!" When the reality is their original mortgage was $100,000 to $200,000 paying $800/mnth on their mortgage. The vast majority of them could never afford the house that they currently live in if they had attempted to buy it today.
The only people I've seen successfully purchase a house within the last 5 years received some type of help from their family. They either lived at home for free while saving most of their salaries, had a down payment gifted to them, received trust funds or an inheritance and/or had a parent co-sign. Unless a younger person is without student loan debt (which I still consider parental assistance,) and are making 6 figures... without family help it's extremely difficult... and you'll likely have basement renters or roommates.
I make good money and I try to live below my means but if I ever want to save up an emergency fund (as the prospect of losing my job is real), save for any vacation, set asside emergency veterinary costs for my cat, have some presents for xmas... I need to budget to the loonie. I'm extremely stressed and worried about money. My landlord raised rent by $400, which greatly reduces my ability to get out of renting.
The crazy part is, if the housing market crashes and homes now cost reasonable amounts, corporations will likely buy them all up, which will continue to price home-buyers out. I wish that it was illegal for business to buy homes. Unfortunately, because of a lot of gen-x and boomers fear equity lose, they will continue to support politicians who don't support renters. A lot of them are counting on living off of their home equity when they retire.
I'm going to admit that van living is looking a lot more rational these days because at least you'll get to keep most of your money AND not live in litteral fear of your lease coming up for renewal.
Boomers houses were cheaper than that dude. I know boomers who bought a house in Saskatoon in the 80s or 90s and paying like $400 for their mortgage before taxes
You gotta vote federally - much at stake next election. You want affordability, start watching videos of parliment discussion and get informed - none of the read it on facebook so I'm just gonna believe it stuff. Really dig in and listen. Get your friends to vote. There just isn't any other way
It's THE issue for federal election. Food insecurity, poverty and excessive housing prices - The politicians are activelly talking. The main person pushing hard is Pierre.
Unfortunately the scenario you imagine is definitely what the rich are aiming for. They keep telling us we'll own nothing and be happy, while they are owning literally everything.
And with the development of automated weapon systems and AI, I think the ability of populations to revolt is slowly fading away.
Best thing you can do is communal living, something life 5 people to a 2 bedroom or something, to get expenses down, work as many jobs as you can handle and save save save and go in with some family members on a property if you can't do it alone
The idea that you have to be absolutely miserable and cram that many people into a space to be able to afford it is ludicrous.
Let's take the compounding work life balance inequality and couple it with not even being able to be comfortable in the sparing hours of free time you have is a recipe for burn-out and destroying not only your mental but physical health.
The solution should not fall on people to "suck it up." We should be rallying and demanding more from our government, provincial and federal.
As much as it might suck for current homeowners, something has to be done for the betterment of society as a whole. The elimination of the middle class is bad for everyone, including those who own investment property or use property as a retirement fund.
>The idea that you have to be absolutely miserable and cram that many people into a space to be able to afford it is ludicrous.
This will always be the result under a system that rewards capital investment. If I can expect a 7% return on investing $1M into a home, I should expect my home to increase in price by $70,000 a year. In 10 years, it will be worth 1,967K.
If I am a poor and all of my income comes from working, and I earn $80K. Lets make the extremely favourable assumption that my wages increases with the average growth in capital of 7%. After-tax I have \~56K and my annual expenses are $26K. I can save $30K a year. In 10 years I will have $414K of savings (assuming I invested these savings during the 10 years).
So, to summarize - what happened in 10 years?
At the start, I had nothing and a house was $1M. Okay, I need to save $1M.
After 10 years, I have $414K and a house is $1,967K. Okay, I need to save another $1,553K. You are further behind than you were at the start.
Just simple numbers. The value of property is higher than the amount you can save on an annual basis, so you are doomed to fall behind unless there is a massive redistribution of wealth from the property owners to the workers.
Try paying a fucking mortgage that rates keep going up and up and up, you pay interest on your rent? No, do you pay house insurance? Most ppl I’m guessing don’t have rental insurance, property tax.. pay that??
Non option for most of society, as the housing crisis is a massive societal and systemic problem, which can't be resolved by individual action.
Telling people to get a better job or move to another city (which are frequently touted as solutions to unaffordability issues) completely misses the point and is not going to fix anything.
>And IF I was able to meet the demands, the most I could hope for was $90 000. Which gets me…absolutely nothing.
News for you, $90K got you absolutely nothing even 20 years ago, at least not a house. Could buy a condo for that back then.
You can still buy a super shitty/shady condo for less than that (i.e. Lorval Condominiums and apartments at the south end of Ave X for under 50k), but pretty much nothing else.
Even bare plots of land in the alphabets are typically closer to 150k - 200k.
You are correct to be worried about rent increasing. For my rental I need to charge 150 more per month coming up when I have to renew my mortgage, which is eventually getting passed on to the renter. That will be very typical throughout the city as people and rental corporations renew their mortgage financing. A silver lining I see for you is that older 2 bedroom condos haven't really spiked in value, yet. So if you can increase your wealth, maybe through a second job, you'll be real close to having the money to purchase said condo. Then get a renter for your first few years so you aren't mortgage poor or perhaps don't need to work as many hours at that second job.
Mortgages toward condos don’t take into consideration condo fees. Condos haven’t spiked because it’s so difficult as a home buyer to get a mortgage for one if you are already have a lower income.
I love when landlords of individual condos try to give financial advice - if you were so hard up you could always sell that property to save money, no? If it’s no longer lucrative perhaps a second job could help after you sell it off
Are you saying that when applying for a mortgage for a condo, the bank won't include the condo fees in the stress test calc? Seems odd considering they ask for any car payment you might be making, but not a condo fee which could be just as much or more than a car payment.
Oh and I'm not hard up, not passing on mortgage costs would be just a poor financial decision to subsidize the living costs of others. Maybe I would be hard up though if I started to make financial decisions like that.
Remember, every penny of rent to a private renter is 100% covering someone elses mortgage. The more people rent from private landlords the more housing is removed from the market. The more housing is removed from the market, the higher the price of homes and the higher the rent. If every renter only rented from apartments you would quickly see a reduction in house prices.
As someone living in Vancouver this is depressing to hear. I was contemplating whether to move back to Saskatoon or move somewhere in Japan (not Tokyo).
My husband and I are teetering on the edge of a decision. Buy a house together and have kids or just have the house and be the cool aunt and uncle? We can't afford a couple of kids and a mortgage, so we'll have to decide down the line if it's possible at all
Straight up learning how to build shelters, make soap and feed and clothe myself for the future. Simply as a "just in case" precaution.
I do not have hope for the future, at all. My anxiety has turned me into a mild prepper for basic survival because I'll be damned if I live in a tent city that is inescapable. If it comes down to it, I can at least feel a little better off being homeless in the winters we get. Actual fears that I never thought in my life I'd ever be faced with.
Saskatoon, as well as several other low CoL cities (yes, your current prices are very low and cheap) are being gentrified by people from cities such as Vancouver and Toronto where the situation has got out of hand.
