Don't use Craigslist

Craigslist has to be the worst place to begin an apartment hunt. Whenever I've went apartment hunting I've hit the pavement in the area I've wanted to live in. Then, when I would see a for rent sign I would call on my cell phone right away. Within 24 hours the apartment would be mine. Now, the last time I used this technique was three years ago but still.

I don't feel too sorry for a med student who has just spent 4 months in Asia. Maybe, as a student she could've looked into campus housing?

janh asked who is buying up expesnive condos. It's not Vancouver residents, it is foreign buyers. This is what makes the Vancouver market crash prone, and the 6th most over priced real estate market in the world, according to Forbes.

Bubblicious

great article, very well-written.

One thing that is really puzzling me: almost without exception, my friends, colleagues and family refuse to believe that Vancouver (actually all of BC) is in the middle of a housing bubble.

Even when I mention the Aug 24 '07 Forbes article listing Vancouver as one of the 10 most overpriced real estate markets IN THE WORLD, http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2007/08/24/housing-overpriced-world-forbeslife-cx_mw_0824realestate.html people remain firmly in denial.

"Vancouver has mountains". Vancouver is a beautiful city but that won't prevent a housing bubble from popping e.g. San Diego.

"Where else can you ski in the morning and play tennis in the afternoon?" I don't know anybody that has ever done this.

"Vancouver is one of the best cities in the world". Actually some people don't like Vancouver and leave. Reasons include: it rains---a lot; the Downtown Eastside; property crime; traffic congestion and---wait for it---lack of decent affordable housing.

When I point out bubbles in other "best cities in the world" ( e.g. Madrid, Miami, San Franciso, Paris, San Diego), the responses are always: "oh its different in Vancouver, the Olympics will keep house prices rising".

I agree with Ed Deak's July comment, the BC housing market will collapse in late 2008. Condo construction, in Vancouver, the Island and the Okanagan seems to be wildly over-built.

And the housing collapse will trigger a major economic recession as housing as been driving the economic boom in BC, the US, and many countries within the EU.

So back to rental accommodation. Anyone know what happened with rental housing in Japan after the collapse of their huge housing bubble in 1990? Apparently their economy is still recovering http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P116564.asp

Coach Houses?

Why is it that every garage in the city does not have a coach house above it? With the highly inflated value of the land underneath, why are home owners not making some use of that space? Do zoning bylaws allow such a thing, or is it too complicated?

rentals? HA

I am lucky enough to be in one of those "close to the beach" apts in kits, but it seems that unless I win the lottery I will never be able to leave here! While my rent has increased almost every year, my income has not, therefore I am one of the ubiquitous denizens who are, literally, one paycheque away from the street.
I found that the only way to save any money was if I did virtually nothing! I am already a vegetarian who doesn't own a car,or a cell phone for that matter. I went through a period where I did not eat out,nor order in,did not go out to the movies,go for drinks,nada-zilch. I stopped drinking coffee years ago so don't even try to tell me.."but you probably spend 5 dollars a day at starbucks"....nope,I was able to save a measley 1200 bucks, which in turn went to emergency vet bills for my cat.
I cannot bear to start over again living in complete austerity, so I figure I'll at least enjoy my extended stay here!! And after I walk down the street and watch the fireworks,I can return to a few beers in the fridge,and Nats Pizza to accompany them!!

misused space

And why is it that the city owns acres of parking lots all over town that are simply expanses of asphalt that sit empty much of the time?

The land around B.C. Place and G.M. Place is testament to the massive waste of an under-utilized resource. Those parking lots are only one example of this waste Every one of them (city owned, open air parking lots) could (and should) consist of covered parking topped by social housing, co-op housing, or even market rental units. An easy solution to a pressing problem.

But, when you follow the money... and determine which special interest group is most likely to feel such a progressive trend smack in the pocketbook... and then correlate the connection between that group and the two political parties responsible for guiding the city and the province for most of the past twenty or thirty years... the reason why becomes painfully obvious.

Priorities

Interesting article and I think a couple of you have been a little overly critical of the author by pointing out the sojourn to Asia, and that they are “pre-med” students. If that line of criticism is applied (especially by the first post poster) then people who choose to own two dogs should consider long term mobility and residence issues before acquiring two pets.

If indeed there is a “bubble” then the market has corrected itself. It just sucks to be in a situation where the bubble puts the squeeze on certain individuals.

