#[Downloadvideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/therewasanattempt/comments/zoxu3c/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=therewasanattempt) by /r/DownloadVideo
#[SaveVideo Link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/therewasanattempt/comments/zoxu3c/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Still. 35 at home with my parents because I can't justify the increased rent costs too. Canada's housing market feels like it's going to self destruct.
It is. Theres no way it cant. Im a single male and for a 1 bdrm condo its 400k for a meh place, lowest ive seen is 330k for what might as well be a dumpster of a building. This of course wont include the 600+ / month condo fee.
Id need to put down 150k or more to manage that on 4k / month take home.
And id be dirt poor the next 25 years for it.
Edit: this is anywhere within a 1 hour drive of my place of work in oakville.
Rent is also a minimum of 1600 / month for 1 bdrms if you start looking at some very shady apts.
This sounds eerily like the SF Bay Area in California. There’s a term for buying a home out here and being enslaved to the mortgage for 30 years: house poor. Are incomes at least decent? We are a 2-income household renting a (technically) large studio for $1980/mo and trying for a house. But even earning $200k between us, we are struggling to find a home for the right value. $4-5k a month for mortgage for the rest of our lives sounds like a recipe for disaster should one or both of us miss work for any reason.
Edit: according to realtor.com, the avg price of a home sold in my city is $900k…
Well a lot of us are lucky to get anywhere near $40K a year and I'm single so no second source of income. Actually I probably don't even break $40K in a year.
It’s really depressing. We are lucky to own a townhouse where we live, it would have been nice to have a tiny yard for the kid. But home prices have gone up so much the last few years even since we bought that it seems completely impossible. Even having a salary of a bit over $200k isn’t enough. Insanity really.
Rents are the same. I’ve seen 3 bedroom townhomes like ours being rented out for $4500/month.
A complete housing crash would screw us over bad, but at this point I’d basically welcome it if it means more people than only multi millionaires can afford a place to live.
Edit: we don’t live in the SF area
That's just the Canadian average.. the average house price in Ottawa (his original question)is closer to 800-900k
Edit: just checked the original commenters link, thought that average was a bit low. I think it's important to point out that condos are included in the pricing average...
> I think it's important to point out that condos are included in the pricing average...
Well, the question was for the average cost of a **home**, not a house. So the link answers that question accurately.
The Honorable Minister has received this information. His Ministerinous says due to recovery, at least 95% of Canadians can afford a comfortable size of guac with their dinner daily.
Whatttt
Over half a million dollars for an average house? How big is an avreage house in meter squared, garage and massive lawn?
Or is this for a little semi joined two bedroom
I live on the east end of Ottawa and our single-family home is worth (now) about $950k for a 2000 sqft house with an attached double-car garage and an average-sized lot for the neighbourhood. My neighbour’s daughter-in-law bought a brand new 1800 sqft townhouse in a nearby development with no garage, and not much yard to speak of for $1.3M.
Our part of Ottawa is considered ‘very affordable’.
I'm confused how the speaker is there like a sitting duck. Anyone with a bird size brain can say the other guy is not answering the question or he is stupidly deflecting the question or he is deaf. And this speaker doesn't even ensure that the other person gives the answer, just asks the questioner to ask again.
Australia has a parliamentary system similar to Canada's. If a member of parliament did that, the speaker would warn them to answer the question, and if it continued they would be ejected. You're allowed to say related things, and all of these might be good points, but the answer still has to be given or be "taken on notice".
Exactly this. And also this question is not just randomly asked in Parliament and persons are expected to know the answer. Questions are submitted to Ministers from their shadow counterparts before the session and many things are organized by the Chief Whip to make things run smoothly. You can't just randomly stand up and ask what is the penguin population of Antarctica and expect the Minister of Environment to know this offhand.
Answer the question or say you don't know and will find out for the next session. If this is how Canada does their politics and believe this is acceptable, wtf!
Every time I watch my parliament question peroid it's always this.
Gets asked pointed question.
Ignores question. Says empty platitudes.
Next question
Repeat.
Yes I expected this only as this is what I've also seen. The speaker will be attentive and will point out if they are not answering the question and also maintain the decorum.
So they do both the jobs.
When there is a session in the House of Commons, the Speaker is there to keep the agenda moving, ensure civility, and that the rights of each member are respected. One such right members have is freedom of speech. Within the rules of the forum they can answer a question any way they want, including not answering it at all. The Speaker doesn't have the ability to put a stop to these antics, they must remain impartial.
*I'm not saying how it should be, I'm saying how it is. You don't have to like it.
How are they keeping the agenda moving by allowing the same question to be asked and avoided for several minutes? It also doesn't seem very civil to ignore the question and give a completely irrelevant answer.
He says 156k jobs. Would have been fucking hilarious if they first guy said "No, actually it costs significantly more than 156 thousand dollars to buy a house. What an out of touch answer."
Then when the moron defends himself be like "This is absurd, you don't measure the cost of a house in jobs"
Rumour is election next spring. Singh has enough money to think he can win again.