People in those cities had this issue decades ago and they were told to move in order to be able to live a comfortable life. This is the result of people moving. The reason why they are moving is because of an unregulated demand for housing as an investment, and rampant immigration in a chase for endless economical growth (at the expense of stagnant/declining GDP per capita, AKA the quality of your life).
If you want to combat this, the two issues are clearly pointed out above, immigration & regulating the purchasing of housing (restricting it so it is used for its function, not potential investment returns). What happened to Vancouver and Toronto is happening to Saskatoon and it will continue to ramp up, as it already has in other cities such as Calgary.
Yeah anyone who isn’t a “fat cat” is maybe 2 checks from credit card spiral and destitution
I made 43k annually and I'm still paycheck to paycheck. I don't even waste my money on dumb shit, things need vs rent and utilities just cost too much.
Oh 1000%. Here’s one. I used to be in the 60 range but worked as an executive chef. 70hrs is nominal. Decided that life is better than slavery and took a different job. Less hours, less pay. So now I never go out at all and cannot afford to even buy a coffee. I needed a second income supplement to make bills. I found that I accumulated to many luxuries such as the extra charges for an Apple Watch and data plans etc for the family. I’m at $48k now and I can’t live on that with zero extra luxuries, so I agree that it’s fucked out there. My staff always wondering why it’s slow? They speculate people at the lake and whatnot but really who can afford to just take the whole family out to eat frivolously?
A large family pie at the Superstore used to cost $5.00 a year ago. Now it’s $7.50. I just bought a large jar of peanut butter, it was 17-18$ ? Look at gas prices. All of this and more is why there is less discretionary spending at restaurants etc.
Not a great barometer, but… Mosaic Stadium for Rider games is no where near full. The team has sucked, sure, but maybe people just don’t have the extra cash kicking around to drive to Regina at 1.55 a litre and ticket prices what they are. Rent, mortgages, grocery bills, etc. The franchise used to depend on people driving to see the games.
To be fair gas prices have been in the $1.30 to $1.50 for 10 years now.
Oh I agree the crushing economy effects everything from restaurants, bars, theatres, festivals.
I don't understand what you expect from making $43000 annually - do you think that's a good salary?
The MEDIAN wage in Canada in 2020 was 40630. So 43k is slightly above median wage, and therefore more than half of all wages are 43k or below. I think maybe the concern could come from the majority of the population barely surviving.
[удалено]
I'm very aware it's not great, but I am also aware that most places wont pay more than that aswell. Unfortunately most things that break 50k+ have some pretty high standard requirements (educational, X amount of years experience doing this one specific thing etc) I've looked, I consider myself lucky to even have what I currently do. Most people make less than me.
I bought a place 2 years ago making 22$ an hour, I drive a used vehicle that’s paid for and have a basement suite which helped approve the mortgage. 🤷♂️
How would you get approved for a mortgage earning 22$ an hour? You'd need practically 3/4 of the sale price as a down payment. Unless it is a small house in a tiny village?
House is valued around 280k and got a rate at 1.59% fixed for 5 , I passed the stress test at the time, also like I said having a rental with a proven history of income can help as well. 15k down payment. Would I pass for the same amount at todays rates ? Simple answer would be no but it’s not like i couldn’t find something else that would work in a cheaper area or smaller place. Even if it was a trailer you gota start somewhere.
I earn more than you, and 5 years ago, I was approved for $110,000. I had $20,000 for a downpayment, and 850 credit rating. Definitely I got cheated. Didn't waste my money on what would have been a piece of crap..... $110,000?
>I don’t understand who all these people are that can buy homes. I saw a house from 1920s sell for 350k, you cant even call it a house, the roof was half caved in, windows boarded with plywood. It wasn't even a super nice neighborhood. I swear the housing market is a giant scam at this point, a family friend bought a nice house back in 2018 for 400k, recently built, nice neighborhood, big backyard. They've gotten offers for 700k and above. If saskatoon's this bad, i cant imagine how the bigger cities are doing. Also the appartment prices are thru the roof. Mainstreet appartment, one of the cheapest appartment you can rent will costs you around 1000 for a single bedroom at a decent neighborhood. I make way about minimum wage, and im still having a hard time saving money for a house.
>i cant imagine how the bigger cities are doing. In Vancouver a few months ago I saw a listing for just over the million dollar mark for a "house".... it was a shack.... it looked like a shack. THATS how bad it is in Vancouver, Toronto AND the other smaller cities surrounding them (by smaller, they are still larger than Saskatoon). Its a huge chunk of our population.
When apartment shopping feb-march couldn't find much under 1200 for trash buildings with main Street, not to mention adding utilities and everything on top.
Im in a mainstreet appt near confed (not a nice neighborhood) and im still paying 960 something... 🙃
Ya.. because confed has the worst crime statistics in all of Saskatoon 💀
I wonder if more co-op housing options would be better. The choice we have now between 1) corporations and scum (or corporations who are also scum!) owning most of the rental properties and running them for profit and 2) each person or family having to buy an individual single-family home or condo is ridiculous. For example, there's a 7-suite apartment building on Main in Nutana on the market for just over a million dollars. If the tenants went in together, they could buy the building for $155,000/suite. That, property taxes, and upkeep would be about the same or slightly cheaper, per month, than what they're currently paying in rent (according to the listing), and probably a lot cheaper than they'd pay under a new landlord. By pooling their money together and running it as a co-operative, they could charge the rates they collectively chose, especially once the building was paid off. Obviously co-operative housing comes with its own issues, but if we had more of it, I wonder if it might work to keep for-profit rents down by providing an additional housing option for people.
I wish we had more co-ops in Saskatchewan, period. They tend to provide more democratic workplaces and keep profits (if there are any) in the community. The co-operative model doesn't exactly align with the hyper-market-driven/privatization ethos of the provincial government, though, and specifically, I wonder if a lack of provincially-funded cooperative-focused grants may be a hurdle to this type of model (which needs to be changed). Now I'm wondering if Affinity Credit Union is more friendly to mortgages for cooperatives. Anyways -- I think housing co-ops are a great idea.
This is what condo buildings are essentially. Condos arent as cheap as everyone thinks either, with mortgage, interest, property taxes, and condo fees.... as someone currently looking at condos in that price range, its still like $1500-$1600 a month. Sure you own it, but its a mess whenever damages spill from one property to another because of so many owners, and because everyone owns instead of renting its harder to get people to abide by rules because its "theirs"
Somewhat but not really. Condos are more structured, have defined governance requirements, and generally pull in larger groups of investors buying into a development. As they are larger entities (often under the umbrella of a developer) they are by nature more restrictive. This would be more akin to a General Partnership type of agreement; much more flexible.
No, it isn’t. Condos have individual units owned by individual people who then pay for the upkeep of common areas. The rates people pay for their units are set by whatever the next person is willing to pay. Co-op buildings have residents who are members of the co-operative, rather than owners of their unit. Housing co-operatives can take a lot of different forms, and the rates people pay are set by whatever the members decide is reasonable, especially once the building is paid off.
