CdnFox

Well there's leftism and then there's leftism. Remember that the far left - which is currently the very slim majority of the left as far as i can determine, will happily cancel or severely punish/chastise many on the left who aren't "left enough" on some issues. Right now the left seems mostly about tearing down western society and institutions with the intent of replacing them with their vision of a soclistic utopia. They demonize everything as being horrible with no redeeming value. Police? Get rid of them all. Lincon? That slave owning rat bastard's statues must come down. Canada? Horrible place - we should ban canada day (they actually tried to do that) and the entire country is completely ruined because a large number of children died of illness that was killing a large number of children EVERYWHERE. So we should cancel canada. They basically want you to feel bad about everything. Your heritage (guilt if you're white, anger if you're anyone else), the country's history, the religious institutions that are traditional, ideology or moral structure, Once enough people decide that our current culture and social structure are 'bad', then they'll be open to the Left's vision of a socialistic/communistic society as they envision it.

Some jurisdictions are moving towards involuntary treatment. BC already does it, alberta was kind of toying with it. Obviously there's conditions, they can't just grab someone at random or some guy they find with a gram of something in his pocket but bc right now can involuntarily force someone to a treatment facility. I'm not sure we HAVE any - but if we ever do then by god we can force them there!

Well sure... when you say it like THAT....

Don't be so silly. That's a TERRIBLE idea. Martha's vineyards. That's where you put Relocated Illegal Alien World. Not Chicago. Yeash.

We have more opportunity for small businesses to start and thrive than we ever have. A local craftsperson can sell their creations world wide and it'll cost them pennies to set that up. A skilled person can sell their skills online to people around the globe from everything from writing to programming to taxes. Any person with a microphone and camera can be an 'influencer' and many do quite well. I know many who make use of modern tech to promote or sell their stuff to a much wider market than they could have. I think you'd have to provide some species of evidence if you were going to claim that big tech was hurting the entrepreneur more than helping.

no - your point was that it would be easy to do it by sq feet - i pointed out in direct response to that it would not be easy, which is why they don't base it on that exclusively. But it's a factor. I think we've already established you have no idea how this works. No it isn't - that's a tiny point in what i was arguing. what i was arguing is that toronto is NOT the lowest property taxes at all and that raising taxes isn't a good idea. And one of the basis's of that was that lower rates still equal more taxes when combined with higher values. Which you initially questioned and now seem to agree with which is great. I get why you're trying to CHANGE what i was arguing - you can't argue against that. But - sorry, it was simply one point that when they are looking at what to charge and how much they have to make they consider that. And my point was valid - toronto is NOT the lowest taxed. At all. Ok - i'll try again. There is no chance the municipality can accurately asses the value of your individual property. That would take an insane amount of time. So they need to work out solutions that are 'reasonable' and easy - while still accounting for as much as they can. They ALSO know they need X number of dollars. They don't just pull a number out of their ass - they plan budgets carefully. So they have to have a good working knowledge of their 'taxable stock'. SO they have to use tools to gauge approximate values and revenues in order to come to an "estimated" value. And absolutely sq ft plays a role in that because it's a measurable constant. Its something they can work with to come up with a model to assess the thousands of properties they need to quickly. So you get something similar to "age is xx - lot size is yy- sq ft is zz = value xyz That's simplistic but it demonstrates the point. And sq ft is something that's very easy to measure for up coming years. Developers put in plans and permits and it's very easy for future planning over the next couple of years to use a per sq ft rate as an average and come very close. So it's very important. Councils can say "we have xxxx sq ft of taxable space coming on line in the next 2 years - so revenues will increase by an average of... " Hell - even your realtor will take sq ft into account when determining what your home will sell for. This is not complicated. It's a major part of the model to determine value so it's a very easy figure to use when they're doing planning. As the report you posted noted, and as we've discussed, toronto is currently overtaxing commercial property and under taxing residential, and is moving to bring that into better balance. The bottom line is that toronto property taxes are already fairly high, and raising them would not be a good idea. I suppose one could say there could be exceptions to that but as a rule it woudln't be a good idea.

There's much truth there. Of course - someone who just says yes when they say no doesn't get very far and he IS improving his standing with people , for whatever reasons they feel he's competent. But for sure - the real show is the next election. Campaigns matter, and nothing before that is going to change that acid test.

https://archive.ph/8WdxE I would encourage everyone to read this - but it IS very long. This is 5 months of investigative research and most of it has the ring of truth to it and meshes with things i've heard from local people. TLDR point: The 'free drugs' given out as safe supply are sold to buy street drugs which hit harder. The 'free' drugs are sold cheap, which means people can afford them and there's less desire to stop, so fewer people get off the drugs. The situation has led to a host of overdose and medical issues. These programs haven't seemed to reduce the problems DRs who speak out against it face reprisals and punishment. This is not working. This should not be expanded and should probably be stopped. We need a better solution.

