Ontario Budget 2014 -- Election

Icebound · May 13, 2014

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/0c6e9302-c3e2-11e3-a8e0-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2yz1aCVku

Yet the book also has clear weaknesses. The most important is that it does not deal with why soaring inequality – while more than adequately demonstrated – matters. Essentially, Piketty simply assumes that it does.

One argument for inequality is that it is a spur to (or product of) innovation. The contrary evidence is clear: contemporary inequality and, above all, inherited wealth are unnecessary for this purpose. Another argument is that the product of just processes must be just. Yet even if the processes driving inequality were themselves just (which is doubtful), this is not the only principle of distributive justice. Another – to me more plausible – argument against Piketty’s is that inequality is less important in an economy that is now 20 times as productive as those of two centuries ago: even the poor enjoy goods and services unavailable to the richest a few decades ago.

The reason soaring inequality MATTERS.... is because it is rising FASTER than the rise of GDP. While the workers share of GDP has been in more or less constant DECLINE http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/brent.neiman/research/KN.pdf

It may be true that the poor enjoy good and services more than ever, but how much of that is the result of the huge personal debt load? Or, for that matter, personal AND public....

...

Boges · May 13, 2014

I think Wynne has fallen into a bit of a trap here. Hudak says he'll eliminate 100,000 civil servant jobs and Wynne goes after that policy like White on Rice.

It's forced her to try and defend the public service. Yet the Liberals policy regarding the increase in the civil service is quite indefensible. Everyone else seems forgotten in just about everything Wynne says. It's all about protecting where her bread is buttered.

She's not really saying what she'll do to improve the economy. Only fear-mongering about what Hudak will do to fix the economy. She says the term "Safe-Hands" It's hilarious because under Wynne, Ontario is anything but safe.

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

No it hasn't. It has been proven that corporate tax cuts create economic growth though... And economic growth frequently leads to job creation.

It has already been proven MANY MANY times that corporate tax cuts without any conditions do not result in job creation. You really didn't know this by now?

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

Why not? They already spend $1.9B on employment.

It all comes down to npv of a project. If rogers could double their customer service levels by hiring a bunch of minimum wage csrs then it would likely be a high npv project and create employment. But with the ever-increasing costs of labour (such as Wynne's 2% tax hike on employment and minimum wage increases), job creation is less likely to have an acceptable npv and a soundly managed company should redistribute profits to shareholders who may have higher npv projects themselves.

The reason companies are hoarding cash is because it isn't economical to spend that cash on employment.

You and I both know that $68M was not going to hire 1000 employees or anything like it.

...

BobbyS · May 13, 2014

No it hasn't. It has been proven that corporate tax cuts create economic growth though... And economic growth frequently leads to job creation.

I guess you know better than the former Governor of the Bank of Canad or the late Jim Flaherty

"To hear Mark Carney tell it, company directors are sitting on piles of “dead money” when they should be giving some of it back to shareholders or putting it to work."

"Cash reserves held by non-financial companies totalled more than $550-billion in the first quarter of this year. That’s up from $370-billion in mid-2009, when the country was emerging from the recession."

"In the past few years, Carney and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty have both urged corporations to increase investments to boost the economy and improve Canada’s long-term manufacturing efficiency. They have said this is particularly important at a time when consumers are maxed out and governments are reducing spending to curb budget deficits."

Edited May 13, 2014 by BobbyS

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

No but I know how to read. Nothing you quoted says anything about corporate tax cuts not creating jobs.

I guess you know better than the former Governor of the Bank of Canad or the late Jim Flaherty

"To hear Mark Carney tell it, company directors are sitting on piles of dead money when they should be giving some of it back to shareholders or putting it to work."

"Cash reserves held by non-financial companies totalled more than $550-billion in the first quarter of this year. Thats up from $370-billion in mid-2009, when the country was emerging from the recession."

"In the past few years, Carney and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty have both urged corporations to increase investments to boost the economy and improve Canadas long-term manufacturing efficiency. They have said this is particularly important at a time when consumers are maxed out and governments are reducing spending to curb budget deficits."

BobbyS · May 13, 2014

No but I know how to read. Nothing you quoted says anything about corporate tax cuts not creating jobs.

I'm not sure you do know how to read. It clearly states that corporations have been urged to increase investments in the economy and they woudl prefer to sit on billions of dollars and not reinvest them to create jobs.

I'm not telling you who to vote for, it is just sad how ill-informed some people are.

Boges · May 13, 2014

The Liberals sure know how to pick their candidates. :lol:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario_election/2014/05/13/third_liberal_candidate_criticized_for_sexist_tweet.html

Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne was caught off guard Tuesday about what New Democrats charge is a sexist social media post by a third Liberal candidate, this time in London West.

Nick Steinburg, a former constituency assistant to retired energy minister Chris Bentleywho represented the riding for a decade, posted the tweet on Feb. 10 talking about “mackin’ on ladies.”