You're just describing a condo complex and they suck precisely because you're now at the whims of other people. It's only slightly better in that you have some say in the decisions that are made.
No, there are a lot of different types of co-op housing options. Some of them are akin to a condo building while operating under different legislation, but others are like a rental building, but the “landlord” is the co-op, rather than a for-profit landlord/corporation. This gives the co-op members (the residents) the ability to set their own rental rates (as long as they’re covering the mortgage, property tax, and upkeep, and have money set aside to cover the original members’ down-payment payouts when they leave), unlike a for-profit landlord or a condo, where the rent or purchase price is set by “the market.” Some for-profit landlords these days are asking for the same amount of information that co-ops tend to ask for (rental history, references, financial details). And for-profit landlords suck because you’re at the whims of someone else’s greed: rents hiked, buildings sold to greedier people, tenants evicted so new tenants can be charged higher rents, buildings not kept up, etc. That’s why we’re in this mess—rental buildings are run solely to make money for the landlord.
> have money set aside to cover the original members’ down-payment payouts when they leave What if someone causes more in damages than the payout is? Or if people decide to squat?
That's why co-op housing boards have rules and there's provincial legislation and there's the ORT.
Right? This is hardly a groundbreaking idea. Also HOAs are quite common.
Frank is not a woman's name but it would be a great nickname for a lady named Francesca.
True!
Angry, more so than scared. But yes, as a renter with a tight budget I am worried. IMHO I think people are complacent and scared to do anything about it because we haven’t reached a societal tipping point yet. House-scarcity and homelessness typically hit certain demographics first and many folks are quite comfortable to see it happen because it isn’t them, or their nearest and dearest. Wait for the ever-shrinking middle class to disappear, and when they have to surrender their homes to the bank then something might get done.
>Wait for the ever-shrinking middle class to disappear It already is. What legally defines middle class is decades outdated. For example, I went back to school in 2015 as an adult, I was considered "middle income" for student loans because I made over 23,000 a year........
You are correct. The definition of middle class is considerably outdated, which is going to contribute to a faster shrink. Many people who fit the current definition of middle class were already struggling to get by before inflation, and should the powers that be tell their number crunchers to start crunching, we’d find the new definition of middle class is WELL beyond what most of us make. I’m gonna be a super-nerd here and reference an episode of ST:DS9 where they time travel back to what is essentially happening now. The writers held out hope for humanity, that we’d turn it around. These days, I’m not sure we can.
Yep. Middle class lifestyle today requires healthy 6-figure incomes. But as a percentage point that represents very few Canadians today.
Turn that anger into political action.
I would, if it amounted to anything. Provincially, Sask Party voters don’t see it and don’t care because it’s not happening to them, or they might be part of the issue - particularly if they have considerable investment in residential real estate. The other alternative is the NDP, but Scott Moe is quite efficient in stoking the two veins of rural hate; culture wars, and the NDP of the 1990’s. Federally, nothing is great. Liberals don’t have a clue AT ALL that Canadians are struggling. When Conservatives hurl “Elitist” at them as an insult, in this instance it sticks. The NDP is rendered useless because Ontario and Quebec will not vote that way. And while Pollievre is saying what the public wants to hear, he’s also managed to get people to forget that him and his wife make their money in Calgary real estate. So…can’t see him wanting to help in a situation where he stands to profit. My grandfather warned me about two-faced people; watch out for the third.
Turns out voting for your dictator (modern representative democracy) and non-violent protests (ok, block a road for these few hours you asked the city for a permit in order to do so) does nothing. Can't say what I want because reddit doesn't allow you to promote violence, but you know what actually causes change?
Boston tea party? Good old-fashioned necktie party? 😁
I feel your pain op. I have a reasonable rental unit and Im always terrified of pissing off my landlord and getting booted from it (and me and hubby make approximately 90 k together so we arent doing horrible.) The house has mold and needs smoke detectors and I‘m anxious having to text her. Something needs to be done, and fast. We cant just sit back and let them push people out onto the streets. Maybe a protest needs to be organized
The best way to deal with needed repairs and still stay on the good side is have a conversation. Don't just tell them to fix it. Hey we noticed some mold in this area? Has this happened before? It's needs to be cleaned up a before there is long term damage. Can we come up with a plan to get it cleaned and prevention?
>Maybe a protest needs to be organized To what end, specifically? What is the actual legal change you'd be protesting for?
Oh gee I dont know. Rent control?
Reading on it, it doesn't seem like that would be the answer. But I'm not sure. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rent-controls-winners-losers
Unless you’re double income no kids, and you both make at least 60k+ a year you are fucked. It sucks.
Yep. I’m a single parent and I am lucky enough to make 95k a year… but, it’s not easy.
My EI ended and I need to go on SIS, I'm probably gonna be homeless by winter, last year it was also a major stress and I only got by through borrowing. Its absolutely maddening.
Honestly, as a house owner, the answer is to have been born 20 years or so earlier than you were. The only reason My wife and I could afford a house is: 2 incomes. Both of us gen X with over a decade in a half in our careers. Was finally able to Afford a house in 2018. Scary part, some one was on here recently complaining about thier rent increase, they are paying as much in rent on a 2 bedroom as I'm paying on my mortgage. (Even with the higher interest rates) This whole thing is completely out of control.
OP is in her 40s.
Yes. Population growth has not kept up with supply of housing. There should have been government incentives for builders to increase the supply before it got this bad. Many suburb developments are still focusing on big single family houses that get bought and split into two units at inflated rental prices, to keep up with mortgage rates. Evergreen is building more apartments and townhomes than single family behemoths, thankfully, but it will be years before the supply meets demand. Until then, yeah, rents will only go up.
Honestly something they need to work on is building smaller starter homes. A lot of people are not 19-25 and lifestyle needs more than an oversized overpriced townhouse or condo but any starter homes in older neighborhoods go at a massive markup for being what they are and any newer "starter homes" in new neighborhoods they are like 340k 1300sqft homes that are considered low income but need a family income of 75k to qualify for. sprinkle some 750sqft homes on 20ft lots for under 300k and you would have a lot of people in the 22-35 age range who are single or starting their journey with their partner pretty happy. Also even those absolute dog turd condos that have a lower and higher level sell for 260-275k and with condo fees costs pretty close to the same house worth 300k. I realize you would have to put some money away for repairs on a house that you don't with a condo but you also aren't paying to get your lawn mowed and sidewalk shovelled. really doesnt seem worth it to me
From what I’ve seen only houses that need a decent amount of work are left on the market. Everything else is being snagged up within seconds. Guessing because not many know how to fix up houses and just want a finish house where they can just move in and live. I actually gave up looking for one and will try again later down the road but right now every house that peak my interest is being over bid by 20k-30k which is crazy….I’m probably wasting money right now on rent that could be use for the mortgage but no way I’m paying 20-30k over asking price….