I think you may be conflating productivity with production, your comments make more sense with the latter. Cdn worker productivity wouldn't be affected by moving jobs offshore

All of the colonizers are dead. There aren't any to 'wax' about anything. As to slave owners in canada those were mostly the first nations. But they;re all dead too so cant ask them.

At this point the platform will be a simple exercise. The challenge is to get known and get people to like you and think you're competent WITHOUT using promises or specific policy to showcase. But he seems to be pulling it off. The key to winning, which both Andrew and Erin missed, is to lay the foundation and be well known and respected before an election starts. If people are just discovering you as the election starts its hard for them to get very confident in you, And you can't be giving away your platform before the election so it can be a bit of a task.

that is absolutely hilarious - i JUST noticed that EXACT thing in the store this weekend Well if you're a mr noodles fan you can always still buy at costco But the most common foods are up quite a bit. It's very common to see a 3 lb tube of ground beef at 18 dollars, when just a year and change ago you'd think it was crazy to pay more than 10. chicken is upwards of between 15 and 20 dollars a bird often enough. Eggs just jumped. I don't drink much milk but i'm told that's up. A whack of it is carbon tax, which is a cumulative tax unlike something like gst. But whatever it is there's no doubt that food is up a lot more than a lousy 8 percent.

Yeah - pointing out that something is factually accurate when you thought it wasn't isn't really 'declaring victory'. But hey - if it makes you feel better about yourself to think of yourself as a victim or something, you do you Sigh. There you go declaring victory for yourself again. Well, actually that would be pretty hard. How would you account for land value? If i have a prime hunk of real estate but havn't built on it yet - i pay no taxes at all? Or i put an out house on it and that's all the tax i pay? I can sit on 3 acres of land down town with no tax as long as i don't have buildings on it? That's why it's a consideration but it's not the only factor. Further it wouldn't account for improvements to the property. Interestingly enough there ARE proposals out there to look at switching to flat tax system and there are places that do it but for the reasons i just mentioned and others it's not popular at all. THat's literally what i've been saying and you've been arguing against. You've got this weird habit of switching positions in the middle of a discussion and pretending it was your position all along when your arguments don't pan out. So a lower rate does not mean the person pays lower tax. They may pay MORE tax for a similar property even though the rate is lower. Sure, that can be a factor. Well as i've shown you've been completely and entirely wrong' about literally everything else you've claimed on this subject so you'll understand when i say you very clearly have no idea what is or is not ridiculous or how ANY of this works. I mean - you honestly thought at the start of this that people in toronto paid less tax for a similar property than anyone else in ontario.

If you mean "we" as in the majority of people here, i don't think so. It's pretty common knowledge. Its like not having to cite that the sun came up in the east this morning. If you mean 'we' as in the royal we as in YOU well you can go do your own research, sealioning is a bad look. Yeah. But i'm sure it got lots of clicks. Not that CBC is the only ones who do that kind of thing. Oh sure it does. A lot. I would argue more than the truth happens in many respects Vice is a left wing media outlet Well... was.

I noted observational evidence - observation is perfectly acceptable as evidence and does not require Psychic anything. MEGA-fail. Inflation. That should be obvious even to you. If we produce 100 dollars more but things cost 110 dollars more our gdp has gone up but our wealth has not. Plus additional gov't spending. Remember that a gov't workers wage is included in gdp. That's seriously not how math works. Wealth is not an absolute. it is not like a mineral or anything, there isn't a finite amount of 'welthonium' out there or something Wealth is simply the effect of economic activity. More activity more wealth. So you can't "distribute wealth" to the top like that. Regardless of what's going on at the top people should be able to create wealth based on their value. IF their value goes down then they earn less - and their value can go down as a result of everything else going up. Further - GDP is not an indicator of wealth. Using it as a primary indicator of things is not going to give a complete picture. So - you've asked a lot of questions - here's some for you. If wealth is being moved to the top, how is that process happening precisely given our labour laws, collective bargaining etc. Show where this money has been taken from the workers and redistributed to the top. If that is the case and you can demonstrate it - what's your solution? Will you be apologizing for stating my claim was laughable when i was able to prove it true or are you just a bit of a penis? Take your time.

Uh - i WAS responding to this: "I personally do not think neither are good leaders. " kinda sounds like an opinion Ahhh - an excellent 'compromise' candidate - still liked by the right but leans a little to the left. Not a bad choice at all. Unfortunately she's a little too smart to want that job.

That is oddly specific, but sure!

