CPCFTW

I'm convinced socialism is a mental disorder. These responses are sickening. "You owe us what you've earned because you live in our society". Sorry guys, the wealthy don't owe you anything. They paid for their right to live in this society through taxes (of which they paid a hell of a lot more than the protesters making these kinds of arguments).

Very well said. I also don't understand the mentality of these people. I know people who worked much harder than me through high school and university, taking very little time to go out and party. They graduated with little debt and good jobs and were buying multiple properties within a couple years. I went out every weekend spending $50-100, didn't work, and lived off student loans and my credit card. Then I had to bust my ass after graduating to get a decent job, pay off my debt, and to start investing. Why should I get to relax for 4-5yrs of university and expect the same financial outcomes as people who studied harder than me while working part-time and forgoing partying? I'm not 6'8", 260lbs of athleticism so I don't think I should be entitled to the money people pay to go watch Lebron play basketball. I don't see how it is fair to take more of his excessive income and redistribute it for "the greater good"? Why not just put all the big athletic blacks in a cage in the state circus and make people pay admission to watch them? Pay them each a "fair" $150,000/yr and use the rest of the admission to pay for everyone's health care for the greater good! They just inherited their genes like some people inherited their wealth right? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. As idyllic as it sounds to take from the rich and give to the poor, it's not the least bit fair in a "free" society.

Uh oh.. Watch out for that big bad 2% inflation.. It's gonna get you!

So you just have more of your opinion on how the world should work and still no citation for the baseless claim in your sig? I guess citations only matter when they contradict you.

Saying "a variety of sources" doesn't constitute a source. Please provide the variety of sources that have estimated tax evasion at $300b. Percentages you pulled from your ass don't mean anything. Please explain why tax breaks are "welfare"? If I buy a house and rent it out, is the tax break I get on the mortgage interest on my rental investment "welfare"? Please add up the welfare that the wealthiest 1% get in numerical terms with specific citations, then add up the welfare that the poor get, and "do the math" proving that the wealthiest 1% of canadians get more welfare than the unemployed.

"The wealthiEST 1% of Canadians get more government WELFARE than unemployed Canadians." How about you provide a link for your sig before you start being another lefty citation nazi?

But what about the top 0.147%?!? They must be the ones making me poor! I knew it was them all along!!

You are clueless and disgusting. It's sickening to read this drivel from someone who obviously has no idea wtf he is talking about. Try educating yourself in finance and economics rather than letting your emotions control your every thought.

You seem to have trouble distinguishing between the economy and Wall Street banks. They are not one and the same. The economy faltering has nothing to do with Wall Street banks this time around. In fact, it has more to do with your precious socialist ideologies bankrupting some European economies and slowing global growth. The Wall Street banks are not asking for stimulus spending, it is a policy to appease voters.

I think something like 20% of the canadian labour force is employed in financial services. The big bad banking industry pays billions in taxes, employs millions of taxpayers, and pays 4-5% dividends to shareholders (ie. Pension plans of teachers and government employees). Millions of Canadians realized their dream to own their own cars, furniture, and homes because the big bad banking industry provided them with financing. Damn those bankers!!

Funny when a person breaks his contract to pay back a mortgage it's the banking industry's fault, but when a company breaks a contract to provide a pension (which was likely signed under the duress of strikes), it's the company's fault. If worker's want to threaten the existence of a company to negotiate their contracts, then the contract will never be negotiated in good faith and there is a possibility of it being broken. If I threatened your existence by holding a gun to your head and demanded you pay me $500,000 in 30 years, I'm sure you would sign too. You have the corporate hate blinders on as usual.

Because there are different ways to generate income? If I am in real estate, and I buy 100 properties, renting them for a combined $200,000/month, then I have $2.4 million per year in rental income. But I can deduct my mortgage interest, property management expenses, property taxes, utilities, insurance, etc. from my income. If I sell a few properties at a loss, then I can deduct the capital losses on those properties as well. I may have $2.4mil in paper income, but might have lost wealth over the year. Same thing applies if you are small business owner who has a huge income, but also huge tax deductible expenses. Meanwhile, if you are a CEO getting paid $2.4mil, then that whole amount is taxed as employment income. As you can see, your numbers and statistics are meaningless without context. I'm surprised you couldn't figure out the reason on your own.

