Just so I understand, is your belief is that trump will do so badly that America will, despite decades to the contrary, raise tax rates on the wealthy to a point where they'd be comparable to us raising our highest tax rates?
They can keep running away to other countries, but at some point the other countries will catch up.
What on Earth are you basing this on beyond wishful thinking? If someone rich leaves Canada for the States, your position is that America will suddenly undo decades of low taxation for funsies?
And it doesn't stop other countries with higher taxes from doing business.
Are you talking about corporate tax rates? Or is this just a petulant "fine, we don't want you and your billions of taxable dollars anyway!?!"
I think mine would've been fine if I did it when she was younger but then she was down with her scratch pads, scratch post and the front yard adventures.
Now, she's an elderly kitty who almost tolerates the medical changes (seizure meds twice a day, asthma inhaler and trimming) but is grumpy about it.
She's almost 20 years, arthiritic and on anti seizure meds. She has multiple scratch posts and pads but doesn't or can't use them enough anymore (even with catnip inducement.)
As a result, without trimming, she gets her claws stuck and has yanked one out quite painfully.
This is how I can best help her as she ages, as recommended by our vet. (And, while she doesn't love it she sort of tolerates it, just occasionally tries to leap from medicine couch to the treats and skip the whole trimming part.)
Weirdly, I don't really want the tax cuts when we need the revenue but I'd prefer Carney to win regardless. And being the only viable candidate not offering tax cuts makes it a lot harder to be a winning candidate.
Same reason I disagrees with but supported dropping the carbon tax.
Intuitively and morally, yup, tax the rich more. But, the flip side is that the wealthier you are, the more incentive you have and the easier it is to move. Many countries have discovered this.
It's a serious problem but an incredibly difficult to solve.
Personally, I think bringing back more inheritance taxes would be helpful and less prone to capital flight but honestly, it's a topic for smarter folks than myself.
Ahhh, I see the confusion. Inflation is generally excluded as a measure of inflation (which is super helpful in this context, otherwise you'd be in for a bit of circular reasoning.)
it's still falling short of the rate at which speculators can out-compete new generations for assets.
This was always the case. It's not like in the 90s or early 00s, home buyers could magically outbid those with deep pockets.
I'm not claiming housing is now affordable but nothing has really changed in the fundamentals of capitalism that would explain the rise of housing prices.
What has happened, imo, is that unsurprisingly, population growth outpaced home starts (poke around the housing start data yourself, it's neat AND more home starts were of the type people didn't intend to live in forever (apartments, which is why there's now an odd glut of small condos in larger cities) AND land near desirable large cities became more scarce (do what you will, hard to increaelse the amount of land) prices rose quickly.
All this to say, it's easy to blame speculators and the wealthy but it's not a particularly convincing argument as those already existed in large numbers well before housing became unaffordable.
Anyway, glad we're both for the housing initiative!
What changed is 20 years of incomes falling behind inflation
That wasn't the case in Canada (or in the States I believe.) Real wages (wage growth accounting for inflation/CPI) increased every year until the pandemic. Even then, inflation outstripped wage growth but not by much:
more wealth consolidated into the asset owning class. Generational wealth got siphoned to the 1%, leaving millennials set back and gen-z to start with nothing and their labor undervalued to boot.
Similarly, the timing doesn't really line up for this. If you've read Piketty's arguments about Capital in the 21st century, inequality has been taking off since the mid 70s. So maybe there's some sort of tipping point but that seems a little odd.
But, we do both agree that this supply of homes is a good thing and worth fighting for, so that's groovy!
When a large chunk of your party idolized trump and the rest of the country hates him with a passion, yeah, I guess I could see how that could raise issues.
Fun fact, the US also provided security assurances. (Budapest memorandum.) Those turned out well, right?