![](/static/213bde8/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
It’s literally the opposite of taxing innovation. If you reinvest your revenue back into improving the company, you don’t pay any tax. If you use the revenue to prop up stock prices instead, expect to pay taxes on the capital gains.
It’s literally the opposite of taxing innovation. If you reinvest your revenue back into improving the company, you don’t pay any tax. If you use the revenue to prop up stock prices instead, expect to pay taxes on the capital gains.
Or they could suck up a bunch of subsidies to get started, then sell their subsidiary to Loblaws. Foreign company gets cash, and Loblaws gets even more market dominance. Everyone wins!
And take the opportunity to electrify the rail network while we’re at it.
If you look here, you’ll see that all the trades involved in housing construction are on the list for fast-track immigration already.
As for training, we may find that it’s more the number of people leaving the trades that is the problem. It’s not that the pay is bad, exactly, but it’s an industry extremely prone to boom/bust cycles. People leave for jobs with some sense of stability. Increasing unionization and enhancing EI might be more cost effective than funding more training.
For a concrete example of what @asterfield@lemmy.world said, if there are 10 workers, and 9 of them are making minimum wage ($17.40 in BC), then the remaining worker would make $192.90/hr. $1772.40/hr if 99/100 make minimum wage.
Median is definitely the better measure, though no single measure is adequate to answer the question of whether Canadians are better off than they were last year.