What proof you have he will? He has given no indication of it, and it is currently canceled.

I don’t know how to be clearer for you.

A hard stance looks like this:

"Canada values its strong partnership with the United States and acknowledges the concerns raised over our proposed DST. In a show of good faith and commitment to reaching a balanced trade agreement, we are suspending the DST indefinitely.

However, if a mutually acceptable agreement cannot be reached, Canada reserves the right to implement the measure as planned. Our goal remains a fair and forward-looking solution that supports a level playing field for all."

Thus we reached trumps goal - DST doesn’t move forward or go through. It stays exactly where it is, but its not a concession for nothing, and makes it clear that the DST remains part of the negotiations.

Not suspended the DST pending an agreement, but rescinded fully

Its not hard to say “were willing to play ball, provided this leads to an agreement”.

I’m not opposed to dropping the DST, I’m opposed to dropping it rather than suspending it so trump will come talk at the table.

I agree - given that trump was the one who made the last round of NAFTA (aka the USMCA cuz god forbid the US isn’t the first in the title), which he has now torn up, there is no reason to expect him to honour any agreement we make now.

I’d prefer to not jump right into a pissing match with an enormous economy like the US, but I think we can stand firm on what we let them push us to do. I’d like to see any tariffs we do apply directly solely to small businesses which can shoe a demonstrable loss in revenue due to the tariffs, but given Carney/lib history, I’m guessing it’ll be gobbled up by larger corps instead.

Time will tell how his capitulation on the DST goes, but so far I’m not impressed.

The question was what has Carney done (or not done) that he said he would (or would not) do.

He was elected on a strong, elbows up approach. So far, he has capitulated on the DST without us seeing any gain or concessions from that. And no, returning to the bargaining table does not count.

Not suspended the DST pending an agreement, but rescinded fully. My point is that he has not taken the firm stance I expected of him.

Not the other guy, but I’ve been disappointed so far. For a PM elected, almost entirely, based on taking a firm stance against the US, he hasn’t taken that approach.

Now maybe there’s more going on behind the scenes, and the final agreement hasn’t come out, but I’ve been disappointed with what’s been publicized. I’m open to my view changing, but believing that conciliation works with bullies, or that any agreement is worth anything (considering Trump ripped up deals he previously wrote in his last term) is ridiculous.

Hospitals have to be nonprofit here, so we can’t actually have shareholder payouts.

Executive compensation is public information in Ontario and you can look it up - often they’re paid less than Doctors in their own hospital.

EDIT: also, unit rates are set but the insurer (in this case the govt), so its not like hospitals can charge different amounts based on internal costs.

Problem is the uber wealthy aren’t actually PAID that much. They’re given stock options or other, non-liquid cash, which isn’t taxed as income. It also doesn’t get taxed until you withdraw it (see the capital gains “scare” that the media hyped up over the recent changes to tax code). Had to dig a bit to find it, but Quebec provides their people with >1mil income per year, which is about 7,000, or 0.08%. Extrapolated to Canada-wide (which I’d argue is not accurate and way too high) gives us 27,000. That’s not a lot of people to try and draw any major funds from. Especially at a ramping rate of return like proposed.

Very rich (bezos, Westons, etc) then draw it out as needed, or use it as collateral against loans at lower interest rates than their return on investments, driving things like private equity, corporate landlords, etc. This then cycles, increasing their paper wealth while not actually having a lot of income to tax easily.

We should de-incentivize wealth hoarding

I agree. The problem is how to do that without penalizing the bottom end, overcomplicating tax laws further, and/or creating some other loophole for the rich to jump through. What counts into your wealth hording? Property? Investments? Are unrealized gains (ie stocks worth a ton but not yet sold to gain actual money) counted against them? What about property - if the market skyrockets, are people forced to sell their homes?

What about things like the wealthy transferring their extra wealth to children or spouses? How does that play into it? Its messy once you get into the details of it, and those are the key points that would actually make a difference.

Especially with that single-payer healthcare we have. The unit rates for things like Dr. hours or beds in hospitals are enormous. If we can cut down on the number of visits required because people have somewhere safe to live and aren’t getting injured/sick living on the street, we could save huge amounts of money. Add onto that the cost of policing and/or incarcerating them, plus the economic benefit of having downtown areas feel safer for people, thus encouraging more people to live/work/spend time in those areas.

Assuming this was supposed to reply to my response (you’re just responding directly to the main post FYI).

Canadians actually pay about HALF of their gross income in taxes

I haven’t ever heard a number this big. Where did you get this from, and how does it compare to other countries?

I don’t disagree - we’re taxed more than the US, but that comes with things like single-payer healthcare and higher regulatory enforcement. GST, for example, isn’t something collected in the US meaning they only have the effective PST component of our sales tax, which varies widely by municipality to municipality, but is quite a bit less.

And since WHEN in the history of mankind, if a gov has saved some money in other areas, have they LOWERED taxes due to the savings? Never.

Governments lower taxes all of the freaking time. This last federal election it was one of the largest points that all three major parties were proposing.

Because the only people who support it are students and academics and think tanks. The rest of us live in reality and are sick of our very high tax burden in Canada. So enough with the studies, kill this idea once and for all.

