Big increases in EI

[benny]

LOL Reminds me of one fellows assessment of the Amway spiel: "Surely, someplace along the line, somebody has to sell some soap!"

Surely the one most tired of doing nothing!

[whowhere]

No...no..it would not be subject to an EI deduction...but it would be subject to capital gains...which do you think takes a bigger bite? The $730 a year deducted for EI or capital gains on $50,000?

You might want to take your time on that....

What are you talking about?? A paycheque is pay cheque. A return on Investment and Capital gains is not a pay check and Yes Investments are subject to Income taxes and whatever other taxes. Well, so is income paid out by a pay check.. What I am saying it is time we stop providing a free ride on the backs of those who are the muscle behind the GDP. You draw a pay check you pay the EI tax. Whether your income is $20000 or $200000 you will should pay a EI percentage. Not charging this tax on Income over $40000 is lost tax revenue.

Make no mistake, EI is a tax because no one really knows where it goes but the ruling party. Investment Income has nothing to do with "pay cheque" income.

[whowhere]

I'll give you three guesses what would happen if no one worked an actual job and everyone just got their money playing the stock markets...

The tools are out there to propel you to never working a day again. Just because most people don't have what it takes they should shut the eff up and start making Canada a prosperous Country instead of a Bottom feeding leach to the world.

For Starters Make EI a percentage applied to all pay cheques of whatever amount (ie %2). So that would means when a Toronto Maple leaf gets his pay check of $1 million he will pay $20000 in EI tax. Like it or not you draw a pay check you pay.

Mr CEO at CIBC makes 3.6 million he pays $72000. No one escapes period. It can be established perhaps the percentage is to high and reduced to %1 in a growing economy and increased in a declining economy. This tax would d put pressure on the decision makers to do right by the Canadian economy and ensure Canada is in fact "truly" growing and expanding instead of tilting towards rewarding people who create economic distress with more money.

Harper is clueless and don't rely on him to make Canada a Prosporous leader among the G20. Leadership also includes Quality of Life Harper which is measured by Stat Holidays and the amount of Vacation weeks as well.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The tools are out there to propel you to never working a day again. Just because most people don't have what it takes they should shut the eff up and start making Canada a prosperous Country instead of a Bottom feeding leach to the world.

For Starters Make EI a percentage applied to all pay cheques of whatever amount (ie %2). So that would means when a Toronto Maple leaf gets his pay check of $1 million he will pay $20000 in EI tax. Like it or not you draw a pay check you pay.

Mr CEO at CIBC makes 3.6 million he pays $72000. No one escapes period. It can be established perhaps the percentage is to high and reduced to %1 in a growing economy and increased in a declining economy. This tax would d put pressure on the decision makers to do right by the Canadian economy and ensure Canada is in fact "truly" growing and expanding instead of tilting towards rewarding people who create economic distress with more money.

Harper is clueless and don't rely on him to make Canada a Prosporous leader among the G20. Leadership also includes Quality of Life Harper which is measured by Stat Holidays and the amount of Vacation weeks as well.

A smart move in this nation from a legislative position would be to reduce working hours to 32 a week with overtime for everything above that. Add more stat holidays, at least one a month and increase annual vacation entitlements. Just one more thing, lower the retirement age and pension qualifications down to 80 points or 50 years of age. All of these things will reduce the workforce and actually cause people to be hired to lower the employment costs of business. Yes business will pay for these changes, so why not reduce their tax load accordingly? There are in fact many ways the government can approach the problems, but that would take a spine, and a brain.

[benny]

A smart move in this nation from a legislative position would be to reduce working hours to 32 a week with overtime for everything above that. Add more stat holidays, at least one a month and increase annual vacation entitlements. Just one more thing, lower the retirement age and pension qualifications down to 80 points or 50 years of age. All of these things will reduce the workforce and actually cause people to be hired to lower the employment costs of business. Yes business will pay for these changes, so why not reduce their tax load accordingly? There are in fact many ways the government can approach the problems, but that would take a spine, and a brain.

In France, this has been tried and it failed miserably.