[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by lio45

exactly. Meanwhile in canada, it's the opposite: People have incentives to have the lowest possible incomes, so they can get benefits, while having the highest-value possible real estate.

Multimillionaires getting the gst credit and all the other "low income" benefits are very common.

You discourage what you tax. Canada discourages productive behavior (working), while encouraging real estate investment. Texas does the opposite.

100%. This is an important point that gets brought up here on occasion (including by myself), but as of yet hasn't seemed to work its way into the mainstream consciousness. Our model of high income taxes/low property taxes inherently promotes unproductive economic behaviour, and exacerbates inequality by having workers subsidize homeowners (the former group being poorer, on average, than the latter, despite the overlap). It also drives up housing prices by making it a more attractive investment vehicle than it otherwise would be if homeowners had to pay for the true cost of servicing their property. We're all poorer as a result; yet the prospect of raising property taxes is still taboo and met with revulsion across the political spectrum.

In Canada, one of the best possible situations to be in would be own a property but not have a job; then sell said property every 366 days or so, collect however much the price gain in the last year was tax-free, while also collecting low-income/unemployment benefits on account of not working. Depending on your age & location, you may even be able to avoid paying the standard property taxes. Completely unethical, but entirely legal under the current system.