A litany of anecdotal examples to “prove” the point
The editorial (July 31, 2024) claims Canada is not broken, yet in the same edition we are told that the Supreme Court that Canada breached treaty obligations. May I opine that this is at the least a malfunction?
The federal government imposes a carbon tax on Canadians when heating their homes and travelling ostensibly for the purpose of discouraging the use of carbon fuels, yet boasts that it redistributes ninety percent of that money. One would hope that such a tax would be spent on infrastructure toward electrification and lowering the cost of practical transportation alternatives. Is this not a form of broken?
705 area code residents might want to give thought to this especially in a region where the economy and well being of its people heavily rely on tourism dollars. If tourists can not travel, there will be no tourism. In the last three years two large gas stations have opened on highways 400 and 69, yet do not provide electric car charging facilities. Why wasn’t the carbon tax spent on providing infrastructure to not only encourage but to make electric vehicles practical? Is this not a form of broken?
Now a group of faculty lounge theoreticians has the ear of our Prime Minister, recommending that home equity be taxed as novel solution to government debt. How is taxing away the one safe investment Canadians can make, their retirement savings in an already highly taxed jurisdiction- not broken? To break even, now home owners will have to ask for a higher sale price to wind up whole after taxes. This only worsens the housing affordability crisis we have. How is this not broken?
A minority government propped up by a third party, completely out of touch with reality can still rule as if it had a large majority. How is this not broken?
Ronald Kay
Assiginack Township
