taxi

Members
  • Content count

    3,484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,295 Revered

About taxi

  • Rank
    Canucks Third-Line

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

9,572 profile views
  1. No. None of the USA, Russia, or China want to be involved in a nuclear war right now. North Korea is constantly coming up with weapons that make them a big enough threat just not to be invaded. That's how they survive. Now that the threat of their missile bombardment of South Korea has been minimised by anti-missile technology, they have a ballistic nuke. The USA won't invade them. There's also a bid difference between the kind of nukes NK has and the kind the USA has. NK nukes would injure and kill people few dozen blocks, while the USA's would level entire cities. The Cuban missile crisis was literally one missed or misinterpreted communication away from the end of humanity. Do you really think more people are building shelters now than they were in the middle of the cold war? At the height of the, schools were teaching children how to hide in cellars and wait out nuclear fall out.
  2. This actually may be the most peaceful time in human history. Per capita you are far less likely to die in armed conflict than any other time in human history. Honestly, no one really cares about N. Korea or Syria enough to start a world war right now. No it's nowhere close to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
  3. It's a common and powerful steroid. I would never go there, but it will make you cut.
  4. MvVeigh's motivations were clearly libertarian/anti-government. This is the exact opposite of jihadists, who wish to impose rigid Islamic rule. He was definitely a terrorist though.
  5. Those things are about as good for you as candy bars. Many candy bars have similar macros and 10+ grams of protein. Adding a few grams of protein to a candy bar doesn't make something healthy.
  6. It takes two to tango. I'm not saying I would do things any differently. But when someone selling a home has an offer from a local couple and chooses to go with the higher bid from the offshore investor, they've contributed to the problem. I really don't see this big "fight" to stay in their homes or how those fortunate to buy into the market when it was sane are victims. It's great that some people have parents who are looking out for them, but not everyone does, and we have to look into the health of our community as a whole. I'm not disputing that foreign investment into real estate isn't a problem, but it's not the only problem right now.
  7. I'm not sure taxing capital is the right approach. Although taxing more of the profits from it definitely should happen. It just seems like BS that a policeman earning $90k/year might have to pay 30+% of their income in tax, but an executive earning $500k/year can shield their earnings in a corporation and pay 12%.
  8. I don't find the tax laws all that complicated. They seem to be purposely set up to allow people with capital to avoid paying taxes, while those who are working get boned.
  9. Also to add to this. It's not always "double taxation". Once you actually have money, there many ways to avoid paying taxes on your investments. RRSPs, TFSAs, Trusts, Corporations, etc... Once again, our system is flawed, for the most part only those actually working with fixed and reported incomes are taxed.
  10. My issue is that working hard simply doesn't cut it anymore. The cost of capital, taxes, etc.. is so prohibitive right now that working hard and having an entrepreneurial spirit is less helpful than ever before. 40 years ago, a hard working tradesman could afford a house or their own business. Now that dream has become more out of touch than ever before. I do agree that rising real estate prices are very much attributable to foreign capital investments. However, we're in a situation where those born to families of lower means are disproportionately affected by this. There's also all sorts of studies done showing that successful entrepreneurs these days are almost exclusively well off kids with safety nets: https://www.asia.finance/entrepreneur/entrepreneurs-not-special-breed/ Not only do rich kids have more opportunities to explore entrepreneurship, but they have far greater access to capital. Try affording the rent to set up a shop or restaurant these days or even a basic office. It's absurd. Yes it has always been harder for the poor, but now its extreme. The issue is both, not one or the other. Essentially, foreigners driving up real estate prices, then rich parents bailing out their kids. Our society should work towards mobility. We should decrease taxes and increase opportunities for the working population.
  11. An alternative would be to tax people earning income less and those inheriting income more. If the goal of society is social mobility, then doesn't that speak more towards that end? And yes, many many people in Vancouver are getting help from their parents. The ability to buy property should not be solely dependent on whether you were lucky enough to be born into a rich family. This is increasingly the biggest factor in Vancouver as young professional earning $100k+ a year can no longer afford even smaller condos, yet if you're parents can mortgage 15% of their multi-million dollar property they bought in the 1960s, you are set.
  12. I don't see the issue, as long as it was reasonable. And that would be a per person tax. For example, if you have 3 children and each gets 1 million, then no tax. I each gets 2 million, then there would be some tax on the extra 1 million they get, so each child might get 1.8 million instead of 2 million. I also would't describe anyone who has more than 1 million dollars to pass to each of their children as middle class anymore. I agree that real estate is an issue. It, however, doesn't seem fair to only allow people with well invested parents to afford to buy. That's pretty much the scenario now. We have "kids" in their 30s getting help from their parents to purchase condos and homes, which is driving up the prices and making it harder for those on their own to purchase.
  13. It seems like it would be much easier to manage a socialist system in a smaller community. Plus taking away the anonymity of those abusing the system may actually do the opposite of what you're suggesting. If your peers all know that you are abusing the system, that would likely put pressure on you to return to work. My biggest issue with BI is that it doesn't address the larger macroeconomic issues. Money is a meaningless number. What it does is allow people to buy better housing, cars, etc...Creating a BI doesn't create more housing or cars for people. The ultimate end result is likely higher taxes and inflation, as when you increase incomes you merely have more dollars chasing the same products. This pushes the working middle class and those with fixed incomes into poverty. Meanwhile the upper class, who control the capital, can simply set their own wages at a rate that exceeds inflation and taxes. It's basically what's going on right now with the 1%ers all having income at record high levels compared to the working class. Setting a BI may just make the problem worse by taking the middle class' means to get ahead away from them. So yes, it might work in an isolated community. There isn't going to be inflation when you are in a small town and can use your BI to buy goods from neighbouring towns. It also helps that the federal government is infusing $150,000.00 into this project...IE other taxpayers are paying the bill. In short, the two major issues, inflation and tax, are dealt with by outside forces. I'd rather see smaller changes being made. For example, increasing the ability of the poor and middle class to gain capital (Ex. decreasing the cost of real estate). We should be looking for ways to alleviate the tax burden on the middle class, not increase it. I wouldn't be opposed to an inheritance tax on inheritance above $1,000,000 either.
  14. I actually think it could work in small communities. On a larger scale I'm a lot more wary.
  15. Depends on how much you drive in a year too. There's some threshold where it's better for the environment to drive a fuel efficient car over an electric or hybrid. I only drive my car about 5-6k/year. It meant it was more efficient to get a car like a corolla than a car with a battery.