Pretty sure it's the same guy as this picture: https://lemmy.ca/post/23106179
Yes the male did do this shortly after this shot.
I see we have moved the goal post to a "technical recession" now.
Ah so the health care system is so bad we have to fight for it now. At this point it is only a matter of time until they make us pay for it. Then it'll be further enshittified. Things are great 😐
I went to the store a week ago when this was implemented. There were 30% off items everywhere. Presumably people were not buying them and Loblaws had to throw stuff out. They are backing down not because they "listened to feedback" but probably because they are losing money. The greed wins again...
It also tears significantly in my experience, which is pretty unusable....
Some people work part time tho because the companies don't want to pay benefits....
Yup this is basically it. I even have people arguing with me here the moment i mention the word property tax. Unfortunately a lot of people would vote against their own long term interest in terms of services, community well being etc. for short term capital gains (and in the case of real estate, that's tax free, lol).
This is perhaps the greatest problem facing us in the 21st century democracy as the world has become more and more complex and the cause and effects of things becomes ever more debatable.
Yeah but it is literally the biggest thing we should do as mentioned by the report that would address almost 40% of the problem. I'm not sure why are we are debating that we shouldn't do this considering that property tax rates are 3x lower in GTA than everywhere else in Ontario, and that it fixes a large part of the problem.
Basically, before we take the initial, and most impactful step that is uncomfortable but necessary, we are proposing future things to do that is less painful sounding but doesn't have clear returns. We all know why: people don't want to pay more and want to make it someone else's problem instead. Even the report acknowledges this political challenge. This conversation is basically the evidence for that.
Not sure how you got to that conclusion. I said wealth, not income. Wealth inequality is not the same as income inequality and taxing incoming doesn't fix wealth inequality. Neither does taxing consumption, as most people tend to horde their wealth in some sort of asset.
Exactly. If anything we need to catch up to make sure all of us home owners pay our fair share.
Sure groceries are exempt, but there is a limit on how much you can reasonably spend. At the rate housing and asset prices are, there appears no limit on how much your wealth can grow. So instead of using a proxy metric (spending) to tax people with wealth, just go after it directly instead.
Sales tax uniformly applies to everyone by the same absolute amount but relatively affects poorer people more. The city should just raise property taxes instead. May help reduce the housing cost as well which would make the city more affordable.
Unfortunately not... They tend to not venture too close and not as common as the goose
Yeah. The alternative is to move to a deque instead of a vector (as deque doesnt require move or copy) which works for me as I don't need random access, only fast insert and iteration.
I should try this with c++20 and how it does in error messages. Right now I'm on 17...