BC Lags Behind Other Provinces in Life Satisfaction

[opendoor]

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.

Perhaps not on the $250K+ group, but BC has the lowest income tax of any province for people earning under $175K.

And you have to earn $140K before you even hit a 25% average tax rate. That's not far off even states with no income tax (22.3% average tax rate on $140K CAD) and well below places like California (28.6% average rate) or New York (30.8%).

And that doesn't even get into the insane property tax rates most of the lower tax states have. I'd be paying $24K a year in property tax on my house at Texas tax rates vs. the $4K I pay in BC.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by opendoor

And that doesn't even get into the insane property tax rates most of the lower tax states have. I'd be paying $24K a year in property tax on my house at Texas tax rates vs. the $4K I pay in BC.

To be fair, $1.5M buys you a much different house in the Houston, Dallas or Austin suburbs compared to the GVR.

That's not far off even states with no income tax (22.3% average tax rate on $140K CAD) and well below places like California (28.6% average rate) or New York (30.8%).

For singles; but the US implements income splitting so tax rates for couples with disparate incomes can be quite a bit lower.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

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



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



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?

First you're in luck, I don't make the rules, or have any input, so people can shoot up where ever they like.


Second, it's going to cost heaps of money no matter what, I'm willing to accept that my taxes go towards whatever the hell stops people from.shooting up wherever they please. Be that a public health intervention or criminal, just not the status quo.


Third, what's with the if you believe in this then that BS. NCR is fine, so long as it has nuance. I'll leave that for the lawyers.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Third, what's with the if you believe in this then that BS. NCR is fine, so long as it has nuance. I'll leave that for the lawyers.

So maybe leave the public health policies to public health experts?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by rubecube

So maybe leave the public health policies to public health experts?

Seeing as how no one is getting paid to post here but bingo, we are leaving every topic to the experts. Still is fun and low stakes to talk about.

[afc wimbledon]

well I'm not an expert but I consider myself at least semi pro, the problem with any and all discussion about issues around drugs, homelessness crime and poverty in general is that both sides of the opinions are polarized and wrong, the right wing 'lock em all up' doesnt work and is fearfully expensive although right wingers never seem to understand it costs millions to keep people locked up for years.

The left wing veiw that addicts and homeless are basically just the same as us and if they just had a place to live and safe drugs they'd be fine is equally rubbish, all people need boundaries and rules and not adding some level of control is basically just killing people due to neglect while also creating a magnet for people with health and social issues where their problems become magnified and they are preyed upon by pimps and dealers

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

So maybe leave the public health policies to public health experts?

Because they're doing a bang-up job at the moment?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Locke

Because they're doing a bang-up job at the moment?

Let's hear your proposals then. What would you do differently to prevent overdose deaths during a toxic drug supply crisis?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The left wing veiw that addicts and homeless are basically just the same as us.

Literally no one in this thread has said this. I've said that providing housing and support services are integral to reducing the problem. I have also consistently followed up everything I've suggested with "there are downsides to this approach" and/or "there is no silver bullet to this problem."

The good news is, in the last few months, we have seen some declines in overdose deaths, particularly among younger cohorts.

Obviously, it's way too early to draw conclusions, but hopefully these numbers keep trending in the right direction.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024...C%20Gov%20News

Preliminary reporting from the BC Coroners Service confirms that at least 177 people in British Columbia were lost to toxic, unregulated drugs in February.

The total number of lives lost reflects an 11% decrease from the number investigated by the Coroners Service in February 2023, and a 12% decrease from the number reported in January 2024. However, February is also the 20th consecutive month in which there have been at least 175 deaths suspected to be caused by the toxic-drug supply reported by the agency. An average of 6.1 lives were lost per day in February 2024.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/bi..._reporting.pdf

The 198 suspected unregulated drug deaths in January represents a 14% decrease from the number of deaths in January 2023 (229) and a 10% decrease from the number of deaths in December 2023 (221).

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Literally no one in this thread has said this. I've said that providing housing and support services are integral to reducing the problem. I have also consistently followed up everything I've suggested with "there are downsides to this approach" and/or "there is no silver bullet to this problem."

The good news is, in the last few months, we have seen some declines in overdose deaths, particularly among younger cohorts.

Obviously, it's way too early to draw conclusions, but hopefully these numbers keep trending in the right direction.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024...C%20Gov%20News



https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/bi..._reporting.pdf

I was not commenting on this thread specifically but the players on the DTES I have to deal with periodically, there have been a few long running themes with advocacy groups down there from the days of John Turvey to the current, I am fed up to the back teeth of being told the DTES is 'a community' it isnt it's just a killing ground, services and people should be moved out of there if possible not concentrated, I have spent decades watching kids getting drawn into the scene because they were/are sent there, I have sat in countless welfare and band offices watching them cut mildly effed up kids a bus ticket to go downtown 'because they have services for you down there' only to bury the kid 6 months to a year later when what used to be a manageable drug problem becomes full blown addiction.

