I believe this is what they call "preaching to the choir".
merc
- St. Louis?
- Louisville?
- Lafayette?
- Versailles?
- Detroit?
- Baton Rouge?
- Boise?
- Montpelier?
- Montclair?
- Des Moines?
- Eau Claire?
There are a lot of them. If you look at a map of North America circa 1950 you'll see that the vast majority of the interior is French territory. The only reason that it's under American control now is that the British took it from the French in the 7 years war. The British colonists in North America were so grateful for this additional land that when they settled it, they generously paid taxes to the British to pay them back for the expensive war to conquer this territory... ha, just kidding. They rebelled and simply took the territory for themselves.
The issue really isn't foreign ownership, it's for-profit ownership or bias in the interests of wealthy owners. Do you think investigative reports into the Rogers family would happen on City TV or CTV, both properties owned by Rogers Communications? That's why we need to protect CBC. It's not free from bias, but it's much less biased than most mainstream media sources.
They do say it's a no GST on "homes", which could theoretically include units in a condo. Maybe if the building costs multiple millions but your unit is under one million it would count?
It's better than the conservative plan, but it's not nearly enough to fix the whole thing. But, maybe it's good for votes because it's easy to understand.
What I love is that it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
The whole reason it has such an absurd valuation, 20x higher than a normal car company, is that they convinced investors they weren't just a boring car company. They had a visionary CEO who was going to keep innovating and growing the company in ways that normal car companies could never replicate. He was Tony Stark! Now they're in a situation where it's that same CEO who's dragging them down. His politics is tanking their reputation, so it's tanking their stock value.
The problem is, if they dump him as CEO, there's absolutely no way to justify the absurd P/E ratio. They can't just go out and appoint another supposed "Tony Stark" to run the company. That means they stick with him and their stock price tanks because he's one of the most hated people in the world. Or, they ditch him and their stock price tanks because with their visionary CEO gone, the jig is up and there's clearly no way to justify a P/E ratio of 100 when Toyota has a P/E ratio of approximately 7.
And for Elon, half his wealth is Tesla stock, and he borrowed against that Tesla stock to fund his Twitter purchase. If Tesla tanks, it all could come crashing down around him. There's no escape for him either. He can't realistically even sell his stock because as soon as he started trying to do that it would signal his lack of confidence and cause the value to plummet.
It's just annoying that Tesla's stock isn't crashing faster. So many people who don't believe in the sunk cost fallacy, and are desperately lying to themselves rather than cashing out before the bubble bursts.