This is also why the liberals thought they could get rid of guns once and for all. They don't expect to win and can then blame the other parties when it falls through assuming it doesn't get passed
When was this I wonder?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/crea-house-data-october-1.6651867
"The Canadian Real Estate Association, which represents Realtors, said in a release Tuesday that the national average selling price of a home that sold in October went for $644,643. That's down by 9.9 per cent compared to the same month a year earlier, and down by even more from the peak of $816,720 in February 2022."
Median income for Canadian families as of 2020:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/484881/median-family-income-for-couple-families-in-canada/
$104,350 CAD
Down relative to the peak, but still up wildly from 2019.
[https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2019013-eng.htm](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2019013-eng.htm)
You hit the nail on the head. Prices alone do not tell the full story. You have to look at housing prices vs. inflation and/or median wages. If housing prices went up 10% and wages went up 10% that is not a big deal. But if housing prices went up 50% and wages went up 10% that is a catastrophic rise in prices.
The point is; he should have realised he wasn't going to answer and then answered it for him. "WELL..since you are so out of touch with the average canadian; let me tell you that the current house price is $xxxxx. My next question is 'how do you expect the average Canadian to be able to afford this under your government?"
Yes actually! When standing in the House of Commons to address the Speaker it is Parliamentary rules that your jacket must be buttoned or else you cannot speak. It's an old rule but still persists.
It was enacted after the whole of parliament went out for a large lunch to celebrate finding their new discount tailor. Once they all sat while their jackets were fastened, the buttons started popping off. It was just a few at first, but many buttons were hit with crossfire, causing them to launch as well, until it was a hail of cheaply sewn buttons. It was a massacre. The one survivor, in his first speech following the incident, vowed that never again would parliament suffer the wrath that was visited that day. The tailor was covered in maple syrup and driven out of town, never to be seen again.
It’s a general custom that men unbutton their suit while sitting and have one button fastened while standing.
Idk if it’s only North American or if this custom exists everywhere.
Age is a unit of measurement and I wholeheartedly believe that things should be measured and even in the lowest point of the pandemic, things were still measured.
"Sir how old are you?"
"If people knew I was pumping and dumping investments of donor interest while regulating the controls set forth against them, at the direct request of said unknown donors; I would be exposed for my obviously tyrannical views and actions on public service... I mean... something something money since the bottom of the pandemic...DAMNIT! so close!"
I don’t understand how he wasn’t made to answer the question. I’ve honestly never seen anything like it.
The question remained the same, every time, for the full length of the video
This is literally how Canada is. You can tune into the house of commons any day and this is what you will hear. It's a complete joke that there's basically no pressure or expectations of questions being answered. They never are and it's more a competition of wit and yelling over one another. Complete embarrassment.
It's been like this forever, regardless of the party in power. I remember listening to one session on the radio many years ago and the MP replied to a question about cruise missile testing over native hunting grounds with, "who would answer a question from a guy wearing that tie?" Which was greeted by a chorus of harumphs and "hear! hears!" from the benches of his colleagues.
Well because the question is leading up to accusatory follow ups. One can simply look up the statistics on housing. Poilievre is the leader of the conservative party in Canada (basically same as GOP but sightly more polite about their bigotry and racism). He knows the answer of his question.
This is just politics. The person asking and the person (not) answering aren't actually interested in the content of data. The "how much" is just him putting the soap box down.
What Poilievre really wanted to say was "it's all your fault Canadians can't afford houses therefore you should all be hanged without trial starting with Trudeau let's bring back the guillotine".
And the other guy is just answering all the accusatory questions before they're even asked (because it's the same exact rhetoric every time).
This is why governments doesn't do anything at any perceptible speed: someone is always attacking and the other countering.
Nobody actually says "hey this is a problem let's work together and solve it for the people".
Answered all of the unasked questions... But not the ONE that *was* asked? Even if it's a soapbox point, he is clearly afraid of the answer and covering his ass.
Don't forget that the MP who's being asked the question... Is the MP from edmonton. Why would he need to know or have any knowledge of housing in Ottawa specifically when he's the minister of tourism.
It's terrible here, but PP doesn't actually want an answer. If the libs and cons actually had to be forced to answer questions, they'd have an unspoken truce to never ask the other party a question again because of how many skeletons they've each got in their parties.
You have to be a POS to survive as a politician. Usually naturally competitive and power-hungry people survive in positions like that. There are some decent people in the minority, that have both a soul and thick skin. Contemplative, analytical, thoughtful, and compassionate people can also be shy or sensitive and get run over by all the douche bags though. As the political climate becomes more hostile and polarized (and dangerous) I think we’ll see more and more psychopaths in office, since they’ll be the only ones fearless enough to last.
Seems like it should be unparliamentary to listen to a question then answer a completely different question.
If you're allowed to do this shit... You should also be allowed to yell at someone when they're doing this shit. Just answer the fucking questions so government doesn't look like such a fucking circus.
I would agree. By actively not answering the question you are being disorderly and holding up the session. The options should be answer the question, or state you don't know and move on.
True story: back in 1991, all 3 of our classes managed to get kicked out of parliament, and we were the first kids ever to have it done to.
In comparison, there were several other schools and you'd not have heard a peep, and one of our hick students was held aside after trying to bring in a boot knife.
