Good discussions as always on this blog.

I split my responses just to be clean.

As for the priority you suggested, yes. I for sure agree that if LIFE is in danger that goes first.

I’m sure I could say “but but but” and lots of other people could, but that’s implicit.

The most important thing is that people in immediate danger get the help they need

I’m not sure why I’m always put in a defensive position with some of the regulars here. I will ask now if you’d like to narrow your complaint down, but I’ll do my best with what you gave me.

The best I can tell is that you’re complaining about my complaining.

Interesting.

So, where does that put both of us? I’m not sure exactly what you are trying to outline when you make it a point to drag that up.

Is it that I’m astute enough to perceive changes in our society, industries and economy long before countless studies and movements are developed to say the same?

At that point, I guess the salt I take your statement with enhances the flavor to a compliment!

See, Todd. I’m loads of fun to be around. It’s the constant barrage of change-averse people who take their cues from their surroundings that water the moments down for me.

I really don’t like where I have to go to back you off of such a childish point Todd. I’m sure you see that now.

I have some very good and strong friends of varying backgrounds. Each one holds me in high regard and takes what I say very seriously.

Some have disagreed with me passionately in the past and some still do! We engage in very enjoyable discussions and all but one of them has moved away from where I live now.

Those are good friends and I can’t possibly be that bad if I (given my rather short by comparison life) can claim 15+ year long friendships.

Now really, is it all complaints? I see some stuff other than complaints on my blog, so you’re not even being fair along with your impossible rules of expression.

Perhaps it is because they exceed the maximum length of persuasive material people are built to tolerate these days?

I’m not sure what else I’m supposed to say Todd – except that you should probably think twice before giving me a tongue lashing because I express valid ideas…

I just felt like lashing out for old time sake.

If I said, “Alex is a joke” I think that could be characterized as insulting and demeaning.

Most of the people involved in the promotion of affordable housing are not rich folks taking “a stroll” amongst the poor. I see people who are sacrificing an opportunity for something better because they have a passion for helping those less fortunate than themselves. I realize that they’re probably not all saints, but the cause is noble and worthy. It’s not a joke.

I also understand that it’s not easy for the young people who are eager to get a start in a new home, but Alex, when a man is starving to death, you stop and give him a sandwich before you worry about how the “middle class” is doing. I’m not kidding you when I say that there are families out here that are sleeping in their cars, and going to work during the day. They’d flip over backwards to have a warm place where they could be together. Do you not agree that these people should have priority?

You may have missed my point.

It is not their benefit that I outline. It is the seriously unbalanced intentions of those who bring to the low income solutions to light.

The jobs it creates, the homes it makes, the families it saves – goodness how could any of that ever be bad?!

What I have a problem with is it seems more like philanthropy to boost image. When one side of society is raking in unprecedented profits: the stroll taken among the most impoverished is expected to have impacted the middle class as well.

We have people who need housing, let’s help them out! Of course! But the middle class is cruised over, time and time again.

Is it a fuzzy area? Not really. I think it’s pretty easy to pinpoint who is impacted by the indecision these days.

But the most important point is that I would never advocate a point that imposes undue suffering onto others. Especially those worse off than myself.

That’s just flat out wrong.

So keep the affordable housing going STRONG. But others have made the exact same point I have here: We have to stop forgetting about the other people between rich and poor.

I’ll never understand why you insist on insulting the fine citizens involved in affordable housing initiatives and demean the work they have committed their lives to. Maybe you should spend five minutes thinking about the families who are sleeping in their cars tonight as you tuck yourself in to a warm bed in your warm home.

We will likely pay the maximum in property taxes as well. If we can’t afford it? Well obviously the city is willing to extend us lenience for a price…

Don’t get me wrong. I am okay with taxes because I have trees in front of my house, roads to drive on, and so on. But even then still, such things are becoming less and less valued as our society continues to ratchet towards minimalism.

Having a conservative in any position of power these days simply ruins affordability. The left needs to search deep inside for leaders and people willing to speak out against the pillaging of our economy before its too late.

(I’ll tie this back to Saskatoon & Saskatchewan in a sec)

Here in Winnipeg we have a greedy and insular mayor (Sam Katz) and it is a fire-sale here of every kind. If the city wants something, you can rest assured Sam has some business buddies interested in scoring the municipal endorsement.

In Saskatoon you’ve already got the idle Mayor interested only in decisions that improve his standing with his peers.

In Saskatchewan, Lorne Calvert was a conservative in disguise. Some of his ideas were outright selfish – I still can’t get over his hybrid car and his special lane!

With the Saskatchewan party you basically elected a government on a platform of competitive hatred.

I heard it put rather well on CBC the other day while similar things were being discussed: A fox in the hen house…

Though politics has never had a good name, that is what it boils down to these days. Getting in power and stuffing your pockets as much as possible before the people kick you out for another well dressed, god-fearing hypocrite.

Who knows what new tricks the rich will come up with to abuse a system once designed for the people?

