Thanks Michel for pushing the boundaries on housing taxation! As you no doubt know, this isn't a popular view - but we agree that there's reason to rethink the home ownership tax shelter given the harm being caused by our addiction to high and rising home values. In case you haven't seen it, we released a paper on this last year that talks about options (https://www.gensqueeze.ca/home_ownership_tax_shelter). We don't recommend eliminating the exemption as a first step, largely because this move won't capture decades of earlier wealth gains. But it's important to have people articulate the full range of options if we're going to spark a different conversation about taxing housing wealth - and call on our political leaders to be brave enough to engage on this hot button issue.
I agree Michael. And also there needs to be a bigger conversation in this country about tax reform in general. I simply cannot wrap my head around the fact that income is taxed so high yet housing wealth so low (almost non-existant). It's no wonder people are investing in real estate. Corporate tax rates as well as property tax on industrial properties is another big issue. Here in New Brunswick I am paying a higher rate on my rural home than the Irving Oil Company pays on their many owned properties in nearby Saint John. They are a multi-billion $$ company with very poor environmental stewardship even withought considering the oil sector of their holdings. All this wealth left untapped means a lost potential. Money that we could be using to build more non-market housing. Co-op housing is not talked about enough but it is a fantastic model which the feds almost completely stopped investing in 40 years ago or so. Also never any money for social housing or shelters. Here in Saint John there is a city councilor doing a personal fund-raising campaign in an attempt to purchase an abandoned building. He and about a dozen friends are carpenters who are willing to rebuild the building in order to house 5 homeless people. This, my friends, tells me we have completely LOST THE PLOT in this country. The sum of money he needs is $36,000. An amount that would likely be considered an acceptable amount to write off as an error on the books of a few local billionaires here in the city.
I don’t maybe know about policy solutions, but I feel like at least rhetorically I wish there was some more pressure for politicians to be explicit about whether the goal is achieving “affordability” as in prices dropping (or stagnating) for housing that is similar to what already exists, or simply creating more and more tiny units that are actually just as expensive per square foot. It seems there’s some appeal to trying to avoiding picking a side by preserving the price of most/many existing homes while making new homes cheaper by making them smaller.
Agreed Valerie. That's why we think it's important to begin with anchoring policy in the goal of having prices stall (or fall). We still need more bravery from our political leaders when it comes to tackling the wealth side of the housing equation, to ask home owners who've made outsized wealth gains to contribute to solving the problems from which they've benefited . That's a major absence in both the federal budget and the housing plan. The word 'wealth' doesn't appear once in the housing plan...
I feel that part of the issue is the perception of what "a fair chance" really means. It's difficult for those without direct experience - whether personally, or through friends or family - to truly understand the implications (to put it generously; I could also say they don't really care).
There still seems to be a prevailing belief among too many that young people already have a fair chance and are simply complaining, which means there's no real urgency felt to address the core problem. Instead, they view it as a communications issue that needs a different narrative. That's what this budget seemed to really be about - an effort to "change the conversation".
I doubt there's even a conviction to execute any of the proposed solutions, let alone a concern about whether these efforts go far enough to genuinely address fairness. Those making the decisions are so removed from the issue, I believe they don't even see it as real.
This likely holds true for many regular citizen Boomers and Gen Xers as well. It’s just so far outside their personal experiences that they don’t see it as a legitimate concern, but rather as an abstract idea they engage with but don’t truly grasp the urgency of.
"I doubt there's even a conviction to execute any of the proposed solutions, let alone a concern about whether these efforts go far enough to genuinely address fairness." - can't say I disagree with this, given the history of this adminsitration, but just the fact that we have them talking about these things is a big step towards a resolution (whether that comes from the government, or a future one), don't you think? Many conversations have now been sparked around these issues, this is what will hopefull change the minds of those citizens who still don't recognize what is happening to younger generations.
Unless awareness translates into meaningful action or, at the very least, a deep understanding of what needs to be done, it can actually hinder progress by making people feel satisfied with merely acknowledging the problem.
The capital gains issue is a good example. People may recognize generational unfairness, but their reaction to even minor actions like this shows an unwillingness to make any personal concessions to address it. The extent of the hyperbole around it even makes me wonder if it will truly move forward (though I was initially encouraged to see it put forward at all).
If people acknowledge the housing crisis but remain unwilling to consider that solutions may require even a bit of discomfort for cottage owners and mom-and-pop investors, I am not sure they truly acknowledge the crisis. If they don't see the need for action, are they truly aware?
Agree with your assesment of what's happened re capital gains stuff.
Also great point on the awareness stuff. Awareness is not really useful if it doesn't result in action. But action necessitates awareness, doesn't it? So it seems like progress is being made, since awareness is growing...
