Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
That 36% represents almost a million Metro Vancouverites. And 43% of owners and renters in the metro are spending 30+ percent on shelter costs.
Yes, there's a context, No, it's not offensive.Yes, it still hurts his electability - Wilkinson appears committed to thinking that renting is just a temporary setback in your twenties on your way to steady ownership, which is neither an option nor even an end goal for many residents. You see a similar disconnect in the minimum wage debate.
It doesn't help that he went to diss the speculation tax in the West Van Yacht Club a month later. The whole thing can be summed up as "let them eat cake."
As for the marriage quote, there's really no good context to put it in, as chowhou mentioned. At least Scheer's can be reduced to "marriage = man + woman," which is harmless but still dumb to say in Canada unless you're running as a PPC candidate.
Laffer curve economics has been mostly debunked over the last few decades; some of the highest revenues have been taken in with a top bracket in the low eighties, so one could argue that taxes should go even higher.
General consensus is that simplifying the tax code is more effective.
At any rate, "post-Soviet kleptocracy" really shouldn't be the end goal for BC. |
Comparing taxes raised to GDP were already near Sweden levels so I’m worried going higher brings us down the mountain. If our top 1% weren't 50% poorer than America’s top 1% (Or even Sweden’s) I would support this tax but obviously right now our rich are not doing very well compared to how they “should” be doing.
And as I’ve pointed out the NDP housing taxes didn’t bring in any extra revenue overall so clearly they aren’t doing much research before putting taxes in as they are using absolute numbers rather than accounting for reactions.
Btw they are saying housing starts will be down 25% this year despite immigration increasing, scary.
Threaded Mode