2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Mayoral Race

[salsa]

Adam C-F @AdamCF
NEW: John Tory just pulled out of tomorrow's debate on housing. Is it because Tory won't build any new affordable housing? #TOpoli

 

[SunriseChampion]

ouch, how are you paying that much for rent? are you renting in a downtown condo?

I'm at Y/Eg in a typical rental mid-rise building, and my jr 1 bedroom is still just a few bucks under $1,000 (that includes one parking spot, and hydro!).

I also wish I could find a 'significant other' and not just for companionship it would make a huge difference financially. Yardsticks are always about families with kids, but it's fair question: can single people afford to live in this city?

Oh, hell no significant other. That'd be more headache than it's worth
I'd rather stay financially stretched.

It is true though that as soon as you have a double income, costs become much more manageable. This explains why, for example, most of my friends live in somewhat intolerable shared arrangements. The few who go it alone find it harder to keep up.

60k for a family of four IS low....but so is 19k for an individual. If I only made 19k, I don't even want to know what sort of hole I'd have to live in.

Yes, I rent a condo unit, but non-condo rents are not much cheaper in this area. I wanted to live in a certain geographic area and so push the limit on rent, but that doesn't mean that I should feel disadvantaged for paying so much. It is what it is.

That's just how I feel about my situation. It doesn't mean that I disregard those of similar means who have a hard time of it. I very much agree that poverty reduction is extremely important, but understand that it is not a municipal issue.

PS: Parking included! I wish, it's another ~150/mth to rent a spot in my building....if you can find one available.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Your argument is with StatsCan and CMHC. Not me. They consider you poor.

The definition does make sense. Quality of life is largely determined by disposable income. If a huge proportion of your family income is spent on food and shelter, you are poor. Working poor.

Ironically, as a species, humans in developed countries have never before had such easy access to inexpensive food. I don't have to farm, bake, prep or hunt. I've read that one of the top reasons we're getting fat is not the sugar in our foods, but that it takes nearly no energy to get our food in vast quantities.

 

[nohostages]

This. Exactly this. Worse still, that lower middle class family will pay higher user fees and taxes to support those who are benefitting with subsidised services, leaving them actually worse off than the families being helped. No where is this more apparent than with child care and subsidised housing. It actually helps to earn less in some circumstances.

I can see how frustrating that must be for those who work hard, pay thier taxes and feel pinched financially. However those that are receiving subsidised housing and childcare may be able to claw themselves out of the category who qualifies for these subsidies and begin paying a tax rate that contributes to the next wave of workers who need that help to get themselves through the pinch of their early forays into self sufficiency. Some people top out at a rate that keeps them in subsidy income levels, but many excel and become payers to the system instead of recipients of that system.And the alternative? Were we to leave these workers to fend for themselves in a tough housing market with babysitters they cannot trust or afford would mean that many would stay home on assistance leading to a population who cannot see their way out of poverty and require more support in the long run. Its not perfect but I for one am happy to contribute.

 

[kEiThZ]

I did it too. My compatibility with Tory was over 80%.

There's a few over here that accuse me of being firmly on the right. I've kept saying that it's not that I'm on the right, so much as they are far to the left. I have the same thing with many of my politically active friends.

Finally, proof that I'm the centrist I claim to be!

In any event, my disapproval of Chow has to do a little with her history and a little with her platform. But I do sort of understand. I think it's hard to run on the left and focus on transit rather exclusively. Leftists are obligated to cater to lots of social programs. And that seems to be hobbling her. John Tory is all Smart Track, all the time. Chow has to split her bandwith among many causes, some of which don't resonate with the general public. My ideal candidate (for this election) would have been one that was even more focused on transit than Tory.