There are certainly loads of people out there that still don't get it, but that just means we have more work to do, not only to get those people on board, but to also ensure that everyone starts to recognize not just the problem, but what needs to be done to fix it (action), and how they might be contributing to it!
Curious about any suggestions you might have on what else we should be doing?
Generally, I think we need more focus on helping younger people find ways to shift power to themselves and perhaps less on convincing older people to give it to them (because they won't). It's crucial to help younger people advocate for policies and initiatives (and show them how and what to do) that redistribute opportunities and resources more equitably. It's about finding ways to enfranchise younger people and ensuring they have a stronger voice in shaping the future. We need proactive ways to gain power and make change happen - less about convincing people to give up advantages, and more about how we can take them.
Maybe this involves helping younger people get started in politics, providing support to set up and get going, supporting their campaigns, and offering resources and mentorship. By actively empowering younger generations, we can create a more balanced and fair society.
I'll join Kareem in agreeing with you on this. Also, in case you don't get Gen Squeeze's monthly email updates, this is a reason why we're backing Vote 16's campaign to lower the voting age, which has boosted younger people's participation in elections in other countries. You can help too by contacting your senator(s) to ask them to support bill S-201. https://vote16.ca/senate
I couldn't agree more!! I think I saw recently that millenials are now the largest voting generation...so it should be possible to swing things in the favor of younger people if we get them involved.
We're actually currently working on developping a Generation Squeeze "Ambassador Toolkit", part of which would consist of a specific set of asks that would be directed at young people looking to make the sort of changes we advocate for. Any ideas on what those asks should be? What would someone like you (and others you know), be willing to do that would help push forward policy changes, etc?
In my "real life," I work in design and communications, so I know better than to undermine the process by making assumptions about your current strategy, research, or needs analysis with a random idea to throw into the plans like a wrench ;). However, if you’re looking for more specific design help or strategic input, I’d be happy to get involved. My first job (many moons ago) was as a design manager for a non-profit, where I designed and developed a lot of stuff much like what you're aiming for with your toolkit. An added bonus (or not, depending on your perspective) is you’d actually get to know who I am!
I think Millennials aren't the largest part of the electorate yet, which I made a post about a bit ago. This is about rates of citizenship among different age groups, although some of the math was kind of back of the envelope. But, still for sure true that the balance is shifting a bit!
Brilliant! Keep sharing our stories. Lived experience tells a story that numbers alone miss.
All the residential property capital gains must be taxed, no tax exemption for the first residential property capital gains.
Thanks Michel for pushing the boundaries on housing taxation! As you no doubt know, this isn't a popular view - but we agree that there's reason to rethink the home ownership tax shelter given the harm being caused by our addiction to high and rising home values. In case you haven't seen it, we released a paper on this last year that talks about options (https://www.gensqueeze.ca/home_ownership_tax_shelter). We don't recommend eliminating the exemption as a first step, largely because this move won't capture decades of earlier wealth gains. But it's important to have people articulate the full range of options if we're going to spark a different conversation about taxing housing wealth - and call on our political leaders to be brave enough to engage on this hot button issue.
I agree Michael. And also there needs to be a bigger conversation in this country about tax reform in general. I simply cannot wrap my head around the fact that income is taxed so high yet housing wealth so low (almost non-existant). It's no wonder people are investing in real estate. Corporate tax rates as well as property tax on industrial properties is another big issue. Here in New Brunswick I am paying a higher rate on my rural home than the Irving Oil Company pays on their many owned properties in nearby Saint John. They are a multi-billion $$ company with very poor environmental stewardship even withought considering the oil sector of their holdings. All this wealth left untapped means a lost potential. Money that we could be using to build more non-market housing. Co-op housing is not talked about enough but it is a fantastic model which the feds almost completely stopped investing in 40 years ago or so. Also never any money for social housing or shelters. Here in Saint John there is a city councilor doing a personal fund-raising campaign in an attempt to purchase an abandoned building. He and about a dozen friends are carpenters who are willing to rebuild the building in order to house 5 homeless people. This, my friends, tells me we have completely LOST THE PLOT in this country. The sum of money he needs is $36,000. An amount that would likely be considered an acceptable amount to write off as an error on the books of a few local billionaires here in the city.
I don’t maybe know about policy solutions, but I feel like at least rhetorically I wish there was some more pressure for politicians to be explicit about whether the goal is achieving “affordability” as in prices dropping (or stagnating) for housing that is similar to what already exists, or simply creating more and more tiny units that are actually just as expensive per square foot. It seems there’s some appeal to trying to avoiding picking a side by preserving the price of most/many existing homes while making new homes cheaper by making them smaller.
