Someone

Imposed arbitration is bullshit.

Like, trying to get those who primarily sell to working class folks to see how raising the minimum wage actually benefits them, because it means that all of their customers have more money to spend is nigh impossible. All they see is that they'll have to raise prices, and it makes them even more hostile toward their employees.

Yeah this argument never really made sense to me. Unless your product's only input cost is labour (which I can't think of a single job that would apply to, let alone close to minimum wage job) your costs should only have to go up by a fraction of the minimum wage increase. This would leave a minimum wage worker/customer better off after buying your product than they would have if it was cheaper.

But isn't the capital gains tax only on the new capital gained? What you're saying actually sounds like a decent argument against sales taxes.

the party is taking a stand against a policy that disproportionately affects wealthy people and big corporations.

What about every single other policy that's even tangentially related to affordability that disproportionately affects everyone who isn't wealthy and small businesses?

Producers would also be able to package multiple products together as long as the package is still under the 30-gram limit, and products inside also meet packaging requirements. The change would mean producers could sell higher quantities of edibles in one outer package.

Hopefully this means I can get something like a 6 pack of drinks.

I think the number one factor there is real estate. You can't start a farm out of your apartment and restaurants can't easily exist out in the boonies where rent is cheaper.

Assuming you're talking about a full service retirement home and not just a 55+ building $5000/mo seems like a good deal to me, at least from a BC perspective. You'd be looking at almost $2000 just to rent anywhere, you'd be lucky to have a meal cooked for you for $10, $20 if it's decent quality, that's another $900-1800/month. Once you consider utilities you're pretty close to what a new renter would be paying if they refused to cook for themselves.

I mean it's worth it for the cool knives alone.

Let's be real, those of us who can't afford housing can't afford a jacked up F350.

The thought of an across-the-board regulation based rent cap never crossed my mind, but that actually could be effective and fair. If there was some kind of easy to understand formula based on the unit, potential landlords would easily be able to calculate whether it makes financial sense instead of simply cutting costs and squeezing as much rent out as possible. There wouldn't be an incentive to kick people out (can't jack the rent) but there would be one to keep it maintained/updated since they'd be competing on everything but price. Honestly, I wouldn't mind if my rent went up a bit if it meant my unit would be properly maintained or I had the freedom to move somewhere similar without doubling my rent.

Edit: you could make it more enticing to the current landlords by easing some renter protections, like making it much easier to remove problem tenants

Yeah, I do think the assisted living industry would be forced to adjust though. It's not like the real estate market in general, if the majority of their potential buyers simply don't have enough money it's not like they can pivot to other demographics or attract wealthy people from outside the country.

If things aren't corrected, it won't be long before a whole generation of new seniors is cash poor with no house to sell.

It really sounds like the issue there is just another subset of housing (un)affordability.