And to off-the-radar…. there is some truth to the Vancouver hype. As for being able to ski in the morning, and do something else outside in the afternoon… people do it. Try Mount Seymour in May! Vancouver is one of the best cities in North America to live. Other cities have their charm, but Vancouver does have it all. However, I do notice that the people are not as open in Vancouver, and tend to keep to their own social circle. Mind you, this is a personal observation not supported by statistics.

The main problem with Vancouver and surrounding cities is the fear of heights. Nobody wants apartment towers in their neighborhood. However, the cost of this fear is the destruction of farmland in Richmond and Delta, and forest in Maple Ridge and Mission. Meanwhile, as Stump pointed out, we have hectares of open parking lots in the city. It shows you where our priorities lie.

or else?

"The main problem with Vancouver and surrounding cities is the fear of heights. Nobody wants apartment towers in their neighborhood. However, the cost of this fear is the destruction of farmland in Richmond and Delta, and forest in Maple Ridge and Mission."

Please be good and tell me, from whose point of view this is a 'problem'. If people in this town do not like high-rises in their neighborhoods, why should they be compelled to see them go up, and if they win the battle of wills, why is it a foregone conclusion that farmland elsewhere will be destoyed? Have we been invaded by aliens, whom we cannot vanquish, and who will be given highrises or else perpetrate this detruction in the surrounding vicinity?

an opinion or two

a pet is not a basic human right or a necessity in any way. so i have no sympathy for people with pets who gripe about having difficulty finding places to live. indeed, these people are actually lucky that there are ANY rental accommodations here that allow pets - as this is not the case in many other countries, where walking a dog is an activity that indicates one's status as a homeowner.

for an idea of what sort of ecodensity is needed by a city wedged between mountains and the sea, take a walk around tokyo or hong kong.

there is a cap to how much one's rent can be increased per year - know what it is and plan and budget accordingly. if your income hasn't increased in several years, whose problem is that? not your landlord's.

within 100 years, false creek will be but a historical reference. it will be filled in and developed. the area will be far to valuable for it not to be. the process has been underway for decades and has been accelerated within the past year. elsewhere, it's referred to by the euphemism "reclaimed land".

if you want to live in a great canadian urban atmosphere with affordable rents, try montreal.

That's pretty cynical jrb

Although you're correct about Montreal. There is no reason Vancouver can't achieve much higher densities without sacrificing farmland or False Creek. Neither is it necessary to turn the whole city into the West End - highrises are actually a piss-poor way to address density issues - the necessary densities almost never require more than 5 or 6 stories - as Haussmann's Paris proved in the 19th century.

What's needed is planning NOT DICTATED by landowners and developers and some decent public transit.

I agree West

Why is it that neither this administration nor the previous one encouraged 5 or 6, or even 8 stories along and around the transit served Kingsway corridor? There are vast tracts of single storey buildings all over Vancouver.

to jrb - re "no sympathy for people with pets"

Interesting that now it's people who share their lives with dogs or cats that are the pariahs of the rental market. It wasn't that long ago that it was almost impossible to find a place to rent in BC if you had a child. Every rental ad stated "no children" or "adult building". And that was legal for years.

If this was the 1980's, would jrb have said "a child is not a basic human right or a necessity in any way" in supporting landlords' rental restrictions?

I guess the solution if one wants to keep a roof over one's head and can't afford to buy a Yaletown condo is one of those new "virtual" dogs that are popular in Japan. By George, I think that may be the answer.....

Who knows best?

"...there's [sic] some legitimate questions which need to be asked about the amount of scarce resources going to feed companion animals while parts of the world starve..."

Anyone over the age of three recognizes that pets can have calming effects on their owners. Repeatedly, we learn that dogs visiting elderly people and the mentally challenged, give them vast amounts of pleasure. They may also alleviate subtle medical conditions and save the health-care system money.

The sentiment expressed above is typical of a danger we must be aware of, with some people imagining that they know best for us. People with attitudes like this are called dictators if they gain power and implement their paternal ideologies. It's also called self-righteousness, among other things!

Burnaby

What I find funny in Vancouver is that people feel they have a right and need to live in Vancouver proper. You haven't heard of Burnaby? New Westminster? There are lots of places that are a mere skytrain away from the beauty that is Vancouver proper. Sure we don't have the same lifestyle out in the burbs, but maybe if more "cool people" lived here, there would be more amenities.

