30 Major Corporations Paid No Income Taxes in The Last Three Years

[blueblood]

Coyne makes some interesting points, like this one:

As I say, that’s looking at the top quintile. But drill deeper into the numbers, and you find something quite remarkable. It turns out it isn’t the top 20 per cent of the population whose share of the income pie has grown. It’s all in the top one per cent: the bottom 19 per cent of the top 20 per cent, that is those in the 81st through 99th percentiles, have seen no increase in their share.

Interesting that the protesters are right, that even the wealthy are in the same boat as the rest of us - no improvement in income - except for the highest income 1% - so the 99% is a very real phenomenon.

However, Andrew Coyne is (purposely?) obfuscating the real issue by focusing only on income and avoiding discussion of accumulation of WEALTH: WealthiEST and highest income are NOT the same thing/people.

To clarify the difference, in each year some hockey players may make the highest income bracket, but their careers are short and it's unlikely that they'll ever accumulate the kind of wealth as those among the wealthiEST 1%, ie, the kind of wealth that seems to multiply itself.

In quintiles, dividing the population into 5 groups, each containing 20% of Canadian households, 2005 data shows this distribution of wealth in Canada in 2005:

1Poorest 20% - .1% of wealth

2Second 20% - 2.3%

3Middle 20% - 8.4%

4Fourth 20% - 20.2%

5Top 20% - 69.2%

But if you break down the 'Top 20%' you get

5a Wealthy 19% - 29% of the wealth

5b WealthiEST 1% - 40% of the wealth.

I love it, when asked if me shutting down is good for society, we have OWS sympathizers parroting talking points about complaining that the top 1 percent have all the wealth. Its quite obvious that you and your ilk want people like me to do all the work and get nothing for it, while you guys do little or nothing and get all the benefits. On behalf of the 1 percent, OWS can go and eat cake!!

[jacee]

Would that be gross or net income?

"Not including capital gains"

[bush_cheney2004]

Would that be gross or net income?

Doesn't say, but either way the difference is surprising.

[bush_cheney2004]

Its quite obvious that you and your ilk want people like me to do all the work and get nothing for it, while you guys do little or nothing and get all the benefits. On behalf of the 1 percent, OWS can go and eat cake!!

There have been several references to a "guaranteed income". What the hell does that mean and who gets to pay for it? Class warfare aside, there is something fundamentally wrong with that kind of strategy, lest we all kick back and just let the money roll in for doing nothing.

[blueblood]

Not necessarily true. For the past few years, China has had one of the highest savings rates in the world and it has also had one of the highest growth rates. Japan between 1950 and 1970 is another example.

This thread title is misleading. Corporate shareholders (the owners of these corporations) all paid taxes on any income they earned. The corporate officers also paid income taxes.

All taxes must fall on a living, breathing human being. When the government taxes property, it can only tax the owner of the property.

The thread's implicit statement is that the rich pay too few taxes. But is that true?

Andrew Coyne

Coyne's article is excellent, BTW. Well worth a read.

I'll see your Andrew coyne and raise you a Niall ferguson op-Ed. I'd say a better read

Niall ferguson

Edited November 5, 2011 by blueblood

[eyeball]

I'll see your Andrew coyne and raise you a Niall ferguson op-Ed. I'd say a better read

Niall ferguson

We are living through an extraordinary reversal of economic fortunes after 500 years when the big story was what historians call "the great divergence." Beginning in 1500, Europeans and European settlers in North America began to get richer than Asians (and everyone else, too). The gap between the "West and the Rest" widened at an accelerating rate until the later 1970s. But then -- on our watch -- that trend went into high-speed reverse.

Watch Niall Ferguson's TED talk So what has been going on?

He gives us 6 answers but I see Ferguson also missed the drawdown of natural capital having caught up with us. We just don't have the untapped resources of two continents for the easy taking that we once had.

[cybercoma]

I love it, when asked if me shutting down is good for society, we have OWS sympathizers parroting talking points about complaining that the top 1 percent have all the wealth. Its quite obvious that you and your ilk want people like me to do all the work and get nothing for it, while you guys do little or nothing and get all the benefits. On behalf of the 1 percent, OWS can go and eat cake!!

I think you should shut down, since you have absolutely no regard for the work that people do for you.

[bush_cheney2004]

I think you should shut down, since you have absolutely no regard for the work that people do for you.

Really...and what would you have the owners of production and services do besides fund a huge existing welfare state? What additional regard is due them in the face of higher costs and global competition? Do you want the annual frozen turkey back...is that it?

[cybercoma]

Really...and what would you have the owners of production and services do besides fund a huge existing welfare state? What additional regard is due them in the face of higher costs and global competition? Do you want the annual frozen turkey back...is that it?

What are you talking about? How does that have anything to do with blueblood's question or my answer?

[bush_cheney2004]

What are you talking about? How does that have anything to do with blueblood's question or my answer?

