I appreciate where you’re coming from and I understand that it’s important that everyone have a chance to speak their minds. That said, I have to admit that some days I feel like I’m being sabotaged. I actually wonder if you might be one of my competitors attempting to hurt me. You’ve made four or five comments in this post alone suggesting that Saskatoon is a crap town. You’ve made similar contributions in a number of posts. I make my living working with people who want to live in Saskatoon, and marketing homes for people in Saskatoon. I can’t help but feeling that you are attempting to undermine the effort and expense that I put into this blog by strategically dropping turd bombs around my work. I’m not trying to cut you here, I’m just letting you know that your approach makes me feel like you’re working really hard to destroy what I’ve got going here. I fear that someday I will feel compelled to either turn you off or walk away from this effort completely. Perhaps I’ll go to a no comment kind of format. Something definitely has to change.

I very much agree with you. I think the governments in Saskatchewan have been ill-prepared for the issues they have faced, and will face. There wasn’t nearly enough regulation and control to ensure the *people* were protected.

It seems like both municipal and provincial levels of government took their cues from ideological Conservatism.

To counter the “put up or shut up” attitude of most people here, I’d say come to Manitoba! I can’t speak for everyone here, but there’s still such a thing as critical thought in this province…Which I found people Saskatchewan often misinterpreted as negativity.

How long that will last depends on how quickly people can learn that lives aren’t businesses. Happy hunting and I hope you make the best choice.

Too bad that it’s the same thing every time something is on your mind. “Better in Alberta, better in Alberta, Oooooooh Alberta.”

If you moved today it wouldn’t be soon enough. Give us a break please.

When it comes to what matter most financial wise,

how much money do you make, Alberta IS spreading the gap. And there lower income taxes remain. After Saskatchewan’s tax cuts.

I think Alberta is a very attractive option, for new Saskatchewan workers, couples, families etc., with wages there much more attractive and groceries and housing about the same!

Oh, and filling up the tank is cheaper in Alberta.

Maybe they could use the extra $150 to pay their debts since their bankruptcies are leading the country now.

It’s a horrible province and the people there are completely out of touch with reality.

Spent *a lot* of 2007 and 2008 out there and I couldn’t stand it. Nothing to do because all the markets are consolidated. No soul, no character, just people pretending to be happy about slavery and debt.

it is surprising that alberta’s average weekly earnings went up more from one year ago, 7.9%, than Saskatchewan’s, 6.3%

kind of tough to make it sound like we’re THE place to be, when alberta is getting a bigger raise

and alberta has way higher weekly earnings

$802 in Sask

$955 in Alberta?

That’s like $150 each and every week extra to live in Alberta!

No Alberta Advantage my butt!

It doesn’t take many outliers to skew the rest of the measurement.

Ultimately, the majority of people in any population core will not make anywhere near the average. Yet they will be expected to perform at the level of some invisible “average populace”.

In actual fact, expressing the average in detail (and not as a single figure) illustrates the problem quite succinctly. Too many people earning too much and too many people earning too little.

No, I just posted a link to a news story that I found interesting and encouraging given the times.

One-third income may be a reasonable and historical figure for shelter, but I’ve never heard anyone argue that one-third of the average weekly earnings for individuals should be able to pay for an average house (although there was clearly a time when this was reasonable and possible, before we decided we needed bigger houses with more features, bigger tv’s, and a couple of new cars every few years). I’ve always heard this metric used with “household incomes,” either average or median.

-TAX = 3370 – 3370(0.22)=2629

-union = 2629 – 70 =2559

-CPP&EI = 2559 – 230=2329

-Pension = 2329 – 200=2129

A reasonable and historical figure for shelter is one third of income:

0.33 x 2139 = $702

Average price for a 2 bedroom apartment in S’toon is $860

Average home price is about $270000.

A $702 dollar mortgage payment at 3.99% and 25 years amortization will buy you a $135000 home.

So it is expected that every homeowner in S’toon be a couple each of which earn at least the average salary.

Do you all believe this is reasonable?

As far as growth is concerned one should keep in mind the immutable exponential function.

Without rigorous formulae it suffices to use the rule of 70.

70/growth rate =doubling time.

At this growth rate of 6.3% then 70/6.35 per year gives 11 years for the average income to be about $81000/year. Do you think that this is reasonable?