It is unbalanced. Labourers can create greater demand for labour by creating their own jobs. Corporations can't create people.

Another centrist post by MCC. I don't get what the big deal is for union supporters. If there's nothing to hide then this should be a non-issue. It's like dating a girl who refuses to show you her locked phone because "you should trust her". I just know you unions are cheating on me you damn whores!

Why should the wealthy 20% of the world population be able to oppress the bottom 80%. The austerity measures ensure the survival of a system that redistributes wealth from the elitist developed world to hard working developing world. Are you really trying to take the moral highground by suggesting we default on Chinese loans paid for by the backbreaking labour of Chinese workers who are lucky to earn the equivalent of one welfare cheque in an entire year of labour? No. It is the western world's social services and entitlement mentality that is in the wrong here. Capitalism and the financial system just allocates benefits to the hardest workers. It doesn't have the biased, emotional eye of the oversensitive, politically-correct lefties who wouldn't bat an eye at further impoverishing a billion Chinese so that a couple million North Americans and Europeans in "poverty" can continue to be given a free ride.

No he's not. He earns his money through employment, most of that money is taxed at the highest marginal rate. Then the leftover money that has already been subjected to income tax, is invested and subjected to investment income tax. It's not that hard to figure out. Do try to keep up. Now let's say he worked his ass off as a teenager to adulthood, got a great job and earned 100k for 5yrs, then started his own green energy business with the money he had saved and was very successful, then sold his business 10yrs later for 100 million. He's now 40yrs old with 100 million dolars which he has earned and invested. He returns to work making 100k per year, but his lower taxed investment income is 5-6 million per year. Now he is an evil predatory rich elite?

That's a shame but they should be free to entertain themselves with their social assistance cheque. If they want to allocate a portion of that cheque to cable tv, then that's up to them. It is not some sort of necessity. A disabled person (or any of the above) may prefer to have internet, or to play video games, or just to spend $50/mo more on food, or something else. Cut them a cheque and end it, we don't need the government to set minimum entertainment standards for us now.

When we're talking about providing cable tv for those on social assistance, it is not a misconception.

Not surprising.

It doesn't matter what is enough for me or you. The point is cable tv shouldn't even be part of the conversation. If you are unemployed, you shouldn't have an expectation for society to provide you with a minimum entertainment level. Entertain your damn self finding a job. We shouldn't encourage people to be unemployed by making them sufficiently comfortable and entertained. TV isn't some sort of fundamental need. I would argue access to internet is FAR more important, but I still wouldn't agree to providing it for it individually because there is already plenty of access available at unemployment offices and libraries.

Wow... you can't be serious? The minimum standard is to have basic cable to be entertained? Are you insane? You actually believe that's what "basic" denotes? I lived for years without cable so I could save money and pay off debt/invest. You think my tax dollars should go to unemployed "criminals" so they can be more entertained than me? Sickening.

Wow... you can't be serious? The minimum standard is to have basic cable to be entertained? Are you insane? You actually believe that's what "basic" denotes? I lived for years without cable so I could save money and pay off debt/invest. You think my tax dollars should go to unemployed "criminals" so they can be more entertained than me? Sickening.

It is entirely about protecting the freedom of millions of people to get to and from work and their families without being severely delayed by 200 hippies per city who claim to speak for everyone. Freedom of speech has never guaranteed the speaker the right to blockade streets to give their message. You have the freedom to say Harper and the government sucks without persecution. But when you start blockading streets causing millions in economic damage to do it, you better belive the police are going to remove you from those streets. The irony is that the same people who are complaining about their freedom of speech being compromised, are using that speech to argue that the government should seize the wealth and profits from free enterprisers.

I don't like this post. Now if you'll excuse me, me and the rest of the "99%" are going to blockade the street in front of your house and chant slogans at you. What do you mean I can't blockade OUR streets? The government and the system must hate free speech!!

Citation: Jacee's ass. Sorry I don't feel much compassion for the woe is me mentality of teenage mothers and alcoholics.