 

[kEiThZ]

I can see how frustrating that must be for those who work hard, pay thier taxes and feel pinched financially. However those that are receiving subsidised housing and childcare may be able to claw themselves out of the category who qualifies for these subsidies and begin paying a tax rate that contributes to the next wave of workers who need that help to get themselves through the pinch of their early forays into self sufficiency. Some people top out at a rate that keeps them in subsidy income levels, but many excel and become payers to the system instead of recipients of that system.And the alternative? Were we to leave these workers to fend for themselves in a tough housing market with babysitters they cannot trust or afford would mean that many would stay home on assistance leading to a population who cannot see their way out of poverty and require more support in the long run. Its not perfect but I for one am happy to contribute.

Indeed. I, for one, would also happily pay more for these services. I just don't believe it makes sense for these programs to be offered by the municipal government, paid for by a regressive tax regime (property taxes), and limited by income levels. These are services that should be provided by Queen's Park or Ottawa, across the province or country to all families. This is why I like Mulcair's suggestion for a universal childcare program. Ditto, when Paul Martin offered it. I do think we're at a stage where childcare, like health care, is vital to our economic competitiveness. Hopefully, there will be some battling over this at the next federal election.

On housing though, I think we do need to have a very tough discussion on whether it's right to provide subsidies to some families to live in a very expensive part of the GTA, all paid for by other working families. I'd love to live downtown in a subsidized apartment. But of course, I'm not eligible. So I have to choose to share an apartment in the core, or live elsewhere in the city, or even live outside the city. A lot of working families make these same choices everyday. And quite frankly, if you talk to many of them, they'd find the idea of providing subsidies to other families and letting them escape such choices, to be bizarre, when they are expected to make such choices all the time. I don't know what the answer is. But I do know you won't get a lot of sympathy from many working families on this one.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

I can see how frustrating that must be for those who work hard, pay thier taxes and feel pinched financially. However those that are receiving subsidised housing and childcare may be able to claw themselves out of the category who qualifies for these subsidies and begin paying a tax rate that contributes to the next wave of workers who need that help to get themselves through the pinch of their early forays into self sufficiency. Some people top out at a rate that keeps them in subsidy income levels, but many excel and become payers to the system instead of recipients of that system.And the alternative? Were we to leave these workers to fend for themselves in a tough housing market with babysitters they cannot trust or afford would mean that many would stay home on assistance leading to a population who cannot see their way out of poverty and require more support in the long run. Its not perfect but I for one am happy to contribute.

Clawbacks in housing, daycare, and other cash support programs means that there's little incentive to even try to become self sufficient. Our current social safety net even discourages parents from living together, because "household income" is used to calculate subsidies so a woman with children could be cut off from benefits if she actually lived with the father.

Unfortunately traditional progressives like Chow don't really understand the unintended consequences of their policies, nor their lack of appeal among those who might actually benefit from help for low-income working people.

 

[nohostages]

Indeed. I, for one, would also happily pay more for these services. I just don't believe it makes sense for these programs to be offered by the municipal government, paid for by a regressive tax regime (property taxes), and limited by income levels. These are services that should be provided by Queen's Park or Ottawa, across the province or country to all families. This is why I like Mulcair's suggestion for a universal childcare program. Ditto, when Paul Martin offered it. I do think we're at a stage where childcare, like health care, is vital to our economic competitiveness. Hopefully, there will be some battling over this at the next federal election.

On housing though, I think we do need to have a very tough discussion on whether it's right to provide subsidies to some families to live in a very expensive part of the GTA, all paid for by other working families. I'd love to live downtown in a subsidized apartment. But of course, I'm not eligible. So I have to choose to share an apartment in the core, or live elsewhere in the city, or even live outside the city. A lot of working families make these same choices everyday. And quite frankly, if you talk to many of them, they'd find the idea of providing subsidies to other families and letting them escape such choices, to be bizarre, when they are expected to make such choices all the time. I don't know what the answer is. But I do know you won't get a lot of sympathy from many working
families on this one.

Part of the policy of having low income housing peppered throughout the city is to avoid obvious ghettos. The children of low income earners are less stigmatized when interspersed throughout. Is it a tough sell? Absolutely. It cannot be explained in 139 characters.

