(Thread IKs:
ZShakespeare)
|
Also "middle aged struggling musician living with my parents but I somehow scraped enough to buy a Toronto condo" screams "My parents gave me money to buy a condo" because what loving mortgage are they going to qualify for if they're making less than minimum wage including rental income.
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 14:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:48 |
|
|
https://www.thebeaverton.com/2018/0...eir-inheritance
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 15:54
|
|
|
Less Fat Luke posted:What a crock of poo poo, this being Canada they'd just evict the tenants, move in and stay the minimum for it to be a primary residence and then sell it for no cap gains. yeah they kinda give it away that they don't understand how capital gains work, which checks out. I spent too much time on Friday and Saturday explaining to people that they won't have to worry about this EVER because they have nowhere near enough assets to meet that benchmark (or because they're things like principal residences, which are exempt)
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 15:57
|
|
|
There's also a lot of straight misinformation out there. I've seen more than a few places claim the new percentage of gains is 75% instead of the 67% it actually is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 15:59
|
|
|
Wow, why would the large media corporations be misinforming the public on capital gains info?!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 18:01
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Behold, the glory of Globe and Mail letters to the editor: This lady doesn't know what capital gains taxes are or how they work. They've just added a higher capital gains tax bracket over $250,000, so unless she's charging significantly more than that in rent every year she's not going to pay a cent more of capital gains tax until she sells the condo. Even then she's only paying more taxes if she sells it for a profit higher than $250,000.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
We desperately need to add personal finance classes to the high school curriculum. People in this country are amazingly stupid with money and finances, the vast majority not even understanding how even just your basic taxes work. e: Yes I know educating people on this makes them less susceptible to Conservative talking points and likely never going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 22:29
|
|
|
Treat housing as an investment and reap what you sow IMO, I wouldn’t shed any tears over this even if she were right about the tax situation. The government is going to do everything possible to protect house prices instead of focusing on things that would actually benefit everyone, homeowner or not… Build enough housing for everyone, bulk up safety nets so no one lives in poverty (CPP/OAS/disability/EI/mincome please/etc), and who cares what houses are worth?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2024 23:35
|
|
|
kaom posted:Treat housing as an investment and reap what you sow IMO, I wouldn’t shed any tears over this even if she were right about the tax situation. Lol at the new disability benefit being gently caress all, no time soon, for not even many disabled people. I looked at the loving national post earlier and even they were like “what the gently caress is this”
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 03:32
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:We desperately need to add personal finance classes to the high school curriculum. People in this country are amazingly stupid with money and finances, the vast majority not even understanding how even just your basic taxes work. At some point they'll do this and make "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" the textbook.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 16:56
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:At some point they'll do this and make "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" the textbook. Finding a rich findom daddy is also my retirement plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 17:08
|
|
|
I feel like there was a few articles some years ago about people doing what that woman did, buying a condo as an investment that they didn't live in, but the justification in those cases was that it was more like as a hedge for a renter with a good rent controlled apartment in case they ever got evicted. Essentially the notion being that if you've been in a rent controlled apartment for long enough you're now renting below market so it's a Bad With Money move to move to a "higher rent" unless you absolutely have to. The angle here with the woman living in her parents' basement is a weird one tho. It's probably rhetorical flourish and she has a nice independent basement suite in her parents house that her parents would otherwise rent to someone else if she was gone. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Apr 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 17:09
|
|
|
I desperately wish even a small majority of canadians understood: -How tax brackets work (no you're not going to lose money by making more money, the next bracket only applies to money made above that level!) -How property taxes work (no it's not a flat tax on your property value, your property value can go up and your next years taxes go down. It's more complex than a flat tax!) -How housing markets work
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 18:36
|
|
|
Of course every once in a while you get someone like cougar cub jump in with "marginal tax rate" just to muddy the waters a little further.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 18:56
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I desperately wish even a small majority of canadians understood: How governments work Where law comes from What the charter says Just how little American law matters here
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 22:11
|
|
|
