Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 Let us not forget the ease with which many billions can be borrowed as well....... Or they will choose the Mcguinty route. Wildly exaggerate (lie) about an existing deficit while vastly increasing spending and taxes to produce huge deficits which they will continue to blame on the Tories. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WWWTT Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Taxes are not paid while these companies move their operations to another nation with lax labour, environmental laws that provide very very cheap labour. Raising taxes will get them to move that notion along more and faster, and you will see companies move their HQ somewhere else. But this started 30 years ago, so I am not sure how that will turn around in a 4 year term under ANY future short term government. It's also a BS scare tactic because there are laws for Canadian content and trade pacts that oversee equity. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
WWWTT Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Or they will choose the Mcguinty route. Wildly exaggerate (lie) about an existing deficit while vastly increasing spending and taxes to produce huge deficits which they will continue to blame on the Tories. LOL! You think the NDP want your vote? They give a ratt's ass about your vote! They know you're a lost cause in pursuing so why waste time with you? You just don't like it that Canadians want this country to become more socialist! That's what's causing the conservatives to froth at the mouth making wild accusations. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 You know Argus? You just sit there and let Canadians decide what's better for a chance instead of the corporate elite. Naww. Canadians are, by and large, stupid about politics. There's a strong feeling among Canadians that they want stuff, deserve stuff, and yet, shouldn't have to pay for it. Given a choice a lot of them would be happy with lower taxes and better services, even if the government has to keep borrowing the money until we wind up like Greece. In addition to that people vote on dumb factors, like how pretty someone is, or whether he's from their province of the same language or ethnicity. They also vote on stuff that doesn't really matter, that is hardly going to affect anyone. They're easily herded since most of them don't know much about how the country or its economy works and couldn't be bothered to find out. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 It's also a BS scare tactic because there are laws for Canadian content and trade pacts that oversee equity. WWWTT No, there actually aren't. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
overthere Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Or they will choose the Mcguinty route. Wildly exaggerate (lie) about an existing deficit while vastly increasing spending and taxes to produce huge deficits which they will continue to blame on the Tories. Yep. And Alberta has a AAA credit rating and little debt, two things not available to Ontario. The party is just starting. Now she has recruited David Dodge to lend some 'outside credibility' to a massive bout of spending. You heard it here: his report is already written. God help us. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 LOL! You think the NDP want your vote? They give a ratt's ass about your vote! They know you're a lost cause in pursuing so why waste time with you? Hmmm. I seem to recall that when it was suggested the Tories write off groups of people for this very reason a lot of people were aghast that they would be so horribly partisan. It sees the NDP is not so different from the Tories in that way, huh? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Not worried about corps moving their HQ from Canada, there are not many to begin with. I'd be more worried about them moving production and manufacturing elsewhere. Ontario has already has a dose of that. Alberta next I reckon. Anybody planning on retiring in this country in the next 20-30 years better do some hard thinking and planning now. That generous social contract we have now is going to get much, much tougher to fund soon. Manufacturing has been going from Canada for decades. I used to be able to find many made in Canada products, not so much these days. Surprised that some do not quite understand it has already been done. Quote
Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 Manufacturing has been going from Canada for decades. I used to be able to find many made in Canada products, not so much these days. Surprised that some do not quite understand it has already been done. A lot of it has been done. Do you really want the rest to go too? And manufacturing isn't the only sector affected by higher taxes. If ore can be mined cheaper and more profitably elsewhere, then it will be. If wood can be chopped and cut elsewhere with higher profits, then that will happen. If you make it much more expensive to produce oil here than in other countries, then the corporations will focus on producing oil in other places instead. And if you make it hard for companies to get investment, as in by doubling the tax on capital gains, then some companies, many of them high tech, will move elsewhere. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 A lot of it has been done. Do you really want the rest to go too? And manufacturing isn't the only sector affected by higher taxes. If ore can be mined cheaper and more profitably elsewhere, then it will be. If wood can be chopped and cut elsewhere with higher profits, then that will happen. If you make it much more expensive to produce oil here than in other countries, then the corporations will focus on producing oil in other places instead. And if you make it hard for companies to get investment, as in by doubling the tax on capital gains, then some companies, many of them high tech, will move elsewhere. That is already happening. The lumber is shipped to the US for processing. Raw materials are being shipped to China for cheap processing and then used in cheap manufacturing. China has been buying up companies or at the least investing a lot in them to have a more controlling factor. Our government has facilitated this exporting of manufacturing and goods and services to other nations instead of trying to do what they can to keep them here. And the reason oil is expensive to process here is the lack of a new refinery in North America. That is also a long standing issue. Again, the shuffle started decades ago, people are now starting to really feel the impact of that. Quote