Hopefully not to get too off topic but i believe this is something to think about and the way that decisions are made here that are BACKWARDS…the nursing situation. So the gov’t is spending millions and millions to recruit these nurses from the Phillipenes which i find hilarious. They go on these Recruiting drives for all sorts of things but what about OUR people (as in local ones in the province already) that can’t GET INTO the programs beucase either they ‘don’t have enough seats or enough teachers etc…then i read that to retain these nurses would cost 75Million a year…they built the Kinesiology building on campus for 32 Million… you can’t say that they couldn’t put that money into building a new building on campus to HANDLE the extra nursing students and heck, throw in a few teachers…but intstead lets just think backwards becuase we’re from saskatchewan, and go get people from other provinces or countries basically screwing our own kids out of opportunity here.

Like i say a bit off topic but i think to me at least it shows what kinds of backwards thinking there is, and NOT just beucase it’s Sask party or NDP, beucase it’s all the same garbage.

I guess there was sense of things starting to get nutty in the housing situation then. Having just come from the boom in Calgary I probably was too self absorbed to give it much thought.

It seems that out west here housing affordability is usually the first casualty of an economic upswing. Hopefully both provinces have several years of steady but more moderate economic growth.

I believe that “affordable housing” as it’s currently defined is targeted at families with household incomes below $44,500 and there is probably a lower threshold for single parents. Given that applicants must maintain a mortgage that doesn’t eat up more than 30% of their gross income, we can assume that a “$300,000 starter home” is going to fall far outside of meeting the criteria.

I’m guessing that the most immediate focus will be on low-income rentals targeted towards those who are unable to find affordable rental property.

Easy to answer a few years ago, but the way things are right now both need it.

How will 800 new nurses in Saskatchewan “help businesses and corporations?” Fewer sick days?

Smokey,

“But when we complain about the government not helping, maybe we should look at ourselves.”

An excellent point. Thanks for raising it. This is definitely a time when those who have the means should open the wallet a little further and dig a little deeper. I would also encourage people who are able to give to keep your money as close to home as possible and focus on those things that will have an impact on those who need help the most. Any charity which works with food, shelter, or housing is in great need.

Ken,

“I heard a lot of talk about how much better things would be if the NDP were voted out. But it looked to me that the upswing was well under way while the NDP were in power.”

The housing situation in Saskatchewan was indeed a mess before the NDP left power.

Hopefully, we will see some needed improvement this year. I think that the city is working hard to find some answers. I won’t be surprised if we see a few large affordable housing projects get underway this year.

I think the BEST thing that could happen to Alberta is another Western Canadian province gaining economic advantage and rawing some of the heat away from this province.Economic balance in the west can only benefit us all.

I disagree with the government issue though. When I was in Saskatoon last summer, I heard a lot of talk about how much better things would be if the NDP were voted out. But it looked to me that the upswing was well under way while the NDP were in power.

Maybe there is more confidence and a better perception of “business friendly” about a Conservative style government but I think it’s more that it was time for all of Saskatchewan’s advantages to come into play at once.

Another four years of NDP, Saskatchewan’s population would continue to drop. The worst thing that happened to Alberta, was that Saskatchewan voted Conservative. Maybe now we can see a vision for this province. What did the NDP do for affordable housing, squat. What are the Conservatives going to do for affordable housing, squat. The government can simply do so much. There are small things they can do, like turning unused land into developments, and find developers to build modest affordable homes. Maybe create government grants for developers to build lost cost housing. What about zoning the odd area in Saskatoon for affordable housing. Government has to a responsibility to protect the vulnerable, but rent controls will only create less landlords and apartments. But when we complain about the government not helping, maybe we should look at ourselves. How many of us us donate our time and money to causes that promote affordable housing like Habitat for Humanity. Why do people always expect the government to save people. If you don’t think I have perspective, I do. I work with the poor, but I don’t believe government intervention is always healthy. Government intervention needs to only help the vulnerable.

The Saskatchewan Party is not interested in helping actual people–only businesses and corporations. So no, you’re not going to see anything in their budget that will actually help people as far as housing measures are concerned.

It’s a real shame, but the timing of the Saskatchewan Party’s rise to power could not be worse for people affected by the housing crisis in Saskatoon.

(Though, in all fairness, Calvert’s NDP really screwed up and are as much to blame for our present situation [for heavilly advertising this province without any contingency plan for the repercussions].)

But maybe that does need to happen. How can the finances of someone just starting out ever be expected to compete with those more established?

Heaven help anyone against a wealthy individual or a corporation.

Regular people just can’t be expected to produce that kind of buying power. That’s why I have such a difficult time when people advocate for putting regular citizens in such an impossible situation.

I mean really – has anyone thought about this problem clearly and what it entails?

But a year later after the purchase agreement, our house now is approx $40 K – $50 K more than what we originally purchased. Even if the market does a correction, I’m doubting that it will go under our purchase price. We also plan to live there for many many years so we were one of the lucky ones.

I feel sorry for those who didn’t have property when the market corrected/boomed. Everyone who works hard and gets a decent job deserves to have a house. I was a little surprised that I didn’t hear anything in particular in the provincial budget yesterday for housing measures. Did I miss something or was there really nothing to help people starting out?