The lovely shithole called Vancouver BC.

[Craig]

Peeps actually live in this pos city? Yes the druggies low lifes and
misfits love it. You might as well live in Mogadishu.



The Downtown Eastside (DTES) is a neighbourhood in Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada. The area, one of the city's oldest, is notorious for its
open-air drug trade, sex work, poverty, mental illness, homelessness,
infectious disease, and crime. It is also known for its strong community
resilience and history of social activism.

it’s also a port town, and that means it’s a hub for drugs that come by boat
from the Pacific, including pure heroin. Those drugs make their way across
Canada, but plenty of the stuff stays within the city, especially in one
section of town known as the "Downtown Eastside." This stretch of town is
just blocks away from the tourist sections of Yaletown. But it's also the
epicenter of Vancouver's drug problem, and can it resemble the worst
sections of Baltimore or Detroit.

The leaky condo crisis, also known as the leaky condo syndrome and rotten
condo crisis, is an ongoing construction, financial, and legal crisis in
Canada. It primarily involves multi-unit condominium (or strata) buildings
damaged by rainwater infiltration in the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island
regions of coastal British Columbia (B.C.). In B.C. alone an estimated $4
billion in damage has occurred to over 900 buildings and 31,000 individual
housing units built between the late 1980s and early 2000s, establishing it
as the most extensive and most costly reconstruction of housing stock in
Canadian history.

Vancouver experienced an explosive outbreak of HIV infection that remains
one of the fastest spreading HIV epidemics ever documented in the developed
world. Until recently, British Columbia also recorded several hundred
overdose fatalities every year. While Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside is the
area hardest hit by the drug use epidemic, the problem is not restricted to
this neighbourhood. Drug-related health concerns, public disorder and crime
are issues that affect most areas of the city.

This week’s announcement that there are 1,746 homeless people living in
Vancouver—just a fraction down from last year’s total of 1,803—was generally
greeted with nonplussed resignation.

With data collected between 2009 and 2013, Statistics Canada found that life
satisfaction in Vancouver is measured at only 7.8 out of 10, while the
happiest metropolitan area, Saguenay, Quebec, measures at 8.25. Canada as a
whole lands near 7.97.

[Craig]

"Craig" wrote in message news:oke3vi$o3o$1...@dont-email.me...

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_



For Greater Vancouver, the picture that emerges isn’t flattering. For Canada
as a whole, median pre-tax family income was $74,540, measured in constant
2012 dollars. The Vancouver region is near the bottom of pile, scoring 28th
with a median family income of $71,140 in 2012.

The gaps between the best and worst performers on median income are
striking. In particular, Greater Vancouver lags behind top-ranked Calgary by
$27,160 and trails Edmonton by almost $25,000. Perhaps more surprisingly,
typical census families in Regina and Saskatoon boast incomes that are about
$20,000 and $16,200, respectively, higher than Metro Vancouver’s. It is also
worth noting that B.C. is home to two of the country’s least prosperous
urban areas: Vancouver and Abbotsford.

Greater Vancouver’s disappointing ranking on median income takes on added
significance in light of high housing costs. Housing costs here are the
steepest in the country and compare unfavourably with costs in both Toronto
and Montreal as well as all other Canadian (and most American) urban areas.
The juxtaposition of expensive housing and decidedly mediocre (at best)
household incomes is disconcerting and underscores the point that many
families in the Lower Mainland are in a financial bind.

Vancouver ranks second only to Hong Kong in having the least affordable
housing, according to Demographia's 10th annual survey of 360 housing
markets in nine Western countries.

[Thomas E.]

Thanks for this piece of reality.

[Alan Baker]

Calling Michael Patelmo's mouthings "reality" just shows how far you've
sunk, Liarboy.

[Craig]

"Thomas E." wrote in message
news:ddd40791-1bb9-4f8f...@googlegroups.com...

Thank you I was tired of hearing all the blatant lies trying to build it up
into something it just isn't. It's a shithole no doubt about that.

If the Shit Stain could IT would move to a more upscale city but IT's stuck
in that crappy one roomer that IT inherited and hasn't seen a coat of paint
in thirty years. IT's a real financial power in IT's own tiny pea brain.