overthere Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 That is already happening. The lumber is shipped to the US for processing. Raw materials are being shipped to China for cheap processing and then used in cheap manufacturing. China has been buying up companies or at the least investing a lot in them to have a more controlling factor. Our government has facilitated this exporting of manufacturing and goods and services to other nations instead of trying to do what they can to keep them here. And the reason oil is expensive to process here is the lack of a new refinery in North America. That is also a long standing issue. Again, the shuffle started decades ago, people are now starting to really feel the impact of that. It has been slower to happen in Alberta, oil/bitumen exports are still rising. But not for long, we have already seen some major oilsands projects cancelled(pre-election, to be fair). Does it have to happen? Refineries spring up near demand. Refineries in Texas/ Gulf Coast have been expanded to handle new US oil, and were inetended to handle Keystone XL product which will likely never arrive. You think we need more capacity in North America for..... what? Is there some new demand in Canada that requires supply of finsihed products? If so , where? There is a new diesel refinery going up right now near Redwater, AB. Refineries in Montreal and NB will be upgraded to handle AB bitumen, in the unlikely event we can pull our collective heads out of our colons and buit the pipleine infrastructure to get our products across the Atlantic and Pacific. North America is a future wasteland for Canadian products in the future. Our former major consumer, and still our only customer for our hydrocarbons is now a major competitor. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
cybercoma Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) Taxes are not paid while these companies move their operations to another nation with lax labour, environmental laws that provide very very cheap labour. Raising taxes will get them to move that notion along more and faster, and you will see companies move their HQ somewhere else. But this started 30 years ago, so I am not sure how that will turn around in a 4 year term under ANY future short term government. A large majority of people move for far more compelling reasons, like jobs, the cost of housing, family ties or a warmer climate. At least three recent academic studies have demonstrated that the number of people who move for tax reasons is negligible, even among the wealthy. Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/business/high-taxes-are-not-a-prime-reason-for-relocation-studies-say.html Edited June 20, 2015 by cybercoma Quote
overthere Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 A large majority of people move for far more compelling reasons, like jobs, the cost of housing, family ties or a warmer climate. At least three recent academic studies have demonstrated that the number of people who move for tax reasons is negligible, even among the wealthy. Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/business/high-taxes-are-not-a-prime-reason-for-relocation-studies-say.html he was talking about corps moving because of corporate tax increases, you shifted the goalposts into another time zone . Compnaies can and do move operations to reduce costs, and taxes are certainly part of that equation. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
-1=e^ipi Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 what the optimal level of savings actually is, the extent to which an x% increase in different tax rates would impact the levels of savings and consumption, and perhaps the extent to which economic growth and a "richer society" should be prioritized above other considerations. Yes. It gets very complicated. It's still not clear to me from this explanation why corporate income taxes would necessarily discourage savings more than other non-consumption taxes, e.g. your example of capital gains taxes. Actually, a capital gains tax would discourage savings more than corporate tax since capital gains tax is directly on capital gains from investments. Paul Krugman, who is also a Nobel-winning Ivy League economist, advocates raising both income taxes and consumption taxes, so I still wonder if there is consensus among economists on these points. There are two things I think you should be wary of. First, just because someone has a Nobel prize or went to an Ivy League school doesn't mean they are correct about something; I'm not saying Paul Krugman isn't a very qualified economist but one should avoid appeal to authority; try to at least understand the basics of the reasoning that is given in support of their claims. Second, just because someone has the title 'economist' doesn't mean that they don't have significant bias or don't try to dogmatically arrive at a pre-determined conclusion; economics has historically been relatively politicized (though is becoming more objective, mathematical and based on empiricism recently) and you can find economists that are liberal, conservative, communist, anarchist and white-nationalist. Has Solow expressed a view on this (on the specific question of how people should be taxed in the present day)? He's 90 years old and long retired. I have no idea what is view is. If it is true, as you mentioned earlier, that consumption taxes are progressive, why is it that I never heard social activists who advocate for low-income communities advocate in favour of consumption taxes? It seems unlikely that it is purely out of economic ignorance? Maybe it's out of ignorance, but likely it is not seen as 'progressive' enough. Perhaps these social activists do no think that low-income communities should pay any tax, and the 1% or whatever should pay 100% of the tax. (My own untrained intuition, fwiw, would be to favour lower business taxes and higher personal income taxes, which I gather is how it is done in Nordic countries. Also to scrap most of the vote-buying tax credit schemes the Cons have come up with.) That would arguably be an improvement (especially getting rid of the tax credits). Although, as a generalization, higher consumption taxes or even pigouvian taxes (such as taxes on pollution or tobacco) would be preferable to either business taxes or income taxes. Quote
