Ignoring the complex but important political views between generations is not a good way to understand economies or politics. The Boomers had an impact, mostly negative, and we should talk about it so we can figure out what reform would look like.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
The tragedy in discussing housing fixes is that the real future likely holds a slow (already happening) then suddenly quick eroding of available jobs for the population across almost all industries due to automation with more unemployed than anyone alive has seen.
Followed by a catastrophic housing crash, then a new society filled with mass unemployment, violence and uprisings against governments and anyone that has money left.
This has been the refrain since Henry Ford and the onset of the industrial revolution: automation will replace jobs and unemployment will skyrocket. Yet unemployment continues to find new lows, and standards of living keep rising. It is easy to see that jobs that will be lost due to technological advancement, but it is impossible to see the new jobs that new technologies and advancements create. But create they do.
There should be plenty of opportunities providing services to all those old, fat, wealthy, retired boomers - come on, millennials, THINK!
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Ignoring the complex but important political views between generations is not a good way to understand economies or politics. The Boomers had an impact, mostly negative, and we should talk about it so we can figure out what reform would look like.
lol
you should have seen this ####ing planet before boomers came along
This is true but it isn’t based on the cost the city incurs as a result of property size. It’s based on the perceived value to a perspective buyer. It also doesn’t account for the class of home either. If you look at a 450k inner city condo vs a 450k suburban home they pay the same property tax. A person who chooses the 450k condo has less impact on the city but that isn’t reflected in tax rate.
What I want the system to do is reflect cost to the city in a component of city taxes but not just be punitive on people who can’t afford to live closer.
Why does location matter? Isn’t that just a function of the ability to afford and zoning restrictions. I’m not seeing a cost to the city based on where the impact occurs. The total acreage of the city remains unchanged.
Because location is desirable, and the people that can afford to purchase it can presumably afford to pay more.
Why does income matter for income tax rates? Shouldn't we all pay the same for receiving the same services?
Ignoring the complex but important political views between generations is not a good way to understand economies or politics. The Boomers had an impact, mostly negative, and we should talk about it so we can figure out what reform would look like.
Please expand on this for us.
__________________
The only thing better then a glass of beer is tea with Ms McGill
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
Ignoring the complex but important political views between generations is not a good way to understand economies or politics. The Boomers had an impact, mostly negative, and we should talk about it so we can figure out what reform would look like.
Because location is desirable, and the people that can afford to purchase it can presumably afford to pay more.
Why does income matter for income tax rates? Shouldn't we all pay the same for receiving the same services?
Yes totally agree, there should be a progressive portion to property tax. I was misreading your post as saying that the location of the sprawl should change the tax rate on sprawl.
My dream city funding model would be a lot square footage tax, an income tax and a sales tax.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Yes totally agree, there should be a progressive portion to property tax. I was misreading your post as saying that the location of the sprawl should change the tax rate on sprawl.
My dream city funding model would be a lot square footage tax, an income tax and a sales tax.
And tolls for driving into Calgary.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
What was once a good thread has been kind of mashed into a big mess.
Just to recap, we want to make life in the ‘burbs more expensive by launching taxes and increasing tolls to access the core but then meanwhile at the same time we need to be building more housing (where people won’t buy them because now they’re too expensive) and lastly as long as we remember that it’s all the other peoples fault than all is well?
There are shades of truth to all sides of this debt debate. People in general do spend money like complete idiots, let’s just be honest about that one. And guess who spends money like idiots? Men, women, old people, young people, middle aged people, all ethnicities, all genders and all people. Literally every demographic has idiots with spending problems.
So, financial literacy should be a key core course or at the very least a math module required in high school. And I’m not talking that BS Calm course where you took a quiz and then it told you your career should be a florist or whatever. A real actual serious course required for graduation that teaches you such things as:
- money is real
- debt is real
- borrowing more now means you have to pay it back later (hint- it’s not free)
- as SNL puts it, don’t buy #### you don’t need
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
