Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[Altair]

I mean Ukraine and Russia have like 40 and 50 yr old men fighting each other. Ukraine gets shit for not sending 20 yr olds to the front. But that whole cohort suffered a post-communist demographics collapse and they don't want to make it worse.

I mean,I guess that's hope for the future.

Conflicts cannot be sustained long term because there are not enough young people to throw into the meat grinder. At least in the first world.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I mean Ukraine and Russia have like 40 and 50 yr old men fighting each other. Ukraine gets shit for not sending 20 yr olds to the front. But that whole cohort suffered a post-communist demographics collapse and they don't want to make it worse.



I question how much of this is correlation. Like "Extremely Liberal" just being a college aged kid or in this case man child I guess.

According to this sight the average age of Ukrainian casualty is 38.7.

UA Losses

This website presents statistics of documented Ukrainian losses during the war in Ukraine.

ualosses.org

The bell curve actually looks pretty even:

UA Losses

This website presents statistics of documented Ukrainian losses during the war in Ukraine.

ualosses.org

But I am all for sending the old to fight.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Whoa.....there is another thread for that discussion.
Not sure how it applies to our present Govt.

 

[captloadie]

I have a skewed view I believe on some of the Liberal policies that have encouraged larger families, was wondering if anyone was seeing something different. From my perspective, the childcare benefit has assisted parents in making a decision to have more children, as the cost of daycare is significantly less. The change to 18 months of parental leave has also seemed to encourage families to have more children, if for no other reason than to get additional paid time away from work.

This may be countered by Liberal policy that has a larger portion of individuals being accepted for their gender fluidity then deciding not to have children as they don't feel the need to meet previous gender norms.

 

[brihard]

I have a skewed view I believe on some of the Liberal policies that have encouraged larger families, was wondering if anyone was seeing something different. From my perspective, the childcare benefit has assisted parents in making a decision to have more children, as the cost of daycare is significantly less. The change to 18 months of parental leave has also seemed to encourage families to have more children, if for no other reason than to get additional paid time away from work.

This may be countered by Liberal policy that has a larger portion of individuals being accepted for their gender fluidity then deciding not to have children as they don't feel the need to meet previous gender norms.

The 18 month parental leave simply stretches the 12 month benefits over 18 months. Same dollar value.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Its men aged 35-45, so if they're still a "man child", they will likely remain in that state forever.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

But I am all for sending the old to fight.

This is an interesting series based on only oldsters serving in the military:

Old Man's War : Scalzi, John: Amazon.ca: Books

Old Man's War : Scalzi, John: Amazon.ca: Books

www.amazon.ca

 

[Altair]

I have a skewed view I believe on some of the Liberal policies that have encouraged larger families, was wondering if anyone was seeing something different. From my perspective, the childcare benefit has assisted parents in making a decision to have more children, as the cost of daycare is significantly less. The change to 18 months of parental leave has also seemed to encourage families to have more children, if for no other reason than to get additional paid time away from work.

This may be countered by Liberal policy that has a larger portion of individuals being accepted for their gender fluidity then deciding not to have children as they don't feel the need to meet previous gender norms.

Falling birth rate suggests no.

The CCB and extended parental leave help if you're already in a position to have a child. Suitable housing, check, steady career, check, spouse, check.

Considering many don't check these boxes many don't find themselves in a position to be able to take advantage of something like the CCB.

As for the gender thing, studies suggest Canadians want 2-3 kids on average. Canadians cannot afford it, which is why our birth rate is plummeting.

Now I know this belongs in the other thread , but if we topped up the CCB/childcare/parental spending to what OAS is getting annually having kids would actually be a great way to get ahead financially. Currently CCB is about slowing the bleeding, and when young Canadians feel squeezed as it is, why make the decision that will tax their time and disposal incomes further? Because society would benefit? What has Canadian society done for them/us that warrants us making that sacrifice?

 

[Maxman1]

Whoa.....there is another thread for that discussion.
Not sure how it applies to our present Govt.

Should I post the image again?

