![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
Canadas family doctors apparently have the shortest residency in the world.
Canadas family doctors apparently have the shortest residency in the world.
Saskatchewan is the birthplace of the NDP (Canada’s social democratic party), universal public healthcare (ever heard of Tommy Douglas?), and historically one of the pillars of the labour movement. It’s now the most conservative province, but still has tons of new immigrants, racial and cultural diversity, good education, and well funded government services. The SK NDP ruled almost continuously from 1971 to 2006.
SK is much more like midwestern farm states that were formerly pro-labour pro-union hotbeds but are now more moderate or conservative, like Iowa and Wisconsin.
I don’t think Canada has an Alabama. As conservative as they are, Alberta is wealthy, highly educated, and they frequently vote for women and POC. They like “small government”, but also have some of the highest paid government workers in the country. I just don’t see much similarity.
I think the comparison to Texas is more apt because they’re both conservative petro states with center left suburban sprawl cities.
I am in support of any measures to make the lives of speculators and investors miserable but even the graphic you share endorses increasing housing supply! Singapore is famously super YIMBY and builds tons of public and market housing.
Frankly, whatever else we do, there is NO solution without significantly more supply. Yes, let’s change our tax code to stamp out speculation, but it will take years, if not decades, to catch up on building enough supply even if we make changes now.
Vacancy is pretty much zero across the major Canadian cities. We have the lowest housing per capita in the G7. There is objectively not enough housing in Canada and it’s absolutely delusional to say otherwise. Is this wishful thinking just a form of NIMBYism? Do you own a SFH and you want to “preserve the character” of your neighbourhood or something?
Where are you getting that building more homes will disproportionately help realtors and speculators? Even non-market housing, like co-ops and social housing? How in the world does that even work?? Why would speculators like that? I hate speculators, but your theory makes no sense whatsoever!
There is not a single urban economist, right or left, who agrees with you. With beliefs like this so widespread, it’s no wonder we don’t enact any policies to actually help with the housing crisis.
What’s the baseline though? If only 10% of non-first movers in a new industry stay in business, being a first mover is still a comparative advantage.
Many vacancy taxes already exist all around the world. There is not a single one that taxes normal short vacancies. It is just false that this increases costs for all landlords. The vast VAST majority of landlords will never pay it.
On the other hand, the increase in supply due to the tax can be noticeable, which has a much bigger effect lowering prices.
If the landlord can increase rent by $100 and the market will bear that, why is the lack of a vacancy tax stopping them? Landlords charge the maximum that the market can bear.
Most vacancy taxes around the world only kick in after a period of vacancy, say 6 months.
Ok I get the message. I will refrain from cross posting as much as possible in the future. I do think this is not like Reddit and this tendency is a self-own for Lemmy where there is much more balkanization by design.
I agree. I hesitated to cross-post this, but someone suggested I do so on the original post.
But that shows a structural problem with the user incentives on Lemmy. The norm of discouraging cross-posting itself means that we have a system that actively discourages people from connecting with others. And if we’re actively incentivized to unsubscribe from multiple similar communities, that’s even worse! These are the opposite of the sort of incentives we should have in a healthy and viable social network.
Good point. I’m not as familiar with other Activity Pub interfaces so I haven’t thought about the implications for Mastodon, etc.
That’s an interesting proposal. I think I need to understand it better. Could you describe to me in what ways this would be better?
I agree. Do you feel this proposal doesn’t address that? My hope is that sibling communities would allow us to keep redundancy and diversity while still enjoying some of the benefits of sometimes coming together.
I don’t doubt that iPhones are harder to repair than they need to be. What I seriously doubt is that other major phone manufacturers are better about building with repairability and longevity in mind. (Remember, the beginning of this comment thread is claiming iPhones are especially disposable.)
That’s a good point. If iPhones are more expensive to repair, then many people will dispose of them rather than repair. But I looked this up, completely expecting you to be right, and it looks like android phones like Samsung are often even more expensive to repair. So I’m still not seeing the justification for the original claim that iPhones are more disposable.
Are Samsung and Sony providing repair kits in “good faith”? I think they’re all horrible, but no one has a problem getting their phones fixed.
I feel like we’re getting old. Is this our “kids these day can’t even change their own oil” moment?
No need to be rude.
Again, youre wrong. Both Apple and Samsung release repair manuals and provide replacement parts. Literally no one has a problem getting either phone repaired.
I’m all for right to repair, but android phones suck for planned obsolescence so acting like they’re better about this is delusional. Don’t give them a pass.
I’m not in favor of investigating things frivolously when there is no reason to think there’s any wrongdoing.