If No One New Believes Hard Work Can Build a Life or Home – What Will Become of Yours?

Canada's foundational narrative, along with the broader Western story, centers on hope - the idea that we are a place where you can build a better life. I find myself wondering what will happen to us if this notion disappears.

Whatever else I may think of my Russian in-laws, I'll always give them credit for moving here and working hard to improve their family's lives (materially; other nuances are stories for another time).

Despite their differing opinions on pretty much everything else, my partner knew they were on the same page about this. During their (constant, endless) discussions of Canada's limitations and his parents' sneering laments about them, my partner often quipped that if the downsides were really that overwhelming, then why didn't they move back to Belarus?

Such a scenario was tacitly understood as facetious, and (perhaps sadly, from a selfish perspective), it was never pursued.

This is why I was quite surprised when my partner's friend, who always seemed much more settled in Canada, actually did move back to his home country of Georgia a few years ago with his family.

Their story resembles my in-laws' in many ways. In both cases, while the husband found a good job in his field, the wife took on entry-level retail work to gain Canadian experience, since she had difficulty finding employment in hers. Both families had two children. While there are some nuances here, too - for example, my partner's friend and his wife came to Canada at a much younger age than my in-laws did, and before they had children - the broad details are similar.

What truly set them apart was the timeframe: my partner's friend's family arrived in Canada more recently, while his parents established themselves over 25 years ago.

Although his parents had to work hard, they did not have to struggle too much for too long. They started out crammed in a two-bedroom apartment with two kids, but soon moved up. With one decent income and one much more modest one, they were able to buy a semi-detached house within a few years, and then a much bigger, nicer detached house not long after that. I don't want to minimize the effort it took to do this - but it did pay off for them pretty quickly. The fact that they could mostly live on one income also enabled my mother-in-law to go back to school, get certified in her field, and eventually also succeed in her career.

Here, the story takes a significantly different turn for my partner's friend. Despite earning considerably more than my partner's parents (even adjusting for inflation), his family remained confined to a one-bedroom apartment. Moreover, the expense of raising their kids and renting their substandard home prevented his wife from doing the extra, unpaid work needed to break into her field.

In both families, one spouse appreciated (at least to some extent) what Canada had to offer as a more open society, while the other was less enthusiastic. However, the potential to enhance their fundamental quality of life played a crucial role. For my in-laws, the argument to persevere in Canada held sway due to this ability to progress, while for my partner's friend's family, this argument was ultimately lost.

This is despite the fact that they left Georgia because of the Russo-Georgian War. Combining this with the war in Ukraine, you might think (as I most certainly do) that regional instability should have been more of a concern. Yet even this couldn't sway the decision against returning without compelling economic reasons.

It has been said (and I agree) that diversity is the key to our strength; that people flock here because we're "open, accepting, progressive, and prosperous".

However, I think those in charge have significantly undervalued the crucial role of prosperity in this equation.

Despite Canada's reputation for being a diverse and welcoming society, a notable amount of new arrivals choose to depart due to economic struggles. These difficulties encompass challenges within the job market, the burden of high living expenses, and limited access to crucial government services such as healthcare. This reality underscores how these concerns can potentially overshadow our country’s other attractive qualities. Many recent news stories recount experiences similar to that of my partner's friend who decided to leave Canada.

Our economy hasn't been working any better for existing Canadians, either.

Despite a leader who proclaimed a commitment to building the economy from the heart outwards rather than the top down, the aspirations of younger people and newcomers have been cut off at the knees. The prospect of reaching the heights achieved by our entrenched gerontocracy appears distant and elusive, like a mountain peak veiled in mist.

Viral stories abound: a woman earning $34 an hour who still can't manage to feed herself and her daughter; a man with a $75K yearly income struggling to find an affordable place for himself and his son to live; an Ontario mayor who lives with her parents because she can't afford a home in her municipality.

These stories matter because I don't think our governments, at any level, seem to understand that the housing crisis, or the cost of living crisis more broadly, impacts people who would have made it before, but can't now - despite having met traditional markers of success. Instead, they seem to limit their perception of the issue to low incomes, oblivious to how high prices have made building a better life (or affording adequate food and shelter) a privilege reserved for the truly rich, often out of reach even for the upper middle class.

