punked Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) So you are saying that Canada has no need to to encourage the development of non-resource based businesses? We sure do which is why we need targeted cuts. This is what the NDP has been saying different types of business should pay different types of taxes. Lots of places have rocks and trees. People with money invest their money in places where they are likely to get the best return. Governments that make a habit of confiscating private wealth tend to find that projects don't get built or take a long time to develop. BS. What else do what me to say. If the US didn't need our trees they would cut their own, if they didn't need our oil they wouldn't buy. Sorry you are wrong. Edited April 7, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 We sure do which is why we need targeted cuts. Targeted cuts are the worst possible kind. Cut taxes, and let businesses do with them as they see fit. Stop trying to run people's lives. This is what the NDP has been saying different types of business should pay different types of taxes. That's retarded. There should be one business tax. You shouldn't have to pay higher taxes than another business just because you're in a different line of work. Once again, stop trying to micro-manage the economy and run people's lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Targeted cuts are the worst possible kind. Cut taxes, and let businesses do with them as they see fit. Stop trying to run people's lives. That's retarded. There should be one business tax. You shouldn't have to pay higher taxes than another business just because you're in a different line of work. Once again, stop trying to micro-manage the economy and run people's lives. Yes Shady someone taking our Oil which can't be pumped anywhere else should pay the same taxes as someone who created an R&D company here and keeps here employing Canadians even though they could move it to Indiana. That makes perfect sense. This is the problem with you guys the one size fits all solutions. Things that work in the Resource sector don't work in the manufacturing sector or the transport sector and so on. I am sorry it is a simple solution to a complex problem and even a 5 old can see there is something a miss about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Targeted cuts are the worst possible kind. Cut taxes, and let businesses do with them as they see fit. Stop trying to run people's lives. Targeted tax cuts, just like sin taxes, are a means of encouraging certain modes of behavior. While one can take a libertarian view that government has no business telling people what to do the stark fact is that the social good often requires government to do this very thing. A tax which is lower on those who employ a lot of people, for example, vs a tax which is higher for those businesses which contract work offshore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Targeted tax cuts, just like sin taxes, are a means of encouraging certain modes of behavior. While one can take a libertarian view that government has no business telling people what to do the stark fact is that the social good often requires government to do this very thing. A tax which is lower on those who employ a lot of people, for example, vs a tax which is higher for those businesses which contract work offshore. A very good argument. We need to put more thought into our tax policy not less that is for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 These are BS charges! Nice of the PM to call I suppose, but I'm not sure that it is entirely appropriate. Btw, cops don't lay charges. Crown counsel does. However, perhaps the cops could have done a little more mediation and told the thief that it was lucky that he only got a face-full of curry this time. Apparently there is no evidence of the theft, but most store owners don't beat paying customers with a broom and some spice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 from the liberal and taliban NDP hugged thugs who want to steal it from hard working individuals. This is why canada needs a strong leader and great man such as Prime Minister Harper!!! LMAO.. typical of a childish conservative supporter. But on the same note... I believe the Conservative government has performed so incompetently they are looking for anything right now to change the channel. This is nothing more then a repeat when the NDP brought up a case a few years back...and the bill winds its way through.... it was originally and NDP private members bill IIRC. NDP MP Olivia Chow, who acted as Chen’s interpreter at a news conference on the courthouse steps, urged her fellow MPs to adopt her private member’s bill that would change the Criminal Code to protect people like Chen, when the arrest is made “a reasonable time” after the crime is committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 These are BS charges! Nice of the PM to call I suppose, but I'm not sure that it is entirely appropriate. Btw, cops don't lay charges. Crown counsel does. However, perhaps the cops could have done a little more mediation and told the thief that it was lucky that he only got a face-full of curry this time. Apparently there is no evidence of the theft, but most store owners don't beat paying customers with a broom and some spice! Agreed.. however I don't believe there is anything wrong with the PM calling.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) Because most of Canada's large business comes from the resource sector or spin offs from the resource sector. You really think they are going to drill from oil that in the ground in Alberta from the Virgin Islands, or take diamonds that exist in the North from Indiana? If you want that business the Canadian government doesn't need to cut taxes to bring them here they need to say you want to mine in Canada bring your operations and offices here and mine but because you are take the stuff out of our ground you will pay heavily for that right. A simple, but flawed, argument. Large businesses generally do one of the following with after tax income: 1. Re-invest it in growth/productivity 2. Distribute it to shareholders (ie. RRSPs, pensions, etc.) The more after tax income you leave companies with, the more they are able to do one of the above. Now let's say that you are an evil executive for ConocoPhillips. You have billions of cash to spend on one of the above. You are presented with the following investment options: 1. Invest 5B in exploration/development in Country A. You expect this to generate a pre-tax return of $600M/yr. 2. Invest 5B in exploration/development in Country B. You expect this to generate a pre-tax return of $750M/yr. 3. Pay out 5B in dividends which shareholders can re-invest in the market for an estimated 10% return ($500M/yr). Corporate tax rates in Country A are 0%, Country B are 30%. Your after tax profits will be $600M in country A, and $525M in Country B. A good evil executive would choose to invest in the project in Country A. This will create oil and gas jobs in Country A which