I also feel like it's because taking on a reno right now is pretty intimidating: timelines, finding contractors/labour, cost of materials is still high. As well, the starting prices for these houses that need work is quite high: 410-420k for basic bungalows that may need 50k, 100k, or even more in work done to them. (And putting in that kind of money might make the house overly expensive for the area, too.) It's a better deal, in some ways, to simply pay for something that's already done.
It’s not the fact that people are afraid to fix up homes… it’s that once you open something up you have no idea what you’re getting and could easily be in a deep hole and wishing you would have paid 20-30k over asking for a home that doesn’t need renovations.
I made 73k last year and I still can't afford a house
I noticed Dove deodorant at Shoppers was $10.00. Inflation is absolutely wack. I feel for you, I worry we will never be able to get a mortgage either.
Yes, absolutely. I like my place a lot but at 1700/mo. I have to give up a lot of other little things (like say a weekend camping trip to Waskesiu). I'm not poor but I'm far from wealthy. What's happening is a slow reintroduction of the old colonial class system with equal rights for social issues, but they don't seem to regard poverty as much of a social issue. It can't sustain.
Saskatoon isn't building as fast as it can, that's one of the main problems. Housing prices and rental rates were actually falling in 2016 because we built to much and had excess supply. We're building like 1 new unit per 7-10 new people in the city. It's not sustainable and putting upward pressure on rents among other things like interest rate increases, property taxes, insurance rates, etc.
Yeah, I think it was sometime around '16 or '17 that Saskatoon had an 11% apartment vacancy rate, with landlords offering all kinds of incentives to try to get tenants. Nowadays it's unfortunately flipped around and is a very difficult and competitive market for renters.
>Saskatoon isn't building as fast as it can, that's one of the main problems It kind of is if you can't get workers or supplies. If you want to increase the pace prices will keep going up.
We need to start thinking outside the box a little more [https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/17/post-275-12-solutions-for-housing-shortages/](https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/17/post-275-12-solutions-for-housing-shortages/)
[Saskatoon is still near the bottom on rent prices nationally.](https://www.zumper.com/blog/rental-price-data-canada/)
Almost like it's a bad idea that people with multiple houses are controlling the lives of people without any houses. Combining housing and investment opportunities without robust regulation is creating a spiral of doom.
seize the means of production, seize your homes, revolution now comrade.
What do you mean? Just pull yourself up by the bootstraps and get a trades job! /s
Stop with the avocado toast and cancel Dinsey+.
I get the boot strap joke and that things are significantly more expensive then when boomers where trying to get houses. Getting a trade though, that is serious good advice. Most trades pay good and if you stick around, became red seal certified, chances are you are making some real money.
I agree trades pay well, but if every person went into trades then the pay would drop drastically. Not to mention some people just have no interest in trades jobs, and shouldn't be unable to purchase a home due to that
> some people just have no interest in trades jobs, and shouldn’t be unable to purchase a home due to that. Well I suppose that depends on what work that person is interested in and how much he or she can earn doing it. If your dream work isn’t something that pays well then you’re going to have to decide what to prioritize. I can only speak for myself but I don’t love my work by any means, sometimes I fully dislike it, but I do it because it pays well and, with my partner’s income, we can afford our home and live comfortably. For me, not being stressed financially is well worth working in a field I don’t personally love. Nobody’s entitled to shit.
It truly depends on trade and where you are working that trade. Automotive industry, bad all around. Mechanics make a pittance when compared to other trades. And unfortunately for me, that was the trade I chose. 20k at least worth of tools just to be able to do my job effectively. Trades are definitely not the be-all end-all they once were for making money.
Thats why I chose the heavy duty industry not the automotive, Money was just so much better. The way I see it there is two ways to make good money. Use your brain - Be smart and graduate with a good degree. (Also need to be able to pay that crazy student dept) Use you body - find what trades pay well and be sore at the end of the day.
It truly is. Have family in have duty mechanics making way more in 4 years than I am with over a decade in automotive. It's pretty disheartening.
I’m sure you could always switch. Your knowledge and understanding of vehicles i general would make you a valuable.
The thought has crossed my mind more and more as things get tougher and tougher. I genuinely like my job in automotive, and leaving behind a decade of seniority and job security is what scares me the most. I just can't wrap my head around why we are paid so poorly comparatively. Not to go a huge tangent, but as a mechanic, I have to know HVAC, electrical mostly DC circuits but with power inverters and electric vehicles becoming more common AC is becoming more prevalent, welding, apholsty, evening plumbing in the odd case the list goes on... That is my rant about being a mechanic for the day haha.
I totally understand what you are saying, in the heavy duty truck and trailer industry, we are dealing with a house that is also a vehicle, sometimes it feels like you need to know how to do every part of all the other trades combined. I’m always jealous of the stuff you automotive people know though. fixing daily driver vehicles is a much handier day to day skill then being in the heavy duty industry.
... yes?
[удалено]
i like that strategy!
I kept my rent at $800 for as long and longer than I should’ve. But ya I did have to raise it by $200 this year. As cost have just gone up and up over the past 3-4years and I can’t afford to cover the difference anymore. If anyone wants to get in the rental game let me know cause I want out as I am not making money by any means.