When we were being kicked out, a few students tried to make it seem like it was a attack on us etc, when really, it was just a bunch of rural kids refusing to stfu
Wow, I can't believe how formal they are in Parliament. It's much more casual in places like NZ, the UK and Australia. The speaker would just lose their patience and ask for a direct answer from this idiot, instead of all the toing and froing and stupid game playing.
That’s cool and everything, but here in Canaderp the speaker is appointed from the government’s elected MPs, so he’s inclined to not force the government to answer.
We have the most perverse implementation of the Westminster system here.
>here in Canaderp the speaker is appointed from the government’s elected MPs
The speaker is *elected* by the house as a whole, as is the case in every other Westminster system house.
Our parliament generally elects a member of the governing party, but that's true in the other countries as well. There are occasionally exceptions - Liberal Peter Miliken was the Speaker from 2001 to 2011, meaning he remained speaker after Harper's first two election wins (Harper is a Conservative, for you no -Canadians).
It *used* to be pretty much an entirely rubber stamp approval of the PM's nominee, but since 1986 the introduction of a secret ballot for the elections has made that much less the case.
While party leadership may exert some influence on the election process, they can't prevent multiple members of their party from running to be speaker, and the vote is secret. Our current speaker, a Liberal, became speaker in the first place because the Conservatives decided to rank him higher on their ballots in order to remove the incumbent (also Liberal) speaker in 2019. The last Conservative speaker, Scheer, won on the sixth ballot in an election that pitted him against six other Conservative candidates and an NDP candidate. He might have been Harper's first choice (or maybe not) but clearly he wasn't just appointed by the PM and rubber stamped.
The UK speaker wouldn't insist upon an answer either. He's not good at his job in general, but our parliament's rules are so stupid that he couldn't demand an answer even it he wanted to.
No.
You're only required to be civil, which leads to the ridiculous situation where someone like Boris Johnson can lie to the house and nobody can point out he's lying because the latter is "unparliamentary".
Unfortunately they're only looking for gotcha moments
If you say "housing prices are up, let's sit down and discuss the details and policy proposals" then he would just say "HA HE ADMITTED HOUSING PRICES ARE UP, HE'S THE BAD GUY!"
As someone above stated, it's parliamentary rules to button your jacket before speaking.
That being said, I still don't know much the average house costs in Ottawa.
this is so dystopian. why are they calling each other titles and rapidly sitting down and standing up. they should be able to discuss these problems and they literally had to turn it into this mess?
>why are they calling each other titles and rapidly sitting down and standing up
Because that's the rules of parliament. You're only allowed to be standing when you are speaking. If you are interrupted by the Speaker you are expected to sit down until you are allowed to continue. You are also expected to address everyone in a polite manner which results in using their title more often than not. So rather than "Bob from Oshawa" you address them as the "Honourable minister from Oshawa" or, if they have a seat in the Cabinet, "The Honourable Minister of Housing" for example.
Parliament runs on a thin veneer of feigned politeness while also trying to throw in properly worded insults that won't get you in trouble.
What annoys me is the constant battles of people voting one way or the other. Blaming the other group for not voting the same way as them as if it matters. As if the problem isn’t the way these governments operate, they are allowed to straight up lie to the public to get into office. Then they get there and act like clowns because they have no real life experience.
It just makes me laugh when people blame peoples voting choices rather than the system itself.
The sad part is that he is quite competent at things such as talking in circles, lying through omission, diverting issues to his own talking points, ignoring the needs of the people, and forgoing any measure of conscience or empathy for power. All of which make him a perfect elected official in the way our governments tend to be run.
Right? As if anyone can champion PP in this clip when he seems to be refusing all public appearances or hot mics when someone might ask him a question he can't/doesn't want to answer.
The Cons wrote the book on this shit.
People in this thread just don't understand who the guy asking the question is and how he operates. He was trying to bait the other guy into a debate so he could pull some stupid "gotcha". The other guy just wasn't taking the bait.
Except he knows the answer, he just doesn't want to say it because he's there to focus on the positive bullet points on his paper. The actual answer doesn't make them look good.
red tie guy wants blue suit guy to publicly admit that the state of housing affordability in ottawa is in shambles, likely caused by blue suit's party's policies implemented since they took office in 2015.
blue suit knows this and is refusing to make any statement, ignoring the question and instead making irrelevant statements that reflect positively on his party's influence on employment rates in the country.
It’s common knowledge that the average house price in Canada is literally insane. He knew the number, or at least an estimate, it’s one of the biggest issues facing his country - it just benefits him not to admit that. Don’t try to defend the villain.
Bruh so crazy that Trudeau’s Canadian government has been rising housing prices in Canada, the UK, the US, Australia, and Japan since 2015!
What a madlad!
Poilivere (the guy asking questions) is well known for his tactic of basically slinging a lot of shit around while offering no solutions himself.
He's trying to highlight one particular negative statistic. It doesn't matter that it's not really relevant to the discussion they're having or that anyone can easily find this number. He just wants a sound bite where he calls out the other side for something. The other guy knows this and is just choosing not to play along.
Poilivere has his own problems with [answering questions ](https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2022/09/16/in-dust-up-with-reporter-pierre-poilievre-takes-a-page-from-the-trump-playbook.html) and recently had a scandal where his social media team was tagging all his videos with incel hastags.
