Why we fight: Squeezed from Coast to Coast
First in a series of stories about why we're part of Generation Squeeze
To wrap up this year and keep us inspired in 2024, we’re going to start sharing some personal reflections from our leadership team about why we joined Gen Squeeze’s quest for generational fairness. First off, we bring you the story of Jennifer Fox, a founding member, advisor and manager of our X and Facebook channels.
We hope this series might also inspire you to share your story about how generational unfairness touches your life and the lives of those you love.
Jennifer Fox: Squeezed from Coast to Coast
I joined Generation Squeeze as a founding member in that post-2010 Olympics haze when we all still had hope in a Canada that works for all generations. My 30th birthday spurred reflection on the idea that hard work pays off:
“Study hard. Get good grades and go to grad school. Buy a home, save for retirement, and raise a family.”
And when that doesn’t work?
“You just need to save a little longer.”
What’s worse was the prevailing advice echoed by Canadian media at the time: “Spend less on avocado toast and lattes”.
A decade ago, young Canadians’ financial struggles were seen as personal failures. Dr. Paul Kershaw and the Generation Squeeze Lab at the University of British Columbia were the first voices I heard swimming against that tide with a different narrative: That young Canadians face a disproportionately large squeeze for time and money compared to the generation that came before them. Dr. Kershaw’s growing body of research showed how government budgets and policies were neglecting Canada’s younger generations. It attracted a good crew of us founding members, and many of us are still here over a decade later, celebrating our wins and advocating for change.
In the early days, the canary in the coal mine was singing loudly in Vancouver. Housing was quickly becoming unaffordable, and the Occupy Movement was in full swing. That groundswell of people power inspired Gen Squeeze’s goal: Gain the momentum needed to influence the world of politics. And we did! We hosted community town halls and I was given the task of co-organizing Vancouver’s very first rally for affordable housing in 2015 with Eveline Xia, the creator of the hashtag #donthave1million. Partner organizations joined in to amplify the canary’s song and to demand transparency in government housing data. Gen Squeeze memberships were growing – but sadly, I had already reached my breaking point.
When it became clear to me that retirement savings and family planning were well out of reach, I left Vancouver for the more affordable east coast – but not before writing a dear john letter for The Province that went viral. The open comments reflected a society divided, many still unaware that the deck had been stacked against young Canadians.
In the wake of my departure, a foreign buyer’s tax came into effect in Vancouver. Three years later came the country’s first speculation and vacancy taxes, then came regulations for short term rentals. These were all part of the solutions Gen Squeeze had proposed for dialing down harmful housing demand. But for me it was too little, too late.
In Halifax I got a great job and was elected president of a housing co-op, but the canary in the coal mine was still singing to an empty room. I spoke regularly of Gen Squeeze to MPs, MLAs and a packed city council chamber. I warned of the approaching housing crisis, like a visitor from the future having time traveled, but I saw no urgency from our politicians. It was painful to watch a city make the same mistakes Vancouver had, and worse to know there were data to facilitate better policy choices.
Enter a perfect storm of skyrocketing home prices, my unwillingness to compromise on becoming a mother, and the COVID-19 pandemic. My mother moved in, and we needed more space. We got pushed out of Halifax and into rural New Brunswick where we bought a home and now feel grateful for what we have: our apple trees, a view of the Wolastoq river, work from home. But our multi-generational household is far from easy. It was not a goal any of us had. It is an adaptation we made because our cities, provinces and our country are choosing not to support the generation raising children the same way they have long supported our elders.
With rising inflation, a warming planet and growing political division, I am anxious for our family and our country. I am not alone. The canary is now long dead, and struggle is the new norm for young Canadians. (Editor’s note: False alarm! THE CANARY IS NOT DEAD! She’s just taking a well-deserved rest, so we’ll keep singing for her for awhile.)
