Friday’s Headlines

8 comments

1. Suburbs to city comparisons will always be a hot topic. ALthough i love my city neighbourhood, there’s also nothing wrong with free-er space in the country. It all depends on work right? If i could work in a smaller town, i’d do it. I do feel the city is congested. With immigration, culture can be found in both 416 and 905(*even 705!) But because alot of work is still in the GTA, folks must commute everyday, contributing to personal stress and polution. Transit infrastructure also helps when speaking of rural towns. But let’s be honest, suburbs just outside the GTA are mal-planned. Ugly architecture and no good transit. We’re still very car-dependent in Canada. Maybe in the future this will resolve itself. Good articles though.

2. The Star article on the study regarding how immigrants tend to move OUTSIDE Toronto once they become more establishsed reflects a point that I made a few months back. A key reason for this, which the article only mentions obliquely, has to do with the cost of freehold housing in various jurisdictions. The majority of immigrants with families (and extended) and who can afford to purchase property: 1) don’t want to live in a condominium, and; 2) are looking for a relatively new home (not something requiring major renovations) at a relatvely modest price. Typically, a 350k home in some of the surrounding suburbs buys you a lot more space than it does in Toronto (with the exception of some parts of Scarborough). And regarding the costs for property taxes, the mill-rates are higher in those surrounding communities — but because the cost of a similarly sized house in TO would be a valued much higher, the property taxes are actually less than what would be required for a similarly sized home in TO.

   Bottom-line is that I think the study is further evidence that municipalities across the GTA need to work in a much more coordinated way when it comes to issues of transit, land-use planning, social housing/social assistace (which are often relied on by immigrant families who haven’t sufficiently established themselves).

3. samg,

   you mean this tread?…
   https://spacing.ca/toronto/2009/02/10/tuesdays-headlines-83/

   Again I stand by my points that average property tax is a fair comparison because it ignores the the price premium for Toronto. I repeat,

   I will have to disagree with a few of your points. The percentage of the budget that is influenced by density, and therefore lot size, is small.

   I have had a look at the immigration issue and again find flaws in the argument that it has a large burden exclusively for Toronto. The 905 area attracts more immigrants to than Toronto. And yet we we see reports like “Poverty by Postal Code”, which offer the immigrant issue as an explanation. This is impossible to reconcile. If immigrant families are highly represented in the poverty figures, while Toronto’s share is decreasing, the trend should be the opposite. Conversely, if factors making immigrants more susceptible to poverty are innate, then we should see an increase in poverty in the 905 regions, as they are now the destination of the majority of immigrants. This did not happen. Immigrants in Toronto are have struggled while those in the 905 have prospered. This was not always the case. The only factor that changed during the time when the levels of poverty took different trajectories between the regions is Toronto’s move to CVA. It was not a radical change in immigrant demographics nor numbers that increased poverty. It appears to be simply a reduction in the availability and location of the type of work they could initially participate in.

   Insofar as Toronto being an attractor for the poor. Yes that is true. If the cost of that is the total of the 725 million downloaded by the province that amounts to ~$725 per household. This is more than offset provincial transfers of ~$2,200 per household over and above that of the surrounding regions.

   The issue was, is and will be jobs, jobs, jobs.

4. Glen,
   Won’t go into all your points now… The issue, as I see it, is not which municipality has a higher proportion of immigrants. As per the study, one might do well to distinguish between immigrants who have established themselves and gotten a financial foot-hold and those that have not. And as the study suggest, many immigrants (not all) tend to move out of Toronto ONCE THEY BECOME ESTABLISHED. What that means is that during the period when they are not established (more dependent on social housing, social programs, etc.) they tend to be centred in TO. What that means is that the City (thanks in part to provincial downloading but also federal policies) is carrying a disproportionate share of the cost associated with helping immigrants become established.

   Regarding the property tax issue, I would agree with you that business taxes are way too high in this city — and many businesses have fled TO as a result (something that some of the posters on this site don’t like to acknowledge). But it’s also true that in terms of tax paid per amount of living space, TO property taxes are substantially higher than in the surrounding areas.

