Careful, don’t cut yourself on all that edge.

Real royalty are constrained by a comprehensive legal framework. This nutcase is not. Quite the opposite, in fact — she is actively undermining the actual government.

Great read - the part about meeting Bowen was powerful.

These schemes are very appealing to politicians because they get to have their cake and eat it too, at least for a short time. Their solution will work for a few years and they get to please both the homeowners and homebuyers. They will no longer be in politics by the time housing has doubled or quadrupled in cost, so someone else will take the blame and they can live their comfortable retirement telling everybody that back in their day, they successfully fixed the problem, but contemporary politicians aren’t as smart or skilled as they are.

It eventually will be. If something yields a guaranteed return, the cost to buy that thing increases exponentially. The math is very simple and no amount of politicking can hide it.

Edit: let’s use the classic investing “rule of 72” to illustrate (multiplying the rate of return and number of years to double your capital will total 72). Assuming an annual increase in house value of 5%, which is way below what is happening in Canada right now, the value of a house will double every 14.4 years. Every 29 years (roughly a generation nowadays) the price will quadruple. Grandkids would pay sixteen times more for their grandparents’ house than the grandparents did.

It depends on your definition of “storage”. Like I said, I bought because I didn’t want to give money to a landlord for the rest of my life. The best-case outcome in my mind was breaking even when it comes time to sell. Any more than that necessarily increases housing costs for every subsequent generation.

No, because that government money to fund those programs has to come from somewhere, and it’s almost always debt that future generations end up saddled with, so it’s still making younger folks pay for it either way.

Housing CANNOT be an investment, and I say this as a homeowner whose house value has nearly tripled since I bought it. I bought a house simply because I didn’t want to rent for the rest of my life.

It’s obviously absurd to claim to want affordable housing and refuse to cause prices to go down. If housing is an “investment” then you are by definition fucking over all subsequent homebuyers. Everybody needs a place to live.

I don’t think I’d buy a new laptop with only 8GB RAM, especially if it’s running Windows.

Epic has at least one free game every Friday.

I didn’t know AliExpress sold computer parts. I’d be nervous to buy from there - has anyone here tried?

They operate a bunch of mediocre chain restaurants, not grocery stores - unless I’m missing something?

Did someone say UBI? UBI. UBI, FFS!

Yup. See also the rampant use of ancient busts as profile pics. For some reason they are obsessed with the penis-graffiti-drawing, buttsex-enjoying, poetry-writing ancient Romans (and Greeks), when I’m pretty sure a typical aristocrat of the time would find them boorish and incredibly uneducated simpletons, barely fit to till a field.

Headline should be “private company says government should give it money”

Costco are known for treating their staff unusually well compared to other retailers, so I think that’s fine.

Well, shit. In my defense, is it my fault Montreal recycled such a distinctive name for a street that isn’t even on campus?

Did you read the article? Your own quote says the branch is on campus.

I guess it’s just an innocuous coincidence that you’re saying mysterious “banker” “parasites” are using their “money” and their “lapdogs” to attack a university for… unspecified reasons? in order to prevent themselves from being “exposed”?

Anybody else hear a whistling sound?

Sorry, I’m not following. Why would Scotiabank care about protests at a university?