 

[ytz]

Currently CCB is about slowing the bleeding,

CCB gives me just over $100/mo for my grade school kid at my family income level (~$180k). Big help there..... Doesn't even cover half of her afterschool care.

I think CCB is just a checkmark exercise to say they did something. Nothing more.

The biggest impact is housing. And it's pretty damn obvious. There's a direct inverse correlation between housing costs and birth rates. Here's a simple exercise anybody can do. Consider what the cost is of an extra bedroom in your hood. What's the cost of going from 2 to 3 bedrooms, or 3 to 4 bedrooms. That's the cost of having 1, 2, or 3 kids up front. That's the marginal capital cost of another child. In a lot of cases, just moving from a one bedroom condo to a 2 bedroom condo is $100k more on the mortgage. Getting an extra $200-300/mo in CCB will help. But it doesn't even begin to cover the added mortgage. And you have to have that before you have the kid.

 

[Altair]

CCB gives me just over $100/mo for my grade school kid at my family income level (~$180k). Big help there..... Doesn't even cover half of her afterschool care.

I think CCB is just a checkmark exercise to say they did something. Nothing more.

The biggest impact is housing. And it's pretty damn obvious. There's a direct inverse correlation between housing costs and birth rates. Here's a simple exercise anybody can do. Consider what the cost is of an extra bedroom in your hood. What's the cost of going from 2 to 3 bedrooms, or 3 to 4 bedrooms. That's the cost of having 1, 2, or 3 kids up front. That's the marginal capital cost of another child. In a lot of cases, just moving from a one bedroom condo to a 2 bedroom condo is $100k more on the mortgage. Getting an extra $200-300/mo in CCB will help. But it doesn't even begin to cover the added mortgage. And you have to have that before you have the kid.

I find it fun when I see people in 4 bedroom houses. They either have no kids or they have 3 kids.

No kids meaning they put all their time and energy into getting the 4 bedroom house via savings or career advancement, or they are really wealthy and the 3 kids is a flex.

I'm not sure when it's going to come up in the data, or if it can be isolated somehow, but it's also fun watching my wife go through her Facebook friends and saying so and so are having their 3rd, they must be rich.

 

[brihard]

CCB gives me just over $100/mo for my grade school kid at my family income level (~$180k). Big help there..... Doesn't even cover half of her afterschool care.

I think CCB is just a checkmark exercise to say they did something. Nothing more.

The biggest impact is housing. And it's pretty damn obvious. There's a direct inverse correlation between housing costs and birth rates. Here's a simple exercise anybody can do. Consider what the cost is of an extra bedroom in your hood. What's the cost of going from 2 to 3 bedrooms, or 3 to 4 bedrooms. That's the cost of having 1, 2, or 3 kids up front. That's the marginal capital cost of another child. In a lot of cases, just moving from a one bedroom condo to a 2 bedroom condo is $100k more on the mortgage. Getting an extra $200-300/mo in CCB will help. But it doesn't even begin to cover the added mortgage. And you have to have that before you have the kid.

Ok but CCB is means tested as well; at 180k net household, the same logic applies regarding apportionment of benefits. CCB should definitely be heavily weighted to low income families. You and I ain’t it.

 

[Altair]

Ok but CCB is means tested as well; at 180k net household, the same logic applies regarding apportionment of benefits. CCB should definitely be heavily weighted to low income families. You and I ain’t it.

You're right, but the basic equation remains the same.

How does someone who makes 60-90k afford a 4 bedroom house or rental?

300-500 per kid doesn't move the needle in terms of housing to make up for said kid, and you only get the money after having the kid.

 

[ytz]

Ok but CCB is means tested as well; at 180k net household, the same logic applies regarding apportionment of benefits. CCB should definitely be heavily weighted to low income families. You and I ain’t it.

Sure. But I put that income there to point out at the exact same level, if it was split between my wife and I, we'd both be getting full OAS. So several hundred dollars a month when we're old and mortgage free. But only $100 per month when we have a kid and pay $4k in mortgage and property taxes per month. Make it make sense.