Well -your second paragraph peels the onion i'm afraid. Because we're not building enough homes for our population it doesn't really matter if someone buys or rents - either way they're going to get kind of screwed. If more people rent then rents go up, if more people buy then housing prices go up and if we keep building fewer homes than our growth demands both are going to continue to go up. People will have to very seriously re-evaluate their expectations for living spaces - and evne that only helps for so long before there's not enough again.

You have lied by claiming i have stated I can read your mind. Ultra-fail. If you have to lie to make a point you don't have a very good point. Agreed. Two seperate issues. Poverty has many sources including drug addiction, mental health issues, social and situational issues such as being a single parent at a young age which limits training and career advancement, and the fact that due in part to the fact we haven't BEEN keeping up productivity wise there's less wealth and inflation hits the lower income earner hardest. And a host of other reasons. Well of course it depends on how you define wealth. We will be wealthier than some, less wealthy that others, but at the end of the day far less wealthy than we should have been. There will be more poverty, less social programs and safety net, less food security, less of a lot of things. Which is disappointing.

Numerous news media outlets wrote their stories in such a way that Reasonable people would believe that the flags and symbols were everywhere. Just like CBC Published that the Convoy was funded by Americans who were all Republicans. There was a specific effort to direct hatred and anger at the Convoy. Spreading hatred and division is something that left-wing media Outlets thrive on and they believe it will make them lots of money. I noticed that vice is closing its doors however and most of the media Outlets that leaned to the left are suffering.

Fail - you are not, and observable fact is observable fact - not opinion. No - there were two issues raised initially. One was that we are 'more productive today", and the other was 'we will lag behind for 40 years. You raised one, i'd commented on the other, i felt it would be fair to address both at the same time. So the first quotes show we've been lagging in productivity for a while now - and the second links show a report that indicates we're going to lag even worse for at least the next 40 years. My apologies if it looked like i was changing the channel - it was just an attempt to address it all at one go. Homelessness is something of a seperate issue - but our ability to deal with it is hampered by poor productivity. Everybody tends to enjoy a benfit from increased productivity. workers get more work done and therefore are worth more money. Employers can earn more for less output even paying higher rates. And gov'ts rake in more tax revenue. If we lose ground to other countries, what happens is that our people put in the same effort but produce less value. And that means they're worth less, even tho they worked as hard. So they either have to work harder to catch up or earn less and have less gov't services. And it gets very hard to attract business investment when you're less efficient.

And there's a percent of undecided who haven't 'met' him yet. So to achieve 45 percent At this stage is excellent. At the end of the day he will take a majority if 40 percent of those who vote choose him, so it means he's cleared an important hurtle. But perhaps more importantly it's a lot higher than his numbers 6 months ago - and it's been a steady increase. That is going to be extremely encouraging for his supporters, suggesting that his methods are working and he's building a solid base there will be those who share your opinion. Of course there is no matter who you're talking about. So who would you wsh had been running for leader (any party)

It's entirely relevant - don't be such a sore loser The reason municipalities use value is it's easier to calculate on a simple basis but the RATE they come up with and how they arrive at that is based very much on the average per square foot price - that's why places where prices are higher charge lower rates. If they didn't then people in vacouver would pay insane amounts of tax compared to other places. So they all look at that and say 'we need to raise x dollars, there's y number of taxable square feet out there, therefore we need to average this - now what rate gives us that" So - a person with the same place in windsor as in toronto would pay far less taxes in actual dollar amounts. For the same place. So you can't say toronto is the lowest. If we expand to other parts of toronto it proves my point even more. But - go ahead and calculate the numbers if you like And your claim was that toronto was the lowest in Ontairo. It's BARELY lower than guleph and it's far higher than freaking WINDSOR. By a lot actually. Property taxes are already fairly high in Toronto - raising them would be a mistake.

Everybody is trying to predict 40 years in the future. What - you didn't think the world would be here in 40 years?

no, you're not. You're a biological left winger who likes to pretend he's conservative. You're not conservative, you're "trans-political". We are not more productive than we were in the past in comparison to productivity rates today. we have fallen behind and are less competitive compared to others than we would have been in the past. As a direct result we're producing less value than others are and that makes us less wealthy. Sure. Here's the last 20 years - showing we have fallen behind almost ALL of the major players in productivity using the us as a constant. https://bcbc.com/insights-and-opinions/canadas-productivity-performance-over-the-past-20-years https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-lagging-u-s-productivity-growth-since-1980-statscan-1.638007 here's the next 40 years https://bcbc.com/insights-and-opinions/oecd-predicts-canada-will-be-the-worst-performing-advanced-economy-over-the-next-decade-and-the-three-decades-after-that We're going to lag behind all the advanced economies. Which means virtualy all the countries on earth will improve their productivity and qualities of life more than we will. So yeah. Looks like you were wrong across the board. We HAVE fallen behind, we ARE going to lag behind everyone, and you are DEFINITELY not a conservative.