will generate employment income tax revenue. These jobs will also reduce the cost of social programs such as EI and Welfare as more people will be employed. More employment also means higher wages, as companies are forced to offer more lucrative compensation to attract labour. The employees will also generate consumption tax revenue, and their investments/consumption will further stimulate the economy. Country B will get nothing despite their 30% corporate tax rate. When Canada is the only country with oil, minerals, and trees, or if companies had limitless resources to invest while shareholders had no profit/return expectations, then maybe your argument would have some merit. Unfortunately for you and the NDP, that is not the case. Edited April 7, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) A very good argument. We need to put more thought into our tax policy not less that is for sure.Yet the businesses who employ a lot of people tend to be the businesses that you want to penalize with higher taxes. Incoherent and irrational nonsense like this is why exactly why the government should not be 'picking winners'. Edited April 7, 2012 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Apparently they can still be arrested ----------------- In Toronto the last holdout of the lieberals. Insults of political parties are still considered insults. Please consult the rules again, Titler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Yet the businesses who employ a lot of people tend to be the businesses that you want to penalize with higher taxes. Incoherent and irrational nonsense like this is why exactly why the government should not be 'picking winners'. Yah I get it you hate taxes that isn't an argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 A tax which is lower on those who employ a lot of people, for example, vs a tax which is higher for those businesses which contract work offshore. Businesses contract work so-called offshore for a number of reasons. Usually because they either can't find enough skilled workers locally, or they need to to stay competetive. So you're arguing to make it more costly for them with taxes, so that they need to contract even more work offshore? That's brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Yet the businesses who employ a lot of people tend to be the businesses that you want to penalize with higher taxes. Incoherent and irrational nonsense like this is why exactly why the government should not be 'picking winners'. Exactly. Large businesses and large corporations employ lots of people. Small businesses don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Yet the businesses who employ a lot of people tend to be the businesses that you want to penalize with higher taxes. Incoherent and irrational nonsense like this is why exactly why the government should not be 'picking winners'. You mean those businesses that employ fewer and fewer people for less and less time for increasingly lower and lower pay?? Those businesses that are sitting on billions of our money?? They deserve "Tax Relief"? Thanks for your personal Friedmanite/Von Hayekian/Von Mises incoherent and irrational nonsense... Pure comedy gold,I tell ya"!... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Insults of political parties are still considered insults. Please consult the rules again, Titler. Hilarious typo given the warning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Hilarious typo given the warning. Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't notice until now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Those businesses that are sitting on billions of our money??Your money? Communist claptrap. The money belongs to the shareholders of the businesses who should be paying taxes when the profits are paid to them. As long as those profits are taxed when they are removed from the business there is no justification for taxing businesses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Your money? Communist claptrap. The money belongs to the shareholders of the businesses who should be paying taxes when the profits are paid to them. As long as those profits are taxed when they are removed from the business there is no justification for taxing businesses. Speaking of Hayekian claptrap... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Your money? Communist claptrap. Don't mind Jack, he's completely delusional. He thinks that the money businesses earn are somehow partly his. He thinks that they secretly tap his bank account during the middle of the night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Don't mind Jack, he's completely delusional. He thinks that the money businesses earn are somehow partly his. He thinks that they secretly tap his bank account during the middle of the night. Yah it is not like they use our roads, or our educated people, or our resources or anything. They owe us nothing........No wait they need to pay their fair share to make life better in this country and to have more of those things they use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Yah it is not like they use our roads, or our educated people, or our resources or anything. They owe us nothing........No wait they need to pay their fair share to make life better in this country and to have more of those things they use. Or our police, our courts, our fire services, our utilities, our EI insurance (so they don't get sued by employees), and on and on and on. They shouldn't have to pay taxes. We should be paying them jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Which is EXACTLY the argument the conservatives use to justify cutting all business taxes. What rational basis do you have for supporting a small business tax rate of 0% while supporting a increased tax rate on large businesses? Since as you pointed out they are cutting taxes to ALL business owners which THEY are part of, on both sides of the aisle. Talk about conflict of interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Or our police, our courts, our fire services, our utilities, our EI insurance (so they don't get sued by employees), and on and on and on. They shouldn't have to pay taxes. We should be paying them jobs. Lets just go back to the days where they own everything and we get indebted to the company store to feed our families so we are slaves to work for whatever wage they went to pay us. That is what these guys wants as far as I can tell. They seriously don't think these companies should pay for the right to take OUR OIL or OUR TREES or OUR COPPER and make huge profits on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Yah it is not like they use our roads, or our educated people, or our resources or anything. They owe us nothing........No wait they need to pay their fair share to make life better in this country and to have more of those things they use. So how does that make a businesses private property Jack's? You use our roads as well. Does that mean your money is mine too? /facepalm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.