I’m still a member of Generation Squeeze because there is still so much work left to be done, and so much hope that crisis will spur citizen engagement on generational fairness. Political bravery is badly needed to right the ship before it’s too late for my son’s generation as well.
Jennifer is a founding member of the Association for Generational Equity (our national non-profit). She began her career as a teacher where she became increasingly concerned about the growing vulnerabilities she saw in her young students and their families. Switching careers to policy development and public health research, Jennifer worked for BC First Nations organizations and then joined the Generation Squeeze lab over a decade ago. Her work at UBC focused on knowledge translation and grant writing. She continues to work and volunteer in the intersections of education, health research, social justice and community development. You can chat with her on Generation Squeeze's Facebook and X/Twitter accounts, which she currently manages.
Generation Squeeze has a wealth of practical policy proposals for right now. I am asking if Squeeze members are familiar with Helena Norberg- Hodges ideas- works. If corporate Growth does not wipe out our future , then our Future is Local- decentralized and less materialistic. In OUR Future is Local she argues that this is happening around the world...maybe so but I don't see much evidence of it in Ontario.
BUT it's not the sort of thing corporate media would report on.
Thanks for your article Jennifer. Very well said.
To me, (I am a very young boomer or very old GenXer) the problem is one of wealth redistribution in a just society.
In a just society we should care about the whole of our community and ensure everyone has opportunity and is sufficiently supported. Part of that caring involves sharing the wealth. Income/wealth redistribution via taxation and equitable redistribution is critical in order to assure health, happiness and a secure future for all of us and our children.
We have a few glaring issues in Canada that need to be addressed one way or another.
For example:
We have insufficient income/asset-testing for tax supported programs in Canada.
We treat individuals differently based on age (favouring seniors) which is flat out policy discrimination which we wouldn’t tolerate if were based on race/religion/sexual orientation etc.
Our governments use tax dollars to support public sector pensions and benefits and early retirement in the public sector that the private sector and small business can only dream about.
Why should a teacher retire in their early to mid-50’s with an indexed (and very generous) pension for the rest of their life? If the government is matching pension contributions (or more) for government workers why do they not offer this same benefit to other citizens to ensure their securely funded retirements too?They don’t match CPP contributions for example. They don’t provide citizens with gold-plated medical/dental benefits funded 94% by government with tiny co-pays such as teachers in Ontario enjoy for example.
Government workers are not keen to give up their unfair share of tax revenue supported benefits/pensions any more than seniors appear to be. These two voting blocks alone almost guarantee nothing will change.
Ultimately, if everyone has to give a little bit more and no one is happy - that’s the sign of a good compromise that is fair and just.
I often hear people blame private enterprise - ie ‘corporate raiders’ are making huge profits and not providing equivalent pensions/benefits to their employees, ie greedy capitalists are to blame.
But the reality is that most people working in the private sector are employed by small and medium sized businesses (88% of private sector in 2021) which cannot begin to provide what government does for their workers. Sure, make Google and Tesla etc. fund better pensions and benefits out of their profits - but this represents a very small percentage of folks working in the ‘corporate’ world. (Better to make large corporate players pay their fair share of corporate tax, and prevent offshoring of head offices to tax havens.)
Government also allows seniors to income split but not working families. How is this fair or equitable?
Seniors maximize OAS when they have assets in the millions. See this article from the G&M Dec 30/2023 - https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/personal-finance/financial-facelift/article-can-wilbur-60-and-patsy-55-afford-to-retire-next-year-and-gift-some/
Why is OAS not income/means tested?
I think we should encourage seniors entitled to OAS who don’t need it to redirect those funds to social causes (food banks and subsidized housing come to mind) or at least towards a down payment on housing for their children/grandchildren.
If government isn’t willing to address these glaring inequities to create a more just society then citizens should begin doing it themselves and maybe that would help draw attention to the issue and help sway opinion.
We can try, I just hope that everyone who is privileged is willing to give up a little of what they have to achieve a more just society.