Argus Posted June 20, 2015 Author Report Posted June 20, 2015 That is already happening. The lumber is shipped to the US for processing. Raw materials are being shipped to China for cheap processing and then used in cheap manufacturing. China has been buying up companies or at the least investing a lot in them to have a more controlling factor. Our government has facilitated this exporting of manufacturing and goods and services to other nations instead of trying to do what they can to keep them here. Really? What do you think would keep them here? Lower taxes? Less bureaucracy and red tape? Streamlining environmental regulations? Please tell me how raising corporate taxes, making energy more expensive, and adding multiple new layers of bureaucracy and regulation is going to help more? And the reason oil is expensive to process here is the lack of a new refinery in North America. That is also a long standing issue. Oil is not more expensive to process. It's more expensive to get out of the ground. That's the issue. Also that we can't move the damn stuff because of environmental regulations and bureaucracy. Again, please tell me how raising taxes, raising royalty rates, stiffening environmental rules and adding in CO2 emissions and more oversight is going to help. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Vancouver King Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Oil is not more expensive to process. It's more expensive to get out of the ground. That's the issue. Also that we can't move the damn stuff because of environmental regulations and bureaucracy. Again, please tell me how raising taxes, raising royalty rates, stiffening environmental rules and adding in CO2 emissions and more oversight is going to help. The issue is the reality that $60 oil is likely here to stay. When the Saudis cut the $110 price in half and jacked production it was to accomplish more than making oil sands production or American fracking unprofitable. At $110 alternative energy sources, sun and wind, had all but caught up to oil's price. They can't move the damn stuff since increasingly clean alternatives will soon be available. Now Germany and China share a trillion dollar market in an alternative energy technology - a market Canada can't sell into due to Harper's obsession with fossil fuels. Quote When the people have no tyrant, their public opinion becomes one. ...... Lord Lytton
WWWTT Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 No, there actually aren't. Yes there actually is. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
WWWTT Posted June 20, 2015 Report Posted June 20, 2015 Hmmm. I seem to recall that when it was suggested the Tories write off groups of people for this very reason a lot of people were aghast that they would be so horribly partisan. It sees the NDP is not so different from the Tories in that way, huh? LOL! BS buddy BS. I seem to remember lots of things as well. Vote NDP! WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
eyeball Posted June 21, 2015 Report Posted June 21, 2015 ..;why is it that I never heard social activists who advocate for low-income communities advocate in favour of consumption taxes? It seems unlikely that it is purely out of economic ignorance? Maybe you're not listening closely enough. Lefties have been suggesting for years now that we replace income taxes with consumption taxes. Amongst the other reasons why is that doing so will help restrain profligate consumption thereby lessening environmental impacts. I'm hoping this will also inspire people to demand better quality things that don't break down or wear out as fast. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Argus Posted June 21, 2015 Author Report Posted June 21, 2015 Now Germany and China share a trillion dollar market in an alternative energy technology - a market Canada can't sell into due to Harper's obsession with fossil fuels. Ontario's energy costs have doubled due to the Ontario government green energy, even though it only makes up a fraction of our energy. They poured money into it with he proud declaration they were going to create a ton of jobs in green energy. Well, it didn't work. Manufacturing requires cheap labour and cheap energy, and Canada has neither. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 21, 2015 Author Report Posted June 21, 2015 Yes there actually is. WWWTT Oh, well, then you can cite them, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
overthere Posted June 21, 2015 Report Posted June 21, 2015 When the Saudis cut the $110 price in half The Saudis did not cut the price in half. They control only their production, and influence others within OPEC. What scares the crap out of the Saudis is their lack of control over supply. This is not 1973, when OPEC had no worries about new oil. The world price would have gone down in any case as all that new oil comes to market. Demand has not kept up with supply. And the Saudis do not control OPEC, any agreement to continue to produce at high levels will be temporary. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Moonbox Posted June 21, 2015 Report Posted June 21, 2015 The issue is the reality that $60 oil is likely here to stay. What are you basing that on? Is it nothing? When the Saudis cut the $110 price in half and jacked production it was to accomplish more than making oil sands production or American fracking unprofitable. Right. It was to screw over Iran. So what? At $110 alternative energy sources, sun and wind, had all but caught up to oil's price. They can't move the damn stuff since increasingly clean alternatives will soon be available. Except they're not anywhere close to being viable alternatives. Now Germany and China share a trillion dollar market in an alternative energy technology - a market Canada can't sell into due to Harper's obsession with fossil fuels. Yeah Germany and China are real success stories...with German converting from nuclear to coal and China's fossil fuel consumption skyrocketing. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
WWWTT Posted June 21, 2015 Report Posted June 21, 2015 Oh, well, then you can cite them, right? I'm sorry, who was it again who made the free trade deals? WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Vancouver King Posted June 21, 2015 Report Posted June 21, 2015 The Saudis did not cut the price in half. They control only their production, and influence others within OPEC. What scares the crap out of the Saudis is their lack of control over supply. This is not 1973, when OPEC had no worries about new oil. The world price would have gone down in any case as all that new oil comes to market. Demand has not kept up with supply. And the Saudis do not control OPEC, any agreement to continue to produce at high levels will be temporary. By using their influence to cut the prevailing price in half plus increasing production by 8-10%, they effectively control world supply - all at $18 per brl cost of production. Not only did this make oil sand investments unprofitable, it also served to regain an edge over alternate energy pricing which relentlessly falls with technology improvements. All the talk of the NDP's influence on production in Alberta and the oil patch moving to Saskatchewan is nonsensical in the context of permanent $60 oil. Quote When the people have no tyrant, their public opinion becomes one. ...... Lord Lytton
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.