3 ms·
> This means that my family's wealth has increased by $75,000 per year just from owning our home. That's more than the median income in Canada! This is a patte
by epups 3y ago
> This means that my family's wealth has increased by $75,000 per year just from owning our home. That's more than the median income in Canada!
This is a pattern we also see in Europe. Homeowners, largely older, get richer and richer by just standing still, while at the same time controlling politics so that fiscal policy supports this and new construction is made expensive by regulations.
It surprises me that Canada, with a relatively younger population, has similar issues.
- guidedlight 3y agoIs the same issue in Australia. However it increasing has become a supply and demand issue, where housing supply has not kept up with immigration policy.
- hylaride 3y agoThe same is in New Zealand as well. Canada, NZ, and AU all have a points-based immigration system, which awards points to education and skills in white-collar areas. Over 40 years these systems have grown the population, but has kept trades out. The result is it's now more expensive than ever to build. It's not the only reason, but it sure contributes. All three of these countries have insane housing prices.
- dukeyukey 3y agoUh, Australia imports loads of blue-collar labour under their points system.
- bawolff 3y agoIts kind of true of capitalism in general that its easier to get ahead by owning valuable things rather than being an employee. I think that would be true of any economy that is growing, which is most of them.
- tmnvix 3y agoEarned vs unearned income. Taxes on unearned income (i.e. income from simply owning something) have eased over time relative to taxes on earned income (i.e. income from actual productive activity). Those that argue against wealth taxes on the basis that they discourage hard work and productive activity are often hypocrites in my opinion. They are usually more interested in maintaining a system that has a tendency towards concentration of wealth instead of promoting a system that encourages positive contribution to overall wealth (i.e. societal progress). Property markets are a glaring example of this.
- medvezhenok 3y agoSort of. Picketty writes that it’s about the capital to labor replacement ratio. If you can replace labor with more capital (I.e. robots, automation, tools/equipment - etc), then wealth is going to tend to concentrate. With the speed of technological innovation today, this is largely the case.
- bawolff 3y ago> Taxes on unearned income (i.e. income from simply owning something) have eased over time relative to taxes on earned income (i.e. income from actual productive activity). Over what time period? Canada didn't even have capital gains taxes pre 1972.
- Tiktaalik 3y agoLooking a bit more recently, after Canada added capital gains taxes, Chretien cut the inclusion rate by 50%.