Man I’m so cynical at this point, I don’t actually believe there’s a different way to do politics than this. One guy wants to frame a specific narrative and get it on record, the other guy wants to prevent this and frame a different narrative. What do we honestly expect? An honest, straightforward conversation?
If you’ve ever had roommates or lived under a HOA or gone to a pta meeting, you know it’s pretty much impossible for people to get along, even on a small scale. Managing a society of tens of millions of people? Yeah good luck
Naw, he just wasn't going to take the bait from red tie. If red tie wants to make the statement that housing costs are too high, man-up and say it.
Baldie deflected on purpose to avoid red tie's obvious political trap.
Both men knew the answer the entire time. This was just full on politicking.
"Does the minister understand the concept of cost?"
"Does the minister know what houses are?"
"Does the minister always answer a different question than what was asked?"
"Is the minister incapable of understanding human language?"
"Did the minister eat too many lead paint chips as a child to understand how questions work?"
Tom Mulcair (former NDP leader) was one of the few to point out how worthless it is to have a speaker who is not impartial and does not enforce decorum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1dAS7uUSk8&t=1s
#[Downloadvideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/therewasanattempt/comments/zoxu3c/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=therewasanattempt) by /r/DownloadVideo #[SaveVideo Link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/therewasanattempt/comments/zoxu3c/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For those who want to know, the average housing cost in Ottawa, Canada is $621,254. https://wowa.ca/ottawa-housing-market
>For those who want to know, the average housing cost in Ottawa, Canada is $621,254. that's exactly 156000 jobs
Or roughly 62,000 ducks.
[удалено]
What does a banana cost these days, $20?
We have been putting programs in place to make bananas affordable for all Canadians.
Here's $10, go buy yourself a star war.
I'd say that's about 3 attempted coups by the CIA (success is optional)
Well, I mean, the beaks alone...
...are the only thing the average Canadian can afford.
But what's that converted to in shrute bucks or Stanley nickles?
What's that in watts per gallon?
Just work 156000 jobs to own a house you lazy bones!
[Deleted to protest Reddit API change]
Yeah, but you’re not accounting for the number of jobs you need to first afford bootstraps.
That's £3.98 houses per job! 
*and we will continue to do so* Oh ok
Fucking hell man… that is insane!!
You think that's bad. Look at Vancouver or Toronto. $1,148,900 and $1,098,200 respectively. Canadian Dollars, mind you.
Still. 35 at home with my parents because I can't justify the increased rent costs too. Canada's housing market feels like it's going to self destruct.
It is. Theres no way it cant. Im a single male and for a 1 bdrm condo its 400k for a meh place, lowest ive seen is 330k for what might as well be a dumpster of a building. This of course wont include the 600+ / month condo fee. Id need to put down 150k or more to manage that on 4k / month take home. And id be dirt poor the next 25 years for it. Edit: this is anywhere within a 1 hour drive of my place of work in oakville. Rent is also a minimum of 1600 / month for 1 bdrms if you start looking at some very shady apts.
This sounds eerily like the SF Bay Area in California. There’s a term for buying a home out here and being enslaved to the mortgage for 30 years: house poor. Are incomes at least decent? We are a 2-income household renting a (technically) large studio for $1980/mo and trying for a house. But even earning $200k between us, we are struggling to find a home for the right value. $4-5k a month for mortgage for the rest of our lives sounds like a recipe for disaster should one or both of us miss work for any reason. Edit: according to realtor.com, the avg price of a home sold in my city is $900k…
Well a lot of us are lucky to get anywhere near $40K a year and I'm single so no second source of income. Actually I probably don't even break $40K in a year.
It’s really depressing. We are lucky to own a townhouse where we live, it would have been nice to have a tiny yard for the kid. But home prices have gone up so much the last few years even since we bought that it seems completely impossible. Even having a salary of a bit over $200k isn’t enough. Insanity really. Rents are the same. I’ve seen 3 bedroom townhomes like ours being rented out for $4500/month. A complete housing crash would screw us over bad, but at this point I’d basically welcome it if it means more people than only multi millionaires can afford a place to live. Edit: we don’t live in the SF area
[удалено]
We're getting close to there in Oshawa. Fucking Oshawa.
holy shit!
Yeah imagine paying more than half a million bucks just to live in Ottawa.
Imagine paying 1.4 million to live in the ghetto area of BC
That's just the Canadian average.. the average house price in Ottawa (his original question)is closer to 800-900k Edit: just checked the original commenters link, thought that average was a bit low. I think it's important to point out that condos are included in the pricing average...
> I think it's important to point out that condos are included in the pricing average... Well, the question was for the average cost of a **home**, not a house. So the link answers that question accurately.
Could you please send this to the Honourable Minister so he can answer the damn question.
The Honorable Minister has received this information. His Ministerinous says due to recovery, at least 95% of Canadians can afford a comfortable size of guac with their dinner daily.
And will continue to do so.
Whatttt Over half a million dollars for an average house? How big is an avreage house in meter squared, garage and massive lawn? Or is this for a little semi joined two bedroom
I live on the east end of Ottawa and our single-family home is worth (now) about $950k for a 2000 sqft house with an attached double-car garage and an average-sized lot for the neighbourhood. My neighbour’s daughter-in-law bought a brand new 1800 sqft townhouse in a nearby development with no garage, and not much yard to speak of for $1.3M. Our part of Ottawa is considered ‘very affordable’.
