And the millionaires aren't going anywhere, for the most part.
Excellent update on year 2 of this program:
Last May, we were very happy to report that the Millionaire Tax instituted in the state of Massachusetts was working out very well, not scaring off all of the rich people, and raising funds for necessary education and transportation initiatives. The state had raised $1.8 billion — $800 million more than they predicted — and none of the terrible things the naysayers had predicted happened at all.
But how are things going a year later? Even better! The tax has now generated $3 billion more than expected, for a total of $5.7 billion that has been spent on projects that are positively benefiting Massachusetts residents and “being used to bridge repairs, bolster literacy programs and address the transportation system’s budget deficit.”
In case you need a refresher, the tax is a 4 percent tax on anything people make over a million dollars.
Years ago, Finland made an argument for ending homelessness based on three core principles. It’s had a lasting impact decades later.
"Since 2008, homelessness rates in Finland have dropped by 75%.
It’s a feat that is even more remarkable when noting that their method of counting — and defining homelessness — is much more inclusive than other leading countries.
In Finland, for example, homelessness statistics include individuals temporarily living with friends and relatives, living in an institution, staying in hostels, congregate shelters, and “rough sleeping” outside on the streets.
Their complex method of counting homeless populations goes hand-in-hand with the country’s “Housing First” method of approaching homelessness, by recognizing that homelessness is not a black-and-white discussion — it’s a systemic issue that can manifest in a variety of ways.
In 2017, the Y-Foundation — which promotes social justice by providing affordable housing to low-income families as Finland’s “fourth-largest landlord” — released a 128-page report on successful Housing First policies.
The foundation said that Finland’s success in lowering homelessness rates can largely be attributed to the country’s “Name On The Door” approach, which was introduced to Finland’s Minister for Housing in 2007.
The methodology made a sound argument for ending homelessness from a moral, legal, and economic perspective.
“The ethical perspective means that homelessness has to be eliminated because human dignity belongs to everyone. A home is a human right,” the Y-Foundation surmised.
“The legal perspective emphasizes, for example, that according to the Constitution of Finland, anyone who is unable to acquire the necessary security for a dignified life is entitled to essential subsistence and care.”
“Eliminating homelessness is also a worthwhile investment in terms of the social economy,” the nonprofit added. “The report states that the economic conditions for eliminating long-term homelessness were better than ever (in 2007).”
Reducing homelessness has been a source of pride for the country’s leaders for nearly two decades...
In an interview with The Globe and Mail, Helsinki Mayor Juhana Vartiainen said that Housing First is “the right way to fight the problem of homelessness.”
“That’s really the fundamental idea of our policy,’ Vartiainen said, “if we give people a home, there will be very positive side-effects.”
In the last year, national cuts to income, social security, and housing support have resulted in the first notable change to homelessness trends in over 11 years.
Even with the slight rise in homelessness seen locally in 2024, Finland estimates that 3,806 citizens are currently experiencing homelessness (about 0.06% of the Finnish population).
In comparison, over 771,480 Americans were counted as unhoused in January 2025 (about 0.2% of the US population).
Regardless of short-term challenges, the “Housing First” approach is still at the core of the organization’s mission.
The Y-Foundation’s head of international affairs, Juha Kahila, told The Globe and Mail: “When people have a roof over their heads, they can overcome the challenges they have in their lives and not have to worry about where they will sleep that night or where they will live next month.”"
An amendment to Alberta’s Election Act approved one year ago changed the rules to remove restrictions on government advertising for a standa
A pro-immigration group has submitted a complaint to Elections Alberta, claiming the province’s new referendum website wrongfully uses taxpayers’ money to campaign in favour of one side.
Avnish Nanda, the Edmonton lawyer who helped create the group, called Our Alberta Advantage, says the Alberta government website is written in a way to influence yes votes by either misrepresenting situations or leaving out certain information.
“That undermines the spirit of democracy,” Nanda told CBC News.
As an example, Nanda pointed out that the Alberta Referendum 2026 website notes temporary residents cost Alberta taxpayers more than $1 billion per year in social services.