I posted a few months back about the Umar Zameer case and there's a big update there. He's been acquitted. There's a political component to this story, both in terms of actual politics and in terms of the influence of police. The background is that on Canada day in 2021, Zameer, a Toronto area father, getting into his car with his family in at the Toronto City Hall parkade. While he was doing this, some people ran towards making gestures. It's worth noting that this was a week after the terrorist attack that killed a muslim family in London, Ontario. Zameer jumped into his car, and these people started banging on the car. He tried to flee, and then a large van came right as his car, so he swerved to miss it. The van then took another run at his car and smashed it so hard it was disabled. Anyway, the people yelling and attacking him were plain-clothes police. And the van was a police van. The police had received a report of a stabbing. There is no controversy that Zameer and his family were not involved in the stabbing and hadn't broken any laws or even done anything suspicious. It's entirely unclear what led the police to accost Zameer in the first place. And it turns out that during this bizarre sequence of events, Zameer's car ran over a police officer. The officer died. A court has now ruled that the above is what happened, at a factual level. This isn't a surprise. It's what Zameer and his wife testified happened. It's what two independent experts said the scene shows. And it is consistent with what the other non-police officers in the garage testified too, basically that people in street clothes started screaming at accosting Zameer and never identified themselves as police. But the police had a completely different story. They claimed that they had identified themselves as police. That Zameer was evading detention and that he drove straight at the officer who died in a deliberate attempt to kill him.The police told the public this is what had happened. quote:Following the incident in July, Toronto Police Chief James Ramer called it an “intentional, deliberate attack.” Give the courts credit here. They saw this for what it was immediately. Zameer was granted bail, which is unusual for those charged with first degree murder. https://globalnews.ca/news/8212220/umar-zameer-bail-jeffrey-northrup-toronto-police/. That prompted our oh-so-wise premier to lash out (Tweet since deleted): https://twitter.com/CBCQueensPark/status/1440741278891724806 There was a publication ban, which made it hard for the media to report on what was going on. But the media, also to its credit for once, picked up on the fact that something was seriously off. And now we know. There wasn't evidence other than the say-so of the police officers involved to support the police version of events. The available video evidence suggests the police account was not accurate. There was no damage to Zameer's car from the supposed head-on impact with the police officer. It's not known exactly what happened, but it appears he got knocked down and when under the side of the car, being run over in the process. After being subject to a seriously dubious prosecution for three years, this week a jury quickly acquitted Zameer. The case against him was so meritless that the judge presiding issued an apology to Zameer https://www.cp24.com/news/my-deepest-apologies-judge-offers-rare-apology-to-umar-zameer-after-trial-sheds-new-light-on-case-1.6856671. That is not remotely normal after an acquittal. This is a judge who is upset that an man was subjected to a trial because of bad decisions by prosecutors. How bad? The Toronto Sun (!) described the result as, "A terrible miscarriage of justice was avoided with the jury's verdict" https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/umar-zameer-not-guilty-of-toronto-cops-death-in-city-hall-parking-lot On the one hand, I hope this guy gets to move on with his life. On the other, this cries out for a public inquest and if they do that they'll need his evidence. The charges never made sense at all, let alone on the evidence as it is now known. While Zameer was acquitted, it imposed a terrible toll on him and his family seemingly because the police couldn't accept that one of their own died as a result of an accident caused by poor police decision making. And the public was told by police there was a deliberate murder but not allowed to know anything else, and the police account just wans't true. The public was lied too. Not only was Zameer innocent of a criminal offence, nothing he did was even unreasonable in the circumstances. The Crown Attorney's offered this explanation for proceeding to trial on what every judge thought was a weak case: quote:(the officer's death) warranted a trial to determine accountability The most polite way to describe that explanation is: a pile of manure. That's not how prosecutorial decisions are supposed to be made. Also, the police and crown have been telling the officer's family that this trial was about accountability. Accountability would involve looking at the police decision leading up to and during the incident.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 22:15
|
|
|
I have also been following the trial and the lying and collusion by the police despite all evidence to the contrary has been disgustingly egregious. I'm immensely glad he was declared not guilty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 22:31
|
|
|
Maneck posted:Give the courts credit here. They saw this for what it was immediately. Zameer was granted bail, which is unusual for those charged with first degree murder. https://globalnews.ca/news/8212220/umar-zameer-bail-jeffrey-northrup-toronto-police/. That prompted our oh-so-wise premier to lash out (Tweet since deleted): Just to clarify, Ford deleted his tweet, changed the word 'responsible' to 'charged' and reposted it on the same day, the edited tweet remains up even after the acquittal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 22:32
|
|
|
Glad he got acquitted, this is the first I've heard about this case and it's incredibly gross obviously; I'd suggest he move very far away from the GTA though
ColdBlooded fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Apr 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 22:35
|
|
|
Common police L
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:12
|
|
|
This is also the first I'm hearing about it, but I gotta respect the judge including "the police are loving lying" in the jury instructions:quote:[Judge] Molloy told jurors before they began deliberating that it was her opinion there was no evidence to fully support the Crown's theory, but that the defence's theory aligned with the video, the experts, and the testimony of Zameer and his wife. Shame there doesn't seem to be any perjury or contempt charges against those officers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:14
