Live data from Hacker News

Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

theguardian.com

61–70 of 217 posts

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#61
post #56

As someone that lives in Toronto and is moving out in the middle of the month to go back home near family. The idea that Toronto is going to focus on "affordability" is laughable. It's one of the most expensive cities to live in in the world, and the incompetent city council, mayor and all the way up to the provincial government are doing absolutely everything they can to keep it that way - mostly without even realiz…

>> It's one of the most expensive cities to live in in the world, [...] Toronto was ranked as the 98th most expensive city in the world; not even in the top 50, even though it's the 4th largest city in North America. Perhaps it's more accurate to say that Toronto and Vancouver are unaffordable and expensive cities for domestic Canadians to live in. >> Our debt to GDP is out of control. Our federal government keeps bo…

>Perhaps it's more accurate to say that Toronto and Vancouver are unaffordable and expensive cities for domestic Canadians to live in.

Yes, the numbers in that first link are in the context of expats. But even with remote work likely becoming more common, it's more meaningful in general to think about cost of living with respect to local salaries because that's what people living in a city are earning.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#62
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A down payment on a Toronto house should take 24 years to accumulate", reading the article this seems to be based on a severe case of dyscalculia. If the apartment costs 1 million and you want to save until you have 6% (which is 60k), and you only save 10% of your annual 170k salary, meaning you save 17k per year so after 3 years plus you have the down-payment. In addition to proper math one also should probably sav…

Not sure where you got the numbers but to buy a 1m condo in Toronto would require closer to 250k not 60k. And that isn’t taking into consideration the condo will also be up 8-10% next year.

My numbers are from the article linked in the post I answered to.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#63
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically Toronto already had a floating restaurant called Captain Jacks. At the base of Yonge St. The Port Authority and the Owner could not come to an agreement on money owned for use of the slip. The owner packed in after a good run for a couple of decades. The vintage ship was towed away, and hacked up for scrap. Toronto was left without a good restaurant on the water.

It's hilarious for me to see > Toronto was left without a good restaurant on the water which should actually be > The business owner was either unwilling or incapable of making his business succeed.

The man was a crook and the restaurant was terrible, but he was very successful at not paying taxes. After years in dispute, I was there to cheer the tug to tow that dump away. Then the city erected a monument to commemorate him!

https://www.blogto.com/city/2013/10/city_of_toronto_tells_ca...

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#64
Those plans were smart, they made Google richer. Not sure why people can't see this, that what a company wants is getting richer. They don't care about you.

Some people know this but want to out-cheat Google. The results are always the same. They are the pros, not you.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#65
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fed Gov and BoC have no choice but to keep interest rates at zero and continue to play with numbers to keep the ponzi going so the whole Country doesn't collapse. You also have to take into consideration that there is no where else to find any work but in the big cities. The whole damn situation is a mess with no way out. Feel sorry for the kids who finish a degree in STEM from Waterloo or UoT and end up working…

>> Feel sorry for the kids who finish a degree in STEM from Waterloo or UoT and end up working for 40k a year. The starting salary for STEM grads seem to be well above 40K CAD, perhaps even >65K CAD [1]. >> A down payment on a Toronto house should take 24 years to accumulate When you pair your linked article with the fact that the GTA has experienced net-positive population growth every single year since 1971[1] then…

>If a new grad wants a starter property in the city then perhaps start with the purchase of a studio/1-bed.

This lacks the history on what people used to be able to purchase, not just in Toronto but in all of Southern Ontario, and now even as far away as the Maritimes.

The purchasing power for the average Canadian to afford things that actually mater (like housing), is dropping like crazy.

Allow me to give you my own anecdote. 12 years ago, I purchased a "starter home" in Waterloo for $249,000 in the neighborhood I grew up in. Detached with a single car garage, on my "new community college grad" salary of 47k/year with 25k of savings that I had.

Today, with say a 60k/year salary, a new grad in my city could afford to live in a small "starter condo", a huge downgrade to ones expectations who wants to raise a family. The standard of living and affordability has objectively dropped for young people today.

Last week a house on my street that is actually smaller than mine just sold for $780,000. I wonder what their mortgage is like?

But according to some people, hey you can still get into the market! Just buy a condo!

Now lets get to the meat of the issue. Why is this happening (and in many Western countries)?. Economic crashes are literally a built in guaranteed feature of our money system, but our government has found a way to kick the can down the road through mass immigration. As long as they can bring in half a million people in every year willing to take on debt, they think they can avoid a market correction, and they aren't wrong, they have avoided a correction for 12 years now thanks to the people they bring in on a daily basis in Canada. But this was not without a great cost, even if they can continue this nonsense for another 10 years, they have destroyed the purchasing power of your average Canadian to afford things that actually matter, like housing.

I would argue that they found a way to avoid a crash by substituting that with a gradual decline of our standard of living. They stole from the young to pay for their pensions and nest eggs to avoid facing the music.

Unfortunately, in many forums you can't bring up the elephant in the room if you are against mass immigration for its many downsides (including wage stagnation), you get denounced as a racist, or you get attacked by people who want this ponzy scheme to continue because after all, the economy now depends on it! They would rather you blamed the city for not building more condos (that noone wants to live in), and NIMBY's. But don't you dare bring up mass immigration.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#66

Pet peeve, articles that use "untested" as a critism when testing something is the point.

It may be the point for Google , but not for Toronto citizens , who surely want a better city more than they want to be a science experiment. I'd say the usage is purposeful and correct.

Any new idea has to start somewhere. We'll eternally stay at local maxima without experimentation.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#67

As someone that lives in Toronto and is moving out in the middle of the month to go back home near family. The idea that Toronto is going to focus on "affordability" is laughable. It's one of the most expensive cities to live in in the world, and the incompetent city council, mayor and all the way up to the provincial government are doing absolutely everything they can to keep it that way - mostly without even realiz…

As far as I can tell, the affordable housing movement has been broadly co-opted by developers who leverage grants and incentives to expand their portfolios of rent generating assets.

Regulations which include language like "X% of units must be for renters making There is a genuine affordable (and equitable) housing movement, largely built on urban equity-cooperatives and community land trusts, but those promising efforts have been very effectively redirected into boosting opportunities for "master planned" real estate corporations.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#68

Pet peeve, articles that use "untested" as a critism when testing something is the point.

This is a city with real people in it, not a new gadget Google can throw out of the window like half of its projects two years later.

When it comes to the physical environment of people 'untested' in particular of the tech sector variety is a very legitimate criticism in an of itself.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be the point for Google , but not for Toronto citizens , who surely want a better city more than they want to be a science experiment. I'd say the usage is purposeful and correct.

Any new idea has to start somewhere. We'll eternally stay at local maxima without experimentation.

This is still missing the point. The sentence is about Toronto's current priorities. While the world surely benefits from guinea pigs, any individual guinea pig may not want to be one.

Re: Toronto swaps Google-backed, not-so-smart city plans for people-centred vision

#70

Politicians like these are why innovation is so slow. Google was primed and ready to try something new but it was just too different for these people to handle. I don't even like every aspect of the Google city plan but it would have been an invaluable experiment.

And if they paid the guinea pigs industry standard rates of about $100/day for joining the experiment, maybe it's a good idea.
Post reply on HN