¡llɐ-ɹoɟ-ǝǝɹɟ ʎɐpıɹɟ
¡puǝʞǝǝʍ ʇuǝllǝɔxǝ uɐ ǝʌɐɥ puɐ ǝɹǝɥ sǝʇopɔǝuɐ puɐ sʇɥƃnoɥʇ `sʞuıl sʍǝu ɹnoʎ ʇsod ¿ǝɹǝɥʇ ʇno ƃuıǝǝs noʎ ǝɹɐ ʇɐɥʍ os
-ʎɹǝllɐƃ ɯɐɔɥsɐp ɹoʇlɐǝɹ :ɐɐǝɹʌ
-ɹǝʇuǝɹ ʇɹɐɯs ʎǝuoɯ ɐ ǝq oʇ ʍoɥ
-sǝıɹoʇs ɹoɹɹoɥ ɹǝuʍoǝɯoɥ ǝƃɐllıʌ ɔıdɯʎlo
-ƃuıuıɐldɯoɔ ʇou sɹǝʇuǝɹ ǝƃɐllıʌ ɔıdɯʎlo
-¿ɐpɐuɐɔ uı ǝɔɐld ʇsǝq ɐʍɐʇʇo
-uoıʇɐlɟuı sǝɯıʇ xıs dn sǝɔıɹd ɔǝqǝnb
-unɹ llnq ɯoɹɟ pǝʇɐlnsuı oɯıɐuɐu
-sǝɹnsolɔǝɹoɟ ɟo poolɟ :sǝıɹoʇs ǝɹnʇɔıd
-
:ʇɐɥɔ ǝɥʇ ɟɟo ʞɔıʞ oʇ sǝıɹoʇs ʇuǝɔǝɹ ʍǝɟ ɐ ǝɹɐ ǝɹǝɥ ˙pɐǝɹɥʇ uoıssnɔsıp ɔıdoʇ uǝdo puɐ dn-punoɹ sʍǝu ʞǝǝʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo puǝ ɹɐlnƃǝɹ ɹno ɹoɟ ǝɯıʇ s,ʇı suɐǝɯ ʇɐɥʇ puɐ ¡ǝɹǝɥ sı puǝʞǝǝʍ ǝɥʇ
April 5th, 2011 at 7:54 am
@patriotz: …The only difference is that your net return for the RRSP depends on the relative tax rates at contribution and withdrawl. If equal, returns are the same…..
And the other thing you can't ignore is claw-backs. When you income gets too high, claw-backs for services start to kick in, and RRSP withdrawals are considered income while TFSA's are not.
And, God only knows (actually I doubt even he/she knows) what new claw-backs are in store for all of us over the next few years.
April 5th, 2011 at 7:46 am
@Bums Up2: …..Hi, thanks for replying! Your post is a little light on content so I’m not sure what you’re confused about but the two 15k withdrawals I’m referring to would be in separate tax years. So, the idea is that you’d be taking out a chunk (tax-free) from your TFSA, which is not counted as income, and a portion from your RRSP, which is, but would barely be taxed at all since, as you point out, $15k of income does not generate much of a tax obligation.
……
I think you're missing my point. The $15k, $5k or $1k that you cash out of your RRSP is not treated separately from the rest of your income in any given year; rather it's added to it. So, if your entire income for the year is only that $15k, the you're right you probably won’t pay much tax – but who the hell out there has no other income in a year so liquidates half of their $30k RRSP?
More likely, you cash in that $15k and add it to your $40k income (just for example) giving you a total income of $55k which puts you in the second tax bracket so you'll pay about 22% tax on about $13.5k of that $15k along with the 15% on the remainder. If your real income is higher, whell then you'll pay even more tax on that $15k
2011 tax rates From the CRA site:
15% on the first $41,544 of taxable income, +
22% on the next $41,544 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $41,544 and $83,088), +
26% on the next $45,712 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $83,088 and $128,800), +
29% of taxable income over $128,800.
15% on the first $41,544 of taxable income, +
22% on the next $41,544 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $41,544 and $83,088), +
26% on the next $45,712 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $83,088 and $128,800), +
29% of taxable income over $128,800.
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.h…
April 5th, 2011 at 3:59 am
@Bums Up2:
Assume you want to invest $10K out of pocket. For the TSFA that's $10K. Say your marginal tax rate is 25%. For the RRSP you put in $13.33K, and get $3.33K back, net $10K out of pocket.