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Timeline wise the unmarked police van rammed zameer in the rear after he had escaped being blocked in the forward direction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb8gfsZWXRo This video shows what the crash experts say they think happened. Zameer while reversing to avoid the van knocked northrup down via a sideswipe, while down northrup wouldn't have been visible to the Zameer. This is also very contrary to the police officers sworn testimony and "notes" that northrup was standing in front of the car hands outstretched, in the laneway when he was struck and hit the bumper/hood then went under the car. Which was impossible based on the "damage" to zameers car (none on the front where a 6'1" 300 lb man supposedly struck the bumper/hood), and the surveillance video, (that doesn't show northrup in the laneway)
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:21
|
|
|
Maneck posted:[a very good recap of the events of the case was here] No individual Crown wants to be the one to take responsibility for things like this. When you hear things like "oh, I'm sure the judge will let him out," and then oppose an application for Judicial Interim Release, or "I'm sure that the Justice will grant a discharge, but..." and not join the defence in recommending a conditional discharge as a fit and appropriate sentence, it speaks to a level of cowardice that has spread throughout Crown prosecutor offices across the country. But no one wants to wear the goat horns, because those sorts of decisions are unpopular with the hooting and braying jackasses who fail to understand how the justice system actually works. So a Crown that does make the correct decision to abandon a prosecution for the correct reasons gets excoriated in the media. And that's going to make every successive decision and decision maker a little more gunshy... ...Until you get to the point we are at now, where they just throw up their hands and say, "let the judge decide." It's an abrogation of their duty as a quasi-minster of justice to be constantly evaluating their case for the public interest in prosecuting and the reasonable likelihood of conviction. "its not my fault," says the crown on the file, "the judge just didn't see it out way. Alas." Now no one (that matters) can be mad at the Crown for doing their job, it's those gotdammed activist judges! Who do they think they are, anyway?
Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Apr 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:24
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:
Incredulously, the three officers testifying have been reprimanded in the past for shady poo poo iirc including lying on the stand during another trial and impropriety surrounding a t-shirt fundraising drive for another slain officers children ( Lisa Forbes, nee Hayford) . e: Google Scharnil Pais too, he's been found guilty under the police act in the past as well related to the Neptune 4 incident. Another Bill fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Apr 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:32
|
|
|
ColdBlooded posted:Glad he got acquitted, this is the first I've heard about this case and it's incredibly gross obviously; I'd suggest he move very far away from the GTA though Yeah seriously. The cops aren't going to let this stand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2024 23:43
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:This is also the first I'm hearing about it, but I gotta respect the judge including "the police are loving lying" in the jury instructions: Unfortunately, the same rules that protect criminal citizens also protect criminal and perjurious cops.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2024 02:02
|
|
|
Dude's lawyer is right in their faces about it too, correctly accusing Certain People of formenting hate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2024 03:02
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I desperately wish even a small majority of canadians understood: You can, actually, because our tax system is stupid as all gently caress. I just found this out today from a letter from my accountant. The government has decided I deserve free money, I guess, because my actual wages were poo poo. I get like $1400 (thanks Trudeau!). But if I made $1000 more, I would get no free money, and I'd be $400 in the hole. This is due to something called the Canada Workers Benefit, which like all tax matters is unnecessarily complex and that's why I hire an accountant. But -- as far as I can tell -- it's like a very meager UBI for people who already work, because you aren't eligible if you don't have income from paid work, and you are eligible for more money if you work more (up until you hit the cutoff point, at which point gently caress you). I really hope I'm misunderstanding what the gently caress this is, because it makes literally no sense to me. What it *seems* like is the government is handing out a top-up to people employed in jobs that pay like poo poo, to convince them to not simply leave those jobs entirely, which is in essence a handout to employers to allow them to pay people like poo poo. Where I'm going with this is: our tax system is very, very stupid. It's bad and we should feel bad. It should not be a game of figuring out which narrow incentives you qualify for and whatnot, and how to best manipulate previous losses and expenses to minimize your tax liability. It's a massive shell game designed to funnel money to accountants as best as I can tell, because the government refuses to use any policy levers apart from bizarre and obtuse tax incentives. I'm benefitting from it currently for some unknown reason and I still think it's stupid, if for no other reason than I understand so little about it that I can't understand what action on my part they're actually trying to motivate, so it's inherently pointless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2024 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:48 |
|
|
Tory and Brad Bradford also jumped on that bandwagon. https://x.com/gradytripp00/status/1440859913463341058?s=46&t=eYnb6uC9Nqku2TRAz1AKtQ
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2024 04:50
|
|