 

[captloadie]

CCB gives me just over $100/mo for my grade school kid at my family income level (~$180k). Big help there..... Doesn't even cover half of her afterschool care.

I think CCB is just a checkmark exercise to say they did something. Nothing more.

The biggest impact is housing. And it's pretty damn obvious. There's a direct inverse correlation between housing costs and birth rates. Here's a simple exercise anybody can do. Consider what the cost is of an extra bedroom in your hood. What's the cost of going from 2 to 3 bedrooms, or 3 to 4 bedrooms. That's the cost of having 1, 2, or 3 kids up front. That's the marginal capital cost of another child. In a lot of cases, just moving from a one bedroom condo to a 2 bedroom condo is $100k more on the mortgage. Getting an extra $200-300/mo in CCB will help. But it doesn't even begin to cover the added mortgage. And you have to have that before you have the kid.

Your last paragraph highlights one of the affordability issues and whether you can afford more children. Or, to be more precise, the myth. You don't need to have a separate bedroom for every child. It would be nice to, but it isn't a requirement, especially when they are young. It actually creates more of a burden on the family, in that it is more to clean, more to furnish, more to pay for.

Government intervention that goes to mortgaging larger and larger two generation homes is causing both a real problem now as an affordability issue, and a future problem, where it becomes the expected standard that you need to have a room for each child, marble kitchens with an island, and a fully finished basement to relax in.

Going back to the CWELC, it is one of the benefits that can allow parents (and yes taxpayers as a whole) to do so much more for their kids. My wife's families were averaging $12K/year/child before CWELC. Now those families only pay 5-6K out of pocket per year/per child. If they take that extra 6K and put it in RESPs and TFSAs every year, for the 3 1/2 years on average they have those savings, they can build needed savings.

 

[ytz]

Your last paragraph highlights one of the affordability issues and whether you can afford more children. Or, to be more precise, the myth. You don't need to have a separate bedroom for every child. It would be nice to, but it isn't a requirement, especially when they are young. It actually creates more of a burden on the family, in that it is more to clean, more to furnish, more to pay for.

I didn't grow up with a backyard either. In the part of the world where I grew up, that wasn't a thing. But most families in Canada, consider an individual bedroom and usually some kind of lawn space a minimum requirement. You can argue that our culture is entirely wrong. Go for it. But you're not going to reverse the birth rate decline, if that's the plan.

 

[YZT580]

I didn't grow up with a backyard either. In the part of the world where I grew up, that wasn't a thing. But most families in Canada, consider an individual bedroom and usually some kind of lawn space a minimum requirement. You can argue that our culture is entirely wrong. Go for it. But you're not going to reverse the birth rate decline, if that's the plan.

off the top of my head: baby boomers house size less than 1200 sq. ft. GenX house size was between 1500 and 2000. Millennials are up to 2500. No one can afford anymore so the sizes are going back down but it will take a while. They did it to themselves.

 

[ytz]

off the top of my head: baby boomers house size less than 1200 sq. ft. GenX house size was between 1500 and 2000. Millennials are up to 2500. No one can afford anymore so the sizes are going back down but it will take a while. They did it to themselves.

Source please.

Somehow I doubt the cohort with the lowest homeownership rate is only buying 2500 sqft houses. But give me something credible and I'll buy it.

 

[YZT580]

Source please.

top of my head, I told you. I guess you missed it. Plus I read the real estate and compare the house sizes with the age. Plus I was brought up in Scarborough as a baby boomer and lived in one or two. I have watched subdivisions being built and seen the average size increase proportionately with time. I can drive around the different neighbourhoods now and see the size of the house compared to the lot and I can read the advertising billboards for developments for luxury towns starting at 2000 sq. ft and detached at 2500. How many examples do you need or does it have to be a product of AI before you consider someone elses comments as being of value or perish the thought even true?

 

[MilEME09]

main street polling has the liberals just barely over 50% in BC in new poll, quick google and i believe the last time a federal party was this high was 1984

https://twitter.com/x/status/2044502057772519728

EDIT:

also manufacturing sales up in feb

https://twitter.com/x/status/2044414352443514951