The DTES is romanticised by the left as much as it is demonised by the right, I hate the DTES, if I could bulldoze the whole area I would, it has killed hundreds of kids I worked with and I have the ashes of one of my lads on top of my bookshelf who overdosed in a shelter on Hastings, it is just an abattoir for the poor and mentally ill, it's a ghetto that we on the left should decry and move heaven and earth to get rid off

[afc wimbledon]

sorry I'm ranting a bit, just had to retrain for my Naloxone certificate, I spend most of my days scared witless for my kids

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I was not commenting on this thread specifically but the players on the DTES I have to deal with periodically, there have been a few long running themes with advocacy groups down there from the days of John Turvey to the current, I am fed up to the back teeth of being told the DTES is 'a community' it isnt it's just a killing ground, services and people should be moved out of there if possible not concentrated, I have spent decades watching kids getting drawn into the scene because they were/are sent there, I have sat in countless welfare and band offices watching them cut mildly effed up kids a bus ticket to go downtown 'because they have services for you down there' only to bury the kid 6 months to a year later when what used to be a manageable drug problem becomes full blown addiction.

The DTES is romanticised by the left as much as it is demonised by the right, I hate the DTES, if I could bulldoze the whole area I would, it has killed hundreds of kids I worked with and I have the ashes of one of my lads on top of my bookshelf who overdosed in a shelter on Hastings, it is just an abattoir for the poor and mentally ill, it's a ghetto that we on the left should decry and move heaven and earth to get rid off

That's fair. Definitely some of the advocacy groups go a bit too far. I get not dehumanizing the people who live there, but those areas (DTES, Surrey, Pandora corridor, etc.) are horrorshows.

It's also a shame that the DTES dominates so much of the media coverage. Where I work, I end up doing a fair amount of consulting/engagement with treatment centres and addicts in rural and remote regions. Things are even more dire there because they have dick all for support services and, outside of PG, the province basically pretends they don't exist.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Let's hear your proposals then. What would you do differently to prevent overdose deaths during a toxic drug supply crisis?

All I'm saying is that the standard 'Appeals to Authority' in order to let 'The Professionals' figure it out hasn't been going so well. So maybe we need to be more open-minded.

"The War on Drugs" didnt work and "Free Drugs" doesnt seem to be working so maybe we shouldn't act as Ned Flanders' parents.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Locke

All I'm saying is that the standard 'Appeals to Authority' in order to let 'The Professionals' figure it out hasn't been going so well. So maybe we need to be more open-minded.

"The War on Drugs" didnt work and "Free Drugs" doesnt seem to be working so maybe we shouldn't act as Ned Flanders' parents.

Decrim has only been in place since January 2023. Meanwhile, we've had less than four years of safe supply and the uptake has been incredibly slow due to the hurdles people have to jump over to access it. I'm happy to explain some of the hurdles if people are genuinely interested. We do know from the B.C. Coroner's Service that people who access safe supply are generally not dying from it.

Considering how long it takes government to implement, staff, and then adjust programs, don't you think it's just a wee bit premature to declare these measures failures?

[FlamesAddiction]

I am behind the logic of decriminalization for possession. That alone doesn't solve the problem though.

I would prefer that decriminalization for possession be combined with severe punishments for people caught importing and trafficking. Like really severe to the point of being shocking.

I don't think there should be punitive measures against addicts or people falling into the temptation, but the people who enable them need to be caught and taken out of society. I would like to see people caught for possession not charged, but they should also still have to explain where they got the drugs so that the police can investigate and catch the people further up the chain. Just letting them go with no questions asked doesn't help.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I am behind the logic of decriminalization for possession. That alone doesn't solve the problem though.

I would prefer that decriminalization for possession be combined with severe punishments for people caught importing and trafficking. Like really severe to the point of being shocking.

This is really difficult to do, as it depends on what the Criminal Code and the SCC have to say about it.

I would like to see people caught for possession not charged, but they should also still have to explain where they got the drugs so that the police can investigate and catch the people further up the chain. Just letting them go with no questions asked doesn't help.

Again, it's not a bad idea in theory, but doesn't really work logistically. It relies on the idea that addicts know who they're buying their drugs from. You'd also have to implement punishments for those who don't cooperate, which just ends up with putting users in jail again.

[Winsor_Pilates]

B.C. to require hospitals have designated spaces for patient illicit drug use, health minister says

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...substance-use/

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Decrim has only been in place since January 2023. Meanwhile, we've had less than four years of safe supply and the uptake has been incredibly slow due to the hurdles people have to jump over to access it. I'm happy to explain some of the hurdles if people are genuinely interested. We do know from the B.C. Coroner's Service that people who access safe supply are generally not dying from it.

Considering how long it takes government to implement, staff, and then adjust programs, don't you think it's just a wee bit premature to declare these measures failures?

Sorry Rube, but decrim has essentially been in effect for the last 10-15 years. Simple possession hasn’t been enforced for a long long time.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

B.C. to require hospitals have designated spaces for patient illicit drug use, health minister says

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...substance-use/

Behind a paywall. Do you have access to the full article?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Sorry Rube, but decrim has essentially been in effect for the last 10-15 years. Simple possession hasn’t been enforced for a long long time.

I personally know people who have been arrested for simple possession. It may not have been enforced on a wide scale, but it didn't completely disappear.