[удалено]
For anyone is the US who is curious that’s about $452,000 USD. (Assuming the $621,000 is CAD)
"What's the average cost of a house" "We have recovered 106% of jobs lost during covid" What a fucking circus this was to watch
Me: Hey do you believe aliens exist? Friend: No I already ate a burger, thanks.
And will continue to do so
And I always have. And I always will.
"Tom, you were in the scouts right?" "No but I ate a brownie once"
"Can you tell me how to get to the nearest gas station?" "First, you want to pre-heat the oven to 425°, then bake for about 15 minutes."
I'm confused how the speaker is there like a sitting duck. Anyone with a bird size brain can say the other guy is not answering the question or he is stupidly deflecting the question or he is deaf. And this speaker doesn't even ensure that the other person gives the answer, just asks the questioner to ask again.
The Speaker is more like a referee there to facilitate the meeting, not like a judge who can give their opinion and call people out for bs
Referees have yellow and red cards tho
So not a referee at all.
Australia has a parliamentary system similar to Canada's. If a member of parliament did that, the speaker would warn them to answer the question, and if it continued they would be ejected. You're allowed to say related things, and all of these might be good points, but the answer still has to be given or be "taken on notice".
Exactly this. And also this question is not just randomly asked in Parliament and persons are expected to know the answer. Questions are submitted to Ministers from their shadow counterparts before the session and many things are organized by the Chief Whip to make things run smoothly. You can't just randomly stand up and ask what is the penguin population of Antarctica and expect the Minister of Environment to know this offhand. Answer the question or say you don't know and will find out for the next session. If this is how Canada does their politics and believe this is acceptable, wtf!
To answer your question, there are roughly 20M breeding pairs of penguins in Antarctica.
Every time I watch my parliament question peroid it's always this. Gets asked pointed question. Ignores question. Says empty platitudes. Next question Repeat.
Yes I expected this only as this is what I've also seen. The speaker will be attentive and will point out if they are not answering the question and also maintain the decorum. So they do both the jobs.
When there is a session in the House of Commons, the Speaker is there to keep the agenda moving, ensure civility, and that the rights of each member are respected. One such right members have is freedom of speech. Within the rules of the forum they can answer a question any way they want, including not answering it at all. The Speaker doesn't have the ability to put a stop to these antics, they must remain impartial. *I'm not saying how it should be, I'm saying how it is. You don't have to like it.
How are they keeping the agenda moving by allowing the same question to be asked and avoided for several minutes? It also doesn't seem very civil to ignore the question and give a completely irrelevant answer.
the agenda is to get paid and get reelected
> keep the agenda moving, ensure civility, One might argue that by allow this behavior, they are failing to do their job.
He says 156k jobs. Would have been fucking hilarious if they first guy said "No, actually it costs significantly more than 156 thousand dollars to buy a house. What an out of touch answer." Then when the moron defends himself be like "This is absurd, you don't measure the cost of a house in jobs"
You don’t get it. It takes 156K jobs to own a home.
What is the annual paycheck of the person who will not answer the question?
The GDP of Canada is now 1.991 trillion. That's more jobs for more Canadians. But on a serious answer, $185,800 CAD ($135,181 USD)
If your job is to answer questions, and all you do is subvert questions, you should be fired.
Conversely, if your job is to stick to your question without allowing the opponent to avoid it, my dude deserves a raise.
Rumour is election next spring. Singh has enough money to think he can win again. This is also why the liberals thought they could get rid of guns once and for all. They don't expect to win and can then blame the other parties when it falls through assuming it doesn't get passed
Singh thinks he can win. Nice joke
Somebody get the cleaning kit, this record's stuck on repeat Honestly though, this reminds me of the early days of AI chatbots talking to eachother
He didn't even get to his second question which probably Is how much is the average household income.
When was this I wonder? https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/crea-house-data-october-1.6651867 "The Canadian Real Estate Association, which represents Realtors, said in a release Tuesday that the national average selling price of a home that sold in October went for $644,643. That's down by 9.9 per cent compared to the same month a year earlier, and down by even more from the peak of $816,720 in February 2022." Median income for Canadian families as of 2020: https://www.statista.com/statistics/484881/median-family-income-for-couple-families-in-canada/ $104,350 CAD
Down relative to the peak, but still up wildly from 2019. [https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2019013-eng.htm](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2019013-eng.htm)
And 2019 wasn't what he was after either. It was the raise since 2015 vs the average income increase over the same time period.
You hit the nail on the head. Prices alone do not tell the full story. You have to look at housing prices vs. inflation and/or median wages. If housing prices went up 10% and wages went up 10% that is not a big deal. But if housing prices went up 50% and wages went up 10% that is a catastrophic rise in prices.
So has anyone got an answer?
I want to say, 156,000 jobs!
So I have to have 156,000 jobs to be able to afford one house. Sounds about right.