[Craig]

"Thomas E." wrote in message
news:ddd40791-1bb9-4f8f...@googlegroups.com...

The overall crime rate in Vancouver is 17% higher than the national average.
For every 100,000 people, there are 9.48 daily crimes that occur in
Vancouver.

Yes, a lovely place to live in fear.

[Craig]

"Thomas E." wrote in message
news:ddd40791-1bb9-4f8f...@googlegroups.com...

Gang activity in the greater metropolitan area is well-documented.
Gang-on-gang violence, including targeted homicides, continues to pose a
concern. Canada reportedly has 950 gangs, many operating in the Vancouver
area. Asian organized crime and outlaw motorcycle gangs operate throughout
British Columbia, trafficking goods to the U.S., Australia, and Japan.
Marijuana cross-border trafficking, kidnapping, extortions, and homicides
are the primary means that these elements support their illicit activities.
U.S. private sector interests have not been significantly impacted by these
recent activities; however, there is a prevailing concern that continuing
gang violence could affect the general public.

Generally, the east-side corridor of downtown Vancouver should be avoided.
While areas near East Hastings Street and Main Street are filled with
attractive boutiques and restaurants, individuals fueling drug addictions
are also present and steal/sell items to support their habits.

[michae...@gmail.com]

Yeah, a Shithole for a Shit Stain. Kinda goes hand and hand.

[Thomas E.]

Do you deny that Vancouver is one of the least affordable housing markets in the world? See table 7, page 14 and pages 43-45:

http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf

In the latest report Sydney and Hong Kong are less affordable.

Do you deny that the U.S. is the most affordable major housing market in the world? See page 2 op. cit.

"There are 11 affordable major housing markets in 2016, all in the United States. Rochester is the most affordable, with a Median Multiple of 2.5, followed by Buffalo (2.6), Cincinnati (2.7), Cleveland (2.7), Pittsburgh (2.7), Oklahoma City (2.9), St. Louis (2.9) and four at 3.0, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Indianapolis and Kansas City."

Do you deny that Canada's policy of urban containment limited the housing supply, and that such a policy is correlated with housing affordability? See figure 4 page 15 and page 71 op.cit.

Do you deny that Canada's housing market is deteriorating to the point that prices are reaching "bubble" levels? See page 19 op. cit.

"The health of the housing market has been deteriorating rapidly in Canada. Both international and national organizations have expressed concern about the damage that rising prices (some suggest a “housing bubble”) could do to the national economy."

"Among major markets, Canada has a seriously unaffordable Median Multiple of 4.7. There are no affordable major markets, one major markets is rated as moderately unaffordable, three are rated seriously unaffordable and two are rated severely unaffordable. The Median multiple for all housing markets in Canada is 3.9."


"Major Housing Markets: As in all of the previous Surveys, Vancouver is rated as having the worst housing affordability in Canada. Vancouver is rated severely unaffordable, with a Median Multiple of 11.8. Vancouver has also experienced modest net domestic out-migration."

Page 20 op. cit.

"Indeed, house prices have been rising well above the economic fundamentals in Canada for at least a decade. Vancouver had already developed a
severely unaffordable housing market in the first Survey (2004), which has been associated with its urban containment policy, adopted about five decades ago. Vancouver has experienced the greatest housing affordability deterioration among major markets in the Demographia Annual International Housing Affordability Survey, with its Median Multiple more than doubling, from 5.4 to 11.8. The UBS Global Real Estate Bubble Index rates Vancouver as having the world’s worst housing bubble risk."

Page 22 op. cit.

"A 2016 Frontier Centre for Public Policy research report reviewed the strongly rising house prices relative to incomes in 35 markets across the nation."

"This represents a “sea change” from the decades of relatively stable housing affordability across Canada. From the early 1970s to their first inclusion in the Survey, there was virtually no housing affordability deterioration in the major markets, with the exception of Vancouver. The rapidly escalating prices of houses has been associated with wider adoption of urban containment policies."



So, Alan, what in this report is not reality?

