Jump to content

Occupy Wall Street Sept 17 2011


Recommended Posts

We know that a larger and increasing proportion of the wealth of Canada is going to the wealthiEST Canadians.

Lawfully...a different matter altogether than illegal "tax evasion".

If the 99% were 'the problem', we'd be taking wealth away from them.

Since they are accumulating more and more of our national wealth, we can be confident in finding some predators among the wealthiEST if we start our investigations with them.

Nice try...this is just a dodge. Taxpayers are taxpayers, regardless of wealth.

We already have laws about confiscation of 'the proceeds of crime' where the 'underground economy' is concerned, and police investigation is the key to this as well.

It's not a crime to sell chickens....just not to pay taxes on the net income. See the difference? Maybe you don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You’ve yet to identify a Canadian 1%er that isn’t paying his or her taxes………You speak of this group as if a monolith…….The civil rights movement had Wallace………The Vietnam protestors LBJ & Nixon…..the no nukes Reagan…..and the Tea Partiers Obama……….Try and put a name(s) to your cause…

Maybe we're not looking for 'the fall guy' who takes the rap to protect the people and systems who created them. Maybe we're looking for all the criminals among the wealthiEST and among the lawmakers and law enforcers who protect them, and the laws made to shield them from taxation.

Maybe we are demanding TRUE law enforcement for all, instead of showcasing a fall guy to protect the rest of the criminals. :)

And maybe we are also looking for the 'law enforcers' who violate their professional oaths and standards to protect wealthy predators instead of protecting the people from predators who undermine constitutional rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I said a while ago that we would see protests come to America, I think what we are seeing now is nothing compared to what we will see. It seems that these protests are getting more organized and I think they will eventually move from wall street to the Federal Reserve banks where they should be.

America has always had protests....not a very surprising prediction. Start protesting in Canada if you want change...there. The Americans are not your problem, and there is nothing you can do about them anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawfully...a different matter altogether than illegal "tax evasion".

We don't know that because the investigations have not been done.

However if it was all 'lawful', why are some of the wealthiEST paying a full 45% intaxes while others pay little to none?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America has always had protests....not a very surprising prediction. Start protesting in Canada if you want change...there. The Americans are not your problem, and there is nothing you can do about them anyway.

Protesting in Canada starting soon ...

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/10/03/protesters-look-to-occupy-bay-street/

Canadian activists inspired by protesters in New York are planning to converge on Toronto’s financial district on Saturday Oct. 15 before marching through the streets when the Toronto Stock Exchange opens on the Monday. Similar protests are being planned online for Halifax, Calgary Montreal, Ottawa, Victoria and Nova Scotia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know that because the investigations have not been done.

Then do them for all...ever heard of equal protection of the law?

However if it was all 'lawful', why are some of the wealthiEST paying a full 45% intaxes while others pay little to none?

Because much of their wealth has already been taxed the first time around. They are called "wealthy" for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shady, jacee uses "democracy" in place of socialism. Jacee believes in an economic democracy, where as long as there are enough votes, certain groups can take what they want (money, wealth, resources, skills, etc) from others. You do realize that jacee is a communist, right, as she shows strong solidarity with the uneducated and unemployed trash in the streets screaming "our streets!" while impeding a major thoroughfare? I am not kidding, she is a straight up communist. The enemy within, literally.

:lol: :lol:

Ooooooo ... the scary COMMUNISTS!!!!

That's just naive Bob . Your fearmongering attempt at scaring people like Shady into are obvious and laughable.

I've owned and operated a business and may again. I have no love for communal living, thinking, or business and no illusions that it's even humanly possible. I like my privacy and independence and will defend it to the endth degree.

I'm probably more libertarian than you because I support reducing the size of government and dismantling many controls on free enterprise, while implementing very strong controls on predatory capitalism/corporatism that undermines and victimizes true entrepreneurs by co-opting our lawmakers and enforcers.

I would probably call myself a centrist libertarian, "live and let live" and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". In other words, live independently by your own choices and wits, but do not victimize others to your personal benefit.

And by the way ... re 'dismantling many government controls' ...

