Recent content by kEiThZ

These are silly conspiracies. Bids are expensive. Hundreds of thousands to millions to respond. Very rare to see companies bid if they genuinely believe they don't have a shot. Indeed, the federal government has cancelled projects where they ended up with a sole bidder. Federal project...

Most of that is additional health and social spending. As an example, is the growth of OAS we discussed here earlier. This government has grown the public service substantially. But simple math will tell you that's not the root of our fiscal problems. Laying off 50 000 public servants will...

That's not evidence of STRs causing a housing crisis. That's evidence that they face the same tight housing market as everywhere else. For STRs to be the problem in those markets, you'd have to show that: 1) Those STRs are suitable for year-round living. 2) The owners would likely to choose...

Correct me if I'm wrong. I haven't seen a single problem we discuss here where your preferred solution isn't a federal program (new or expanded) or legislation. It's your natural instinct. There's nothing wrong with that preference. We all have our biases. And yours leads to demanding that...

You want national legislation to solve a problem of too many parties in cottage country? And you think this is relevant to the housing crisis because? To be clear, this is not evidence of STRs impacting housing in those areas. Do you have actual evidence? Did you actually read the links...

This article is talking about getting overwhelmed with revellers. Speaking of Canadian law you should know that regulating property is squarely in provincial jurisdiction.

What facts? Can you cite the post where you provided evidence that STRs were a problem in cottage country? I must have missed it.

Our contracting framework doesn't allow automatic sole source without direct political intervention. And good luck with that.

There's no "carve-out". Rules against STRs are regional not national. It's actually you asking for further regulation. I've simply argued the feds shouldn't be sticking their nose in areas that aren't really a problem. And the ownership demographics of cottages isn't a national problem.

You mean substantially taxing capital gains from housing (which they limit to $250k per person for life on their principal residence) and running a 6% national deficit?

I could ask you the same: You seem to think national policy should be built entirely around your life. Well then, it behooves us to discuss your life.

No. Just surprised you don't understand how privileged you were. Maybe you're focused on the importance of owning a cottage because of your childhood experiences. You seem to forget how important the stability your parents provided was. They weren't moving around every few years just because...

It's both. Units moving to the STR market increase rents and purchase prices. Renters and buyers have to compete with the cashflow potential of an STR. Heck, there's a whole hidden market where people run STR businesses using rented condos. The above could be true of cottages. But again...

Very much doubt that. We'd have heard more about a project team. But even there's some hidden project team somewhere, the RFI-RFQ-RFP-Contract Award timeline will take 12-18 months at least.

Agreed. I broadly see STRs are improving access for those who wouldn't and/or couldn't normally own a cottage. I don't see how access can be improved if the ability to rent them is removed. The difference should be obvious to most. But we're also talking to a Boomer who can't understand why...