BC Lags Behind Other Provinces in Life Satisfaction

[blankall]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, well the big problem there is that province still has to go to war with the municipalities over zoning (looking directly at you, Oak Bay).

We're also still seeing way too many condos being built that are not affordable for the majority of British Columbians. Freeland touting those $1600/month, 330 square foot condos as making like more affordable for families was hideous.

I'm not sure what things are like in Victoria, but in Vancouver the "missing middle" is a major issue. The way the city slowly leaks out permits, means that only tiny luxury units are ever built. The existing home owners have done a bunch of mental gymnastics to convince themselves that fighting density is what's good for lower income renters, as opposed to just property prices.

BC's population is at 5.6 million, but they are actually seeing net negative interprovincial movement now. Alberta cross 4.8 million. Alberta doesn't have the land restrictions that BC does, but there's a limit on how much even they can build. It's all a mess.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by blankall

I'm not sure what things are like in Victoria, but in Vancouver the "missing middle" is a major issue. The way the city slowly leaks out permits, means that only tiny luxury units are ever built. The existing home owners have done a bunch of mental gymnastics to convince themselves that fighting density is what's good for lower income renters, as opposed to just property prices.

BC's population is at 5.6 million, but they are actually seeing net negative interprovincial movement now. Alberta cross 4.8 million. Alberta doesn't have the land restrictions that BC does, but there's a limit on how much even they can build. It's all a mess.

Yeah, we have a MMH initiative going on here, too, but the rollout has been dismal.

Again, it doesn't help matters when the politicians in charge think $1600/month is reasonable for low-income earners.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

What you're saying basically flies in the face of years of evidence-based research on the topic. It's also an incredibly ableist position.

People will make all sorts of poor, life-altering decisions for a variety of reasons beyond their control. When your brain is so poisoned by a mental illness, you may not have the mental capacity to adequately assess the risks related to substance use, etc., especially when you are seeking out relief from said mental illness and there are a lack of treatment and support services available.

There is a reason risk-taking behaviour and substance abuse are heavily linked to mental health issues. It's because the brain is impaired in a way that prevents people from making healthy/safe life choices.

Do people have no agency then?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Do people have no agency then?

What do you mean by agency? There is nothing preventing them from making their own decisions. However, their decision-making process is significantly impaired and influenced by their disabilities. Saying "well they just need to make better decisions" is incredibly ignorant and ableist.

Using your line of reasoning, there also should be no NCR decisions in the justice system, people with severe mental illnesses shouldn't be banned from owning firearms, etc.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by you&me

What's the threshold for affordability for a family? Or is it 330sf for a family the issue?

It's 330 square ft that's the issue. Even beyond that though, that's barely affordable for a single person making $50k or less annually.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

What do you mean by agency? There is nothing preventing them from making their own decisions. However, their decision-making process is significantly impaired and influenced by their disabilities. Saying "well they just need to make better decisions" is incredibly ignorant and ableist.

Using your line of reasoning, there also should be no NCR decisions in the justice system, people with severe mental illnesses shouldn't be banned from owning firearms, etc.

I think again you're conflating my arguement. I haven't argued against any resources or procedures. In genral a medical intervention to opiate addiction is far superior to a criminal one. All I've maintained is that at some point society at large shouldn't be responsible. It circles back to another point I made, which is the worst part about addicts is they think that they're only hurting themselves. Does a fire fighter need to resuscitate the same person 12 times?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

All I've maintained is that at some point society at large shouldn't be responsible. It circles back to another point I made, which is the worst part about addicts is they think that they're only hurting themselves. Does a fire fighter need to resuscitate the same person 12 times?

Well that's a silly argument for a couple of reasons.

1. Again, these people are mentally impaired. You are applying your unimpaired or less-impaired cognitive abilities to people who do not have those same faculties due to a medical condition.

What your are describing are generally symptoms of mental illness, trauma, etc.

2. We have a public health care system. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your view, that means we treat sick people, regardless of the decisions that brought them to that point. People know that smoking gives them lung cancer, poor eating habits can lead to heart disease and diabetes, etc. We still treat them regardless.

Why should substance abusers be treated differently than other people who make poor life choices?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Oh, well, if the government had a deficit for the last couple of years, that totally makes up for 16 years of cuts under the Campbell and Clark governments.

The BC NDP also posted three straight years of balanced budgets before COVID hit.

What a deeply unserious post.

Highest income tax bracket in BC kicks in at $252,752/yr and is at 53.50% and sales taxes are 12%. How much do people have to pay to not live in 'austerity'? How much debt does BC have to rack up? How heavy do the deficits have to run?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Highest income tax bracket in BC kicks in at $252,752/yr and is at 53.50% and sales taxes are 12%. How much do people have to pay to not live in 'austerity'? How much debt does BC have to rack up? How heavy do the deficits have to run?

