By Lucas Powers · CBC News

  • MarkG_108@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Important stuff like basic groceries are exempt. Also, there is a tax rebate for those of lower incomes, so its affect is primarily on those who have greater wealth. What’s being discussed is a one percent addition; hence, a penny from moneyed spendthrifts for integrity of services within the city. Sounds good to me.

    • pwnna@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sure groceries are exempt, but there is a limit on how much you can reasonably spend. At the rate housing and asset prices are, there appears no limit on how much your wealth can grow. So instead of using a proxy metric (spending) to tax people with wealth, just go after it directly instead.

      • MarkG_108@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        You’re suggesting a municipal income tax? I doubt that would come to fruition. Again, there is a rebate for those in lower incomes, which I believe addresses your initial concern.

        • pwnna@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Not sure how you got to that conclusion. I said wealth, not income. Wealth inequality is not the same as income inequality and taxing incoming doesn’t fix wealth inequality. Neither does taxing consumption, as most people tend to horde their wealth in some sort of asset.