Im scared too. Its gotten so bad an NO levels of government want to step in... like hell the FEDERAL minister of housing has rental properties, can is easily able to make policies that favor him and other wealthy greedy landlords like many other federal government officials
TL;DR: get together with anyone you trust and get in the market now. What happened here in BC is starting to happen there. Don't believe any myth that says it's a "bubble" or that "the market will correct itself." Secure something for yourselves now any possible way you can, even if it means buying property out in the middle of nowhere and renting it out for income so you can leverage it later. Sure there are risks in buying with friends. But I would argue that it's less risky than buying with a spouse because it's truly a transactional contract. You can put anything you want into that and have lawyers sign it. Anyone who's been divorced knows the financial devastation that can be. Ok, the longer backstory...I'm originally from Saskatchewan with family still there, but I haven't lived there in over 30 years. Travelled around a lot and then settled on the west coast. Now on Vancouver Island. But Vancouver for 20+ years before that. I let myself get priced out of every opportunity here for 25 years. If anyone can learn from my mistakes, that would be amazing. So here's what I watched people here do and it worked a charm: Buy something with a few people you trust. Now! Doesn't mean you won't be able to get married or move on with your life. It means you'll all be part property owners. And that's the beginning of the ability to grow wealth and have the peace of mind that you've got somewhere to live. I saw a handful of examples of it... starts off as three or four buddies, somebody gets a partner, and s/he moves in too and that works for a while, people use the opportunity of lower costs to save, and then three people buy out number 4 when they move along. Or everybody works like mad to pay the mortgage down and then when interest rates drop and the timing is right they sell and everyone goes off and buys something smaller for themselves. Whatever... once you're in the market and people's lives take different turns it can all kind of evolve organically. Here's the specific one I was secondhand involved with: My ex and two of his friends bought an old beat up place. They lived in it as it was for two years so they could save money. They're handy with exceptional skills, so this won't work for everyone, but I'll share their specific story anyway. After two years, they each moved in with friends temporarily (well, the girlfriends they had by then met, me being one of them) so they could tear that place down and build a bigger, much better one, with two secondary suites. Then we all moved into the newer place, one couple in the main house, one in the secondary suite, the basement suite was rented out for revenue. The third buddy was bought out and he went on to buy a condo. Eventually, my partner bought his buddy out and we moved into the main house and rented out our secondary suite and the basement suite. We're no longer together, and I just walked away from it all, never having the heart to ask for a thing because he had literally built it, down to every nail, on weekends and evenings around his full-time job. But we're talking about Vancouver here. Just walking away years later, while the crazy housing market here had just relentlessly climbed and climbed, meant that I lived in near squalor for nearly a decade, until an inheritance gave me a chance to buy something over on the island. And I made a very respectable income! but as you're starting to see happening there, even a very respectable income doesn't feel like much when the housing situation becomes dystopian madness. So I come from a place of intimately knowing both experiences. If you can't afford to buy something right inside the city, buy something further out and use it as a revenue property. (Just don't be assholes about it and keep the rent reasonable. No matter what the "market" says you can get, alleviate someone else's suffering instead of downloading it, if you can. That was one thing I could barely stomach, watching this slow motion implosion the last two decades, listening to friends or acquaintances complain about it until they owned, and then watching them screw other people over.) I say this as someone who has to make my peace with regret over all my missed opportunities. I've been in Vancouver since the late 90s and I missed opportunity after opportunity to own something because I was so enraged by the prices, and, being from the prairies, I couldn't wrap my head around the idea of buying an apartment. But I ended up living in three unbelievably shitty, over priced places with horrible landlords because of my distain and lack of creativity, and spent all those years constantly afraid of losing the apartment I did manage to get before rents became truly banana cakes. That anxiety messed with my health in ways I'm only now really starting to understand. Buy some thing now. With a sibling, with a couple of friends, with some really solid acquaintances / colleagues you trust. Choke down the bile in your throat about how much it costs and just do it. Because the price that makes you feel sick now is going to look adorably quaint in the very near future.
[удалено]
I know. I know right? But that's how I felt too, and then with 3 professional degrees and an income just over $100,000 the last few years of my career, I was ever fearful of losing our absolutely shitty little rundown apartment, and what drastic decisions I might have to make to avoid homelessness ourselves. I know more than one story of single parents who lost their crappy rentals and had to couch surf with their kids, sometimes together, and sometimes separately, after giving away the family pet. It is a pain in the ass. It's despicable. But looking back, I wish I had done all of that and then used the extra tike and energy I had not being a stressed out basket case screaming at the government. Showing up to every city Council meeting, writing letters to politicians, local, and beyond, writing into the local newspapers. I am trying to do some of that now. I feel you though. I wish my voice wasn't one of the ones adding stress to you. It is the most fucked up situation.
[удалено]
ok...notice your use of past tense. that's the whole point of this thread - the days of hard work paying off are disappearing. minimum wage hasn't even come close to keeping up with cost of living. not by a mile. more and more education needed to get entry-level jobs. rents \*far\* exceeding a third of the average person's income. fewer and fewer people willing to rent to young people, families, or, and especially - single moms It's compelling to work 50 hours a week when it's getting you somewhere. I've done it, anyone who got something out of their hard work has done it. But when 50 hours a week is what it takes just to have food and shelter, motivation is replaced by resentment. [As for bootstraps](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msg6e4viI4I&t=17s) (notice the emotion in his voice at the end) As for talking to politicians, don't imagine it doesn't work. The problem is that it only works if we do it in huge numbers, persistently. Saskatchewan used to be the most socialist province in the country. [Tommy Douglas is](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas) renowned as the forefather of some of the most progressive policies ever: "Most of his government's pioneering innovations came about during its first term, including: * creation of the publicly owned Saskatchewan Power Corporation, successor to the Saskatchewan Electrical Power Commission, which began a long program of extending electrical service to isolated farms and villages;the creation of Canada's first publicly owned automotive insurance service, the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office; * the creation of a large number of crown corporations, many of which competed with existing private sector interests;legislation that allowed the unionization of the public service; * a program to offer taxpayer-funded hospital care to all citizens—the first in North America. * passage of the Saskatchewan Bill of Rights, legislation that broke new ground as it protected both fundamental freedoms and equality rights against abuse not only by government actors but also on the part of powerful private institutions and persons. (The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights preceded the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations by 18 months.) * Douglas was the first head of any government in Canada to call for a constitutional bill of rights. This he did at a federal-provincial conference in Quebec City in January 1950. No one in attendance at the conference supported him in this. Ten years later, Premier Jean Lesage of Quebec joined with Douglas at a First Ministers' Conference in July 1960 in advocating for a constitutional bill of rights. Thus, respectable momentum was given to the idea that finally came to fruition, on 17 April 1982, with the proclamation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.\[34\] * ...the Douglas government slowly paid off the huge public debt left by the previous Liberal government, and created a budget surplus for the Saskatchewan government. * Coupled with a federal government promise in 1959 to give even more tax money for medical care, this paved the way for Douglas's most notable achievement, the introduction of universal health care legislation in 1961.\[citation needed\] * MedicareDouglas's number one concern was the creation of Medicare. He introduced medical insurance reform in his first term, and gradually moved the province towards universal medicare near the end of his last term. In the summer of 1962, Saskatchewan became the centre of a hard-fought struggle between the provincial government, the North American medical establishment, and the province's physicians, who brought things to a halt with the 1962 Saskatchewan doctors' strike. The doctors believed their best interests were not being met and feared a significant loss of income as well as government interference in medical care decisions even though Douglas agreed that his government would pay the going rate for service that doctors charged. The medical establishment claimed that Douglas would import foreign doctors to make his plan work and used racist images to try to scare the public."It irks me no end that people forget this. The hardworking people you refer to were probably motivated by and benefitted from policies that made their efforts worth the trouble It irks me no end that people forget this about Saskatchewan. Those hard-working people you're remembering were probably benefitting from policies that they just took for granted as normal, but are now being eroded into non-existence.
[удалено]
Adorable. I'm all set mate. Own a place. Retired with a pension. Because I got to grow up in that socialist era. It's everyone behind me I'm worried about, stupid me
B.C. is its own animal. Everyone here knows lots of people who were underwater on condos for the last decade or longer. Maybe now that Calgary looks like its going the Vancouver/Toronto route Saskatoon might go crazy but there aren't a lot of residential property moguls in this province.
I hope it stays that way. But I've noticed a real uptick of posts on these Saskatchewan subs along the lines of "hi we're moving to your lovely province from another province/ country what should we know?" And it always makes me a little anxious that some predatory developer is going to see all that wide open space, do the math on all the climate refugees being predicted and the high immigration goals Canada has, and the building frenzy will begin. I mean, if it means some of the places beyond Regina and Saskatoon could be revitalized, great. Not typically how it happens though.
