Bryan

I ALWAYS get the long one. I have never filled it out before, and I have no intention of filling it out now. I'm sure not going to log in to their website and punch in their code either.

I hope so.

A Red Tory is a liberal wearing a blue suit. People don't always join the party most closely aligned with their beliefs (and sometimes they change one without changing the other). The are conservatives in the Liberal Party, there are liberals in the Conservative Party.

Truth. The lack of an actual conservative option is the reason that the Reform Party was founded.

They also do so to reduce the amount of taxes they are required to pay whether they reported it or not.

They also do so to reduce the amount of taxes they are required to pay whether they reported it or not.

Or, structure the things you own so that they legally don't qualify as income for tax purposes. Financial Post runs articles on how to do those kinds of things fairly regularly. Also, giving up residency does not always automatically mean giving up your healthcare. There are always exceptions that the blurbs on the websites don't cover.

Healthcare and government services are a right that is totally free whether you ever pay any taxes or not.

Yup. The older my parents get, the less time they spend in Canada. The whole winter is spent in a combination of tropical locales. Even serious health issues have been easily dealt with for very little cost. Most of the time they have been impressed with how efficient the "third world" health care has been.

Sure, people make mistakes. The rest though? Not without first giving warning and letting the girls cover up and/or exit before he enters.

There is no reasonable explanation for an adult male to be entering an area where girls are changing and showering.

It damn well is my business if a man tries to go into the shower/change room at the pool or the gym when my daughter is in there.

Less risk from a lawyer who specializes in it.

It's just to emphasize that just because money was generated, that does necessarily mean that it fits the definition of income for tax purposes. You're still doing it. Talking about that same tiny little box you try to shoehorn every scenario into. I get it, you don't know anything else, that's OK. I'll take advice from smarter people than you.

I'd trust a lawyer far more than an accountant to go to bat for me over the legality of my financial situation. Wouldn't you?

I said assets every single time I asked you. That there is a difference is the reason I asked if you understood that the way you kept phrasing your answer did not apply to what I was asking you. I asked you multiple times if you understood that other people look at the problem and structure their assets in a different way than what you were describing, and you either have a reading disability, or you did not understand.

I'm generally with you on that concept, but there are things that break the mold on that, and Saskatchewan is the proof. They have better cell phone rates and plans than anywhere other than Manitoba (and the lone MB company that does almost as well as they do used to be public and still operates in some ways as if it were). MB and Sask also have rates and conditions for car insurance that (in most cases) are as good or better than the neighbouring private options. As much as I despise the CONTENT on CBC, the infrastructure of it also flies in the face of "private is better". Terrestrial broadcasting may be on it's way out the door, so the future value may be negligible, but for generations CBC was the one that was the very best in the nation when it comes to reaching the most number of people. In large swaths of the country, CBC was the only radio or TV you could get for a long time. So, even though I originally dismissed the idea of a nationalized cell network, I now wonder if that might be a more productive use of the CBC infrastructure. Use those towers and satellites and repeaters and such as a public cellular network to reach the places that the private service is bad or absent?

I'm saying that there are Canadian Tax lawyers who openly advise ways to legally reduce how much of the assets you may have that need to be reported to CRA as "income". I was wondering if msj was aware of this. Apparently not.

It's not ideal, but an "I told you so" campaign can be quite effective. Especially since his losing bid actually garnered more votes than two of his winning ones, a new campaign could easily yield different results. Will it happen? I doubt it. I don't think MacKay would get enough support for it to be necessary.

You know a lot about a very specific thing, and next to nothing about another. That's OK. I still love you.

They'll have lots of money to cover it when asked, instead of not being able to afford it being the meme.

Send it in then.

So you don't know. OK.

That's not how I read it. I thought he meant the LPC and CPC can go head to head over which of them is actually (small-c) conservative, vs which one lying when they say they are.

Why? He's right.