You say all that, while they continue to push for and in many cases successfully push through bills that do help the working class.
You're welcome to your own opinions, but realize that when they aren't actually based on anything they likely aren't true.
This opinion piece reads like a high school paper.
What a waste of my time reading it.
The closest working class party we have at the federal level is the NDP, while the Conservatives are farthest.
If you at all care about the working class you shouldn't ever vote conservative.
I certainly miss self checkouts. They were always faster, and I never had significant problems with the.
Losing self checkout at the grocery store has been especially painful. It was so much more efficient to grab items from my cart and pack them directly, the extra step of passing them through a cashier causes me to forget what items I haven't bagged yet, and makes it that much harder to group items while I'm checking out, which then makes it a little harder when unloading at home. That one change has added 15-20 minutes extra overall time commitment to any large grocery run, and I'm pretty bitter about it
The Beer Store isn't nanny state, it's not owned by the Ontario government.
IMI that is part of why the Ontario owned LCBO actually has a decent selection compared to the beer store. The beer store has a near monopoly with no reason to improve service, while we in Ontario actually own the LCBO and it has a vested interest in decent service.
So while the beer store sucks, it's not likely that beer selection will get any better if corner stores started carrying beers (just look at Quebec, even before moving to Ontario I often still bought my beer at the LCBO because they had a much better selection)
If Ford is able to do this while not reducing the tex income we make from the sales, I don't really care. But I won't hold my breath on that one
That isn't the definition of working class, or middle class
The carbon pricing redistributes the earnings back to people.
This then does let people have an impact on climate change by influencing them to choose products that produce less carbon and therefore appear to cost less.
The genius is that the price difference is artificial, if on average people in the province choose the more expensive option, they will make back the difference quarterly.
As is the system only really penalizes people who consistently choose the more carbon inefficient options and do it a lot.
Did you not read the earlier comments in this thread? That very point was already addressed.
The point the article is trying to make is that after selling the house, even after mortgage is settled, these homeowners have a lot of cash. Much more than their renter peers who are in the same position (houseless) and trying to find something they can afford.
The point above seems obvious when it's put like that, but it's still hard for people to grasp.
This is why the article argues that people who are in the privileged position of having huge equity in their house need to also consider what that does to their wealth class, even if they themselves don't believe it. A lot of home owners who have had a house for 10-15 years (and even more who paid off their house years ago) have no clue how much harder it has gotten for middle class income people to buy houses.
I don't agree with that take.
Those house owners likely fall into upper middle class rather than middle class.
Another way to look at it. Depending on who you ask middle class roughly covers household income of about 75k-150k
If one of those home owners sold their home and made 1 million in equity, that money could be expected to make them ~50k a year. For many current home owners that hypothetical raise would push them above the middle-class bracket.
For anyone who purchased a house in the last 5ish years sure. Much longer than that and they are sitting on a whole lot of equity.
Yes if they sold the house they would have 1/2 - 1 million dollars in cash and be homeless. But that's a lot of dollars better than all the other people who currently also don't own a home and don't have all that cash.
Which is sorta the point the article is trying to make.
A lot of people do love in dense areas in cities though. That's what makes them dense.
And programs like the carbon pricing makes those places more attractive to build denser housing.
EVs don't even need to be the only alternative, if the carbon pricing is encouraging someone to buy a more fuel efficient ICE vehicle, the incentive is still working.
I still have such a hard time understanding how people are calling the carbon pricing setup a stick, most of us are getting more money back from the program. Yes overall oil prices worldwide have gone up since the program started, but international oil prices aren't impacted by Canadian carbon pricing policy...
Criticising only works if you have an argument to back you up. When you're just making things up you're just talking shit.
People don't really take "talking shit" seriously, which is why you're getting the reaction you are.
If you have anything substantial to back up anything you're saying, people are generally happy to listen. But the reality is you're regurgitating the same fake points that we've all heard and have been disproven dozens of times.