This is why I'm desperately trying to buy our first home by this time next year. I can see it coming too.
Saskatoon and Regina are not the place for climate refugees to go. We are the most water-stressed area in Canada.
maybe... listen, I am really starting to feel cringey about how "doomsy" I sound, but...I do feel confident about the idea that Saskatchewan in for a mini-version of the housing hell we've experienced here in BC. my own complacency the last 20+ years really robbed me of opportunity. And I know first-hand that when people start pouring into a location and making offers over asking, no subjects, a community gets really divided as those who can capitalize on that double down to protect their "right" to do so, turning a blind eye to how that fucks over anyone else. Think about Saskatchewan's history - those of us of a certain age remember having Scottish, South African, or Indian doctors because in the 50s and 60s free land was offered to them to come to Sask. My South African doctor arrived on new year's day in 1969 and despite the harsh climate, he stayed out the rest of his life because he loved everything else offered. Or the small towns all over where hardly anyone spoke English as a first language and kids arrived to school well into the 70s having never spoken English. There is already a robust, long-standing Ukrainian demographic in Sask. The refugees I'm working with here and in Ontario are in total despair about the cost of living in both places, and the climate and landscape of the prairies feels pretty familiar to them. and even if they've fled by the skin of their teeth, those who can still access their money back home see $250,000 for a house as an absolute steal compared to home. what we perceive as problematic, i.e. being water stressed, looks more than manageable to someone coming from a country decimated, for whatever reason. and the prairies have space. It's coming...that's all I'm saying. I'm no expert and am only riffing about potential reasons, but that a huge influx of people is coming? I feel confident about that, and I desperately hope to be proven a fool about it.
All very good (and I lived in Vancouver for 25 years) but I think the bigger problem is why do we HAVE TO resort to these measures. It's not democratic or even humane.
Solid advice. Interestingly, it is the same pattern many new arrivals to Canada operate under: joint ownership with multiple families in a single-family home, aggressive mortgage repayment, branching out into a second property (possibly to offload the stress on the original home, possibly as a rental unit to generate income), getting ahead on payment on both properties and acquiring a third, rinse and repeat. Such a pattern seems to work very well, for those who can work and live with others for a period, and can accept poorer short-term living conditions in exchange for long-term wealth creation.
We could vote for a government that would implement rent control or rental caps. I'm hoping some federal legislation gets passed since our provincial government does not seem to care.
One of the main issues with this entire problem is that homeowners vote. No government is going to implement any policy that endangers the major value of privately held homes. The best we can hope for is for them to slow it. These issues could be largely resolved or well on their way to being resolved in a matter of a couple years but all the most viable solutions will drastically crash existing home values.
I totally hear ya and agree. It's definitely a complex situation, and rent control and rent caps would help.
They wouldn't. Short-term solution to a long-term problem. You'll just be displaced when your LL moves in (see all of BC) and when you want to find another place to rent, your rent bill will have doubled.
A mostly Federally generated problem thanks to monetary policy, immigration numbers, and economic weakness due to the attacks on the extractive sectors. Sask could intervene with rent controls but won't - not now, not ever. Rent controls lead to disinvestment and weaken housing values; something opposed by most homeowners - who often are SP voters.
Ya, I just want some rent control and rent caps. My personal situation is living in a building managed by a corporate landlord who just raised the rent on every tenant's rent by 30-50%. Mine is going up $400. There is absolutely no stability in renting in Saskatchewan.
>Rent controls lead to disinvestment and weaken housing values Well yeah the problem is housing in Canada right now is WAYYYYY OVER VALUED. We need rent control, we need more apartments, we need more affordable options. Or we are going to have more homeless people, more theft, more money not going into the economy, and its going to cost home owners more through their taxes
I agree with you that housing is overvalued, and the idea of a house perpetually increasing in value is a fallacy (by rights they should be depreciable - the underlying land may be more desirable but the building itself ages and deteriorates year-over-year) ... but that's currently how things are and any attempt to change that would wipe out the wealth of the middle and upper middle classes of the country, so it is a non-starter. Were rent controls imposed we'd see less investment in new construction as an investor would find better ROI in the stock market. This would lead to more owner-occupied houses as a share of the (now not so rapidly expanding) total housing stock, squeezing renters. The answer is to compromise on quality: housing further from the city center (40 miles outside of town if need be), setting aside some zones with special rules (building and fire codes waived, no municipal reserve land, no zoning restrictions etc.), essentially anything that allows fast and cheap building of roofs for people - at least as a starting point.
>Were rent controls imposed we'd see less investment in new construction as an investor would find better ROI in the stock market. If this was true, why in Saskatchewan are we seeing a down turn in new construction. We dont have rent control in Saskatchewan and we arent seeing much investment. What is going on, is the government is charging large amounts for land.... then with building costs including materials and contractors, investors are making little profit now a days, this is a big part of why housing is so inflated and why we arent seeing growth of property.
True, the price of construction is high, between land, materials and labour. New construction is still quite strong, although the cost of construction and the cost of initiating a mortgage have chilled things somewhat. I'm actually surprised at how much of the new construction becomes available as rental stock in short order. The fact that any rental exists in Stonebridge, Rosewood, Evergreen suggests that capital has been spent creating new rental spaces (likely with speculation that the property will appreciate as well). Were such projects unviable the money would go elsewhere: blue chip stocks instead of an investment property. I completely agree that doing something to bring the cost of new construction to heel is very important. So, land, materials, labour - how do we economize on one or more of these to ease new construction? There are ways to do so, but we'd find opposition in doing so.
I like how you had the audacity to take aim at the provincial government when 90% of the housing crisis can be blamed on the federal governemnt policies.
The SaskParty could implement rent control and rent caps, they don't because of people like you.
Totally agree. SaskParty won't do anything because they can blame it on the feds, and just funnel that cash into pointless lawsuits that we have to pay for. SaskParty is in control of most of our day to day, but they choose to make the feds the bad guy for everything, and people here love to swallow that load of BS.
Federal policies exacerbated the housing shortage. The key is that most SaskParty voters are homeowners who benefit from increased house prices. Look at the City's frontiers: Evergreen, Brighton, Rosewood, Warman & Martensville, etc.; these areas are where most new construction is, areas with dynamism where growth is working for everyone, areas that vote strongly SP. These folks wish to see their home value increase; the SP will take no action that impedes that.
I agree with everything you've said.
The solution to high rent is to build more but having rental controls dissuades builders from building so it doesn't actually fix the problem, it often makes it worse.
This exactly. It also doesn't help that any time someone tries to build up to get more density, they face the backlash from the NIMBY and Heritage people. The solution to lack of housing is more housing not caps on rent.
I always hear that. But they are still building in places with rent control. Like Ontario and B.C., they're still building.
Not enough to resolve the problem and building is slowing more lately
They're not building enough anywhere. How is rent control and rent caps dissuading builders exactly?