R/man -

The sentiment, if you'd taken the trouble to look, was JRB's, not mine...and this is what he said:

a pet is not a basic human right or a necessity in any way

I don't object to people having pets - I have a dog myself, but there are legimate questions that can be brought to bear on the culture surrounding pet ownership which were, I'd suggest, accurately subsumed by the carefully chosen words I used:

Pleas focus on the 'amount of scarce resources' part...people who feed ground round to their Great Danes, as an example, or who buy a lot of the designer crap I see in pet specialty stores ought to give their heads a shake...and I'll stand by that statement.

When pet ownership is taken to narcissitic extremes it is, I'd assert, as pathologically wrong as any other selfish fascination which puts the self over and above all other uses and needs.

Furthermore, that being said, while I wouldn't put pet ownership on the list of 'basic human rights' and I don't think the United Nations would either, I think renters ought to be able to keep a pet in any accomodation so long as it is properly cared for and supervised. I think a society where someone like jrb or, for that matter a whole class of capitalists who happen to own rental accomodations, can scoff at another Canadian citizen who thinks it's important to have a dog companion and belittle the importance of that for them in their search for decent affordable accomdation, has gone a long way toward turning this city into a worse place than it already is for the majority of the people who keep it running.

desire v/s reality

Highrises have a smaller footprint. If planned carefully they should allow more green space per inhabitant than the low complexes.

If we really worry about good land being paved over, the option remains to have roof-top gardens!

About basic rights:
Pet ownership is not a right, just as smoking or drinking are not rights!
They are distractions that some people seem to need in order to survive life as we experience it here.

Landlords have had experiences with the damage that kids and pets can make in a very short time; much more than any damage deposit could offset.
So, you may want a dog in your apartment while I might want a 16 foot kayak in mine; Perhaps neither desire is reasonable?

Back back east

"Some people don't like Vancouver and leave":

I agree,and that bubble may just burst sooner rather than later. I'm from back east and it was always my dream to live in Vancouver. The Ocean, the mountains, the mild winters, the relaxed westcoast attitude. How could you not be happy?

But I've just left Vancouver after 2 years...I find the dichotomy between the extremely rich and the extremely poor too heartbreaking. And this dichotomy is perfectly illustrated when you walk from Main and Hastings to Gastown or Yale Town, or take the ferry across to some of those mansions in North Vancouver.

And I think that the problem is made worse by a "Liberal" provincial government that is very pro-business and doesn't care about working people. This inequality has become even worse since the last municipal election. The NPA just wants to sweep Vancouver's "undesirables" under the carpet rather than address the problems that have lead many of them to poverty or drug addiction, mental illness, etc...

And the NPA doesn't care too much about the municipal workers who make Vancouver the beautiful city that is despite its problems.

I started thinking about leaving Vancouver in May, but then thought, why not stay one more summer, since Vancouver has some of the best ameneties to cater to my favorite activities: swimming, cycling, and hanging out at the library. Ironically, the weather was too cool to swim in the ocean, and the pools and the library have been closed all summer!

So I'm back east, and though I feel a little nostalgic, I'm not sorry. Vancouver has the potential to be the greatest city in the world. But it has to face and address its problems first.

Plus ca change...

littleboat, you may have only been here for a couple of years but I can assure you that things were no different during the city administration of the COPE, seriously left-leaning party and the administration of the NDP, more lefties, in Victoria. There is much more money being spent now trying to solve these intractable problems.

littleboat

don't listen to the r/man - the real problem has very little to do with civic administration - although COPE was significantly less knee jerk right wing than the NPA...the real problems are a result of a 'developer' mentality, a marketing philosophy and a provincial government that cares about nothing other than accommodating them...sorry you left - we have too few thoughtful caring people and I hate to lose a single one. The thing that will save Vancouver - if anything can - is a thoroughgoing crash...sadly.

Cheers.

some do need a crutch in life!

Hello Dorothy:
Hit a touchy subject, did I?
So you figure that smoking or drinking has nothing in common with owning a pet?
For many daily life, living alone, is dreadful. Distractions like these give people a reason to continue.
Others find their strength through religion, whatever it takes!

The fact that many people require pets, for whatever reason, does not oblige a landlord to put his property at risk!
If you ever have seen trashed apartments and buildings you would know that damage deposits are a joke.

I do not expect any apartment to accomodate my kayak, even if it provides me with the kind of lifestyle I need.
My point is that we do not have such "rights"!

I do not have any solutions, but will insist that housing is for people, and those who give fewer problems will always be preferred as tenants.