False, I live here and work here and support exploring the idea to see what and how it would work. You can’t know how expensive it is based solely on theories, so we NEED to run these studies to show it either is or isn’t more expensive. Especially given our single-payer healthcare, reductions in healthcare spending due to better life circumstances/proper nutrition can very quickly and easily make up significant costs spent elsewhere.

Canada’s tax burden is not actually that high. Curious what you’re comparing to. Taking Canada’s average income of $55,000, they pay effective rates of 13-20%, based on your province.

Taking a few US cities as comparison,, Georgia is at ~20%, while Michigan sits at 19% because they have a city income tax rate. California falls around the 19% mark as well. BUT many of those places have cities which also have rates ranging from 0.5 to 2.5%.

If they can afford a lawyer on staff, there’s a 0% chance they’re offloading the screening to some random real estate agent

Even then, I’d argue they still disproportionately impact those most likely to be on the road - those who need to drive for or to work.

But so what? Drive the speed limit and you don’t get ticketed. This isn’t some unfair cop picking and choosing who to pull over. Add scaling fines for income and its STILL going to disproportionally impact working class people.

Its still not an argument to get rid of them

My inlaws are dual and living in the US. Very surprised and confused why I was still upset about it.

Man has some golden quotes, but this takes the cake, with respect to him denying responsibility over the MOU the convoy released.

“I humbly, humbly apologize if Canadians felt that that was the premise of it,” Bauder added. “I apologize to Canadians over and over and over. I’m sorry if there were a few words that got construed and slurred around and misrepresented with disinformation and misinformation from the fake media.”

My man doesn’t seem to realize that the MOU was publicly available and still is.

For those of you who haven’t read it, basically it drastically misunderstands how the government works (no surprise there), including demands that the Senate create a council comprised of people the senate chooses, and people Canada Unity (convoy) chooses which then leads the country for decisions. That is so NOT how the Senate works, and this is the part that people say is an overthrow - there is no mention of the elected officials we chose, nor is there a mention of Trudeau or the Prime Minister.

Our system basically has two houses - the Senate, who are unelected and long term serving to mediate fluctuations in power and generally propose changes or modifications to bills passed by the Commons, where our elected officials are. Proposed bills (or directions) need to pass both houses to become law. This is easily discoverable by a google search “Canadian government”.

“Canada Unity (CU) offers this “Memorandum” to the Senate of Canada and the Governor General of Canada, the highest authorities representing the Federal Government (SCGGC) as “The Government of Canada”.”

He can claim its a misunderstanding, but dude, if you’re getting over $10m in donations, you can afford to hire a lawyer that understands how our government is set up. Combined with the fact that the other co-signers from Canada Unity are all pro-separatist/Wexit members, I have a hard time believing it was an ‘accident’.

Bigger problem is people are bad judges of risk while driving. People’s perception of how fast they can safely travel doesnt line up with their actual abilities.

Roads are built with a design speed 20kph higher than the posted limit because that’s the margin left for safety. That covers things like balding tires, like a distracted driver not paying attention, or bad weather.

There can be some changes (ie the number of municipalities that insist on a 4m wide lane is RIDICULOUS for residential roads), but the vast majority of the factors that make it “safe” to drive that speed are there for a reason.

The problem is that people are AWFUL at evaluating their own risk when driving, and drive at speeds that ARENT safe. Look at how few people leave appropruate stopping distances between vehicles, which is the #1 factor in preventing accidents.

The methods you proposed would likely decrease the speed vehicles travel at (ie from 80 to 60) because drivers feel like they can’t travel at that speed, but the road likely still isn’t safe for vehicles to travel at 60 when its that narrow.

Speed cameras catch everyone speeding, 24/7, and are the single best, economical, way to eliminate speeding from a road. Cop can’t pull over every vehicle going 80 on a 4 lane road rated for 60, but the camera can ticket them all.

For sure, promote a narrower road, encourage MUP over sidewalks, and encourage safer driving when you talk to your councilors, but road reconstruction happens, generally, once every 25-50yrs. We can’t wait for that timeframe to fix these problems.

Ah yes, the urban hotspots of…Scotland?

There’s something poetic about climate change (caused in no small part due to farming and particularly cattle farming) allowing a tick that causes red meat allergies (thus reducing red meat consumption) to expand its territory.

My wife was bit by one when she was a teen, and its pretty nasty. Hers hits when she eats a lot of red meat, or eats slow-cooked red meat, but its hives, scratchy throat, and nasty stomach cramps.

I mean NGL, the examples they cite are pretty bad.

In April, Calandra put the Thames Valley District School Board under supervision following a review of a $40,000-staff retreat to Toronto that included a stay at the hotel connected to the Rogers Centre, where the Blue Jays play.

This is not just about boards that are running deficits, Calandra said, pointing to the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board, which was the first board he put under supervision.

That came after an investigation found four school trustees racked up a $190,000 bill on a trip to Italy to buy art for new schools.

IF those are the only cases where they’re stepping in, I’m okay with it. We should have oversight to make sure our tax dollars aren’t being wasted on fancy trips.

That can be true at the same time as its true that the govt needs to be properly funding education. Article states $1,500/student less funding now compared to 2018