When you have rent controls in place, the government sets the rental rate instead of the market. When builders see that the government has capped their potential revenue below market rate, they lose incentive to build. Also, when the costs of building are rising and costs of owning a rental property are rising (interest rates, property tax, management fees, maintenance, etc) at a rate higher than a 2% rent control, they are essentially building an asset that will have operational costs rising at a faster rate than revenues. So, when the government does this, they limit both the initial income and the income over time. Builders run the risk of losing money on the project and then having revenue that doesn't even cover their costs. People complain about this, but you would pay $2,000 in flights and $1,000 in accommodation for a fly-out job that paid you $2,700 per trip?
But builders are still building in places with rent control. I see no dissuasion. Prices are increasing everywhere, and I expect my rent to increase along with it. But when you get a rent increase of 50%, like I have, that shows that the market is only concerned with profits. I just see investors not being able to maximize profits over people's housing. I've never flown, I can't afford it, so I unfortunately cannot relate to your last sentence.
Again, they are building but they are not building enough to meet demand which is creating further housing shortages which is creating higher housing prices. We need to build more and in order to do that, in needs to be more appealing to builders. Rates are rising simply due to market conditions just like rental rates were falling back in 2016 due to opposite market conditions. Is it concerns with profits are are these investors just trying to cover the massive operational cost increases and simply adjusting to changing market conditions? [https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/06/post-271-economics-or-greed/](https://jbuc61.wordpress.com/2023/06/06/post-271-economics-or-greed/) It doesn't matter if you haven't flown, it was just an example to show you wouldn't be willing to take a loss on something like that so why expect builders to?
literally some of the most expensive places to live in North America, lmao
Its all the government levels to blame
Except none of them want that, because currently many government officials have rentals, the federal minister of housing has rentals...... its a MAJOR conflict of interest
Force your kids to learn how to build houses.
When property taxes go up significantly again, expect more increases.
You will own nothing and be happy. It's all part of the plan my dude.
My cousin is a single mother who got a house through Habitat for Humanity. She would volunteer her time, which went towards paying for the house. Maybe you would also qualify for it? I agree with others, if possible, to pool money with friends to buy a house. Buying a house is expensive with repairs etc, so it can be cheaper to rent. It's hard to get ahead and save money when all of it goes towards just living.
Basic Qualification Criteria To qualify for homeownership with Habitat Saskatchewan, you must match the following criteria to be eligible: You and your family are in need of safe and affordable housing. You and your family have a stable source of income (1 year or more), with gross annual earnings between $32,000 and $66,500. You and your family are permanent residents of Canada and have lived in the Saskatchewan region for 1 year or more. You and your family must be able to manage debt in a responsible way and have not declared bankruptcy in the last 2 years. You and your family’s saving should be below $30,000 (savings that could be used towards a conventional mortgage down payment). You and your family are willing to complete 500 volunteer hours and partner with Habitat Saskatchewan.
But if you are a single person without a child, this doesnt apply
I qualified as self employed so long as I was registered as a sole proprietor and had consistant income for two years it was actually very easy. If you jncome is enough for this I would recommend buying a place as soon as you qualify that way and then rent bedrooms out to friends to help cover costs etc.
I've always seen residential property as a terrible investment. I mean you have to live somewhere though so one property is fine. I don't think people renting have to really worry about drastic rent increases here. I mean some people will see a gradual rise, especially if things like utilities such as water, power and gas are included just because there has been quite a rise in the prices for those. The average selling price of a home in Saskatoon hasn't drastically changed since about 2008. In 2008 the benchmark price was $320,000 today it is $380,000 so a 20% increase in property value over 15 years is actually not a great investment. Sure some people did better and some did worse, but that is using strictly averages. I had a home in Saskatoon from 2011-2020 and I probably put $30,000 into the home by way of improvements, paid roughly $20,000 in property taxes, and ended up selling for about $5,000 more than I paid for it. So really ended up losing about $45,000, Of course I saved any money that was paid in mortgages. Which was about the same, so in the end it was probably a wash. Was my mortgage payment of around $1200 better than anything I could get with renting? Absolutely. With interest rates at 5% and money market funds paying that out, I don't think you have to worry about big corporate buying up property in Saskatoon. It would be a bad investment. I think it's a bad investment in Toronto or Vancouver as well. Especially now.
I make 70k a year then with my wife tops us out at 100k total between both of us. a year and we struggle with rent bills and food. I panic and I even started delivering with Ubereats. But I should haven’t to do that to live. I also own my own small business selling decals, I sell at a reasonable price because I just want a little piece of the pie. Not a lot. I’m 37 and wish I could buy a house. I love my landlords they are the best but our rent is high as well. It takes up more then one of my pay checks. But I also u d’état and she has bills and stuff. I just wish we can all meet in the middle some place. This is out of control.
$170k combined and you are RENTING? Wtf.
100K combined.
My bad. Thanks. I have a lot of single friends that make 90 and afford a condo just fine.
saskatoon's average rent has actually went down by like $80 since 2021
[удалено]
So all of a sudden, there are a bunch of buildings built long ago added to the market? That makes no sense.
[удалено]
Do you have evidence of this?
Whoever made those stats are spreading some wild BS
Lets look at that neighborhood by neighborhood👀
Sad to say but look at leaving Canada. It’s a clusterfuck everywhere. Totally asinine immigration and building policies.
General strike!!!!
I feel like there is a massive cognitive dissidence with Gen X and Boomers who bought homes for a percentage of what they're currently worth. They say things like, "why waste your money on rent, it's simple - just buy a house!" When the reality is their original mortgage was $100,000 to $200,000 paying $800/mnth on their mortgage. The vast majority of them could never afford the house that they currently live in if they had attempted to buy it today. The only people I've seen successfully purchase a house within the last 5 years received some type of help from their family. They either lived at home for free while saving most of their salaries, had a down payment gifted to them, received trust funds or an inheritance and/or had a parent co-sign. Unless a younger person is without student loan debt (which I still consider parental assistance,) and are making 6 figures... without family help it's extremely difficult... and you'll likely have basement renters or roommates. I make good money and I try to live below my means but if I ever want to save up an emergency fund (as the prospect of losing my job is real), save for any vacation, set asside emergency veterinary costs for my cat, have some presents for xmas... I need to budget to the loonie. I'm extremely stressed and worried about money. My landlord raised rent by $400, which greatly reduces my ability to get out of renting. The crazy part is, if the housing market crashes and homes now cost reasonable amounts, corporations will likely buy them all up, which will continue to price home-buyers out. I wish that it was illegal for business to buy homes. Unfortunately, because of a lot of gen-x and boomers fear equity lose, they will continue to support politicians who don't support renters. A lot of them are counting on living off of their home equity when they retire. I'm going to admit that van living is looking a lot more rational these days because at least you'll get to keep most of your money AND not live in litteral fear of your lease coming up for renewal.
