Downsizing your life? You can easily lose money. Here's how to downsize and keep the most money possible
The typical vision is something along the lines of lowering costs, raising some liquid capital and simplifying the workload. Downsizing for many Canadians involves moving to a smaller home, shifting to one car or going car-less, reducing high-maintenance assets like boats, cottages, equipment and other fun machines, cancelling expensive memberships and generally having fewer things to stress about with more money in the bank.
It's a grand effort to downsize, and can take years. When done thoughtfully, it can shore up retirement savings and ease pressure on one's budget. If rushed or the plan's half-baked though, downsizers can easily lose money. Don't let this be you.
Opinion articles are based on the author's interpretations and judgments of facts, data and events. More details
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
42 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Major projects will be slowed by court challenges if rights are violated: B.C. chief
OTTAWA - The regional chief for British Columbia said Wednesday that governments should not speed up major projects at the expense of First Nations rights — and warned that projects will be slowed down by court challenges if First Nations are not consulted from the start. 'We're asking the government to follow your own laws,' Terry Teegee said, citing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the federal government adopted. The government of Prime Minister Mark Carney introduced major economic legislation last week. The bill has two parts — one to break down federal barriers to internal trade and the other to fast-track major projects. It sets out five criteria to determine whether a project is in the 'national interest.' Those criteria include the project's likelihood of success, whether it would strengthen the country's resiliency and advance the interests of Indigenous Peoples, and whether it would contribute to economic growth in an environmentally responsible way. But First Nations leaders say their interests weren't considered when the legislation was being drafted and they were given just one week to review and bring comments forward on a briefing document on the bill. 'It's probably going to take a lot longer to get approval for some of these projects because we're going to end up in court,' Teegee said. 'This is where we end up.' The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations agreed. 'It's not about the bill itself. It's about the process. And I think that ramming something through when you should be hearing from Canadians, from industry, from First Nations … is the wrong way to go,' Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak said. 'You don't want to end back up in court. You don't want to have civil unrest. Why not just invite us to the table?' First Nations leaders have warned that widespread protests and blockades are possible if governments don't obtain affected Indigenous communities' free, prior and informed consent, as required by the UN declaration. The federal government has said that declaration doesn't amount to a veto — a statement Justice Minister Sean Fraser walked back last week following criticism from Woodhouse Nepinak. Teegee said 'no government has a veto, meaning that when we come to a decision, all governments come into the room to make a decision together.' 'First Nations, certainly as a part of this, need to be part of the decision-making process,' he added. Even groups that generally support development are raising concerns about the federal government's plan. Mark Podlasly, CEO of the First Nations Major Projects Coalition, said he was 'surprised' First Nations were only given seven days to review parts of the legislation before it was introduced. 'The answer will not automatically be 'no' from First Nations when a project comes along. It's just that Indigenous rights and involvement has to not only be included, but respected. That hasn't happened a lot in the Canadian past,' he said. 'There's also a question on the environment, and there's a question about who bears the impact of these projects if they're rushed through. It's going to be Indigenous Peoples, especially in parts of the country where there's mining or energy sources (on lands) that are integral to our lifestyle, our cultural practices.' Podlasly said that while the federal legislation 'seems to have Indigenous participation at its core,' it's not clear what that participation will look like, especially under the tight two-year approval timeline the government seeks. He said First Nations can support projects and many do — but they don't want to be 'caught at the back end' of decisions made without their knowledge or consent. 'We're all operating with seven days' notice. That's what we're operating with. And time will tell,' he said. The Assembly of First Nations is holding an emergency chiefs meeting on Monday to discuss what to do next. Woodhouse Nepinak vowed to follow their direction and said a legal review of the legislation is ongoing. 'We need time,' Woodhouse Nepinak said. 'And we're not being given that time.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 11, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
U.S. booze is back on the shelf in two provinces. But is anyone buying?
Canadians in Alberta and Saskatchewan will see U.S. booze back on the shelf after the two provinces lifted their bans on American-made alcohol imports. Andrew Ferguson, the owner of an independent liquor store, says he does not expect this change to have a big impact because not a lot of people are buying American anyway.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Liberals reject Bloc proposal to split Bill C-5 to speed 'consensual' lifting of internal trade barriers
OTTAWA — Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon rejected the Bloc Québécois' proposal to split Bill C-5 in two parts, so that the sections on lifting internal trade barriers and the fast-tracking of major projects can be studied separately. Bloc House Leader Christine Normandin said earlier this week it made little sense that the bill, in its current form, would be sent to the House of Commons committee on transport as it falls under the mandate of Minister of Transport and Internal Trade Chrystia Freeland. Normandin instead suggested dividing the bill to study the portions on free trade and labour mobility in one committee and the fast-tracking of major projects in the national interest in another. She said the free trade portion is 'rather consensual' and could go 'a bit faster,' whereas the major projects portion would warrant more scrutiny. On Wednesday, MacKinnon offered a resounding 'no' to the Bloc's proposition. 'This is a bill that responds to economic conditions caused by the tariff war, among other things, and mobilizes premiers, mobilizes Canadians from coast to coast to coast behind projects of national significance,' he said. 'These projects have a certain urgency, as do interprovincial trade barriers that must fall,' he added. 'This is a very comprehensive bill. We understand that it's going to be debated, but it's something that we solicited and secured a mandate for.' Prime Minister Mark Carney said his intention is to see the bill passed before June 20, when the House of Commons rises and MPs return to their ridings for the summer. 'It is a top priority for this government, and we will do everything to get it passed before the summer,' he said after C-5 was tabled on Friday. 'And if Parliament needs to sit longer, it should sit longer in order to get it passed. That's what Canadians expect.' MacKinnon said to date there is no consensus from other parties to sit into the summer. The part of the bill on lifting internal trade barriers would allow a good or service that meets provincial or territorial rules to have met federal requirements but also make it easier for workers to get a federal licence by recognizing provincial or territorial work authorizations. The second part, which is a bit more contentious, seeks to get projects deemed in the national interest — such as highways, pipelines, mines and nuclear facilities — built faster by having only one environmental assessment done and respecting federal conditions. On Wednesday, the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) once more expressed concern the Liberals were 'ramming' through this bill without giving First Nations time to properly study the text. 'I keep hearing that they want to push through this legislation right to the end of this month, and I think that that's the wrong way to go,' said AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak during a press conference on Parliament Hill. Woodhouse Nepinak is expected to meet with Carney in July, presumably after the bill may have passed. She urged the government to slow down the process to allow meaningful consultation and study to occur with all the parties involved, including First Nations. 'Look, take the summer, take the time to listen to First Nations, take the time to listen to Canadians. And I think that'll make a more united country,' she said. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, on the other hand, is favourable to the fast-tracking of major projects like pipelines and dismissed the need for a consensus to move ahead. 'If you wait till everybody agrees on everything, nothing will happen. You're never going to get everybody to agree on every single project,' he told reporters on Monday. 'If the prime minister says he's going to wait until everyone agrees, then nothing will get done, which is what has been happening for the last decade,' he added. Woodhouse Nepinak said national chiefs before her were ignored in discussions on major projects, which caused civil unrest and lawsuits that slowed down the projects. 'Isn't it better to talk through things rather than always being in litigation?' she asked. 'It seems like First Nations always need to litigate, and then we get… results later.' 'Does Canada want to change that or not?' National Post calevesque@ Carney prepared to sit over the summer to pass new bill to fast-track major projects Proposed fast-tracking of national projects 'serious threat' to treaty rights: AFN Chief Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what's really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our newsletters here.
