Someone @ Someone @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

328

Joined

2 yr. ago

I see where you're coming from, but I can't really see how that outcome would be any more or less common than it would be currently. I suppose I should've said effectively no tax, as it would simply be the new combined income being higher than the total property tax.

Some quick hypothetical math:

For illustrative purposes we can pretend every house is worth the same amount so we can deal simply with averages. At the same time we'll round the average household to 2.5 people. Let's say every house currently pays $5000/yr in property tax and that gets doubled, then we distribute the total evenly between every person in the country. We should end up with every individual person getting $2000/yr. If your household is 2 people, you'd effectively pay $6000, if your household is 5, you'd pay $0.

In the real world values obviously differ, but it would theoretically lower taxes on full houses and raise taxes on underutilized houses, with the impacts felt much less on small single occupancy houses and much more on huge mansions occupied by a small family.

I'm no expert, I'm simply a normal guy taking someone else's commented idea and running with it, so I'm sure there would be issues. In fact I see one already. This sort of sounds like how the carbon tax was supposed to work, where the average consumer breaks even, but in reality people in more rural areas felt like they were being punished because they didn't have realistic options to cut down on their fuel usage. This housing idea would have a similar issue where people in the least affordable cities would feel punished, because their shoebox sized studio might cost as much as a house fit for a multi generational family in a different province.

If I'm understanding this correctly, you wouldn't need to adjust any taxes based on occupancy. The property tax would be fixed based on the value, as it is now but higher. If a single person lived in a big house the new guaranteed income might be less than the tax increase, if you added a second person you'd double the income and potentially cancel out the increase. If you had a family of four in that same house, you'd potentially pay no taxes at all or even get some back.

I always see this stereotype but it must be a regional/American thing. In my part of Canada at least that stereotype would apply to Dodge, more specifically Dodge Journeys.

How can I say this without offending anyone...?

Don't worry about it, anyone offended by what you said deserves worse.

They only switched the signs to GameStop in 2021, and if your area was anything like mine the only ones left by then were in the deep recesses of a few malls. I don't think I've ever seen a GameStop exposed to natural sunlight.

It is what it is, I'm not complaining, but your MPs represent less people than average. NS isn't even that disproportionate, PEI and the territories are way worse.

MPs/100,000 people
BC 0.86
AB 0.87
SK 1.24
MB 1.04
ON 0.86
QC 0.92
NB 1.29
NS 1.13
PE 2.59
NL 1.37
YT 2.49
NT 2.43
NU 2.71
Canadian average 0.93

If you want to argue whether or not population is actually a good measure of over/under representation that's fine, but you can't argue some people's votes count more or less than others.

Average population per riding federally is about 108000 (2021 numbers). For Nova Scotia it's about 88000. AB, BC, and ON are all around 115000 and Quebec is pretty much the only one right on the average.

Edit: I just did some quick spreadsheet math to see how even it could possibly get with the current total number of seats and making sure the territories each kept their seats: SK -3, NB NL NS PE -2 each, MB -1, NT NU QC YT no change, AB +2, BC +3, ON +7

And that guy won too, off to a great start.

Nova Scotia is kinda over represented though.

I get your point, but in what reality does it make more sense to move a country than to move to a country.

No one actually "runs for Prime Minister". The Prime Minister is simply the leader of the governing party. That is determined by the number of seats each party wins. The PM is almost always an elected MP, but as demonstrated for the past few weeks they don't have to be.

The American government has already shown they're happy to round up people who look like "foreign enemies"whether they are or not. If your enemy has almost the exact same demographics, all of a sudden there's probable cause to detain anyone (I know, it's not like they care about any due process but everything else feels like we're in make believe land anyways).

I'm curious what they mean about this "12 month restriction". Currently it takes 24 months of a class 7 (N) to be eligible for a full class 5. Is this lowering the bar further, or is it extending it to 36 months?

This would've been the (school)year before the movie came out, 2005/6. I suppose it's possible it was publicly available at the time. It doesn't really matter, it was just a cool memory from decades ago. I hope it didn't come across as a classic "my uncle works at Nintendo" kind of comment.

Night at the Museum (all of them) was a big one that very few people realize was shot in Canada.

That just brought back a memory for me. I remember a career day or something like that at school and one of my classmates brought his aunt who worked on that movie. She showed us some early pre-sfx footage she had of the t-rex chase where it was just a tennis ball on a stick. Definitely not something that could happen today, but that was before every kid had a camera on them at all times.

the lack of tourists.

It's a big country, that's definitely not the case coast to coast.

The annexation threats and tariffs just caused people to stop booking, the massively increased chance of being detained is what's causing the cancellations.

The third that didn't vote essentially said "I'm happy either way". I don't think that's much better.

The sad thing is on this current trajectory there will be a day when it actually looks like a hopeful, optimistic view of the future.

I guess I didn't make my point clear enough. At this point it's about as neutral as an empty space, the only way to make it worse is for it to make the mall worse, like having an entrance closed (or if we want to get silly, like having the employees squirt you with water guns while you're walking past to get to the food court).