So your original investment has tripled. For the TSFA you take out $30K. For the RRSP you take out $40K, pay $10K in tax, and keep $30K.
The only difference is that your net return for the RRSP depends on the relative tax rates at contribution and withdrawl. If equal, returns are the same.
And it doesn't matter how you split your investments between the two.
You could make the case that you should put higher growth investments into the TFSA because you will be less likely to move up a bracket on withdrawl. On the other hand, the TFSA is much better suited to temporary withdrawls and redeposits, so that's a reason to put low volatility (i.e. low growth) investments in it.
April 5th, 2011 at 3:42 am
@Anonymous: Hi, thanks for replying! Your post is a little light on content so I'm not sure what you're confused about but the two 15k withdrawals I'm referring to would be in separate tax years. So, the idea is that you'd be taking out a chunk (tax-free) from your TFSA, which is not counted as income, and a portion from your RRSP, which is, but would barely be taxed at all since, as you point out, $15k of income does not generate much of a tax obligation.
Hope that helps and welcome to VCI!!!
April 5th, 2011 at 3:21 am
@Bums Up2: …..If you need it all at once and take out all $30k you come out about $5k (over 15%) ahead after taxes. If you split that $30k into two $15k withdrawals you hardly pay any tax at all, and come out about 25% ahead of a TFSA-only strategy. …..
"If you split that $30k into two $15k withdrawals you hardly pay any tax at all". I'd like to be paying tax in that bizarre universe where you apparently pay taxes, because here in Canada, when you withdraw fund from your RRSP, it's treated as income so you pay tax at whatever the rate is for the rest of your income. So, unless your only income is that $15k, your taxes are going to be significant.
Of course, TFSA withdrawals are tax free.
April 4th, 2011 at 8:35 am
@patriotz:Like I say I'm not an expert but I don't see how you can call it a wash between the two.
Assume you can triple your money over x years. $10k in a TFSA nets $30k tax-free. $10k in a RRSP + $3k reinvested into a TFSA leaves you with $39k: $30k which is taxable in that RRSP, and $9k tax-free in your TFSA.
If you need it all at once and take out all $30k you come out about $5k (over 15%) ahead after taxes. If you split that $30k into two $15k withdrawals you hardly pay any tax at all, and come out about 25% ahead of a TFSA-only strategy.
Now, go back to my strategy and assume asynchronous growth in the two investments: high-risk growth in the TFSA, safe boring stuff in the RRSP. Say, TFSA $15k / RRSP $24k. Now you're even further ahead– take out 7.5k/year from your TFSA, $12k from your RRSP, and pay almost no tax at all (a few hundred bucks) on that SAME (2x) $19,500/yr of income. So basically the difference between $30,000 (TFSA) and $38,500 (TFSA+RRSP).
If my figures or strategy on this are way off, someone please correct me, but it all seems pretty good on its face to me.
April 4th, 2011 at 4:02 am
@space889:
Like if I immigrated to China the Chinese wouldn't be telling me exactly the same things?
Every immigrant to Canada is making an undertaking to obey the law and respect the rights granted to its citizens and residents. And one of those rights is that the infirm cannot be discriminated against.
The message comes through loud and clear that you think the Chinese are some kind of master race who have the right to practice their cultural norms anywhere they want. Well they don't.
April 4th, 2011 at 3:51 am
@space889:
I believe you mean the Totem Park residence. The frat houses are nowhere near the proposed hospice.
Are we supposed to excuse the condo owners for trying to deny the human rights of those in need because a bunch of adolescents didn't want to bring their drinking under control? At least the latter didn't pretend that the hospice residents would cause them some kind of mysterious harm.
April 4th, 2011 at 1:28 am
@Renting: Agree and nice point about the homeless shelter.
April 4th, 2011 at 1:27 am
@patriotz: To you maybe. Sorry but you are not the supreme being who gets to decide what's right and what's wrong, what's valid and what's not. Just because you think some reasons are stupid doesn't mean they aer stupid to everyone. You might be objecting to some issues based on reasons others think are stupid and baseless.
While you think you are helping, you really are not because the way you come across is not someone who has a disagreement and want to discuss, educate, etc. Rather you come across as supreme know it all who's here to teach the Chinese what's right, what's wrong, what's good for them, and what they should do. Sorry that type of approach is just not going to work very well and frankly make things worse off. If you want to effect change then get off your effing pedastal and talk/debate on equal footing.
April 4th, 2011 at 1:02 am
@patriotz: Didn't they also not put the hospice next to a student fraternity house because students complained they can't party at night?