What "regard" are you talking about? Beyond wages and benefits, and funding the welfare state? What more do workers "deserve"?

[jacee]

I love it, when asked if me shutting down is good for society, we have OWS sympathizers parroting talking points about complaining that the top 1 percent have all the wealth. Its quite obvious that you and your ilk want people like me to do all the work and get nothing for it, while you guys do little or nothing and get all the benefits. On behalf of the 1 percent, OWS can go and eat cake!!

My "ilk" and I are comfortably retired and concerned about the next generations who, without serious change to the system, just won't be able to get ahead at all.

The 1% are draining wealth from the rest oof us, and are not reinvesting it in Canadian jobs and products and people.

It really isn't about people like you, bb.

Not sure why you're so defensive about it: The 1%'rs aren't defending you. They're just as happy sucking wealth from you as anyone else.

[bush_cheney2004]

My "ilk" and I are comfortably retired and concerned about the next generations who, without serious change to the system, just won't be able to get ahead at all.

Ah...so your concern is continued funding of your "comfortable retirement"...natch.

The 1% are draining wealth from the rest oof us, and are not reinvesting it in Canadian jobs and products and people.

The government benefits provided to retirees can "drain" wealth just the same if not faster.

[dre]

I love it, when asked if me shutting down is good for society, we have OWS sympathizers parroting talking points about complaining that the top 1 percent have all the wealth. Its quite obvious that you and your ilk want people like me to do all the work and get nothing for it, while you guys do little or nothing and get all the benefits. On behalf of the 1 percent, OWS can go and eat cake!!

I would just say that it doesnt make much difference. You do what you do because its profitable, and you are able to do it because theres demand for your products and services. If you shut down other producers will pick up the slack. If your industry as a whole isnt profitable and a shortage of producers developes, then prices will go up making production more attractive.

Stop acting like you are doing things for other people. You do what you do for the same reason that a short order cook shows up to work at the restaurant down the street.

[blueblood]

My "ilk" and I are comfortably retired and concerned about the next generations who, without serious change to the system, just won't be able to get ahead at all.

The 1% are draining wealth from the rest oof us, and are not reinvesting it in Canadian jobs and products and people.

It really isn't about people like you, bb.

Not sure why you're so defensive about it: The 1%'rs aren't defending you. They're just as happy sucking wealth from you as anyone else.

According to the numbers I am part of the 1%. I squeeze in there, but I am what I am. The only thing that sucks wealth is gov't spending. If anything we are generating wealth. In case you haven't noticed, the better other countries do, the richer Canada gets. Having people get out of poverty in Asia is a good thing.

I am defensive about it because when business grows it benefits society as a whole. When I see people protesting others who succeed, that to me sends a horrible message.

[blueblood]

I would just say that it doesnt make much difference. You do what you do because its profitable, and you are able to do it because theres demand for your products and services. If you shut down other producers will pick up the slack. If your industry as a whole isnt profitable and a shortage of producers developes, then prices will go up making production more attractive.

Stop acting like you are doing things for other people. You do what you do for the same reason that a short order cook shows up to work at the restaurant down the street.

If I shut down to join the 99% that means I shut it right down. If I donate 3000 acres to ducks unlimited or some other environmental organization, the wealth created from that 3000 acres disappears.

But I do do things for other people, my pursuit of more dollars feeds people, provides some part time employment, and supports businesses in town.

[cybercoma]

What "regard" are you talking about? Beyond wages and benefits, and funding the welfare state? What more do workers "deserve"?

People are not just a means to an end and should never be treated as such. They're human beings, not factory equipment

[bush_cheney2004]

People are not just a means to an end and should never be treated as such. They're human beings, not factory equipment

Yes they are....that's why it is called "labor". Working conditions and perks have changed over the years, but this fundamental relationship remains. Workers who are least able to cope with change have your point of view, and are at a disadvantage today.

[cybercoma]

You are everything that is wrong with society today, full stop.

[bush_cheney2004]

You are everything that is wrong with society today, full stop.

Thank you, as I am also everything that is wrong with society in the past. Kids like you have no idea what real problems are.

[cybercoma]

Thank you, as I am also everything that is wrong with society in the past. Kids like you have no idea what real problems are.

Who are you calling, kid?

[bush_cheney2004]

Who are you calling, kid?

Anyone who starts a poll about member ages.

[cybercoma]

Anyone who starts a poll about member ages.

What's your point?

[bush_cheney2004]

What's your point?

You just made it for me...kids!

[maple_leafs182]

Thank you, as I am also everything that is wrong with society in the past. Kids like you have no idea what real problems are.

I don't think you do either, if you did, you would be protesting against the Fed.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think you do either, if you did, you would be protesting against the Fed.

No, I support the concept of a national central bank, and I know why it exists. I do not worry about what the central bank in Canada does from across the border.