5. samg,

   The study is about initial settlement and possible subsequent migration. As such if Toronto’s aggregate immigrant poverty is increasing while aggregate immigration is decreasing it points to a problem with either Toronto or the immigrants themselves. If, as you suggest, they may settle in Toronto first then migrate elsewhere (I assume by increased financial means)afterwards there should also be a decrease on top of that which the decreased numbers would provide. Yet the numbers show the opposite.

   I don’t accept that the problem is with the people immigrating, that Toronto gets a different demographic of immigrant. Again look at the timing of this change. The major event during the time involved was the move to CVA and the resultant lose of opportunity in Toronto. Growth in the F.I.R.E. segments have softened the unemployment numbers somewhat but the difference in type of employment has had a material effect.

   Insofar as housing cost being cheaper in the 905. look at the cost of housing that they are purchasing. They could easily afford larger homes within Toronto proper in a number of areas. North York has a huge amount of 3 bedroom homes on large lots that sell for far less than comparable ones in Mississauga. Not only that but besides the savings on property tax, in Toronto there is income potential from renting a basement apartment. These immigrants are not moving to the outskirts of the 905, they tend to move into the heart.

6. Glen,
   Regarding your comment: “I don’t accept that the problem is with the people immigrating, that Toronto gets a different demographic of immigrant.”

   First off, I want to agree with the first part of your statement that the problem is not with the people immigrating. However, I’d like to separate the first part of your comment from the 2nd part. The study says that those living outside big Cities (ie TO) were less likely to be living off social assistance, less likely to be unemployed, and twice as likely to be university educated. I think that does point to a different demographic to some extent.

   The study also made the point that Toronto was a first destination for immigrants who will later move out to the 905 area and beyond once they become more financially stable. In other words, many immigrants who will eventually move to the 905 are in TO during the stage in their settlement when they are likely to require the most supports.

   Regarding your comparison of North York homes to Mississauga homes, I will point out that the area of Mississauga which is most predominantly populated by recent immigrants is Malton, where homes are considerably less than comparable sized properties in the rest of Mississauga, and than in Etobicoke and North York. And most of the new immigrants who settle in Peel Region (which includes Mississauga) are likely ending up in Brampton where homes are even more modestly priced. Regarding your point about renting out basement apartments, trust me, many new immigrant homeowners are already doing that in Brampton, Halton, Durham. (I know some will be shocked but Toronto is not the only place where basement apartments can be rented.) Also, some recent immigrant homeowners in the surrounding GTA aren’t renting out the basement because they need the space for an in-law suite or to accommodate other relatives. Lest you think I’m making this all up, I will say that I have worked with many of these people during periods when they were making home-buying decisions.

   As I said before, I don’t think there is anything wrong with immigrants who come here. I also believe that if we allow people to immigrate here, we owe it to them to provide supports that will help them succeed. At the same time, I think there is quite a lot wrong with our immigration system. Our points system does a poor job of identifying those most likely to succeed in Canada. And, too many people are allowed to immigrate given Canada’s actual labour needs…which basically disadvantages anyone trying to gain a foot-hold in the job market (the young, the unemployed… and also new immigrants). If I were cynical, I would say that mass immigration during periods of substantial unemployment (anything over 5%) is primarily a tactic to keep wages depressed for the benefit of companies dependent on cheap labour. Oh wait, I am cynical.

7. samg,

   What this report, along with the “Poverty by Postal Code” one, shows is that immigrants in Toronto are having a hard time. It is a trend that is worsening. I invite you to look at it like this, ignore the 905. Toronto has been receiving less immigrants. Yet the number of immigrants facing poverty has increased. Those who do achieve success would not effect this statistic if they moved out of the city or stayed because the important number is the aggregate not percentage. They are removed from the poverty statistic regardless of location.

8. Glen,
   I’m ok with what I’ve said. I’m not sure how your points dispute what I’ve said — but maybe there’s something I’m missing. My reading of the report is that is: 1) Toronto is overwhelmingly home to recent immigrants during period of their settlement when they require most supports, AND; 2) many of those recent immigrants who remain in Toronto seem to be those who are struggling (which should not be a surprise given that TO has more social housing and better transit, etc. than surrounding municipalities). Both of these trends, in my view, would account for why the trend in TO is a higher percentage of immigrants having a hard time. It’s sounds like you are ok with what you are saying. It’s ok that we disagree with each other on this.