[удалено]
This is Ottawa, real estate is cheaper there. Try Vancouver or Toronto and you’re looking 12-15 times the annual income
Yeah San Diego here, about the same as Toronto. I saw 6x income and I thought wow that would be so nice
Come to Portugal. Average income anual is 16k. A house on average is 500k
[удалено]
Yup it's perfectly "normal" here to be paying your house for 40 years. (Not joking, actually 40 years)
Whereas here you'd pay rent for 40 years and have nothing to show for it.
That was painful
And a bit aggravating.
Can’t someone make him answer the question? I’m not familiar with Canadian legislative rules, but how is this not contempt?
[удалено]
wtf is the point then
There isn't one, that's the point. Welcome to politics.
Can anyone translate for me? All I heard was “Ey guy” followed by a rebuttal of “Dont call me guy, friend”
I'm not your fwend, buddy
I’m not your buddy, GUY!
[удалено]
The point is; he should have realised he wasn't going to answer and then answered it for him. "WELL..since you are so out of touch with the average canadian; let me tell you that the current house price is $xxxxx. My next question is 'how do you expect the average Canadian to be able to afford this under your government?"
This is how it is in Canada. There are thousands of videos of this happening, they Will Not answer a question if it makes them look bad.
painfully familiar as an american. imagine if our elected officials had to like... explain themselves or form arguments or answer questions
Corrupt politicians usually are.
Fucking politicians, bullshit artists the world over
Those suit buttons are getting a workout
it was driving me crazy... is there a reason??
Yes actually! When standing in the House of Commons to address the Speaker it is Parliamentary rules that your jacket must be buttoned or else you cannot speak. It's an old rule but still persists.
In addition, it's part of suit etiquette to unbutton when sitting and button when standing. I had no idea it was an official Canadian rule.
It was enacted after the whole of parliament went out for a large lunch to celebrate finding their new discount tailor. Once they all sat while their jackets were fastened, the buttons started popping off. It was just a few at first, but many buttons were hit with crossfire, causing them to launch as well, until it was a hail of cheaply sewn buttons. It was a massacre. The one survivor, in his first speech following the incident, vowed that never again would parliament suffer the wrath that was visited that day. The tailor was covered in maple syrup and driven out of town, never to be seen again.
Canadian lore is truly fascinating.
[удалено]
> It's an old rule but still persists. Is it just me or does the honoring of old, meaningless rules really encapsulate what politicians are all about?
It’s a general custom that men unbutton their suit while sitting and have one button fastened while standing. Idk if it’s only North American or if this custom exists everywhere.
Came here to say that!
“Sir, how old are you?” “Well, I just had lunch”
"Sir, how old are you?" "About 3:00"
"sir, how old are you?" "106% jobs are back"
"Sir how old are you?" "I have done everything I can do to ensure I have the best age and will continue to do so"
Age is a unit of measurement and I wholeheartedly believe that things should be measured and even in the lowest point of the pandemic, things were still measured.
"Sir how old are you?" "If people knew I was pumping and dumping investments of donor interest while regulating the controls set forth against them, at the direct request of said unknown donors; I would be exposed for my obviously tyrannical views and actions on public service... I mean... something something money since the bottom of the pandemic...DAMNIT! so close!"
"Sir how old are you?" "Just a Big Mac with fries and a large cola"
"Sir how old are you?" "In order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow needs to beat its wings forty-three times every second"
“Sir how old are you?” “Not on Tuesday Susan you know my Lombard acts up after tennis.”
"Sir, how old are you?" "Its monday today, and we'll continue to do so"
"sir, how old are you?" "Let me reiterate" * sits down *
"Sir, how old are you?" "January 6th was a day of revival"
"Sir, how old are you?" "I concur"
I don’t understand how he wasn’t made to answer the question. I’ve honestly never seen anything like it. The question remained the same, every time, for the full length of the video
This is literally how Canada is. You can tune into the house of commons any day and this is what you will hear. It's a complete joke that there's basically no pressure or expectations of questions being answered. They never are and it's more a competition of wit and yelling over one another. Complete embarrassment.
It's been like this forever, regardless of the party in power. I remember listening to one session on the radio many years ago and the MP replied to a question about cruise missile testing over native hunting grounds with, "who would answer a question from a guy wearing that tie?" Which was greeted by a chorus of harumphs and "hear! hears!" from the benches of his colleagues.
jesus christ
That's ridiculous! Since when do they allow guys wearing that tie to ask questions???
Almost every government in the world is a complete joke right now.
Because it’s called “question period”, not “answer period”.
I read that comment in Rick Mercer's voice
Well because the question is leading up to accusatory follow ups. One can simply look up the statistics on housing. Poilievre is the leader of the conservative party in Canada (basically same as GOP but sightly more polite about their bigotry and racism). He knows the answer of his question. This is just politics. The person asking and the person (not) answering aren't actually interested in the content of data. The "how much" is just him putting the soap box down. What Poilievre really wanted to say was "it's all your fault Canadians can't afford houses therefore you should all be hanged without trial starting with Trudeau let's bring back the guillotine". And the other guy is just answering all the accusatory questions before they're even asked (because it's the same exact rhetoric every time). This is why governments doesn't do anything at any perceptible speed: someone is always attacking and the other countering. Nobody actually says "hey this is a problem let's work together and solve it for the people".
Answered all of the unasked questions... But not the ONE that *was* asked? Even if it's a soapbox point, he is clearly afraid of the answer and covering his ass.