“Inappropriate comments, whatever party they come from, are inappropriate comments and they need to be dealt with,” Wynne told reporters.

“In the two instances I’m aware of, our candidates have apologized, they’ve retracted, taken down the posts and I’ve had the opportunity to talk to them and I know their apologies are sincere.”

She was referring to a Facebook post from a Niagara-area candidate, showing the pinup-style picture of a woman in skimpy lingerie who supposedly does leg squats, and an Ottawa-area candidate who posted an item saying women talk without thinking and men can’t multi-task.

They need the likes of JT banning people from running.

People must be combing through the Facebook pages and Twitter timelines of every candidate of every party. SHHESH!

Edited May 13, 2014 by Boges

MiddleClassCentrist · May 13, 2014

Blaming Harper is the act of a desperate person. Pauline didn't even talk about Harper much in Quebec did she? Perhaps because ultimately Ottawa is Quebec's sugar daddy.

I think she was relying on Hudak's unpopularity at the time, also put together with Harpers current unpopularity.

I don't think it was desperate, it was a good strategy. Why was Harper commenting to sway provincial policy. It's not his place.

Harper could have said nothing and remained out of it, Wynne was responding to Harper.

Edited May 13, 2014 by MiddleClassCentrist

MiddleClassCentrist · May 13, 2014

I'm not sure you do know how to read. It clearly states that corporations have been urged to increase investments in the economy and they woudl prefer to sit on billions of dollars and not reinvest them to create jobs.

I'm not telling you who to vote for, it is just sad how ill-informed some people are.

It's common knowledge too...

Canadian corporations have been sitting on so much money... SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH MONEY and doing nothing with it. Even Jim Flaherty told corporations that they need to start investing...

How is having them pay 30% fewer taxes when they already have stockpiles of cash going to create jobs? IT WON'T.

PIK · May 13, 2014

And alot of that investment would be for energy production and why should they when the natives, the left and the courts will shut them down.

Boges · May 13, 2014

Harper could have said nothing and remained out of it, Wynne was responding to Harper.

Wynne thinks we need our own supplemental government pension plan and blames Harper for not agreeing to increase CPP. Wynne kind of started it.

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

I'm not sure you do know how to read. It clearly states that corporations have been urged to increase investments in the economy and they woudl prefer to sit on billions of dollars and not reinvest them to create jobs.

I'm not telling you who to vote for, it is just sad how ill-informed some people are.

Again you didn't say anything about corporate tax cuts being proven to not create jobs... Which was your original argument. Try reading again. It's not that complicated.

Corporate tax cuts would increase cash stockpiles which may or may not be used for direct employment, or which may be saved for acquisitions creating jobs for lawyers and investment bankers, or which may be distributed to shareholders who may then use the process to create jobs through increased consumption.

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

It's common knowledge too...

Canadian corporations have been sitting on so much money... SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH MONEY and doing nothing with it. Even Jim Flaherty told corporations that they need to start investing...

How is having them pay 30% fewer taxes when they already have stockpiles of cash going to create jobs? IT WON'T.

See above

WWWTT · May 13, 2014

Here's another one. Rogers communications. They spend $1.9B on employing 28k Canadians. The corporate tax cut would have saved Rogers approximately $68M in 2013. That's enough to hire about 1000 more employees without affecting the bottom line.

My wife's parents in China pay 100 RMB for cable and unlimited data internet. I think there is like around 80 channels for cable.

That works out to around $20 CDN. In Canada, you would be paying around 180$ for what my in laws get for $20!!!!!!!!

And you think that Rogers should get a tax cut?!?!?!?

If you only knew the reality!

WWWTT

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

Good point.. The article says non-financial companies are hoarding cash... Canada's economy is primarily financial companies and resource companies. Enbridge and TransCanada alone are waiting to invest $12B in pipelines. Suncor is sitting on $5B of cash... Companies are trying to invest and create jobs with their cash reserves but the "progressives" won't let them.

And alot of that investment would be for energy production and why should they when the natives, the left and the courts will shut them down.

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

My wife's parents in China pay 100 RMB for cable and unlimited data internet. I think there is like around 80 channels for cable.

That works out to around $20 CDN. In Canada, you would be paying around 180$ for what my in laws get for $20!!!!!!!!

And you think that Rogers should get a tax cut?!?!?!?

If you only knew the reality!

WWWTT

Yes prices could be lower if there were lower costs (such as taxes and labour) .. Chinese workers make far less than Rogers employees so they can provide cable service for far less. That is reality. Thank you for espousing conservative values. Edited May 13, 2014 by CPCFTW

WWWTT · May 13, 2014

Yes prices could be lower if there were lower costs (such as taxes and labour) .. Chinese workers make far less than Rogers employees so they can provide cable service for far less. That is reality. Thank you for espousing conservative values.

Nope sorry, you're not doing the math.