I don't agree with the protest reason from the residents but I can see how some might feel that way and it will affect property values. However if what I heard is right about hospices sites being rejected by reason such as can't party at night then I have no reason to object to reasons like ghosts and bad luck as such, regardless of race/religion/color. To me, both are just lame excuses.
April 4th, 2011 at 12:26 am
@Flip Flop:
The "stances" of all parties regarding the Canadian RE bubble and inevitable bust are that of the ostrich.
I suppose though you would discuss which of their platforms would survive the bust the best.
April 3rd, 2011 at 11:40 pm
@ Pope et al:
How about a post debating the stances of the Cons, Libs, and NDP and the impact of their policy platforms, as it relates to the impending crash of RE in this country?
Maybe we can get a little attention from some of them.
Either way, it should make for some great back and forth in the comments.
FF
April 3rd, 2011 at 11:26 pm
TD raises rates: http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/TD-raising-mortg…
April 3rd, 2011 at 9:46 pm
@painted turtle:
ah, and you are forgetting – it's a slippery slope!
where does it end?
kudos to the poco council for building the homeless shelter – i know the area quite well, and the fact that residents are bitching about this is ridiculous – they stashed it behind the Brick Furniture Warehouse, a Steve Nash Fitness World, a Lordco and a Superstore. I think the nearest homes are at least 3 or 4 blocks away.. (and those homes are shite anyways)
April 3rd, 2011 at 10:16 am
Full video up..
The next housing shock
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7361572n&a…
April 3rd, 2011 at 7:47 am
NIMBYs are found in all communities, of course. But if a poor Asian community were complaining about power lines not being Feng Shui or a Christian community that they hear to whispers of the devil in the wires, people would laugh at them.
Now, why do we listen to these complains about ghosts at UBC? And why do we give them credit even if they are against the Canadian Charter? Because many in the UNA community, including white boomers, are happy to play the card of cultural sensitivity, to protect property value. Shame on them. And they are heard in the media. It is the double standard that is not acceptable.
April 3rd, 2011 at 7:41 am
According to "Agent Will", the weekly sales reached its peak during the week of Mar 20 to Mar 26. And declined sharply thereafter. Here you go with the numbers (the number excluding certain areas):
Feb 13 — Feb 19 737
Feb 20 — Feb 26 711
Feb 27 — Mar 05 791
Mar 06 — Mar 12 745
Mar 13 — Mar 19 773
Mar 20 — Mar 26 896
Mar 27 — Apr 02 697
http://agentwill.com/weekly-stats/
April 3rd, 2011 at 7:29 am
@Absinthe:
Because individually titled properties, by and large, are only for those with the highest incomes. The common folk live in rental apartments or in the case of China ex-communist apartments which don't have marketable titles. Or in squatter slums. As well, most 3rd world countries have much higher levels of unreported income than we do.
That makes comparing price/income with Western countries meaningless. You have to look just at the incomes of the segment of the population which does own – which in many cases does indicate a bubble today. But the point is that their price/income has always looked high compared to ours, because it's not really measuring the same thing.
I also think VanMag is comparing metro Vancouver with San Francisco City, which is only 11% if the metro population. San Francisco City is very atypical because it has so few households with children and can support a high price/income. Metro San Fransisco actually peaked around 10 and is down to around 6 now.
April 3rd, 2011 at 6:27 am
@Laibach:
FYI… I'm sarcastic please.
April 3rd, 2011 at 6:23 am
Why hospice when you can have this in the backyard. Soon to be seen on Robson.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/04/chinese-…
April 3rd, 2011 at 6:11 am
fixie guy GO FUCK YOURSELF, that is a message from another Caucasian.
You, patriotz and BPOM ruined this site with your bigoted rumblings.
go find yourself KKK site and start jerking over there and leave this site for RE talk.
“I am left with a feeling of discouragement of how there are so many people like him, who are bamboozled by the media spewing biased reporting.” | Vancouver Real Estate Anecdote Archive Says:
April 3rd, 2011 at 6:09 am
[...] at vancouvercondo.info April 1st, 2011 at 5:41 pm- “I just had a brief “water cooler” discussion with a fairly good friend/coworker. The [...]
April 3rd, 2011 at 5:58 am
@Patiently Waiting
I have the perfect solution. Trade the homeless shelter with the Hospice.
Two birds with one stone.
April 3rd, 2011 at 5:43 am
Anyone see the piece in Vancouver Magazine about the idea that we're at the "median" level in terms of affordability when compared with cities around the world?