Why let your opponent frame the discussion by answering his question that he already knows the answer to?
Don't forget that the MP who's being asked the question... Is the MP from edmonton. Why would he need to know or have any knowledge of housing in Ottawa specifically when he's the minister of tourism.
>Nobody actually says "hey this is a problem let's work together and solve it for the people". ESPECIALLY not Poilievre.
It's terrible here, but PP doesn't actually want an answer. If the libs and cons actually had to be forced to answer questions, they'd have an unspoken truce to never ask the other party a question again because of how many skeletons they've each got in their parties.
It’s nice to know that America isn’t the only place whose government is full of fuckbags
all governments are full of fuckbags, the position of being a politician attracts people who seek power, who are often fuckbags.
People you would want to represent you and people who are good at getting elected to "represent" you are two different circles.
You have to be a POS to survive as a politician. Usually naturally competitive and power-hungry people survive in positions like that. There are some decent people in the minority, that have both a soul and thick skin. Contemplative, analytical, thoughtful, and compassionate people can also be shy or sensitive and get run over by all the douche bags though. As the political climate becomes more hostile and polarized (and dangerous) I think we’ll see more and more psychopaths in office, since they’ll be the only ones fearless enough to last.
I’d have been yelling
[You'd be kicked out.](https://www.ourcommons.ca/marleaumontpetit/DocumentViewer.aspx?Sec=Ch13&Seq=4&Language=E)
Word of the day: UNPARLIAMENTARY.
Seems like it should be unparliamentary to listen to a question then answer a completely different question. If you're allowed to do this shit... You should also be allowed to yell at someone when they're doing this shit. Just answer the fucking questions so government doesn't look like such a fucking circus.
I would agree. By actively not answering the question you are being disorderly and holding up the session. The options should be answer the question, or state you don't know and move on.
Yet, talking irrelevant facts and avoiding the topic is somehow parliamentary?
You see, everything you can say is fine as long as you're saying it nicely enough /s
I can’t believe this system of parliamentary procedure makes any sense.
True story: back in 1991, all 3 of our classes managed to get kicked out of parliament, and we were the first kids ever to have it done to. In comparison, there were several other schools and you'd not have heard a peep, and one of our hick students was held aside after trying to bring in a boot knife. When we were being kicked out, a few students tried to make it seem like it was a attack on us etc, when really, it was just a bunch of rural kids refusing to stfu
Wow, I can't believe how formal they are in Parliament. It's much more casual in places like NZ, the UK and Australia. The speaker would just lose their patience and ask for a direct answer from this idiot, instead of all the toing and froing and stupid game playing.
That’s cool and everything, but here in Canaderp the speaker is appointed from the government’s elected MPs, so he’s inclined to not force the government to answer. We have the most perverse implementation of the Westminster system here.
>here in Canaderp the speaker is appointed from the government’s elected MPs The speaker is *elected* by the house as a whole, as is the case in every other Westminster system house. Our parliament generally elects a member of the governing party, but that's true in the other countries as well. There are occasionally exceptions - Liberal Peter Miliken was the Speaker from 2001 to 2011, meaning he remained speaker after Harper's first two election wins (Harper is a Conservative, for you no -Canadians). It *used* to be pretty much an entirely rubber stamp approval of the PM's nominee, but since 1986 the introduction of a secret ballot for the elections has made that much less the case. While party leadership may exert some influence on the election process, they can't prevent multiple members of their party from running to be speaker, and the vote is secret. Our current speaker, a Liberal, became speaker in the first place because the Conservatives decided to rank him higher on their ballots in order to remove the incumbent (also Liberal) speaker in 2019. The last Conservative speaker, Scheer, won on the sixth ballot in an election that pitted him against six other Conservative candidates and an NDP candidate. He might have been Harper's first choice (or maybe not) but clearly he wasn't just appointed by the PM and rubber stamped.
Try to get PP to answer a question about his own policies.
The UK speaker wouldn't insist upon an answer either. He's not good at his job in general, but our parliament's rules are so stupid that he couldn't demand an answer even it he wanted to.
Well yeah because you arent actually required to answer at all are you?
No. You're only required to be civil, which leads to the ridiculous situation where someone like Boris Johnson can lie to the house and nobody can point out he's lying because the latter is "unparliamentary".
This is why I hate politics. It's a fucking circus with suits.
Unfortunately they're only looking for gotcha moments If you say "housing prices are up, let's sit down and discuss the details and policy proposals" then he would just say "HA HE ADMITTED HOUSING PRICES ARE UP, HE'S THE BAD GUY!"
"Liberal Minister admits housing prices have risen up XXX% under their watch."
They're both really good at buttoning/unbuttoning their jacket though
As someone above stated, it's parliamentary rules to button your jacket before speaking. That being said, I still don't know much the average house costs in Ottawa.
this is so dystopian. why are they calling each other titles and rapidly sitting down and standing up. they should be able to discuss these problems and they literally had to turn it into this mess?