Agreed Valerie. That's why we think it's important to begin with anchoring policy in the goal of having prices stall (or fall). We still need more bravery from our political leaders when it comes to tackling the wealth side of the housing equation, to ask home owners who've made outsized wealth gains to contribute to solving the problems from which they've benefited . That's a major absence in both the federal budget and the housing plan. The word 'wealth' doesn't appear once in the housing plan...
I feel that part of the issue is the perception of what "a fair chance" really means. It's difficult for those without direct experience - whether personally, or through friends or family - to truly understand the implications (to put it generously; I could also say they don't really care).
There still seems to be a prevailing belief among too many that young people already have a fair chance and are simply complaining, which means there's no real urgency felt to address the core problem. Instead, they view it as a communications issue that needs a different narrative. That's what this budget seemed to really be about - an effort to "change the conversation".
I doubt there's even a conviction to execute any of the proposed solutions, let alone a concern about whether these efforts go far enough to genuinely address fairness. Those making the decisions are so removed from the issue, I believe they don't even see it as real.
This likely holds true for many regular citizen Boomers and Gen Xers as well. It’s just so far outside their personal experiences that they don’t see it as a legitimate concern, but rather as an abstract idea they engage with but don’t truly grasp the urgency of.
"I doubt there's even a conviction to execute any of the proposed solutions, let alone a concern about whether these efforts go far enough to genuinely address fairness." - can't say I disagree with this, given the history of this adminsitration, but just the fact that we have them talking about these things is a big step towards a resolution (whether that comes from the government, or a future one), don't you think? Many conversations have now been sparked around these issues, this is what will hopefull change the minds of those citizens who still don't recognize what is happening to younger generations.
Unless awareness translates into meaningful action or, at the very least, a deep understanding of what needs to be done, it can actually hinder progress by making people feel satisfied with merely acknowledging the problem.
The capital gains issue is a good example. People may recognize generational unfairness, but their reaction to even minor actions like this shows an unwillingness to make any personal concessions to address it. The extent of the hyperbole around it even makes me wonder if it will truly move forward (though I was initially encouraged to see it put forward at all).
If people acknowledge the housing crisis but remain unwilling to consider that solutions may require even a bit of discomfort for cottage owners and mom-and-pop investors, I am not sure they truly acknowledge the crisis. If they don't see the need for action, are they truly aware?
Agree with your assesment of what's happened re capital gains stuff.
Also great point on the awareness stuff. Awareness is not really useful if it doesn't result in action. But action necessitates awareness, doesn't it? So it seems like progress is being made, since awareness is growing...
There are certainly loads of people out there that still don't get it, but that just means we have more work to do, not only to get those people on board, but to also ensure that everyone starts to recognize not just the problem, but what needs to be done to fix it (action), and how they might be contributing to it!
Curious about any suggestions you might have on what else we should be doing?
Generally, I think we need more focus on helping younger people find ways to shift power to themselves and perhaps less on convincing older people to give it to them (because they won't). It's crucial to help younger people advocate for policies and initiatives (and show them how and what to do) that redistribute opportunities and resources more equitably. It's about finding ways to enfranchise younger people and ensuring they have a stronger voice in shaping the future. We need proactive ways to gain power and make change happen - less about convincing people to give up advantages, and more about how we can take them.
Maybe this involves helping younger people get started in politics, providing support to set up and get going, supporting their campaigns, and offering resources and mentorship. By actively empowering younger generations, we can create a more balanced and fair society.
I'll join Kareem in agreeing with you on this. Also, in case you don't get Gen Squeeze's monthly email updates, this is a reason why we're backing Vote 16's campaign to lower the voting age, which has boosted younger people's participation in elections in other countries. You can help too by contacting your senator(s) to ask them to support bill S-201. https://vote16.ca/senate
I couldn't agree more!! I think I saw recently that millenials are now the largest voting generation...so it should be possible to swing things in the favor of younger people if we get them involved.
We're actually currently working on developping a Generation Squeeze "Ambassador Toolkit", part of which would consist of a specific set of asks that would be directed at young people looking to make the sort of changes we advocate for. Any ideas on what those asks should be? What would someone like you (and others you know), be willing to do that would help push forward policy changes, etc?
In my "real life," I work in design and communications, so I know better than to undermine the process by making assumptions about your current strategy, research, or needs analysis with a random idea to throw into the plans like a wrench ;). However, if you’re looking for more specific design help or strategic input, I’d be happy to get involved. My first job (many moons ago) was as a design manager for a non-profit, where I designed and developed a lot of stuff much like what you're aiming for with your toolkit. An added bonus (or not, depending on your perspective) is you’d actually get to know who I am!
I think Millennials aren't the largest part of the electorate yet, which I made a post about a bit ago. This is about rates of citizenship among different age groups, although some of the math was kind of back of the envelope. But, still for sure true that the balance is shifting a bit!