Minister acknowledges 'challenges' to families as daycares raise costs due to minimum
- Thread starter White_Unifier
- Start date
It costs you then in taxes -- and not just you but even people who don't have kids.
But if you are so into that policy, why did you abandon them for the Trudeau?
Agreed. But raising the minimum wage isn't the solution since then they're just paid minimum wage. I'm not saying there is a shame in that, but just that all other salaries, prices, costs, etc. will react to that.
It's a damned disgrace that we've relied on paying slave wages to those raising our young children. I expect that you get the quality that you pay for.
It is just one example of many of many prices going up and generally increasing the cost of living for all which will all but cancel the extra money coming in from the minimum wage hike (for those that benefited).
Flossy.
SO then why are you paying so much?
Which is about a third of the price it would be with government union babysitters with their industry leading wages and their solid gold benefits package.
AKA monetary discrimination mandated by a government that doesn't believe in equal rights.
Not to mention all the ones that got their hours cut back so they don't meet the monthly minimum hours for benefits.
isn't it just more of a case of min wage catching up to all these other costs?
property values have doubled in Toronto in the last 5 or 6 years? Wouldn't your rent/lease/mortgage costs doubling have more impact on your operating costs?
When the kids were young, my wife took a 5 year leave from work. She was lucky. They held her position and seniority for her.
I picked up a second job, and with some support from family, we eked through those financially trying years. It's terribly expensive having your children in daycare.
I picked up a second job, and with some support from family, we eked through those financially trying years. It's terribly expensive having your children in daycare.
good to know
Commercial rents in Toronto could soar as much as 50% in the next three years as market tightens
A new report suggest Toronto will catch up with major U.S. cities like New York with massive rent increases driven by higher property prices and strong demand
Commercial rents in Toronto could soar as much as 50% in the next three years as market tightens | Financial Post
Commercial rents in Toronto could soar as much as 50% in the next three years as market tightens
A new report suggest Toronto will catch up with major U.S. cities like New York with massive rent increases driven by higher property prices and strong demand
Commercial rents in Toronto could soar as much as 50% in the next three years as market tightens | Financial Post
I seem to remember Wynne hinting at support for rent controls. History already shows that when we do that, businesses leave the rental industry resulting in even more shortages and so people paying landlords more under the table to outbid one another for the available flats. So, we raise the minimum wage to legislate a person out of work and then impose rent controls to discourage businesses from investing in the building of more rental accommodation so as to further aggravate the shortage of available accommodation. Economics 101 man, economics 101.
Commercial isn't resid... oh f-ck it, it's Hoid.
If thats the case, it's really going to be a choice of labour or rent for businesses.
If thats the case, it's really going to be a choice of labour or rent for businesses.
It's the chicken and egg argument. Increase wages drives up costs which drives up prices. It's not the only factor but the wages are not going to catch up. At best they may break even assuming all these business pass on $N of cost as $N of price increase. I suspect a lot are adding a little to N as it gets passed along and blaming it on the wages. So if enough business do that, slight loss. But yes businesses do change their prices from time to time. When you go to a restaurant and notice new fancy menus, I guarantee you the prices have changed.
He means landlords deciding to not become landlords. However, this is false reasoning for a couple of reasons. Landlords will not decide not to be landlords. The properties exist and they need to make money off them even with controls. What it would do is prevent new buildings being put up for rent. This too is not really a good reason as without controls new buildings have not been coming available. It is much more profitable to build and sell the properties than rent.
I was thinking of construction companies. They'd shift from building rental accommodations to other construction since rental companies would no longer want to expand. Some of them might even consider converting rental accommodation into something else and maybe even sell it to prospective homeowners.
Meanwhile, prospective renters willing to work illegally might offer more money to a landlord under the table as they outbid one another. Alternatively, the landlord starts to charge for each little service that he provides, be it repairs, maintenance, renovation, etc.
rent controls will make renting even less profitable than it is now. How does that solve the problem when we want to encourage more construction, not less.
At this point there is almost no construction of rental properties. Having no or almost no controls does not encourage construction of rental properties.