[-hh]

Oh, look: Tom is "cherrypicking" just one of the metrics listed by the OP Troll...

Oh, wait: housing cost wasn't even mentioned in the OP's troll! Oops!
Looks like a "move the goalpost" problem.

In any event, the citation uses a metric that they call the ‘median multiple’
approach, which is defined as the ratio of median house prices to median
household incomes. For example, to get an 11, if the median income is,
say, $100K, then the median home price is elven times that, or $1.1M.

> So, Alan, what in this report is not reality?

Well, the problem with the cited approach is promptly seen when it is compared
to other similar 'affordability' measures, such as the below, which employs a
"Ownership as % of monthly wage" metric:

<http://247wallst.com/special-report/2017/01/06/americas-25-least-affordable-housing-markets/2/>

Taking simply just a conventional mortgage calculator for a 30 year fixed at today's
nominal 4% rate, one can get a monthly payment, which then when multiplied
by 12 months and divided by the income can result in the same basic sort of
percentage that this company used. For example, using $100K again, 11x = $1.1M,
which at 4%/30yr = $5252/month, which times 12 months = $63,024. Divide this
by the $100K income to self-normalize (as 247wallst did) yields a value of 63%,
which means that 63% is equivalent to this 'Median Multiplier' of 11 (Vancouver).
But when the above page is consulted, it reveals that there's 22 places just in the
USA (let alone worldwide) which have ownership costs higher than 63%...which
illustrates how different metrics can so readily draw different conclusions.

The exercise is left up to the readers to decide which of these two published metrics
carries more weight, as well as all of the others which invariably also exist.
Naturally, show your work and develop a supportable rationale for your conclusion.


-hh

[Alan Baker]

Nope. I deny it shows that Vancouver isn't a desirable place to live.

>
> http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf
>
> In the latest report Sydney and Hong Kong are less affordable.
>
> Do you deny that the U.S. is the most affordable major housing market in the world? See page 2 op. cit.
>
> "There are 11 affordable major housing markets in 2016, all in the United States. Rochester is the most affordable, with a Median Multiple of 2.5, followed by Buffalo (2.6), Cincinnati (2.7), Cleveland (2.7), Pittsburgh (2.7), Oklahoma City (2.9), St. Louis (2.9) and four at 3.0, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Indianapolis and Kansas City."
>
> Do you deny that Canada's policy of urban containment limited the housing supply, and that such a policy is correlated with housing affordability? See figure 4 page 15 and page 71 op.cit.
>
> Do you deny that Canada's housing market is deteriorating to the point that prices are reaching "bubble" levels? See page 19 op. cit.
>
> "The health of the housing market has been deteriorating rapidly in Canada. Both international and national organizations have expressed concern about the damage that rising prices (some suggest a “housing bubble”) could do to the national economy."
>
> "Among major markets, Canada has a seriously unaffordable Median Multiple of 4.7. There are no affordable major markets, one major markets is rated as moderately unaffordable, three are rated seriously unaffordable and two are rated severely unaffordable. The Median multiple for all housing markets in Canada is 3.9."
>
>
> "Major Housing Markets: As in all of the previous Surveys, Vancouver is rated as having the worst housing affordability in Canada. Vancouver is rated severely unaffordable, with a Median Multiple of 11.8. Vancouver has also experienced modest net domestic out-migration."
>
> Page 20 op. cit.
>
> "Indeed, house prices have been rising well above the economic fundamentals in Canada for at least a decade. Vancouver had already developed a
> severely unaffordable housing market in the first Survey (2004), which has been associated with its urban containment policy, adopted about five decades ago. Vancouver has experienced the greatest housing affordability deterioration among major markets in the Demographia Annual International Housing Affordability Survey, with its Median Multiple more than doubling, from 5.4 to 11.8. The UBS Global Real Estate Bubble Index rates Vancouver as having the world’s worst housing bubble risk."
>
> Page 22 op. cit.
>
> "A 2016 Frontier Centre for Public Policy research report reviewed the strongly rising house prices relative to incomes in 35 markets across the nation."
>
> "This represents a “sea change” from the decades of relatively stable housing affordability across Canada. From the early 1970s to their first inclusion in the Survey, there was virtually no housing affordability deterioration in the major markets, with the exception of Vancouver. The rapidly escalating prices of houses has been associated with wider adoption of urban containment policies."
>
>
>
> So, Alan, what in this report is not reality?
>

The interpretation of its content presented in this thread so far.

