blueblood

And where do a lot of those tax dollars come from, would it be rich people? Anyone who accepts free money isn't a socialist, that's just human nature.

Compared to the USSR, his taxes were low. Then he went and did this little thing... Now your just flinging mud. Reagan dropped taxes, Obama is planning on raising them. Big problem. Anything that results in taxes dropping is a good thing. This is why when the left wing screams of unfairness, they should be ignored.

If somebody gave you a check for 10,000 dollars, no strings attached would you take it yes or no? This if anything shows a huge problem with socialism, people by nature will take free money or money that is perceived to be free. People will always take the money, any rational person would take it. That's not socialism, that's common sense.

What you wouldn't like free money too?

So??? Once again your not seeing the forest through the trees. A better deal for business is a better deal all around for people in general. Shall we discuss Ireland pre-recession now? The Venezuelans thought that by introducing anti-business reforms for their oil rich country would improve the lives of their citizens, well they still are poor. Alberta has a pro-business attitude for their oil rich province and as a result a person working at timmies pre-recession was making over 15 bucks an hour. You tell me what philosophy in these examples was more "fair" for their population? Here's another example The US wrote the book on capitalism and low taxes, and it is a worldwide superpower and with a population a third of that of China is still the most powerful economy. The Americans live in prosperity The USSR wrote the book on socialism and punishing people for doing well, and it is only relevant when the price of oil is high, and nowhere near the economic powerhouse the states is. The communists lived like spartans. Fairness must be subjective, you look at fairness as everybody living the same, I look at fairness as everybody having a shot at becoming better. Hell even using your definition of fairness, my low tax examples have made it more "fair" for people than your high tax fantasy!

What are you talking about, what did I admit? That I want low taxes and as low as possible. Anyone advocating a 2% tax hike (from 6% to 8%) is wanting me to keep less and less of my money, that person is on the fast track to communism, not to mention is evil. You want higher taxes (I don't know why, maybe you think the government knows how to spend your money better than you do), and I want low taxes. I have no clue what your trying to spin.

Any rational person/business owner would hope for that.

Yes I would be calling those who call for the 8% communists. Anyone who calls for a tax hike to burn through other people's money deserves that label. Are you suggesting all of us small business owners are rich? Do you think small business's should not be allowed to incorporate and get soaked 44% come tax time? The rich are already doing a service to society by creating and spending wealth, and by wanting to acquire more wealth, employ people to help make that happen. If the rich take their money out of Canada, then everybody is poor. Colonial US used to be a cash cow for Britain, then they got the idea to increase the taxes and soak the population, guess what happened? Bye bye revenue stream! Same goes for Russia, punish those for succeeding, guess what happened? Bye bye communist country! And for tax rates, increase taxes, and business reduces growth and in some cases either collapses or leaves. I don't think you are seeing the forest through the trees.

That's a load of bs if I ever heard it. Nowhere in their platform did I find anything about reducing taxes. The base federal corporate tax is 19% and will be reduced to 15% by 2012, yet Layton wants to up that to 22%, stop the madness!!! A lot of Canadians who's business's net income of 400-500K enjoy an approximate 15% corporate tax rate in Western Canada. The NDP wants to up that to 22% and screw over the little guy, why? How does that relate to the OP, people like to keep the money they earn. Under Obama, and the NDP example that becomes less and less of a possibility.

Do you really believe that American's like taxes? Why oh why do so many more immigrants book it to the US instead of Canada? If you think Americans are going to want to pay similar taxes as we have up here your living in candy land on the corner of gumdrop lane. Last time I checked, there was no massive hundreds of billions of dollars of health care reform bill being voted on at this stage in the game during Clinton's tenure. His wife tried to stir up health care reform, but it got slammed down rather quickly. The NDP plans to hike up the corporate rate up to 22%. That in itself will put the kibosh on many small business's including mine that chose to go this route. Why would I go from my business paying 15% corporate tax with just about everything I spend on going to business expenses to vote for a party that will charge my business 22%? What logical business owner would vote for that nonsense? The sooner the fact that the NDP realize its not 1968 and that government interference hinders businesses not encourages them the better.

So you think the founding fathers were socialists, and said "Golly jee darn, lets stiff the king and still tax the dickens out of everybody!" It's quite simple, taxes went up, and people said piss on it. Had the brits not let loose with all those crazy taxes, independance could very well have been delayed. My point is that Reagan and Clinton aren't doing anything as crazy as Obama is. The USSR had a crappy system of government, a system that can't exist in competition. All the US did was compete and the rest is history. Any system that punishes people for succeeding is laughable and proposterous and that is why the NDP will never form government at the federal level.

Zing!!!

Your missing the point, the US was founded because the populace told the King to take his high taxes and shove it. American's enjoy low taxes and they get to keep more of what they earn than we do in Canada. There is a very large and growing opposition to Obama's ideas and he may very well not see a second term. The lesson of the USSR is don't have a crappy system of government that punishes success. The US rewards success and which country is a superpower and which one collapsed?