I believe that every Canadian is born into an inheritance of an equal proportion of ownership of the wealth of Canada, regardless of means and access to power. Those who can and do work harder and smarter earn more along the way, but it should never be at the expense of destructive poverty for those less able, less connected, less powerful. As such, I support universal health care, child care, care for the elderly and less able, universal access to basic necessities (food, shelter, clothing) and rates of public assistance that actually afford healthy development of children in particular: A child malnourished and traumatized. Does not become a healthy and contributing adult without help from all of the rest of us. Thus, I support the establishment of a variety of universal benefits reflecting the equal share we each hold in Canada, to ensure healthy human conditions for all. And I support dismantling many of the HUGE and expensive bureaucracies that are required to perform all the 'means-testing' that is required to determine 'entitlement' to basic needs., substituting instead direct access to basic needs (food, shelter, clothing, health care, education, etc.) ) for all, and modest a guaranteed annual income for all to afford opportunit ie, individually or collectively, for entreprenurship to provide opportunity for service to others and improvement in circumstances of all.

The huge government bureaucracies that do 'means-testing' of the poorest and least able Canadians are so costly that that money could be distributed to each and every Canadian, including the wealthy and wealthiEST, to afford basic healthy living for each and every one of us equal shareholders in Canada, leaving us all free to pursue increasing our incomes through healthy entreprenurship and competition while not allowing predators to accumulate a disproportionate amount of our shared wealth.

Call it what you want, but it isn't "communism", nor is it unfettered capitalism. Greed is just as dangerous to a healthy society as 'laziness'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised they are on the front line.

They're always around, giving the orders.

It was a 'white shirt' who pepper sprayed the compliant and fenced-in women at point blank range, while 'blue shirts' stood dumbfounded and disgusted by his actions. I think the quote from a 'blue shirt' officer was "I can't believe he just walked up and fucking sprayed them!"

That particular 'white shirt' is still 'under investigation' (ya right!) For a previous action during a 2004 protest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite 1%. NA is 5% of the world's population. And if you throw in other nations with comparable living standards (europe, japan, sk, etc) its more like 25%.

Red herring.

Cybercoma wasn't talking about percent of population but proportion of world wealth in North America.

And he's right that North Americans collectively are wealthier than the rest of the world ... but not all of us. The wealth is disproportionately held by the wealthiEST 1% in North America and worldwide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then do them for all...ever heard of equal protection of the law?

Because much of their wealth has already been taxed the first time around. They are called "wealthy" for a reason.

We've already been around that bush.

Income from earnings is taxed 'the first time around'.

Income from investment of earnings is taxed as it is new income.

Your reliance on this ludicrous 'first time around' argument betrays the fact that you have no point to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However if it was all 'lawful', why are some of the wealthiEST paying a full 45% intaxes while others pay little to none?

Because there are different ways to generate income?

If I am in real estate, and I buy 100 properties, renting them for a combined $200,000/month, then I have $2.4 million per year in rental income. But I can deduct my mortgage interest, property management expenses, property taxes, utilities, insurance, etc. from my income. If I sell a few properties at a loss, then I can deduct the capital losses on those properties as well. I may have $2.4mil in paper income, but might have lost wealth over the year.

Same thing applies if you are small business owner who has a huge income, but also huge tax deductible expenses.

Meanwhile, if you are a CEO getting paid $2.4mil, then that whole amount is taxed as employment income.

As you can see, your numbers and statistics are meaningless without context. I'm surprised you couldn't figure out the reason on your own.

Edited by CPCFTW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully 5% of individuals with incomes in excess of $3.5 million paid effective tax rates of less than 10% after deductions and credits.

Which deductions and credits are you referring to? Can you give us some examples please?

A very few high-income Canadians reduce their taxes to zero

Using which tax laws?

Many in the top 0.01% of the distribution face an effective tax rate of over 45%, while some pay as little as 10%.

When you're talking about the top 0.01%, you're literally talking about 50 people in the whole country. Anyways, under what tax laws are they lowering their effective rate to just 10%?

It's about time you started referring to specifics instead of just unprovable generalizations and meaningless slogans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever heard the saying "Wall Street rules the world."?

Well the chickens are coming home to roost. :)

It would be pleasant to irritate the hell out of some young up start stock broker - who borrows 10 thousand from his dad - invests the money through a little non-detectable inside trading - comes out with 500 thousand in profits...and proudly proclaims that he works for a living and is respectable....."Money for nothing and the chicks are free" - Mean while there is some person - a better person - with ethics - who works in some back room washing dishes...who is more intelligent than the broker - who will work for 10 thousand dollars and have half of it skimmed away in all sorts of ways.....Then that money is sent away in the form of a bailout when the stock broker finds it difficult to defy and fool physics any longer and needs a bail out...

