Aristides

Parliamentary behaviour sometimes makes a schoolyard full of ten year olds look like adults.

I can't disagree with those, my point is I don't see how taxing something encourages people to do it.

What incentives would you suggest and would they involve public money?

Lenders will do as they see fit. They will care about what they see fit to care about. If conditions change, so will they. Why would you build anything if appreciation isn't a reason to build it?

There have been more owners of that patch of land than just about anywhere. Jews, Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, Turks, Arabs to name just a few. They all stole it from whoever was there before them.

One of the problems with these huge corps is the control they have over suppliers, and that includes outfits like Walmart. The answer is the same as always, more competition, although I'm not sure how you would go about that.

1: It would if they changed the qualification rules because of it. After tax income will go up and so will your ability to make payments. 2: I disagree, your rent payments are going toward paying off your landlord's mortgage. Capital appreciation is obviously an incentive. Why would you build something if there is no money in it and especially if there is little or no profit from actual rents? You can't speculate on what doesn't exist.

The first decriminalization of drugs was in Oregon. Even its biggest boosters now say it was a mistake and after three years of experience are abandoning the project and recriminalizing possession. When BC announced they were going to decriminalize, Oregon officials who had previously supported decriminalization said don't do it. But as usual, the NDP didn't listen.

Fentanyl is highly toxic, you just can't pour dangerous drugs out on the ground.

That would be a choice a buyer could make. A non choice would be not getting into a home at all because you couldn't qualify. Greater taxation on gains will not increase supply. A big part of buying a rental is the capital gain that will be made when you sell. Increasing capital gains taxes will not be an incentive to build and own rental property. Who will buy them if you remove an incentive to get into rentals? Many of these units were built as short term rentals in vacation locations and aren't suitable for full time residency.

CPP is financed by the people paying into it to support them in their retirement. It should not be used as a government tool.

And capital gains when they sell their shares.

Where do you think mortgage interest goes? The longer it takes a person to pay off their mortgage, the more money the bank gets. Banks pay taxes on their profits.

If you have less than 2.5g the police can't seize it, they have to give it back.

Well obviously you claim to know, why else would you bring up something so stupid.

That's something you would dream up. You have no idea and neither does anyone else because they wouldn't bother with absurdities.

It's a Nanos poll. The other was a U of A study. Using the act was neither unconstitutional or illegal but it was unnecessary and overkill.

I don't think people were apathetic about the convoy. Quite the opposite, they had strong feelings, for and against.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/what-canadians-think-about-the-emergencies-act-according-to-nanos-polling-1.6758343 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/freedom-convoy-opinions-alberta-1.6571653 These outlets are reporting the findings of polls and studies done by others, not making stuff up.

In the book she says the big reason she put the dog down was its behaviour during a hunt, not because it was aggressive. That certainly deserves a death sentence.🙄

Snowflake John Cleese

All the antivaxxers were saying it was just a flu, that people who were dying of Covid were just dying with Covid and not because of it. Explain it yourself.

Well I don't know why you are so upset at them not reporting deaths when it was just the "flu".

Gee, and I thought it was just the flu.