[michae...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 8:10:33 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:

The two little Shit Stains are beating their gums to death, but can't disprove a thing "Michael" posted.

One Shit Stain put out a weak denial, the other wrote reams of nonsense in the usual smoke and gas blowing.

Highly amusing.

BWAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

[michae...@gmail.com]

Oh wait, Shit Stain #2 didn't bother to read before IT shit!!!!!

"Greater Vancouver’s disappointing ranking on median income takes on added
significance in light of high housing costs. Housing costs here are the
steepest in the country and compare unfavourably with costs in both Toronto
and Montreal as well as all other Canadian (and most American) urban areas."

You is a stoopid little Shit, Shit Stain.

You should have quit when you were only miles behind.

[-hh]

> significance in light of ...."

Incorrect. You're quoting from the second troll post, not the OP.
The OP post is here:

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/RsGIH-iE9pc/QbRDCdxBAAAJ>



> You is a stoopid....

*are ;-)

And amongst other things, you missed that I specified "OP", not thread.


-hh

[michae...@gmail.com]

BWAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAAAAAAAA

IOW, ooops... you shot from the lip.

You is a dumb fuck....

[michae...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 8:10:33 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:

Notice IT'S raging denial?

Shit Stain said: "Nope. I deny it shows that Vancouver isn't a desirable place to live."

And again, IT denies "The interpretation of its content presented in this thread so far."

Does IT also deny that the sky is blue??

And that, in a nutshell is all IT has to hang IT'S hat on...denial.

Wadda worthless Dick.

[Thomas E.]

Uh, no, the median measure also shows that there are very expensive places to live in the U.S. LA and the NYC area are prime examples.

[Thomas E.]

Do you don't deny that Vancouver is an expensive place to live compared to the rest of the world? That was the question - that you dodged.

[Alan Baker]

No. What I deny is that that shows its not a desirable place to live.

Quite the reverse: it shows that people are willing to pay a premium to
live here.

[-hh]

Oh, there's not any dispute that these are desirable areas to live; what I was questioning
was the legitimacy of the chosen 'median measure'.

As illustrated above, even just a cursory review showed issues with its claimed list
as 20+ markets in just in the USA were found which appear to be more 'imbalanced'
vs income than what it claimed for the #3 place in the world. Please reconcile.


-hh

[michae...@gmail.com]

Interesting how the two Shit Stains are babbling on and trying to rewrite fact.

And, as usual failing.

[Thomas E.]

Well, people want to live in Carmel too. In fact, since 1980 Carmel population has grown at a just a little bit faster rate than Vancouver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Vancouver

1981 414,281
1991 471,644
2001 545,671
2011 603,502
2016 631,486
1981-2016 52%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmel,_Indiana

1980 18,272
1990 25,380
2000 37,733
2010 79,191
2016 91,065
1980-2016 398%

Maybe affordable housing matters

[Alan Baker]

Or maybe the fact that Vancouver IS FULL, Liarboy.

Check the growth of the surrounding municipalities.

[Thomas E.]

Full of people who can barely afford the place they live in.

[Thomas E.]

I did

https://www.citypopulation.de/php/canada-britishcolumbia-admin.php?adm1id=5915

2011 2,313,328
2016 2,504,363
Growth 8.2%

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/profiles/profiles.asp?scope_choice=b&county_changer2=Rmsa%3A3480&button1=Get+Profile&id=2&page_path=Area+Profiles&path_id=11&panel_number=1

2010 1,834,885
2015 1,951,882
Growth 6.4%

Same 5 year time span, Vancouver area growth is higher than Indianapolis Metro Area, but not exactly worth bragging about.

[Alan Baker]

And yet they still want to live here...

...that makes it a very desirable place, doesn't it?

