Ugh, why can't one normal, level headed person run in politics?
Another election with no good options.
About 20% of the population is now part of the looney bin populist movement, and they come out in big numbers for their people. For a conservative candidate to win, they need to outreach to that segment of the population.
It's exactly the same reason conservative candidates reached out heavily to the Bible belt in the 90s. Why did gay or abortion rights ever have anything to do with fiscal policy?
Our political paradigm lumps a bunch of random beliefs into two different camps. It's broken.
The Following User Says Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
Did they give the sides silly names like “left” and “right”?
I believe it was 18th century France that came up with those terms. The left was supposed to represent those in opposition to the existing establishments. Since then, however, both sides have come up with their own establishments to support.
I remember when I first discovered that the BC Liberal party was essentially another conservative party. Blew my mind when comparing to the Liberal parties across Canada!
Our political paradigm lumps a bunch of random beliefs into two different camps. It's broken.
Multi-party, rep by pop systems aren’t necessarily any better. Look at what’s happening in Europe these days. No party ever gets close to a majority, so every government is a coalition. And it’s becoming increasingly difficult to exclude the populist, anti-establishment parties from those coalitions, as their popular support grows.
So you may vote for a moderate, establishment party. And they might win the election. But when it comes to forming a government, they need to partner up with the populists anyway. And now instead of the policy brokering between those groups happening at an open party convention before an election (as they do in our big-tent system), it happens post-election, behind closed doors. And it can take many months for these negotiations to drag out (9 months for the Netherlands’ most recent government), leaving a zombie government in charge in the interim.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
I remember when I first discovered that the BC Liberal party was essentially another conservative party. Blew my mind when comparing to the Liberal parties across Canada!
Historically, the gap between the Liberals and Conservatives federally used to be pretty close when you consider a lot of policies and platforms. The Reform Party takeover of the Conservatives pushed the party further right. And the NDPs larger piece of the pie pushed the Liberals further left because they cater to them for their balance of power. I still see them as mostly center though, or at least that is what they try to be.
In provinces though, the Liberal and Conservative parties, not held to a federal standard like the NDP is, didn't evolve the same way. In some provinces, they are still relatively close.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
I mean the BCCPC is also expressly anti-trans. These people are insane bigots of the highest order.
As a pharmacist, it's also more than a little scary that some of the candidates want people who administered vaccines to go to jail. And I know pharmacists who want to vote for them! "Oh they just say crazy things, but they won't do that stuff when they're in power". Then how do you know they'll do anything they said when they're in power?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
As a pharmacist, it's also more than a little scary that some of the candidates want people who administered vaccines to go to jail. And I know pharmacists who want to vote for them! "Oh they just say crazy things, but they won't do that stuff when they're in power". Then how do you know they'll do anything they said when they're in power?
Will offer to pay 40% of the price on new construction for first time buyers. Buyer comes up with 60% and government shares in any profits for value appreciation down the road.
Will offer to pay 40% of the price on new construction for first time buyers. Buyer comes up with 60% and government shares in any profits for value appreciation down the road.
Seems pretty short-sighted, IMO. All that'll do is drive up demand without increasing supply, unless I'm missing something.
EDIT: Just saw the BCCPC proposal, and it's worse.
The B.C. Conservatives have promised a major provincial tax rebate to address housing affordability, though the party has not said how it plans to pay for this proposal.
Leader John Rustad announced Monday that if elected, his party would exempt $3,000 per month of rent or mortgage interest costs from provincial income taxes.
The program — dubbed the Rustad Rebate — would start with a $1,500-per-month exemption that would cost around $900 million for Budget 2026, according to the party. The rebate would then be increased by $500 each year until it reaches the target amount in 2029, which the party says could cost around $3.5 billion if used by every home in B.C.
"This is one of the most significant tax reliefs that British Columbia has ever given," Rustad said at a news conference Monday.
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
The way I am reading the information it seems somewhat predatory as well. The government is offering this as a loan to buyers who will pay interest, probably at a fairly reasonable market rate, and the government will also take 40% of the increased value at the time of sale.
The way I am reading the information it seems somewhat predatory as well. The government is offering this as a loan to buyers who will pay interest, probably at a fairly reasonable market rate, and the government will also take 40% of the increased value at the time of sale.
I read it more that the 40% is to cover the interest, but it isn't very well explained.
The way I am reading the information it seems somewhat predatory as well. The government is offering this as a loan to buyers who will pay interest, probably at a fairly reasonable market rate, and the government will also take 40% of the increased value at the time of sale.
Yeah this reeks of double dipping. If you are an equity partner, then you get your 40% increase in value, but it isn't a loan and I shouldn't be charged interest. If it is a loan, then the interest is supposed to cover the time cost of money and they shouldn't be eligible for any increase in equity at the time of sale.
Plus, if after 25 years the house isn't sold the loan is due.. but what about the appreciated value? Is that simply forgiven? - if so then I guess the real incentive is for people to keep the home forever.. but I am guessing more likely there is going to be an additional market assessment and you will owe the original amount plus the appreciated value (deemed disposition) - which I would think ends up forcing most people in that position to sell to simply be able to pay that amount.
Edit - just saw Rubecube's post and yeah that makes sense.. but definitely confusing in the messaging on it. I would need to see something more concrete to be able to judge it.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
The way I am reading the information it seems somewhat predatory as well. The government is offering this as a loan to buyers who will pay interest, probably at a fairly reasonable market rate, and the government will also take 40% of the increased value at the time of sale.
Quote:
"This is a loan," Eby said. "This is not a grant. The homeowner pays interest on it just like they would on any kind of financing."
I think maybe the "interest" he is referring to is just the increase in value of the home when it sells? No actual interest on the government portion. You'd only be paying 60% of the mortgage payment, but then have to give up 40% of the sale price when you sell?
From this reading, it sounds like the government is just finding a way for people to qualify for much higher mortgages. Without more supply, this seems like its just going to increase prices.
I'm having Deja Vu here. The article is dated a couple of days ago, but didn't we already discuss this plan?
This is a much better place to be focusing attention and resources. Really streamline making pre-fabs available, affordable and zoned quickly in municipalities should be an easy way to increase housing.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to belsarius For This Useful Post:
