5833 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

The last CoV election proved that.

As well as the last provincial and federal elections.

[Stephen James]

The last CoV election proved that.

hmmm. 37%?

 

My theory? If someone wanted change to happen, we'd need to cut the leash the NDP tugs on poor suffering Victoria. To do this, we'd just need more voters. 

 

Rape, assault, explosions in BHP, rapidly increasing stranger attacks, being lied to and ignored by city council, horrible homeless policy, diminishing services every year, bylaws that are never enforced, councillors that put their signs up 2 weeks before it's legal because they can, councillors pretending they're not in a slate, Mayors hiring the daughter of the finance minister, councillors breaking the law, lying about where they are during meetings, conflicts of interest, corrupted governance, illegal secret meetings because councillors don't have the courage to make transparent decisions, councillors involved in illegal activity ... this is a small sample.

 

I have no idea what would motivate more than 50% of this city to vote, and I watch with pained embarrassment when an idiot councillor says something like "I won and I get to do whatever I want", when the same idiot got 15% of he community to vote for him.

[dasmo]

The goal is disengagement….

[Stephen James]

The goal is disengagement….

one wonders

[dasmo]

one wonders

No need to wonder. The “think tank” that created the marketing materials and theology behind the missing middle prescribes this explicitly.

“ The goal is disengagement

We all know about successful processes, as measured by the how-many count, that flunked out when it came to producing real, measurable results. So long as you view engagement essentially as an end goal, you’re missing out on its true value as a tool for moving communities forward.

We unsettle people when we tell them, no, your goal shouldn’t be engagement. It should be disengagement.”

https://www.cnu.org/...ytelling-themes

If you watch their videos they will explain why single family zoning is racists and many other mind bending tools for social engineering.

[Stephen James]

No need to wonder. The “think tank” that created the marketing materials and theology behind the missing middle prescribes this explicitly.

“ The goal is disengagement

We all know about successful processes, as measured by the how-many count, that flunked out when it came to producing real, measurable results. So long as you view engagement essentially as an end goal, you’re missing out on its true value as a tool for moving communities forward.

We unsettle people when we tell them, no, your goal shouldn’t be engagement. It should be disengagement.”

https://www.cnu.org/...ytelling-themes

If you watch their videos they will explain why single family zoning is racists and many other mind bending tools for social engineering.

 

The next line is typical of the naïveté and pointlessness of such missives:

 

We unsettle people when we tell them, no, your goal shouldn’t be engagement. It should be disengagement. Reaching a point where trust has been built, people are satisfied and they retreat, confident that their interests are not being undermined.

 

This was written by someone with little to no understanding of politics or human nature. This will never happen and the circumstances this kind of thinking creates, the policy this kind of thinking espouses, are both the guarantees that people will be looking harder and more often. 

 

 

[dasmo]

That’s just double think being programmed into our “leaders” who are being indoctrinated with this. They are no longer operating the mechanics of the city but are rather tools of social engineering of the Davos class. This is why if you google missing middle the exact thing that has and is happening here is happening everywhere. All with a similar veneer of being a grassroots problem with a locally designed solution.

[Victoria Watcher]

$4,375,000

 

 

291 King George Terr

 

 

https://www.realtor....ak-bay-gonzales

 

 

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 01 February 2023 - 06:27 AM.

[Stephen James]

I know that house. 

You could put quite a few townhouses on that lot and every one would sell for $2mm +.

[Victoria Watcher]

It's in Oak Bay, so not going to happen.

 

It's an interesting house.

[Victoria Watcher]

I might have a fold-down boat ramp:

 

 

[Victoria Watcher]

Hold on, more like this:

 

 

 

 

 

Waterfront homes with no access to the water seem lame to me.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 01 February 2023 - 11:38 AM.

[Mike K.]

January data: https://victoria.cit...gh-home-prices/

[Victoria Watcher]

“Despite the slower start to the market in January, and our constrained inventory levels, some consumers still found themselves in multiple-offer situations, particularly on the types of properties that represent the crucial missing middle segment of our market.”

 

Rebecca Sanders – who has been looking to purchase property in Victoria during the past few months to get out of renting – called it “multiple offer madness.”

 

“With rising rates, I didn’t expect so many people to be bidding on the same property,” Sanders told Black Press Media. “It was a little disheartening. It really was madness as the price kept going up with all of the offers. I was told to maybe try not asking for an inspection to get to the front of the line but my real estate agent said that was a bad idea. So I had to drop out of the bidding.”

 

 

 

https://www.vicnews....iff-say-buyers/

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 03 February 2023 - 04:11 AM.

[Mike K.]

Missing middle? There were 37 townhome sales. And the average and medians were way below what we saw in 2022 and most of 2021.

So what was this person bidding on?

[Victoria Watcher]

Investors made up 20 to 30% of homeowners in some provinces: Statistics Canada

Investors in British Columbia came in at 23.3 per cent followed by 20.4 per cent in Manitoba

https://www.vicnews....tistics-canada/

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 05 February 2023 - 03:23 PM.

[IPH]

Investor BAD! I guess renters think their fairy godmother is going to become their landlord.  

[Matt R.]

Looks more and more like that is the reality every day, doesn’t it?

[Nparker]

Just part of the continuing narrative to convince renters that the ONLY viable landlord is the state and that all private rental properties should become government owned.

[IPH]

Isn't something like 99% of all rental housing "Privately Owned By Investors"?  Unless the government starts seizing rental properties, buying it all would bankrupt the taxpayer.