:-)

[Alan Baker]

Noting the very interesting change in timescale...

[Alan Baker]

And noting that you included the core municipal areas in your comparison
rather than comparing bedroom community vs bedroom community as I requested.

[Thomas E.]

REALLY? Same 5 year span. A one year shift - because the official estimates are published that way? Get real.

> And noting that you included the core municipal areas in your comparison
> rather than comparing bedroom community vs bedroom community as I requested.

well, we can correct that.

Metro Vancouver
2011 2,313,328
2016 2,504,363
2011-2016 8%

Vancouver City
2011 603,502
2016 631,486
2011-2016 5%

Metro Ex-Vancouver
2011 1,709,826
2016 1,872,877
2011-2016 10%

Gee, about 2% per year

Carmel
2010 79,191
2016 91,065
2011-2016 15%

About 2.5% per year

I think we are doing OK down here in Carmel.

[Alan Baker]

Ummm...

Do you see where I began the quoted text, Liarboy? No? Let me help:

"Well, people want to live in Carmel too. In fact, since 1980 Carmel
population has grown at a just a little bit faster rate than Vancouver."

Do you recall writing that, Liarboy? Is it coming back to you?

>
>> And noting that you included the core municipal areas in your comparison
>> rather than comparing bedroom community vs bedroom community as I requested.
> well, we can correct that.
>
> Metro Vancouver
> 2011 2,313,328
> 2016 2,504,363
> 2011-2016 8%
>
> Vancouver City
> 2011 603,502
> 2016 631,486
> 2011-2016 5%
>
> Metro Ex-Vancouver
> 2011 1,709,826
> 2016 1,872,877
> 2011-2016 10%
>
> Gee, about 2% per year
>
> Carmel
> 2010 79,191
> 2016 91,065
> 2011-2016 15%
>
> About 2.5% per year
>
> I think we are doing OK down here in Carmel.

Except that you should figure out that you're still comparing apples to
oranges. You're still comparing the very dense parts of a greater
metropolitan area to a much smaller bedroom community that had room to
grow. What if we look out about the same distance from Vancouver to
somewhere like The District of Langley. It's a little further from the
centre of Vancouver than Carmel is from the centre of Indianapolis, but
then we have the Agricultural Land Reserve we need to skip past in some
places.

Both its size and its growth are very similar to Carmel's.

But you're not interest in comparisons that are fair, are you, Liarboy?

:-)

[michae...@gmail.com]

Shit Stain is twying so very hard to alter reality.

Wadda Low Life POS.

IT should put a gun in IT'S mouth and pull the trigger.

If IT were dead, the world would be a better place. And, I would have a smile on my face, like when I see someone step on a roach.

IT must have HUGE roaches living in IT'S shithole apartment. Do you think the Asshole even keeps it clean?

[Thomas E.]

And you just mentioned on of the reasons that Vancouver housing is so expensive - anti-development policy. Way to go!

[Alan Baker]

No. I really didn't.

[Thomas E.]

Yes you did - the agricultural preserve program that locks up develop-able land from residential.

[Thomas E.]

Still it's the best shithole of the shitholes.

[Alan Baker]

So all zoning is "anti-development", then, Liarboy?

[michae...@gmail.com]

You caught Shit Stain, and now IT attempts to skate away.

Wdda low life, 60 YO loser.

[michae...@gmail.com]

Notice how Shit Stain Baker has gone into IT'S "denial mode"?

[michae...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 9:23:03 AM UTC-4, Craig wrote:
> "Thomas E." wrote in message
> news:ddd40791-1bb9-4f8f...@googlegroups.com...

>
> On Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 7:23:32 PM UTC-4, Craig wrote:
> > "Craig" wrote in message news:oke3vi$o3o$1...@dont-email.me...
> >

> The overall crime rate in Vancouver is 17% higher than the national average.
> For every 100,000 people, there are 9.48 daily crimes that occur in
> Vancouver.
>
> Yes, a lovely place to live in fear.

No problem if like Shit Stain, you stay in your tiny, little Hidey Hole all day and night.

[MuahMan]

Vancouver is China