So off goes the stock broker for a well needed break from all the work to drink fine wine - snort coke - get his penis sucked in some fancey resort...while the dish washer lays in his dirty little room wondering what he will eat and if he can make his rent.... BUT of course the "high class and respectable stock broker...is treated with honour - and the dish washer is treated in contempt - for actually providing the world with clean plates to eat of - and the broker provides the world with nothing of value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

Surprised they are on the front line.

Not really…..there’s always high ranking police officers present during such high profile demonstrations……..Someone has to make the decisions on the ground to start tear gassing and bashing skulls ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

Enjoy your retirement.

It's true that those with higher incomes pay more taxes, as it should be.

Except that some of the very wealthy don't.

So the rich will take a hit with the next round of increases, while the wealthiEST get away with paying welfare tax rates.

If you 'won't pay anymore' you should be demanding that the richEST, who control their own tax rates, pay their fair share.

Oh, I’m sure we will……..but I don’t think the type of changes that you call for will happen anytime soon…..As I’ve said numerous times, I don’t think anyone should have to pay more taxes…….I’d like them lowered across the board…..but if they are going to increase them, it should be a hike that affects everyone equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because there are different ways to generate income?

If I am in real estate, and I buy 100 properties, renting them for a combined $200,000/month, then I have $2.4 million per year in rental income. But I can deduct my mortgage interest, property management expenses, property taxes, utilities, insurance, etc. from my income. If I sell a few properties at a loss, then I can deduct the capital losses on those properties as well. I may have $2.4mil in paper income, but might have lost wealth over the year.

Same thing applies if you are small business owner who has a huge income, but also huge tax deductible expenses.

Meanwhile, if you are a CEO getting paid $2.4mil, then that whole amount is taxed as employment income.

As you can see, your numbers and statistics are meaningless without context. I'm surprised you couldn't figure out the reason on your own.

I understand that perfectly and that's why income data has to be discussed with reference to 'effective tax rates' as above.

However, income levels don't necessarily reflect wealth accumulation and it isincreasing wealth accumulation among the wealthiEST one percent that demonstrates the increasing gap. Effective tax rates have to be investigated as a possible source of this top-heavy accumulation of wealth, since we know that the wealthiEST

- are holding an INCREASING proportion of the wealth, and

- have access to the power to lower their own effective tax rates by controlling lawmakers, laws and law enforcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

@Derek L

Who are the wealthiEST tax evaders? They can be identified and investigated through federal tax records and investigated for tax compliance.

Who are the ones stashing money UNTAXED in tax havens? They are harder to track but likely can be identified IF ANYONE CHOSE TO DO SO.

Again, can you prove that any of the Canadian 1%ers are breaking the law?

Assumptions aren’t convincing arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

Maybe we're not looking for 'the fall guy' who takes the rap to protect the people and systems who created them. Maybe we're looking for all the criminals among the wealthiEST and among the lawmakers and law enforcers who protect them, and the laws made to shield them from taxation.

Maybe we are demanding TRUE law enforcement for all, instead of showcasing a fall guy to protect the rest of the criminals. :)

And maybe we are also looking for the 'law enforcers' who violate their professional oaths and standards to protect wealthy predators instead of protecting the people from predators who undermine constitutional rights.

Again, who’s broken the laws?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The under ground economy is what keeps America functioning- not the Wall Street gang. The Wall Street people and their governmental friends don't like this REAL economy - because it is too complex and difficult to plunder - but if you got rid of the under ground economy - there would be no economy - the ancient barter system is what keeps all societies going - no matter what you call that "illegal" system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I’m sure we will……..but I don’t think the type of changes that you call for will happen anytime soon…..As I’ve said numerous times, I don’t think anyone should have to pay more taxes…….I’d like them lowered across the board…..but if they are going to increase them, it should be a hike that affects everyone equally

The intent of progressive proportionate (%) income tax in Canada is specifically that it should "affect" everyone equally. Thus if you are middle class, it might amount to (eg) foregoing one of your two family cheap camping/visiting holidays per year, while for the wealthy it might amount to foregoing 3 of your 6 expensive hotel/cruise holidays per year. :) Edited by jacee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The intent of progressive proportionate (%) income tax in Canada is specifically that it should "affect" everyone equally. Thus if you are middle class, it might amount to (eg) foregoing one of your two family cheap camping/visiting holidays per year, while for the wealthy it might amount to foregoing 3 of your 6 hotel holidays per year. :)

I get one holiday per year that lasts for two days and usually it is a working event - to be able to stay in a hotel - costs a lot of cash - disposable cash..in my world there is no disposable cash...or food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...