If we do not aim for a smaller footprint, where should the people live?

Should we simply say that Vancouver is full, please go away?

reading comprehension

Dear Realistic Man,

I am not a rabid socialist. If you re-read my previous note carefully, you will see that I champion neither COPE nor the NDP.

In your first response to my posting, you say that more money is available now for Vancouver's homeless than was before the NPA came into office. I didn' know that. Can you give some concrete examples of what is being done with that money? Also, how do you know that it's being spent the way they say it's being spent? Where is your information coming from? (I'm not saying it's not true, just that I'd like to investigate this further).

My general impression was that The Powers That Be were more interested in investing money in vanity projects (the Olympics, Gateway to the Pacific and global trade project). They were more interested in coating Vancouver with golden patina so that the world would really really believe that Vancouver is the greatest city in the world.

Meanwhile, not only the poor but also the middle class can't find affordable housing. Riding my bike around Vancouver, I was disappointed to see that modest bungallows (like the kind I grew up in the eighties) were being torn down for hyper mansions. Who can afford housing like that? I've no doubt that things were pretty similar under COPE and the NDP.

Like Ms. Yoo, I had enough trouble finding affordable student acommodation in Vancouver. The plan was to settle there forever. However, I became worried that I would never find a house with a yard to raise a family in, so I left after graduation.

I have to say that I agree with G West, who says that the only thing that will save Vancouver is a "thoroughgoing crash", or a burst bubble. But I'm no economist, so for all I know it'll just make things worse for everyone.

I don't know what will save Vancouver. But right now it is not the "most liveable city" it claims to be.

Alive

The simple fact that a landlord even has a place to rent out, puts her/his property at risk. The question really must be: "Is it discriminatory to ban a particular issue, yet allow another?"

littleboat

I can assure that I never accused you of being a socialist of any hue. I was referring to the posting of someone else.

As for expenditures, if you click on this:
http://www.bchousing.org/aboutus/Reports/AR
then download the 2006/7 Annual Report, on page 21 there a graph showing the increase in social housing. "In April 2007, the Province announced the purchase of ten Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels with 595 rooms in Vancouver, and one SRO hotel in Victoria with 28 rooms. These hotels were
purchased to preserve and upgrade an important source of affordable housing stock for people at risk of homelessness. Work will be undertaken to bring the buildings up to an acceptable standard".

Both current administrations inherited the Olympics and money is being spent but not many would argue the the road to Whistler needed upgrading. The gridlock of traffic, particularly trucks causes more pollution so the upgrading of the cross-town traffic is badly needed too. Traveling from north Burnaby to the docks at the container port is presently somewhat crazy and virtually goes through residential neighbourhoods. The opportunities for expanding trading capacity with rising Asia must be welcomed since this is a relatively clean industry, trans-shipping. Singapore has become one of the cleanest and wealthyest places on earth without a manufacturing base but as a trans-shipment and services centre.

As for the bubble bursting, well, people have talked about that for a long time. Ups and downs are inevitable but a big pop, who knows.

Vanity, Vanity.....

As this news item shows, the purchase of SRO's is really nothing more than an augmentation of the "vanity projects" so loved by the provincial Libs:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/09/21/bc-pivot-housing.html
The report says the number of low-cost housing units in the city is dwindling, while demand grows.
It calls on governments to commit to spending the money needed to build 800 social housing units annually for the next four years.

Likewise, the Sea-to-Sky upgrade is a "beauty" vanity project, as what is really needed is a mass transit system for Whistler, rather than some James Bond style "zoom-zoom" for Lamborghini's. The existing road could have been restricted to commercial traffic (with minor upgrades) and the money being lavished on it now could have gone into light rail, to transport people. After all, once at Whistler, an automobile is really of limited use. But, as someone noted, the politicians with condos at Whistler would then have been forced to ride with the common folk........

THE APPEAL of VANCOUVER IS OVER-BLOWN

Vancouver is, by far, the most over-blown and over-hyped City in North America. It's almost like most of the people that mindlessly trumpet Vancouver are virtually blind to the beauty that exists in so many other places - let alone that we have one of the worst climates in North America if you happen to like the sun.

Have any of these pro Vancouver pundits been to San Francisco lately? How about Santa Fe, Sedona Arizona, or Lake Chelan Washington - where the real estate prices are far more attractive than the Okanagan and the water far clearer and more pristine. Talk about self-induced bias. yes you may able to ski and play golf on the same day - but who does this - and where do they live and work?

