5 ms·
> The bulk of that — $2 billion — is going into a fund that will aim to provide access to computing capabilities and technical infrastructure. What else should
by abdullahkhalids 3y ago
> The bulk of that — $2 billion — is going into a fund that will aim to provide access to computing capabilities and technical infrastructure.
What else should the Canadian government do? How do other more successful countries use such money to jumpstart some industrial sector?
- barfard 3y agotax cuts instead of subsidies might do better
- abdullahkhalids 3y agoInterestingly, last year, Canada introduced tax credits to support the clean energy technology sector [1]. Its "total over $60 billion over the coming ten years" [1]. But there is also some actual money in the same package. So I wonder, what the thinking of the government is in deciding when tax credits and when direct subsidy. [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2023/04/minister-guilbeault-highlights-the-big-five-new-clean-investment-tax-credits-in-budget-2023-to-support-sustainable-made-in-canada-clean-economy.html https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/202...
- depereo 3y agoTax cuts are used more often when the government wants to see more private investment into an industry. Not really an issue with 'AI' right now. Direct subsidy is more common when the government wants to see a particular outcome; then they can more easily steer those funds to realize it.
- 1attice 3y agocitation needed.
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoI would say not necessarily cuts, but at least tax reforms to de-risk equity compensation. Canada doesn't have an 83b election equivalent, and it's easy to end up losing a lot of money through taxes on illiquid stock options that end up amounting to more than the stock options are eventually worth. An alternative, for example, would be to allow paying taxes on stock options "in-kind": have the option to give the government a share of the stock options themselves, rather than paying that percentage in dollars on a valuation that you can't actually sell them for.
- reducesuffering 3y agoThey should prioritize making Kitchener and Toronto have a very affordable high quality of life *cough* build housing *cough*, so that UW students will stay in the country making businesses rather than emigrating for a better quality of life in the US.
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoThis exactly. A sizeable slice of talent at US tech companies are Canadian expats who realized that ironically, the only way they'd ever be able to afford to live in Canada someday would be to move to the States for their career.
- personjerry 3y agoBeing a Canadian, having worked in SF, London, and Toronto, this actually seems like a reasonable approach. It's certainly hard to compete on wages but a lot of people do appreciate Canada and life here, and cutting these costs would go a long way.
- rdsnsca 3y agoHousing is a provinivcal responibility
- reducesuffering 3y agoIt is the state’s responsibility to intervene when provinces have neglected or are unable to support their people. The % of income a median Canadian has to spend on housing is crisis level.
- andy99 3y agoThe premise that they need to borrow $2.4B and spend it on something is incorrect.
- skeeter2020 3y agoInstead of giving Microsoft $$$ for compute, and other loosely-aligned, established companies (your Nortels, RIMs and SNC Lavalins) a bunch of hand-outs, they could fund primary research that will actually add long-term value, address skills shortage with immigration support & accompanying challenges (like housing) and stop taxing the sh!t out of both companies and individuals.
- AwaAwa 3y agoThis sounds sensible. Which means it's off the table. Instead ArriveCan part deux would be a better money pit.