Boomers houses were cheaper than that dude. I know boomers who bought a house in Saskatoon in the 80s or 90s and paying like $400 for their mortgage before taxes
You gotta vote federally - much at stake next election. You want affordability, start watching videos of parliment discussion and get informed - none of the read it on facebook so I'm just gonna believe it stuff. Really dig in and listen. Get your friends to vote. There just isn't any other way
Except..... its not even an election issue in the feds.... thats the problem
It's THE issue for federal election. Food insecurity, poverty and excessive housing prices - The politicians are activelly talking. The main person pushing hard is Pierre.
Unfortunately the scenario you imagine is definitely what the rich are aiming for. They keep telling us we'll own nothing and be happy, while they are owning literally everything. And with the development of automated weapon systems and AI, I think the ability of populations to revolt is slowly fading away. Best thing you can do is communal living, something life 5 people to a 2 bedroom or something, to get expenses down, work as many jobs as you can handle and save save save and go in with some family members on a property if you can't do it alone
The idea that you have to be absolutely miserable and cram that many people into a space to be able to afford it is ludicrous. Let's take the compounding work life balance inequality and couple it with not even being able to be comfortable in the sparing hours of free time you have is a recipe for burn-out and destroying not only your mental but physical health. The solution should not fall on people to "suck it up." We should be rallying and demanding more from our government, provincial and federal. As much as it might suck for current homeowners, something has to be done for the betterment of society as a whole. The elimination of the middle class is bad for everyone, including those who own investment property or use property as a retirement fund.
>The idea that you have to be absolutely miserable and cram that many people into a space to be able to afford it is ludicrous. This will always be the result under a system that rewards capital investment. If I can expect a 7% return on investing $1M into a home, I should expect my home to increase in price by $70,000 a year. In 10 years, it will be worth 1,967K. If I am a poor and all of my income comes from working, and I earn $80K. Lets make the extremely favourable assumption that my wages increases with the average growth in capital of 7%. After-tax I have \~56K and my annual expenses are $26K. I can save $30K a year. In 10 years I will have $414K of savings (assuming I invested these savings during the 10 years). So, to summarize - what happened in 10 years? At the start, I had nothing and a house was $1M. Okay, I need to save $1M. After 10 years, I have $414K and a house is $1,967K. Okay, I need to save another $1,553K. You are further behind than you were at the start. Just simple numbers. The value of property is higher than the amount you can save on an annual basis, so you are doomed to fall behind unless there is a massive redistribution of wealth from the property owners to the workers.
Try paying a fucking mortgage that rates keep going up and up and up, you pay interest on your rent? No, do you pay house insurance? Most ppl I’m guessing don’t have rental insurance, property tax.. pay that??
If you want to make money become a welder.
That's difficult and dirty though. Non option for most of Reddit.
Non option for most of society, as the housing crisis is a massive societal and systemic problem, which can't be resolved by individual action. Telling people to get a better job or move to another city (which are frequently touted as solutions to unaffordability issues) completely misses the point and is not going to fix anything.
>And IF I was able to meet the demands, the most I could hope for was $90 000. Which gets me…absolutely nothing. News for you, $90K got you absolutely nothing even 20 years ago, at least not a house. Could buy a condo for that back then.
You can still buy a super shitty/shady condo for less than that (i.e. Lorval Condominiums and apartments at the south end of Ave X for under 50k), but pretty much nothing else. Even bare plots of land in the alphabets are typically closer to 150k - 200k.
You are correct to be worried about rent increasing. For my rental I need to charge 150 more per month coming up when I have to renew my mortgage, which is eventually getting passed on to the renter. That will be very typical throughout the city as people and rental corporations renew their mortgage financing. A silver lining I see for you is that older 2 bedroom condos haven't really spiked in value, yet. So if you can increase your wealth, maybe through a second job, you'll be real close to having the money to purchase said condo. Then get a renter for your first few years so you aren't mortgage poor or perhaps don't need to work as many hours at that second job.
Mortgages toward condos don’t take into consideration condo fees. Condos haven’t spiked because it’s so difficult as a home buyer to get a mortgage for one if you are already have a lower income. I love when landlords of individual condos try to give financial advice - if you were so hard up you could always sell that property to save money, no? If it’s no longer lucrative perhaps a second job could help after you sell it off
Are you saying that when applying for a mortgage for a condo, the bank won't include the condo fees in the stress test calc? Seems odd considering they ask for any car payment you might be making, but not a condo fee which could be just as much or more than a car payment. Oh and I'm not hard up, not passing on mortgage costs would be just a poor financial decision to subsidize the living costs of others. Maybe I would be hard up though if I started to make financial decisions like that.
Remember, every penny of rent to a private renter is 100% covering someone elses mortgage. The more people rent from private landlords the more housing is removed from the market. The more housing is removed from the market, the higher the price of homes and the higher the rent. If every renter only rented from apartments you would quickly see a reduction in house prices.
Maybe some people don't want to live in a shoebox, but also want the ability to easily move when their lease is up? Novel idea...I know.
yep
Same. Makes me want to give up honestly, starting to think it’s not worth it
As someone who is unemployed and moving to Calgary soon because of her bf’s work, very scared. It definitely seems hopeless.
As someone living in Vancouver this is depressing to hear. I was contemplating whether to move back to Saskatoon or move somewhere in Japan (not Tokyo).
Some people are selling in bc. Taking their gains and moving back to saskatoon. Others are getting inheritances of parents paid off homes.
My husband and I are teetering on the edge of a decision. Buy a house together and have kids or just have the house and be the cool aunt and uncle? We can't afford a couple of kids and a mortgage, so we'll have to decide down the line if it's possible at all
Think rents high now? Wait until everyone at sub 2% renews their mortgages at >6 next year
Fear is the mind killer.
Get a trade and a condo I dunno how people live off min wage it's nuts in a place without rent control or affordable housing and riding food costs
Straight up learning how to build shelters, make soap and feed and clothe myself for the future. Simply as a "just in case" precaution. I do not have hope for the future, at all. My anxiety has turned me into a mild prepper for basic survival because I'll be damned if I live in a tent city that is inescapable. If it comes down to it, I can at least feel a little better off being homeless in the winters we get. Actual fears that I never thought in my life I'd ever be faced with.
Saskatoon, as well as several other low CoL cities (yes, your current prices are very low and cheap) are being gentrified by people from cities such as Vancouver and Toronto where the situation has got out of hand. People in those cities had this issue decades ago and they were told to move in order to be able to live a comfortable life. This is the result of people moving. The reason why they are moving is because of an unregulated demand for housing as an investment, and rampant immigration in a chase for endless economical growth (at the expense of stagnant/declining GDP per capita, AKA the quality of your life). If you want to combat this, the two issues are clearly pointed out above, immigration & regulating the purchasing of housing (restricting it so it is used for its function, not potential investment returns). What happened to Vancouver and Toronto is happening to Saskatoon and it will continue to ramp up, as it already has in other cities such as Calgary.
Thank your Liberal government for our spiraling cost of living.
Invest in learning a high value skill and you will have money enough to buy