Vancouver has very few neighborhoods with any sense of community outside of commercial drive. The entire west side consists of self-involved, isolated home owners who are hardly here - let alone actually talk to one another. The local merchants, bakers, grocers and carpenters have to commute 2 hours becuase they could not ever consider living here due to absolute unaffordability.

Vancouver is a perfect example of how greed and material wealth have gone gerzerk. The result being massive social problems and a society full of unhappy and struggling people. But that's what our so-called leaders wanted when they shamelessly whored themselves and sold our City and Province to the sinister finincial interests from Hong Kong.

This place is so far from the best place on earth, it's not even funny. Am I the only one that finds that propoganda extremely offensive?

When I see houses selling for the absurd prices as of late, it really confirms to me that much of the human race is more closely related to the sheep rather than the ape. An ape woulkd never be that stupid.

Subsidies for whom?

"Budget 2007 responds to the housing challenges of a growing economy and takes a major step towards every British Columbian having access to a safe, appropriate and affordable place to live."

From the figures that Realisticman so kindly provides...

- Am I the only one who sees this 'growth' as only being possible, because the extra jobs that pay crummy salaries are being subsidized with tax money? Why do we not put the onus on prospective employers to pay people whom they want to move here to work for them a salary, which actually makes this possible, or else provide the housing as part of the payment? The way this is being done in the 2007 budget adds up to pure communism and higway robbery...We are being asked to subsidize individual employers so as to allow them to underpay their staff. I am really beginning to see the Midgaard serpent, who surrounds the world and eats itself up from its tail-end...I still say, there is nothing inevitable about this. It remains a set of political choices, and those who are responsible will not be allowed to rationalize their shame.

moving away...

thank you Cynthia Yoo for writing this article. I live in an apartment in New West. I've wanted to move into Vancouver for years but have a) never been able to justify the enormous jump in monthly rent it would mean, and b) when i have gone apt-hunting there i've found the places to be hyped up way more than they deserve to be. So I've reluctantly decided that i will stay here in NW for now (as i lucked into a damn good place about three and half years ago), and i won't let it go until i'm finished school. Then, after school is done, like littleboat above, i am seriously considering moving away. It is simply unrealistic to be able to even think of owning, much less renting a place in Vancouver's over-priced market. An it really is too bad that we don't make much better use of our cityscape as has been mentioned. There are plenty of areas where re-development could mean not only affordable and convenient accomodation for everyone, but beautification of the city as well. Of course it has to be done properly and sustainably. These days though, unless one came from a wealthy family or they got into the housing market years ago, it is unlikely that young people starting out today will ever be able to do something like raise a family in Vancouver. Though I do believe that we are in for some sort of pricing adjustment, it won't be enough to make things affordable. There are just too many wealthy investors out there (many of them foreign) who will continue to keep snatching up property as it comes onto the market. It's sad.

sick, poor and lonely need distraction

Hello Dorothy:
You are one lucky person if you do not know of any one person who do not find living alone in a rented apartment dreadful!

Let me inform you then, that such conditions are exactly what leads people to have a need for a pet (or a drink or a smoke).

I understand this all too well, but am objective enough to realize that it is not the landlords problem!

He is there for the dollar, plain and simple.

Now social Housing is another story, but that requires a willing government.

About getting personal: you make some wild assumptions about me!
I do think and for instance wonder why anyone would expect a free enterprise to suddenly become conscious of peoples need?

Sure landlords suck a hollow tooth too as far as I am concerned, but it is irrational to think that they care beyound the bottomline, and they have no obligations to do so either!

So why stay?

Step Easy, you likely won't regret your decision to leave the Vancouver area should you do so after school is over. After my wife and I graduated, we went to the Sunshine Coast, and it was a good move to get out. It probably would not have mattered much if we had chosen an interior town or a Vancouver Island community instead, because the critical factor that makes such places superior to the Lower Mainland is housing affordability.

I have to laugh at that "most livable city in the world" label. How is it livable if most people can't afford to live there? Sadly, my little utopia has recently lost its affordability as well, as prices have more than doubled in the last few years. Understandably, we are having a tougher time attracting teachers, nurses and other professionals as a result.

As a bonus, you might find, as most people do, that a smaller community offers one a much more "livable" existence than does a large city, and for a variety of reasons that have little to do with housing affordability.