It was irritating, but made me think. The article we've got an index of 9.07 (average price home/average income). They say we rate with Sydney, Oslo, San Fran. (San Fran, I should note, is in the process of dropping.)
Then they mention that Shanghai and Islamabad have indexes of 40 and 50. Therefore, suggests VanMag we are affordable to those Richersons from Shanghai. And Canada is easy to immigrate to.
Plus, VanMag says, HAM is coming to Quebec and then from Quebec moving here, and that there are 6000 HAM investor families coming to Quebec every year. Which could be true, but I don't remember that our interprovincial numbers are that much bigger. I'll have to check.
I have never liked VanMag, but someone left it on our doorstep and of course I had to look.
What I've never really understood is why Shanghai and other non-Western countries have such high prices compared to the western world. With Chinese GDP at $4K per capita, the investors at 50X income aren't making rent money: so property has got to work differently. I know, for example, that unused land in Vietnam is farmable – people grow rice or tea in ditches, build housing in parks – so that ownership has got to work differently there. But what about Seoul? Taipei? How much of the land is owned by government?
April 3rd, 2011 at 5:14 am
@Renting: …..Both are really objecting to the same thing. They believe the proposed change whether it be power lines or a hospice will lower their property values……
Except, that power lines would actually reduce values and nobody would argue that point. Only a greedy asshole would presume having a hospice next door would reduce property values (which, of course, it wouldn't). And, anyone who really wanted to live there (as opposed to a speculator) wouldn’t care, even if there might be an impact to values.
April 3rd, 2011 at 5:13 am
@fixie guy:
You are the A hole if there ever was one. I am Caucasian. Another bad call on your part. Nazi card? WTF are you talking about?
You are one bitter guy. You blame everyone but yourself for your problems.
April 3rd, 2011 at 4:53 am
152 Renting Says: "The racist tone on this blog is getting sickening."
Project much, asshole? Contempt for Caucasians leaps from your posts. And I see you pulled the Nazi card too. Nice.
A facility of higher learning buckling to superstition at the expense of the dying is worlds away from elected officials fielding complaints based on bad science and misinformation. And contrary to a moronic sentiment posted earlier, if these people are only lying, leveraging western fears of upsetting outside cultures in order to personally profit, they're an even lower grade of social parasite than any example you raised.
April 3rd, 2011 at 4:37 am
First of all, the Coquitlam protesters were mostly white, as I said.
A lot of the basis for their object was endogenous in that it was false assumptions about the homeless. The most disgusting claims included child abuse such as pedophilia. It was propaganda hateful enough to please Goebbels.
As to storming the chambers, well check this CBC story about the beefed-up security because of it:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/st…
"A meeting at city hall Nov. 1 descended into such chaos…"
The shelter was dealing with a problem that has been in the area for several years. Homeless encampments have been cleared from the very site where the shelter will be built. There was never any valid claims to additional problems being created by such a shelter. More likely it would solve those problems that already existed.
April 3rd, 2011 at 4:06 am
@Renting: The residents are not all Chinese. Just to be clear.
Residents have taken their story to the media. If they were anti-Semitic residents they would be getting WAY more press than these residents are getting and would be thrown under the bus guaranteed. Yet the local board is somehow able to accept these residents' beliefs as having credence. Do you not see the double standard?
I have no problem with these residents playing the NIMBY card. Just don't trample over the Charter please — they should find a better argument, if one exists.
April 3rd, 2011 at 3:43 am
Patiently Waiting Says:
April 3rd, 2011 at 4:48 am
@patriotz: If want to see an example of (mostly) white people being similar kinds of assholes as the Promontory Chinese, look to Coquitlam. City council chambres were stormed and the Mayor was threatened over a new homeless shelter. The shelter will be in a commercial area, but houses are nearby.
That’s the problem now, you have residential real estate owners are everywhere, ready to resist anything that might affect their property values. City councils need to look these people in the eye and knock them down a few pegs. Coquitlam council did that, and have earned my votes.
RESPONSE
The Coquitlam residence did not storm chambers but came to council and after discussions they left and not exactly pleased but had an understanding of the issues. They had valid concerns as would anybody on this issue.
April 3rd, 2011 at 3:10 am
@jesse:
I am not arguing against the hospice. I support it 100% as I do the power lines. I am arguing patriotz assertion that only Chinese NIMBYs get listened to which is a joke. The racist tone on this blog is getting sickening.