Except for the fact that America was founded because of high taxes. The founding fathers would be spinning in their grave with the amount of spending going on down there, especially with Obama. Governments tend to waste a ridiculous amount of money, what's worse is that incompetant bureaucrats don't get fired. Why people don't learn the lessons of the USSR one will never know...

For the love of God take a commerce and an economics class. The pay for a Walmart CEO is right in line with the pay other CEO's get for other companies. The reason they get paid a large sum of money is because they are worth it. Their decisions can make or break a company. Their decisions cost millions if not billions of dollars. A cashier does not have that kind of responsibility. BTW in your report it said 33% of management positions were filled by women. You sir are not a conservative, you hate business, you don't like the fact that people should earn different pay based on their skills, the only thing "conservative" about you is your a religious zealot. If "socialists" in this country took your stance on religion/crime there would be nothing wrong with that in your eyes.

All I see is a class action lawsuit page with no reference to the numbers of the percentage of men/women in management. All I see there is if your a woman who worked there since 98 sign up to sue walmart. Do you constantly like embarassing yourself?

You are a bloody hypocrite!!! Here's another lesson in economics, when goods are cheaper, that makes lives better for regular consumers who themselves happen to be mom/pop store owners/little guys. What the hell are you talking about, a lot of those "big boxes" are franchises, owned by you guessed it a regular joe!! Not only that, those "big boxes" owned by a regular joe franchisor really cut down on his marketing expenses due to the power of the brand name making him more money. Take a look at the financial statements of Walmart and tell me what would happen if you raised the wages and decided to include lucaritive benefits packages to all walmart employees. Also tell me hown many billions of dollars that would cost. It does not make sense to have manufacturing jobs in Canada that make Walmart crap, there are too many high paying other jobs to justify opening a factory. What was the unemployment rate before the recession 5-7%. Manufacturers would go bankrupt paying the wages you think those chowderheads deserve. You call yourself a conservative, yet every "conservative" on the board has ripped you and your nonsense in half. And there are many many more people who have shares of walmart, should they get screwed over?

What fate? What's going to happen if CO2 goes up? I'd say look back at the dinosaur age for answers, CO2 was much higher then and from what I've seen it was a little warmer, there were a lot more plants around. However, with all of that carbon dioxide in the air, there was an ample environment for plants to grow, plants grew, then sucked out the CO2, then pumped out O2, which then cooled off the earth, and killed off some of the plants, and then the madness starts again. Climate Change? it's been going on for 4.5 billion years.

In other words your a hypocrite. Do you know what capitalism is? This post sure doesn't sound like it I bet retirement funds don't mind Walmart...

That's why I said cheap as well. Lots of middle class people from what I see are pretty cheap. I'd say their target market is people looking to buy stuff for low prices. I'd also say people who are looking to buy stuff and get out (note the shotty layout and overall messiness of their stores) however one can buy a greasy McD's burger there though...

Funny thing is I don't shop at Walmart unless its absolutely necessary, yet I'm defending it. Poor/cheap people need a place to shop to, Walmart caters to that.

Good thing I own a business hence my tag on the side. If you don't want to take the risk of owning a business, then your copping out to a wage. And a lot of the time, wages are not what people agree with; that's the price to pay for taking the easy way out. Any employer worth his salt pays his employees as less as they can before they go and find work elsewhere. Your argument seems that we should screw over shareholders so that employees can drive down the retained earnings of a company. Walmart is not the federal government, they don't have a gun to people's heads demanding money. they can go out of business and have to compete very hard to ensure profitability. Their business model of having rock bottom prices ensures they have to cut costs to ensure profitability.

what economy would that be or did you pull that granola eating hippy crap out of your ass?

Because Walmart has an obligation to its shareholders to run its business as efficiently as possible. Walmart also doesn't have a cover charge for shopping there either. If your a shareholder, wouldn't it be nice if your company could find a legal way to earn an extra billion dollars? Apparently if you had a lot of shares in Walmart, you did alright during the recession. If Walmart decided to raise its costs of production by allowing a union and all of their poison to set up shop, they could stand to lose billions of dollars. Which for a company that size and with that tight of margins would be disastrous. It would be like Lehman brothers (except for the financial sector collapse) - very successful to very broke. Walmart's employees are getting paid what they deserve. The service in a Walmart store is shotty at best. Call it a job for the working poor which is better than all of them going on welfare.

That is democracy in action. Like just about everything democracy is a two way street, you have to take some good in with some bad; in this case socialist crap. It wasn't socialism that helped defeat oommunism, it was the essence of socialism itself and how it punishes successful people; the russkies got pissed off and showed them the door. GW Bush's pharma plan is a pile of malarkey and a huge waste of money. But majority prevailed. If the founding fathers of the US would see what Obama/Bush have been up to as far as tax and spend, they'd have a coniption fit.