Even more importantly, the stories we hear often come from people who, though reluctantly, have fallback options to rely on. Take this woman, who is (justifiably) frustrated by the cost of living in Canada, but acknowledges that she could live with her family if necessary. But what about the next generation? Who will they rely on if their parents can't afford life's essentials themselves? And how dire must the circumstances be for those already grappling with this predicament at present, if even those with good incomes and options are struggling?

To my mind, this explains the trend of quiet quitting, and a desire for "lazy girl jobs," among a younger generation perceived to lack motivation.

Like many, I've felt exasperated by younger colleagues who appear satisfied with minimal effort, lacking the drive to go the extra mile in doing their work (which ends up leaving more work for those of us who will).  However, I can understand why they don't. Negativity and a lack of commitment aren't qualities I admire, and I'm not the type to give up in that way - but I suspect much of my determination stems from growing up in a time where it at least seemed like I could make it (even though my generation has been called the unluckiest).

The impact of lacking that essential spark of hope at the outset of one's adult life is often underestimated.

While many attribute such shifts in attitudes to the influence of technology or societal changes, I firmly believe that the core issue stems more from escalating costs and dwindling quality of life. After all, why invest extra effort if the chances of progress are slim, and your main goal is just to survive?

Some might suggest that our Covid experience and the rise of remote work may have played a role in this phenomenon. While there's certainly some truth to that,  it's crucial to also recognize the fact that for many my age and younger, these circumstances marked the first real improvement in our lives we have ever been given. Set against the backdrop of stagnant wages and the absence of benefits or retirement prospects, we've begun to attach a higher value to the present, rather than placing our hopes on distant rewards that might never materialize.

But even for those who can still enjoy the moment, it's disheartening that the younger generation, much like newcomers, lack the capacity to dream of a more promising future.

Is this still a better place to be than many others? Of course - you won't catch me moving to Belarus anytime soon, and my partner would be the absolute last to ever consider anything of the sort.

However, if we don't urgently acknowledge the growing issue of social mobility in our country, then our long-term prospects will be bleak. 

The balance between catering to the older generation and investing in the young and less established needs to be reconsidered. While honouring the contributions and needs of the elderly is important, a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities is crucial to ensure the vitality and progress of society as a whole. We need to understand that our country is more than just a nursing home, and that younger citizens are more than just personal support workers for an elder ruling class.

In spite of this reality, our government seems fixated on catering predominantly to the older generation, those who have already reached their life milestones. Even our immigration policies are tailored to cater to their specific needs.

It's essential to realize that Canada's assumed superiority is no longer a given. We must offer compelling reasons for people to choose Canada as their home and to remain engaged in its growth.

Bestowing unnecessary gifts upon the elderly, exemplified by decisions such as rolling back eligibility for Old Age Security benefits from 67 to 65 years old, comes at a cost that extends beyond mere financial implications - there are broader societal consequences to consider.

Perhaps it's time for the more prosperous older generation to relinquish some of their luxuries, allowing the cost of living to moderate and providing the younger, less established generations with a shot at a decent quality of life.

There was a moment in our most recent federal debate that resonated strongly with many young people, when it was asked what's more important: helping younger people get access to the housing market, or allowing older Canadians who rely on the value of their homes to live? Like many others, my partner found this particularly enraging.

It begged the question: does the older generation really not get just how important it is for everyone to be able to afford a decent place to live? Do they not think about the ramifications of their choices for the generations to come, at all? Why should the young sacrifice to fund retirement for the old, when most younger people do not even have the prospect of retiring themselves, and struggle to secure basic necessities such as food and shelter? There's also no denying that having a stable home, in contrast to younger generations, inherently provides our elder caste with some security, even without the prospect of a significant windfall from a home sale.

Our leaders' perception of what makes Canada an attractive choice may be rooted in ideology, but what truly resonates with people is the promise of not simply surviving, but thriving. There's more to it than just assuming we're the better option by default.

When someone decides to return to a country they pretty recently fled, especially in light of the looming possibility of renewed instability - it prompts me to question their judgement. But in doing so, it also triggers a moment of self-reflection about our country. Like, how could someone think Georgia could be better - but also, really, how? As more people make similar decisions, we can't just ignore this question. And sometimes, I can't help but question the depth of my own determination to keep trying, here.