[CaptainYooh]

I don't pretend to know what's right. I suspect that there is no 100% correct way of doing this right either. But the discussion could be interesting.

What's right? There were $5M+ homes in Rideau/Roxboro that have been severely damaged by flood. Their restoration costs would be in the many $100K's range plus the expensive damaged property of their wealthy homeowners. There are small older homes in Bowness with restoration costs well under $100K and the damaged property valued at a lot less money. Also, take the range of damaged homes in High River and, say Siksika nation for the breadth of the problem. The burden of restoring a $200K damage for a wealthy person's home is likely much less devastating to them than restoring a $25,000 damage for someone on minimum wage. That's a given. So, what's fair? How should the Government approach its contemplated flood assistance? 100% for everyone? Based on wealth and personal impact? Based on the amount of damage in pro-rata to some hypothetically approved basic amount? Based on one same amount approved for everyone across the Province? Based on the residual amount after whatever one's insurance has approved? Based on making a portion of the restoration expense tax deductible? Remember, most of the assistance money will have to be funded by the taxpayers (municipal, provincial and federal). Opinions, please.