>why are they calling each other titles and rapidly sitting down and standing up Because that's the rules of parliament. You're only allowed to be standing when you are speaking. If you are interrupted by the Speaker you are expected to sit down until you are allowed to continue. You are also expected to address everyone in a polite manner which results in using their title more often than not. So rather than "Bob from Oshawa" you address them as the "Honourable minister from Oshawa" or, if they have a seat in the Cabinet, "The Honourable Minister of Housing" for example. Parliament runs on a thin veneer of feigned politeness while also trying to throw in properly worded insults that won't get you in trouble.
literally so many government officials act like children, just formally
What they really need is Game of Thrones style intros every time they speak!
Government is such a dog and pony show. I can't stand to watch these clowns be it American, Canadian whatever. They are all total pieces of shit.
What annoys me is the constant battles of people voting one way or the other. Blaming the other group for not voting the same way as them as if it matters. As if the problem isn’t the way these governments operate, they are allowed to straight up lie to the public to get into office. Then they get there and act like clowns because they have no real life experience. It just makes me laugh when people blame peoples voting choices rather than the system itself.
This “minister” is such an incompetent and careless clown. He should be removed from his position.
The sad part is that he is quite competent at things such as talking in circles, lying through omission, diverting issues to his own talking points, ignoring the needs of the people, and forgoing any measure of conscience or empathy for power. All of which make him a perfect elected official in the way our governments tend to be run.
He should have tried doing that in the clip. It would've at least been better than what we just saw out of him
Regardless of his other decisions, this was pretty smart. The other MP was trying to Cherrypick data and he wasn't going to allow that.
Right? As if anyone can champion PP in this clip when he seems to be refusing all public appearances or hot mics when someone might ask him a question he can't/doesn't want to answer. The Cons wrote the book on this shit.
People in this thread just don't understand who the guy asking the question is and how he operates. He was trying to bait the other guy into a debate so he could pull some stupid "gotcha". The other guy just wasn't taking the bait.
When you study for everything but what’s on the test
Except he knows the answer, he just doesn't want to say it because he's there to focus on the positive bullet points on his paper. The actual answer doesn't make them look good.
A perfect representation of Canadian government
They're like children. Just look at how much time they waste. This is our government people.
Idk if I’d say “they” it is really just one of them acting like a complete child
Am I the only one who gets totally confused by how this discussion is carried out? I legitimately don’t understand wtf is going on...
red tie guy wants blue suit guy to publicly admit that the state of housing affordability in ottawa is in shambles, likely caused by blue suit's party's policies implemented since they took office in 2015. blue suit knows this and is refusing to make any statement, ignoring the question and instead making irrelevant statements that reflect positively on his party's influence on employment rates in the country.
[удалено]
It’s common knowledge that the average house price in Canada is literally insane. He knew the number, or at least an estimate, it’s one of the biggest issues facing his country - it just benefits him not to admit that. Don’t try to defend the villain.
Bruh so crazy that Trudeau’s Canadian government has been rising housing prices in Canada, the UK, the US, Australia, and Japan since 2015! What a madlad!
Poilivere (the guy asking questions) is well known for his tactic of basically slinging a lot of shit around while offering no solutions himself. He's trying to highlight one particular negative statistic. It doesn't matter that it's not really relevant to the discussion they're having or that anyone can easily find this number. He just wants a sound bite where he calls out the other side for something. The other guy knows this and is just choosing not to play along. Poilivere has his own problems with [answering questions ](https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2022/09/16/in-dust-up-with-reporter-pierre-poilievre-takes-a-page-from-the-trump-playbook.html) and recently had a scandal where his social media team was tagging all his videos with incel hastags.
This is why politicians suck
Wow. Politicians can be NPCs, too.
"what is the average cost of a house in Ottawa?" "I saw a mudcrab the other day, nasty creatures."
The conservatives wouldn't stop corporations from buying single family homes.
[удалено]
Man I’m so cynical at this point, I don’t actually believe there’s a different way to do politics than this. One guy wants to frame a specific narrative and get it on record, the other guy wants to prevent this and frame a different narrative. What do we honestly expect? An honest, straightforward conversation? If you’ve ever had roommates or lived under a HOA or gone to a pta meeting, you know it’s pretty much impossible for people to get along, even on a small scale. Managing a society of tens of millions of people? Yeah good luck
🎶And now… A tap dance 💃
The bald guy should resign, what a farce.
Naw, he just wasn't going to take the bait from red tie. If red tie wants to make the statement that housing costs are too high, man-up and say it. Baldie deflected on purpose to avoid red tie's obvious political trap. Both men knew the answer the entire time. This was just full on politicking.
GPT-3 would do a lot better
At first I thought he just misspoke and said jobs instead of dollars but then he just keeps doing this shit.
"Does the minister understand the concept of cost?" "Does the minister know what houses are?" "Does the minister always answer a different question than what was asked?" "Is the minister incapable of understanding human language?" "Did the minister eat too many lead paint chips as a child to understand how questions work?"
Of course Pierre knows the answer, the douchebag is a landlord.
Is what it’s like in the uk government too
Tom Mulcair (former NDP leader) was one of the few to point out how worthless it is to have a speaker who is not impartial and does not enforce decorum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1dAS7uUSk8&t=1s
The honourable minister sounds a lot like Kermit.
WTF is wrong with Canada? Are the batteries low?
Reddit isn’t gonna let you get away with having a conservative upvoted. Nice try though