Jesus Christ, dude.

I am not saying the current government is engaging in austerity politics.

I am saying that 16 years of cuts to social and health services was a form of austerity politics, and are a big reason we are where we are today. Why is that so hard to understand?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Why should substance abusers be treated differently than other people who make poor life choices?

The obvious reason is that people with diabetes or heart problems related to diet aren't making public spaces dangerous or traumatic.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

The obvious reason is that people with diabetes or heart problems related to diet aren't making public spaces dangerous or traumatic.

We provide health care to people who commit reckless driving, get stabbed during gang fights, etc. Would you like to try again?

EDIT: Also, how exactly is the average substance-abuser making public spaces dangerous?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

We provide health care to people who commit reckless driving, get stabbed during gang fights, etc. Would you like to try again?

And then tho people face criminal charges.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

And then tho people face criminal charges.

I agree. People who are actively putting people in unsafe conditions should be charged. How is the average substance-abuser doing that exactly?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Highest income tax bracket in BC kicks in at $252,752/yr and is at 53.50%

The median BC household (not individual!) income is $99,630/yr, so I'm really, really, really not concerned about the (in)ability of people making over 2.5x that amount to get by. If someone feels like they have too much of a tax burden to live very comfortably in BC whilst grossing $252k/yr or more, then it's because they've made extremely bad personal financial decisions, not because their marginal tax rate is too high.

Source

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

The median BC household (not individual!) income is $99,630/yr, so I'm really, really, really not concerned about the (in)ability of people making over 2.5x that amount to get by. If someone feels like they have too much of a tax burden to live very comfortably in BC whilst grossing $252k/yr or more, then it's because they've made extremely bad personal financial decisions, not because their marginal tax rate is too high.

Source

My point wasn't to illicit sympathy, but rather highlighting there isn't really a lot of room to tax more spend more when the province is already spending record deficits and alreaday taxing over 50% marginal rate on incomes over $250k.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

My point wasn't to illicit sympathy, but rather highlighting there isn't really a lot of room to tax more spend more when the province is already spending record deficits and alreaday taxing over 50% marginal rate on incomes over $250k.

You could be right. My point was simply that cuts are a big reason we're in this mess, and it's very hard to see a way out that doesn't include significant public funds to build/rebuild the appropriate level of services and infrastructure..

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I agree. People who are actively putting people in unsafe conditions should be charged. How is the average substance-abuser doing that exactly?

I don't know what to tell you, but I think that shooting up in hospitals, public transit and parks is a hazard. I think that used needles are a hazard. I think people have episodes and screaming at passers by is a hazard. I think watching someone overdose is traumatic.



Do I think these are criminal? No. But I think addicts should be held accountable.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I don't know what to tell you, but I think that shooting up in hospitals, public transit and parks is a hazard. I think that used needles are a hazard. I think people have episodes and screaming at passers by is a hazard. I think watching someone overdose is traumatic.

Do I think these are criminal? No. But I think addicts should be held accountable.

So what you're saying is that people should be held accountable for the symptoms of their illness, regardless of whether treatment is affordable or accessible?

EDIT: You also realize you're basically advocating for collective punishment based on the unsafe actions of a few, right?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

So what you're saying is that people should be held accountable for the symptoms of their illness, regardless of whether treatment is affordable or accessible?

EDIT: You also realize you're basically advocating for collective punishment based on the unsafe actions of a few, right?

Everyone is accountable for their actions. That's just the truth of life. Whether you deserve it or not is a different conversation all together.


If you get caught doing opiates you should Be placed in mandatory treatment.

If you inject in the presence of minors you should face indecent exposure to a minor charges.

If you litter a used needle you should face a similar charge to uttering threats.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Everyone is accountable for their actions. That's just the truth of life.

I mean there's a certain type of person who definitely believes that kind of thing. I wouldn't say it's objectively true.

If you get caught doing opiates you should Be placed in mandatory treatment.

Who's paying for this? What if there are no beds available? How is the person being transported there?

If you inject in the presence of minors you should face indecent exposure to a minor charges.

If you litter a used needle you should face a similar charge to uttering threats.

Two questions:

1. Do you believe the concept of NCR should be abolished from the justice system?
2. Just to be clear, you're advocating for the incarceration of people suffering from the symptoms of a medical condition?

Also, beyond how completely absurd these ideas are, there's almost no chance they'd survive a Supreme Court challenge.

EDIT: You also realize that what you've proposed is going to exacerbate the issue of Indigenous over-incarceration, right?