Nothing can grow indefinitely. Including bank accounts. It is a physical impossibility.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/090331/t090331c1-eng.htm

It’s important to internalize a core description of society which I won’t say is forced to be likened to socialism just because of the letters “soci”. That said however, government has has to exist for the people and I don’t thinkit all came to exist so that people could collectively be worse off.

US health care is one of those things that has to happen, but I don’t think their pockets *or* the health care system down there are prepared for the tidal wave it will produce.

biberkoph is totally right in saying that some people are engaged in draining the wealth of the world. In 2000, somebody pulled the stopper out of the tub, and it’s been draining ever since.

The lenience of debt is the only thing that has stopped the global economy from buckling under the pressure of baseless greed. But now we are seeing the backlash from that.

The middle class has suffered the most over the past 9 years. We’ve been forcing the system to invent the money to sustain excessive and arbitrary inflation. It’s not right, but the greed created an adversity that left only two options: Debt or the creation of the most unprecedented, instantaneous and widest social restructuring in history.

Look at the housing market as a perfect example. Price averages need to be much lower before the market doesn’t exist through stretching – and that’s only with current interest rates!

My skills grant me perspective into technology and I’ll tell you people are getting fire-hosed there (cell phones, consumer electronics, other network services).

I’m sure automobiles are no different considering people have been content to pay equal prices for lesser American vehicles. Chrysler, GM and to a lesser extent, Ford are finally being called out for decades of lazy greed.

Socialism for the people is mandatory for governments worldwide. There are more people than businesses, so by the numbers alone – we need government for the people.

Of more importance however is the need for government to step in and eliminate the sponges at the top of all economies. Without being protectionist, this is as broad as clamping down on the exporting of labour, taking a huge swipe at reducing debt *on the ground*, to establishing better employment and market regulations.

Damage from some market consolidation also needs to be reversed: Devastated local markets need to be redeveloped with increased focus to local media and empowerment – but with an eye for global context (which may not always be sitting at the table, but *can*).

Neo-conservative sentiment had a good run in North America over the past 9 years. But it’s finally taking it’s toll on the people who mistakenly bought into it. Excessive lenience and consideration for business only results in higher prices and dangerous public/private coupling.

Millions of dollars in cuts doesn’t result in millions of dollars flowing to your bank account. It just means your infrastructure crumbles, your social programs collapse and you’re stuck paying higher bills as everything up to and including air becomes privatized.

All that for a few hundred bucks come tax time?! At least in Canada: We’re engaged in some very dangerous fad-voting.

In the end, if businesses can’t be honest, they must be made to be honest. Anyone who disputes this point is simply in favor of the reckless dishonesty that has brought us here.

The health care system in the US plus entitlements, shall, in 50 years, bankrupt the country of the US. It is not a question of socialism, but of reality.

The US Treasury does not loan money as much as it borrows it and loans it out. It borrows it out from China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, pension funds and mutual funds.

What drives prices up is greed. People have been taught to be greedy so well by the media. As a rhetorical question, why should your house pay you for sheltering your life?

The working class is not being screwed over. They can understand contracts as well as anyone. If they can’t then they need not enter in them but for greed.

The “government” is a group of semi-professional middleweights at best. Do you seriously believe they could be allowed to ‘take over’?

So the gaps in socialism are not quite so bad as there are middle class and upper middle class remaining. I’ve got news for you about Canada. If you earn over $10000/year, you are paying into welfare and health care. Is $10000/year middle class in S’toon?

A handful of people are engaged in an effort, and succeeding, to drain the wealth of the world into their coffers. The wealth of us, our children, our grandchildren, ad infinitum.

I am sure you are not one of them.

Peace be with you.

Agree with you on Detroit. My thinking is that the rust belt will eventually look less rusty. I can recall when oil and agriculture were junk and Saskatchewan was hurting. That has sure turned around, even now, Saskatchewan’s industries are doing okay compared to other places. It is no different in Detroit, they are just at a different phase in the cycle. Ultimately those manufacturing operations will become very valuable, if there is anything left of them. Ultimately the western world will be forced into a position where the rest of the world doesn’t want to make our stuff and that’s when things will really start to turn for Detroit, and Ontario soon. Anything positive that happens sooner is just gravy.

Sure… It’s a bit more than a simple answer so bear with me.

