ReeferMadness

Nice.

Thanks for self-identifying. If more people would do that, maybe we could get you people some help.

Sounds like maybe you should volunteer. It's your idea.

Clearly, some sickness would remain. Since the idea is sick in itself.

So, let's be crystal clear about something. If these were white, Christian, English speaking kids washing up on the beaches, Harper wouldn't be able to get away with scaring people into thinking they were all terrorists or slackers who want to use up our healthcare dollars while they collect welfare. So, yeah, part of it is racism. And part of it is religious intolerance. And part of it is ethnic intolerance. And none of it speaks well for this country or its inhabitants.

Really? How about haberdashers? What about xylographers? What is it that makes them heroes?

I'm assuming that by better race of humans, you mean a group of soul less sociopaths. That seems to be what you're aiming for.

The whole discussion is seriously creepy.

It's mostly their blood and mostly their treasure. And mostly our fault. Across history, the countries that have been subjected to direct invasion, imperialism, colonialism and neo colonialism have, unsurprisingly, turned into basket cases. The mess that is the middle east is mostly a creation of western powers. So, when Harper points to poor, desperate, brown people and subtly (or not so subtly) says we should be afraid of them, it makes me angry. Who should be afraid of whom?

That's assuming bin Laden was actually behind 911. That's never been proven in any court. It's just been alleged. By the same people who alleged that Iraq had WMD's.

The number of racists in this country is truly staggering. And they're not all Conservative supporters.

Awww. You seem upset because I'm not genuflecting in your presence.

Do you often start conversations by saying "I'm not a Nazi but....". If I did, I would start to rethink my views. The impact to the planet of the human species (there is no "human race") can be calculated as (total number of people) x (average ecological footprint of each person). Attempting to focus on one without paying attention to the other is idiotic. Fortunately, we have plenty of experience with how to manage population. History shows that as education improves, access to birth control improves, child mortality falls and the economic incentive to have children is lessened, people naturally have fewer children. In fact, many industrialized countries now have a birth rate less than that needed to maintain a stable population and some have started to provide incentives for women to have babies. So, if we want population to peak and decline, the way to do that is to focus on improving the situation in underdeveloped countries. Focusing on the odd exceptional person who chooses to have an unusual number of children makes no sense. They are statistical noise. So, that leaves us the problem of how we reduce the average ecological footprint of each person. And that, interestingly enough is exactly what environmental groups have been advocating for decades. There are plenty of ways that we could reduce the average footprint while maintaining a high quality of life but most people aren't even paying attention. Finally, I have to say that I find the whole concept of eugenics disgusting and morally reprehensible. As technology advances, our ability to detect, avoid and correct genetic problems increases. If you can produce some actual statistics to show that the species is somehow in some kind of serious danger that would be corrected by eugenics, then show it. Otherwise, seriously. Re-examine your attitudes.

Wow. Would you like to provide any actual evidence for that grandiose sweeping generalization or should we all just accept it as gospel just cuz you're so much smarter than us?

Yeah, I don't mean it like that. There are certain number of business owners who produce revolutionary or evolutionary changes in the world. Like the Elon Musks. I would say that it's a small fraction but they are over-represented as business owners because they have the same attributes that make for successful business owners. There are also a lot of business owners who do a lot of good work within their communities. And, quite frankly, there are lots of them who are just in it for the money and personal gratification and could give a rats a** bout the rest of the world. So, that's why I react a bit cynically when the media and the political parties tend to speak of small businesses in such glowing terms.

Chris Alexander???? Hahahahahaha. You want a leader who does the best 'deer in the headlights' look? Is he going to have a seat after this election?

Bonnie Raitt? That would be awesome. I would enjoy her singing so much more than Steve's.

Not sure what you mean by that...

That's a fair statement. The Chretien Liberals received a lot of money from businesses and wealthy people and were reluctant to rock the boat. Which is why I was quite impressed that Justin was willing to stick his neck out and call attention to how some small business owners misuse the tax regime. If there is one thing that all of the parties seem to universally agree on it's that small business owners are heroes. There's been a whole mythology built up around them. And don't get me wrong - I think some of them are heroes. Just not all of them. Edited to add: And even the ones that are heroes don't necessarily need all of the tax advantages they get.

See? That's what I like about you and Tim. If you can't argue with what I said, you just pretend I said something completely different and argue with that. Let's replay what I actually said about business and the need for incentives: I know, I know. It's so much harder to argue with that.

Well, that's easy. Harper personally decided that to be a resident, you only need to own $4,000 worth of property. So, tell your clients to buy a time share in a pig barn and tell CRA if it's good enough for the senate, it should be good enough for them.

I get what you're saying and I know that CRA does fiddle with the rules when loopholes cutting into revenue is a big way. There is no one set of rules that will satisfy everyone. However, I would still maintain that the current rules allow too much room for interpretation and abuse. And I don't think this is just a cosmic accident. Small and medium business owners are often the people who cut cheques to the Conservatives for a thousand bucks. I would say two things. First, I'm not sure what you do but in my world (IT), it's common for contractors to make $90 - $150 per hour. Out of that, they pay the middle man company (another cottage industry designed to legitimize what are really short term employees) $10-$15 per hour. The difference between what they make and what employees earn more than makes up for vacation pay, EI and benefits In terms of risk, there still is more job security being an employee but not as much as you might think. I've seen lots of contractors hang on for years and companies dump staff (particularly middle management) so readily these days that the difference is not as big as you might think. And in terms of employee standards, where I've worked, contractors are treated almost exactly the same as employees - with two differences. Unlike salaried employees, contractors get paid for every hour worked. When contractors are terminated, they aren't entitled to severance, although the standard contract allows for 2 weeks notice.

Deferral allows you to take the money you should have paid in taxes, invest it for a profit and then pay less taxes later when you're in a lower tax bracket. I think we we all get it. Or they could just make the system fair. And yet... somehow a decade and a half of aggressive tax cutting has only resulted in corporations hoarding more cash. And the economy grows ever more slowly. Maybe you and Harper should go back to school and learn how it really works. Your original statement didn't say anything about this. It said there should be some benefit to owning a business. As if the huge income and all this other crap weren't enough. And for every rule, there are 10 more loopholes. That kiddy tax only applies to minor children, not grown-ups. And there are other ways of working the system. The system is working well for you so of course you can convince yourself it's fair. Not many people are as honest as msj. As Upton Sinclair put it "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

And the bigger corporations get, the worse the problem.

You doth protest too much. Who are you trying to convince - me or yourself? So, I think $170 billion stashed in tax havens represents some kind of issue. But maybe that's just me. That would buy a lot of health care.