Don't get me wrong... I still love my trips into the big town, and Vancouver offers much that most big cities cannot, but it cannot beat a small town for true livability.

managing growth

dorothy wrote:

Well, barring a catastrophe (natural or man made), our major cities will continue to grow in population. Any old map or history book will provide evidence of this. The "Rule of 72" is a very scary and rough way to estimate what we are in for.

I think we both believe that it is simplistic to simply build your way out of problems. I do like high rises, and other creative structures for people to live and work in. But that being said, I cringe when I hear people talk about expanding the freeway or building another bridge. Building up is certainly better than building out. But it makes for better politics to build a road. Then you look like you are doing something.

From South-East Asia,...

water-drenched Vancouver presented as the most attractive city in the word is the best joke, but those people from Honk-Kong, who have never travelled because travelling is not productive would not know. But, their investment(s) has/have had good return. Soon, they will leave and take their well-earned money to a much more beautiful city in the world, sunnier, warmer, cheaper, and whose inhabitants can afford to smile a little.

And, yes, what's with those people who feel they NEED to live in Vancouver. I guess people in Burnaby are not cool.

BTW, many owners will pass on their house/apartment(s) to their children, leaving newcomers in the dust, unless they come from London, of course! For those who never could afford to be in the market (for various reasons), maybe the bubble will burst, but who knows.

why stay, indeed?

Vancouver is only "livable" for people who can afford to pay a minimum of $500k+ for a shack in the slums. The condos that are being built are a joke - 500 sf? Not everyone wants to live in a shoebox in the sky - some of us have animals, vegetable gardens and yards, and like it that way.

I grew up on the North Shore and now live out the Fraser Valley, although I still work downtown and commute via transit. I can't stand the prevailing attitude in Vancouver that previous posters have described so well - a sense of community has been replaced by materialism and a big "me-first" attitude. We make enough to live in Vancouver if we chose to, but nothing on earth would ever convince me to do so. Underneath the pretty tourist facade, this city is poison.

If I could find work in my field in northern BC, northern Vancouver Island or somewhere in the interior that isn't currently draining the water table, I'd leave and never look back.

You make your bed, you lie in it.

If you take a look at the facts on the ground, it should be obvious why Vancouver real estate is in the state we find it:

- narrow land area confined by mountains and sea
- fixed length of coastline/waterfront
- rising population due to inbound migration
- relatively un-diversified local economic base
- international tourist destination status

In these basic respects, Vancouver, like it or not, is in the same position as such cities as Honolulu, Rio, Puerto Vallarta, and Cancun, to name a few. If you choose to live there, you're basically going to have to accept the package deal of high competition for limited space and "perfect views" in a city without a broad enough economic base to create a significant middle class to outweigh the lifestyle disparities between the "haves" and the "have nots". If you're a middle class person, you'll have a better quality of life in a bigger (or smaller) city, one without without the rest of the (monied) world buying up the best bits of town to stay in while on their annual vacations. But if you DO want to own a piece of the Vancouver dream, you'll have to move to New York, or London, or Hong Kong, or some other international business capital, get rich, and buy the land you want, just like everyone else is doing in Vancouver. Otherwise, you're living a pipe dream that'll come to a rude awakening once you're earning a fixed pension!

on community

I've lived (and owned property) on both the east side and west side, and I have experienced a community feel in both.

In Kerrisdale, my SO and I bought a condo and settled in, and were quite happy. We shopped in the grocery stores along 41st, got to know people, and generally enjoyed the area.

We did manage to take advantage of the 'bubble' and lasy winter (Jan 06) sold our condo, buying a fixer-upper on the East side. Again, we love our new neighbourhood (Cedar Cottage) and have made many friends. Everyone is friendly, there are neighbourhood bbqs and gardening groups, etc.

And before I get slagged as being a bourgeois capitalist, although we are both working professionals, we're not rich by any means.

Oh, please, G West

"and there's some legitimate questions which need to be asked about the amount of scarce resources going to feed companion animals while parts of the world starve - your point is well taken."

There are FAR more legitimate questions that need to be asked about why someone would buy an SUV, a Gucci bag, a membership at a country club, etc.... when there are people starving all over the world. DON'T even get me started on that topic. Choosing to spend a few hundred dollars a year on a dog or cat "as a companion" is not something to be criticized when there are far more wasterful things going on in this part of the world, re: our resources~ so end of topic RIGHT THERE.

Other than thatn, great comments on this thread!