News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

I oppose any kind of public assistance for home ownership. I think we should rather invest a lot more in social housing or rent-geared-to-income housing. I have a friend who is 69 and cannot retire, because you cannot apply unless you are already destitute, and then you still have to wait 8 to 10 years for an apartment.
 
Bayer said:
I oppose any kind of public assistance for home ownership. I think we should rather invest a lot more in social housing or rent-geared-to-income housing. I have a friend who is 69 and cannot retire, because you cannot apply unless you are already destitute, and then you still have to wait 8 to 10 years for an apartment.
Click to expand...

I will add the proviso - support for regular, private-for profit homes. Home owner in and on itself isn't a bad thing to aspire to - and there are local and international alternate models.

AoD
 
Northern Light said:
I would like to also see mortgages structured with 25-year amortization limits and clear requirement that on a first mortgage a buyer must agree to a 5-year term (or shorter if they are able top pay it off), and be a 45% equity holder at the 5-year mark.
Click to expand...
How does this work? If you buy an $800,000 house with a 25% down payment and get a mortgage at 5% amortized over 25 years, you will be roughly a 33% equity holder at the end of the first five year term (you'd still owe $530K and hold $270K in equity, assuming for simplicity no increase in the value of the house). You'd have to have found an extra $90K to get you up to owning 45% of the equity ($360K).

Following the regular payment schedule, you'd cross 45% sometime in your 11th year.
 
Last edited:
thettctransitfanatic said:
Conservative platform is out. Last party to release a platform.

Click to expand...

There are a smattering of good ideas buried in that doc........... which is loooong, one area they didn't need to copy Liberal habits...

But the bad ideas that will never fly........are quite abundant.......

Defunding Englsh CBC TV is needlessly controversial and stupid.

But its the tough on crime stuff that includes the most problems......it has a series of proposals that aside from not being grounded in evidence, would almost certainly fail their first constitutional test.

Life sentences for Fentanyl trafficking. No chance.

Three strikes laws, which the U.S. has largely been un-doing as it was expensive, resulted in severe overcrowding of prisons, and wasn't effective, not to mention terribly unjust in some cases. I don't see that passing
constitutional muster here either.

Jailing people in homeless encampments if they've been cleared repeatedly.

If a convicted murderer withholds information on where the bodies are.........they can be held indefinitely........ no way does that pass muster and it directly conflicts with the right not to self incriminate.

Just so much junk.

****

There's a proposal to expand the port at Churchhilll and make it an icebreaker base. While I'm open to this in theory, there's a very sensitive whale estuary/calving ground nearby to keep in mind. Also the Hudson's Bay polar bear population is reliant on intact sea ice.

****

Its a shame that some genuinely decent ideas are buried in a morass of really, really bad ones.

I also find some of the costing assumptions suspect.........
 
I am told a higher voter turnout doesn't usually favour the Conservatives...

...but I am not sure I would stake anything on that. So please get out and vote when you can! And don't do what the Dems did in the last US Election and stay home! >.<
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
UtakataNoAnnex said:
I am told a higher voter turnout doesn't usually favour the Conservatives...

...but I am not sure I would stake anything on that. So please get out and vote when you can! And don't do what the Dems did in the last US Election and stay home! >.<
Click to expand...

Generally, the conventional wisdom is that higher than normal turnout favours the candidate that represents change, which should be the conservatives here.

But to determine whether turnout is "higher than normal" you need something to compare it to. Since we have never had advance voting on a holiday weekend before, it's pretty tough to say whether 7.3 is more than you would have expected or less.
 
Bayer said:
A referendum every time a tax increase is proposed? What nonsense.
Click to expand...
Ontario has that law. So now when the Ontario government passes a bill that includes a tax increase, they don't actually have to hold a referendum, but they do have to include in the new law a provision stating that the tax increase applies notwithstanding anything set out in the Taxpayer Protection Act of 1999.

It's one of the dumber laws we have on the books.
 
Northern Light said:
There are a smattering of good ideas buried in that doc........... which is loooong, one area they didn't need to copy Liberal habits...

But the bad ideas that will never fly........are quite abundant.......

Defunding Englsh CBC TV is needlessly controversial and stupid.

But its the tough on crime stuff that includes the most problems......it has a series of proposals that aside from not being grounded in evidence, would almost certainly fail their first constitutional test.

Life sentences for Fentanyl trafficking. No chance.

Three strikes laws, which the U.S. has largely been un-doing as it was expensive, resulted in severe overcrowding of prisons, and wasn't effective, not to mention terribly unjust in some cases. I don't see that passing
constitutional muster here either.

Jailing people in homeless encampments if they've been cleared repeatedly.

If a convicted murderer withholds information on where the bodies are.........they can be held indefinitely........ no way does that pass muster and it directly conflicts with the right not to self incriminate.

Just so much junk.

****

There's a proposal to expand the port at Churchhilll and make it an icebreaker base. While I'm open to this in theory, there's a very sensitive whale estuary/calving ground nearby to keep in mind. Also the Hudson's Bay polar bear population is reliant on intact sea ice.

****

Its a shame that some genuinely decent ideas are buried in a morass of really, really bad ones.

I also find some of the costing assumptions suspect.........
Click to expand...
The crime related stuff is going to lead to a massive increase in the prison population in a country which is already severely undersupplied on prison capacity. And no discussions on increasing prison capacity either.

The Conservative policies on housing affordability will likely do far more for middle class Canadians on housing affordability than anything in the Liberal platform - but definitely a lot of weak points elsewhere. The budgeting of it all is also all off with a lot of bad math going on. A lot of the tax cut promises are going to cut a lot more revenue than they are assuming.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top