Labour there is making 1/4 to 1/6th compared to Canadians.

But of course, upper management probably only makes 1/100th!!!

And you want to give them a tax cut so that Rogers CEO's can get the "Lime Green Ferrari"?

If you want to give them a tax cut, then YOU pay for it! Stop expecting the rest of the tax payers to go along with your scams!

WWWTT

BobbyS · May 13, 2014

My wife's parents in China pay 100 RMB for cable and unlimited data internet. I think there is like around 80 channels for cable.

That works out to around $20 CDN. In Canada, you would be paying around 180$ for what my in laws get for $20!!!!!!!!

And you think that Rogers should get a tax cut?!?!?!?

If you only knew the reality!

WWWTT

CPCFTW is clearly delusional.....he thinks jobs will magically be created by adding to corporations hoards of money they are just sitting on. Flaherty himself (a conservative) said this was the case.

BobbyS · May 13, 2014

Nope sorry, you're not doing the math.

Labour there is making 1/4 to 1/6th compared to Canadians.

But of course, upper management probably only makes 1/100th!!!

And you want to give them a tax cut so that Rogers CEO's can get the "Lime Green Ferrari"?

If you want to give them a tax cut, then YOU pay for it! Stop expecting the rest of the tax payers to go along with your scams!

WWWTT

+1

Not voting Hudak here. Absolutely out of the question.

We need someone to balance the books which none of them are going to do right now it seems, but I am certainly not going to support someone who wants to give more money away to multi-billion dollar corporations for nothing.

CPCFTW · May 13, 2014

CPCFTW is clearly delusional.....he thinks jobs will magically be created by adding to corporations hoards of money they are just sitting on. Flaherty himself (a conservative) said this was the case.

Flaherty said corporations were sitting on hordes of money, not that it has "been proven MANY MANY times that corporate tax cuts without any conditions do not result in job creation", which is what you alleged.

Again, corporate tax cuts have been proven MANY MANY times to have a positive impact on growth. Go read some studies on the effect of taxes on gdp growth. They almost all unanimously agree that corporate taxes have the worst effect on gdp growth. In most cases gdp growth leads to job creation.

Here's a study for you:

http://www.ecn.ulaval.ca/~sgor/cit/arnold_oecd_2008/arnold_oecd_2008.pdf

This paper examines the relationship between tax structures and economic growth by entering indicators of the tax structure into a set of panel growth regressions for 21 OECD countries, in which both the accumulation of physical and human capital are accounted for. The results of the analysis suggest that income taxes are generally associated with lower economic growth than taxes on consumption and property. More precisely, the findings allow the establishment of a ranking of tax instruments with respect to their relationship to economic growth. Property taxes, and particularly recurrent taxes on immovable property, seem to be the most growth-friendly, followed by consumption taxes and then by personal income taxes. Corporate income taxes appear to have the most negative effect on GDP per capita. These findings suggest that a revenue-neutral growth-oriented tax reform would be to shift part of the revenue base towards recurrent property and consumption taxes and away from income taxes, especially corporate taxes.

I don't know how to make things any clearer.

Edited May 13, 2014 by CPCFTW

Icebound · May 14, 2014

..

...

Here's a study for you:

http://www.ecn.ulaval.ca/~sgor/cit/arnold_oecd_2008/arnold_oecd_2008.pdf

...

These findings suggest that a revenue-neutral growth-oriented tax reform would be to shift part of the revenue base towards recurrent property and consumption taxes and away from income taxes, especially corporate taxes.

...

I don't know how to make things any clearer.

YES! I kind of like it.

So a couple of million sitting in your investment portfolio SHOULD BE TAXED at 1% per year, just about the same as your mansion on the Bridle Path....

And, of course...restore a point or two on the GST, which most economists told Harper not to cut.

Yep... I like it.

...

Edited May 14, 2014 by Icebound

cybercoma · May 14, 2014

Take it with a grain of salt because it's not a trend yet, but it looks like Hudak is yet again on the way to blowing his lead in the election. I've been saying in the fed poli forum that people decide during the campaigns. If these numbers hold and Wynne gets another minority, this election will offer more support to that.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/05/14/tim_hudaks_1_million_jobs_plan_is_a_tough_sell_with_voters_poll_suggests.html

Boges · May 14, 2014

What does your aggregator site say?

This campaign will certainly come down to the debates though. How does Wynne defend the record of her party?

cybercoma · May 14, 2014

It's one data point, so it's meaningless unless there's a trend. Hudak needs Toronto suburbs, like you (I believe said). Those 100000 public servants getting fires is not going to sit well with the Queen 's Park suburbs. That's where the public servants live. It seems people don't believe his million jobs plan. He picked a number too big. People think it sounds like BS. Despite all the scandal with the power plant, Wynne's plans are more believable at this point. But the thing is, these numbers could be the result of random sampling. We will have to wait for more polls to see if others are getting similar results.