As for universal childcare. I agree with it. But its an even tougher sell to the cons. They need it explained that these kids will be paying into the system that will be funding their fully subsidized hip replacements.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Indeed. I, for one, would also happily pay more for these services. I just don't believe it makes sense for these programs to be offered by the municipal government, paid for by a regressive tax regime (property taxes), and limited by income levels. These are services that should be provided by Queen's Park or Ottawa, across the province or country to all families. This is why I like Mulcair's suggestion for a universal childcare program. Ditto, when Paul Martin offered it. I do think we're at a stage where childcare, like health care, is vital to our economic competitiveness. Hopefully, there will be some battling over this at the next federal election.

On housing though, I think we do need to have a very tough discussion on whether it's right to provide subsidies to some families to live in a very expensive part of the GTA, all paid for by other working families. I'd love to live downtown in a subsidized apartment. But of course, I'm not eligible. So I have to choose to share an apartment in the core, or live elsewhere in the city, or even live outside the city. A lot of working families make these same choices everyday. And quite frankly, if you talk to many of them, they'd find the idea of providing subsidies to other families and letting them escape such choices, to be bizarre, when they are expected to make such choices all the time. I don't know what the answer is. But I do know you won't get a lot of sympathy from many working families on this one.

I totally agree with everything you wrote, but it does put you firmly to the right of Chow and "progressive" politics in Toronto. It's a surprisingly common belief that it's unfair to suggest that people on public assistance should have to make such sacrifices. Just look at the controversy around selling off the TCHC houses!

 

[Greg Banks]

Rather than arguing what the cost of living is in Toronto, why not go to a site that outlines it
google www.numbeo.com Cost of living Toronto

Required average disposal income after tax 3,383.11 per month...I would suggest per earner although it is not specified

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Part of the policy of having low income housing peppered throughout the city is to avoid obvious ghettos. The children of low income earners are less stigmatized when interspersed throughout. Is it a tough sell? Absolutely. It cannot be explained in 139 characters.

A nice idea in principle, but in practice it doesn't work. Everyone knows which houses (and which families) are public housing, and children are very good at finding ways to stigmatize and exclude each other. The best way to avoid stigma is to give people the cash and let them live where they want; that way nobody knows where the money comes from.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Just did CBC Vote Compass. I'm just slightly off the origin. So I really am a staunch centrist. Who knew?

71% compatibility with Tory
63% with Chow
55% with Ford.

Exactly as I figured. I did vote for the right candidate for me.

I recommend it. Fun and informative introspective exercise.

Just did mine.


74% compatibility Chow
50% Tory
29% Ford

 

[the lemur]

A nice idea in principle, but in practice it doesn't work. Everyone knows which houses (and which families) are public housing, and children are very good at finding ways to stigmatize and exclude each other. The best way to avoid stigma is to give people the cash and let them live where they want; that way nobody knows where the money comes from.

You don't think people will then gravitate towards areas based on affordability and settle among people of similar economic position anyway?

 

[WislaHD]

Rather than arguing what the cost of living is in Toronto, why not go to a site that outlines it
google www.numbeo.com Cost of living Toronto

Required average disposal income after tax 3,383.11 per month...I would suggest per earner although it is not specified

Thank you for that link. It pretty much confirms what I suspected already. Factoring in my family's monthly expenses and debts, between 90 to 100,000$ household income is needed to live comfortably in the city. John Tory nailed his answer.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

You don't think people will then gravitate towards areas based on affordability and settle among people of similar economic position anyway?

Why not let people sort things out for themselves? There are all kinds of naturally occurring mixed income neighbourhoods in Toronto; single family houses, multi-unit low rise, old apartment buildings, and new condos all mixed up together. It doesn't make sense to force someone with low income to live in an area where all of the stores are catered to high income earners. People choose to live where they do for many reasons.