The overall direction that the U.S. is going in is socialism. There’s already talk of their health care system turning in to what we have here in Canada. In order to change an entire political system to socialism you need to get the “proletariat” (or working class) angry with the “Bourgeoisie” (the upper class). The U.S. did this by loaning as much credit as the corporations wanted in the early 2000′s. This started driving the price of everything up as the fed reserve kept printing dollars. Then they opened up the credit to the upper middle class which inflated things more. Then finally in the later stages they gave money to whom ever wanted it regardless of social status. The masses didn’t care because everyone was making money.

However as soon as things turned around, now the working class gets screwed over and they point the finger at the upper class for causing all this. Now the government can step in and change the system in the name of “never letting this happen again”. They can do this because the masses are blinded by emotion. What people don’t realize is that the government is just taking control of everything. This is why people like George Orwell write books like 1984.

In a socialistic society, there’s still classes of people, however the gaps aren’t as severe. This is done through taxes (almost fully of the upper and upper middle class) to subsidize the lower income earners. Examples of this in Canada are our Welfare and Health care systems. The same will now be done in the U.S. As the years go by, more and more taxes will be put on to the upper and upper middle class to subsidize the lower class.

In fact this is already happening. There are now government grants in the U.S. for lower income earners to buy houses. Some of these grants in combination with each other near $50,000 that the home owner doesn’t have to pay back if they live in the property for more than 5 years. Obama is also talking about a $1000 tax credit for low income earners. He also talks about tax increases for high income earners.

The trickling up rather than down that you speak of isn’t wrong at this moment in time. It’s just a temporary show being put on by the propoganda machine to fuel the rage in the masses. AIG execs are definately lining their pockets… However all this will end shortly. I expect to start seeing a slew of executives going to jail as the years unfold so the masses have some feeling of justice.

Could you explain this when you have a moment? Most of the wealth redistribution I see in the US seems to be trickling up, not down! Thanks.

“there’s alot more pain coming yet, I’d say.”

I agree. I have no interest in buying anything in the U.S. right now. You’ll see me buying there when 1 can dollar gets you 2 U.S. dollars. I’m thinking somewhere around 2012

I’m also staying right away from California for 2 reasons.

#1 their government is ridiculous and so are a good chunk of the people!!! If any of the individual States go bankrupt I predict this one will be the first.

#2 I’m waiting for the big quake to buy

I do like Florida though, but only the inner areas like Orlando, as well as the West coast. A little more protected from hurricanes.

The reason I have Detroit as #2 on my list of U.S. places to invest (In the future, for long term)is:

-The redistribution of wealth causing lower middle class cities to benefit.

-Extremely cheap property that cash flows easily and can be paid off within 10 – 15 years.

-I see Can/U.S./Mexico going they way of the E.U. as more globalization takes place. This will open up cities like Detroit and Buffalo to the huge southern Ontario market.

“That 2009 list is a little light on stars and stripes.”

Indeed! The hangover from the debt party is going to be painful for the good old US of A- let’s hope they learn something. Eventually.

Northstar,

If you’re looking for investment properties in the US, some places CA or FL are going for 70%+ off of peak. It might be a bit more economically stable than MI in the shorter term (not to mention a much nicer climate). I’m not sure if you’re interested in the oceanside tourist/retiree market, though. On the other hand, don’t forget about this:

http://tinyurl.com/6p4c3d

They may be largely through sub-prime, but there’s alot more pain coming yet, I’d say.

If prices, ever, come down maybe.

But Regina is nice and in my line of work Alberta pays way more. Might consider a move to Alberta. Don’t really want to. But sooner or later I’ll get tired of renting and long term, I still think Alberta with no debt, lower taxes and better wages is the better deal. Regina remains a bit cheaper than Saskatoon or Alberta, but one day I’ll have to sit down and figure out the “cost of living” argument, looking at the instant 10% raise, and potential for much more, raise in Alberta.

On that note, I’m should try to cut back on blogging.

Chance I decide to buy in Saskatoon is pretty small.

No chance denying the inevitable move to Alberta, or purchase in Regina?

Doesn’t mean there won’t be the rare check in, or letter to the editor if T*** T****o get back to the “buy now” fear mongering.

topic has peaked my interest. I will eventually be buying U.S. property when I think the time is right and Detroit is one of the cities on my list.

With the future socialization of the States there will be redistribution of wealth. Since Detroit is considered a lower middle class city it will surely benefit in the long term (20yrs).

All my opinion of course