Scotty

I am carrying the suggestion to its logical conclusion.

Because they're lazy, stupid and incompetent?

So if they wrote into the constitution that the president had to be White, that wouldn't be discrimination, because that would now BE a job requirement! Gotcha!

All they need to do is separate the monarch from his/her role as head of the Church of England. Which, imho, should have been done ages ago anyway. With that done, they can remove the worry about Catholics.

How is that relevant to the job? You're saying that if I'm born in England, and move to the US when I'm six months old I'm not going to be a real American even after growing up and spending fifty years there?

That is a fair point, but I see no way around it unless we want to start appointing hereditary lords.

Should have appoint Nazis, Communists and Anarchists to the Senate for the same reason?

I know you can't read it with a straight face...

You are become satire. I can't top that.

Yes, but she does have two hats, and she is Queen of Canada. And not to put too fine a point on it, if a Labour government of the UK abolished the monarchy they could legally come here and live and still be our royal family.

Just so long as they're not immigrants...

Would he be allowed to ride in Air Force One or would the pilot refuse because he doesn't like to carry people in funny clothes?

I'm a British citizen. I'm also a Canadian citizen. I can't be both?

I bet you don't have a clue what, if anything, we spend on the monarchy.

Your opinion is dumb. And I mean that in the kindest way. A lot of Canadians have an emotional attachment with the monarchy as an institution, and as part of Canada's traditions and history. It doesn't need to be further explained than that. It works, and we like it. Your country has a weird fixation with guns shared by no one else on earth, and largely created by Hollywood movies about a fictitious old west where guns were the symbol of independence. This bizarre, sentimental attachment with the notion of yourselves as pioneers defending the homestead causes untold deaths and misery every year, but you won't even consider doing anything about it because too many of you have your minds wrapped up in a romantic concept of what being an American means. So if you want to change something, go ahead and change your own country's love for firearms and ignore us and our quaint attachment to the monarchy.

Yes, yes, we know that Quebec nationalists are no fans of the monarchy. And no one cares! We don't subsidize the royal family, and we pay for all international visitors. And I notice you're not bitching about that silly, made-up organization le francophnonie!

I intend to. I'm basically bouncing ideas around at the moment. ,Perhaps you find it necessary to seek the approval of anonymous people on the internet, but I'm not that lacking in self-esteem Then again, perhaps I have more social skills than you and can brag to people in real life, if I so desire. I don't trust a lot, to be honest. I don't trust financial advisers to be honest. I don't trust lawyers to tell me the downside of things without my thinking about them. I like to get opinions from people who have no vested interest in advising me one way or another, and to point out things I haven't thought of. My accountant didn't mention double dipping, for example, so I was glad someone here did. Nor did he even suggest I incorporate. I thought of that myself. So I'm a little leery about how much thought he's putting into me. I'm reminded of Harper's self deprecating joke about going into economics because he didn't have the sparkling personality to be an accountant. You must be a ball of fun at parties.

Well, first, I think that sort of thing has limits. I don't believe I necessarily have any greater responsibility to the poor than anyone else in society. And I'd resent someone telling me I do. My feeling about the term is more akin to people who are privileged, have always been privileged, have never known want, or need, or fear, or danger trying to tell 'ordinary' people how to live their lives while being completely in the dark about the realities of that life. Remember Paul Martin telling Canadians they just had to tighten their belts? Easy for him to say! What sacrifice did Martin make? He who reflagged his ships and established corporate headquarters in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes? The term evokes images of well-meaning middle aged people in their gucci loafers and two hundred dollar hairstyles driving their BMWs to the Sally Anne to donate old clothes - and get a tax receipt - then bragging about their generosity. Or, for that matter, people like Martin saying we should pay higher taxes while doing everything they can to avoid paying taxes at all. Or, not to put too fine a point on it, liberal types waxing prosaically about the wonderful cultural delights of mass immigration and the great new restaurants they can now visit - while living in areas immigrants can't afford, and sending their kids to private schools.

Normally, as a business expense, yes. However, if my 'corporation' buys the house, and then rents it back to me, that's a way to put money from my royalties into paying for something without doing the 'double dipping' tax thing, of first paying 15% as a corporation, then paying my own personal taxes on the income the corporation pays me. I believe that's probably legal but will want to check.

I did recently get an accountant. Most of my money is coming from the US and 30% is being withheld for tax purposes until I get my forms set up properly there, then I can get that money back by filing a US tax claim. I've spoken to him about this and he is going to recommend an attorney. I did NOT consider the double taxation, and that does give me some pause. On the other hand, it's hard to believe the kind of money I'm now getting ($25k per month), and have been for the last six months, will continue indefinitely. So if I can incorporate, save a bundle on short term taxes, invest the money, and then, presumably when the flow of royalties goes down, I'd save a lot. I do currently write off a home office on my personal taxes, which includes a % of all my household expenses, but I'd be hard-pressed to honestly write off car payments or a salary to my GF. LOL. Not that investing money for the future is looking all that wonderful of late. My mutual funds haven't done a lot this year. My ETFs are down, and the stocks I picked (RIM - ack!) are way down. It's looking like paying off my mortgage early is going to be the best investment I can make. Maybe i can make the house the 'corporate headquarters' and write off the whole thing. Actually, is that legal? Could my "corporation" buy a house, then rent it to me?

Has anyone else here incorporated for the purpose of saving taxes? I'm looking at doing so for my royalty income as I'm currently looking at close to a 40% income tax bracket as is. If I incorporate I figure I can pay the corporate tax rate, put much of the money into investments for the future, and perhaps pay myself a small salary. I know there'll be paperwork, and additional tax forms to do, but is there anything obvious I should be watchful of that others might have experienced? Anyone know what legal fees are generally charged to set this sort of thing up?

Do you understand how PR works? The NDP puts up a list, and then, depending on how many votes across the country it gets, it appoints people off that list in order of precedence. You don't get to vote for your own MP.

They would be, if Americans weren't generally too ignorant to know much about either how their own country is being run or how others work.

Canada as a whole will not have a positive net wealth as many will take that 1000 and buy a big screen TV or go on a vacation to the Dominican Republic or something like that, and so when it comes time for the government to take double the amount Canadians as a whole will not be able to afford it. I'm a firm believer that it's always cheaper to buy than to rent. And unless you're a whiz bang investor who can trust in the market it's always cheaper to pay cash than to pay interest. I don't want 25% - 30% - 35% etc of my income going to service my debts. As that debt rises and the servicing costs escalate I'm put in a tighter and tighter financial position. It's no different with nations, as much as you want to pretend otherwise.

I find it odd that a nation on the verge of economic collapse and bankruptcy finds itself obsessed with abortion, gun control, gays, and whether the president can produce his birth certificate.