Bloc could hold balance of power in a hung parliament:

[msj]

More bull I see.

1) you expand because the opportunity to make more money is there. Paying 9 cents on the dollar vs 11 has an immaterial impact on the expansion calculation.

2) one hires people to help out because it allows you to earn more income and/or it reduces the time you need to work in the business. Once again, 2 cents on the dollar is immaterial.

3). My so called risk is more than compensated for by the fact that I have a job that I love, that pays me well (especially after ridiculously low tax rates), and that gives me some control over my workload or whether or not I really want to do some butthole's year end or not (usually not).

Why should I get anything more than this?

A business person is nothing special.

Some of my clients who I audit - the not for profits - now they deserve praise. Their staff are doing a job as difficult as mine but are getting paid about 1/3 what I do. That's impressive.

4) the top 2% pay lots of tax because they make the most income. Paying tax is the price of civilization and I rather like my head attached to my body. We are getting rewarded plenty but some of us want more, more, more and do not care about the consequences to the less fortunate.

5) I appreciate that my good fortune, at least some of it, comes from luck.

Lucky to be born to a middle class family in Canada. Lucky to not have any mental illness ( not yet anyway). Lucky not to be in an accident (yet) that would disable me. Lucky to receive medical treatment for cancer and be out of pocket for very little cost. Lucky to have great business partners to see me through the treatment with no suffering to my business. Lucky to have had a critical illness insurance policy that paid out like it was supposed to. Etc etc.

Not all of us are this lucky and if misfortune comes my way I hope their are more people like me around than people like you.

If misfortune comes your way you will wishing the same thing too.

Edited October 17, 2015 by msj

[blueblood]

More bull I see.

1) you expand because the opportunity to make more money is there. Paying 9 cents on the dollar vs 11 has an immaterial impact on the expansion calculation.

2) one hires people to help out because it allows you to earn more income and/or it reduces the time you need to work in the business. Once again, 2 cents on the dollar is immaterial.

3). My so called risk is more than compensated for by the fact that I have a job that I love, that pays me well (especially after ridiculously low tax rates), and that gives me some control over my workload or whether or not I really want to do some butthole's year end or not (usually not).

Why should I get anything more than this?

A business person is nothing special.

Some of my clients who I audit - the not for profits - now they deserve praise. Their staff are doing a job as difficult as mine but are getting paid about 1/3 what I do. That's impressive.

4) the top 2% pay lots of tax because they make the most income. Paying tax is the price of civilization and I rather like my head attached to my body. We are getting rewarded plenty but some of us want more, more, more and do not care about the consequences to the less fortunate.

5) I appreciate that my good fortune, at least some of it, comes from luck.

Lucky to be born to a middle class family in Canada. Lucky to not have any mental illness ( not yet anyway). Lucky not to be in an accident (yet) that would disable me. Lucky to receive medical treatment for cancer and be out of pocket for very little cost. Lucky to have great business partners to see me through the treatment with no suffering to my business. Lucky to have had a critical illness insurance policy that paid out like it was supposed to. Etc etc.

Not all of us are this lucky and if misfortune comes my way I hope their are more people like me around than people like you.

If misfortune comes your way you will wishing the same thing too.

First of all its not bull.

1) every little bit helps. Small tax increases is the slippery slope to gradually over time people paying a lit more tax than necessary. I like to draw a line. I know switching to the corporate structure when the cash flow was in place greatly assisted me. But every business is different.

2). It may be immaterial now, but its a matter of principal and drawing a line to stop the slippery slope.

3). Like i say business people are invaluable in society and should be rewarded, not punished. If you feel the need to send a sizeable portion if your income to charity or the government due to your beliefs, then have at it. However, not everyone has the same social beliefs you do. Once again a matter of principle. I think its a far better message to send that people who do well in business should be role models, not vilified as the 1% fatcats who should pay their "fair share". To channel my inner august1991, steve jobs created apple which has made him rich and at the same time made investors some being retired people a lit of money, made products that benefit our lives, and employed a lot of people, and paid taxes. In my opinion hes paying his fair share and society would have been a leaser place without him. Hes still paying a lot in taxes, why should his rates be different because hes making more money. Again a matter of principle and beliefs may vary.

4). The civilization works both ways. Going after the rich too much makes for a poorer society. An example is venezuela and the rich fleeing that place. Not a country id like to live in nor visit. Taxes have to be paid yes, but i think changing the rates just because of an increase in income is unfair in principle given what a wealthy person already contributes to society. Just because we arent a non for profit doesnt mean we dont contribute.

5). Ive had misfortune come my way and i know its not good. Having to take a second job while commodity prices are in the toilet isnt a good time. Ill gladly help my neighbours with their work if they need it as thats how things are done out in the country. I find it more helpful to people to help them directly by providing a job or a hand with their work than having my income taken from me and going through govt waste and in the end not making much of a difference.

[dialamah]

First of all its not bull.

1) every little bit helps. Small tax increases is the slippery slope to gradually over time people paying a lit more tax than necessary. I like to draw a line. I know switching to the corporate structure when the cash flow was in place greatly assisted me. But every business is different.

2). It may be immaterial now, but its a matter of principal and drawing a line to stop the slippery slope.

3). Like i say business people are invaluable in society and should be rewarded, not punished. If you feel the need to send a sizeable portion if your income to charity or the government due to your beliefs, then have at it. However, not everyone has the same social beliefs you do. Once again a matter of principle. I think its a far better message to send that people who do well in business should be role models, not vilified as the 1% fatcats who should pay their "fair share". To channel my inner august1991, steve jobs created apple which has made him rich and at the same time made investors some being retired people a lit of money, made products that benefit our lives, and employed a lot of people, and paid taxes. In my opinion hes paying his fair share and society would have been a leaser place without him. Hes still paying a lot in taxes, why should his rates be different because hes making more money. Again a matter of principle and beliefs may vary.

4). The civilization works both ways. Going after the rich too much makes for a poorer society. An example is venezuela and the rich fleeing that place. Not a country id like to live in nor visit. Taxes have to be paid yes, but i think changing the rates just because of an increase in income is unfair in principle given what a wealthy person already contributes to society. Just because we arent a non for profit doesnt mean we dont contribute.

5). Ive had misfortune come my way and i know its not good. Having to take a second job while commodity prices are in the toilet isnt a good time. Ill gladly help my neighbours with their work if they need it as thats how things are done out in the country. I find it more helpful to people to help them directly by providing a job or a hand with their work than having my income taken from me and going through govt waste and in the end not making much of a difference.

Some business people and rich people over-rate themselves. Without consumers, which is essentially the middle class, business people are toast. And if the rich people are relying on businesses that are failing because the middle class is failing, then they're toast too. The middle class is currently stagnate in Canada, although the rich continue to increase their wealth. That suggests to me that the segment of society that keeps the economy going needs help more than rich businesses or individuals. A shrinking middle class means a shrinking economy; a shrinking wealthy class does not. I'd say that when it comes right down to it, the consumer is more important than the business person.

[cybercoma]

The reason I like the Liberals plan (and what Chrétien/Martin did) is because they put money into the hands of people making less money.

These are the people who are going to spend that money on real things in the economy.

Slowly but surely we'll destroy every last vestige of supply-side robbery. It has caused more harm to the economy over the last 40 years than anything else.

[poochy]

Some business people and rich people over-rate themselves. Without consumers, which is essentially the middle class, business people are toast. And if the rich people are relying on businesses that are failing because the middle class is failing, then they're toast too. The middle class is currently stagnate in Canada, although the rich continue to increase their wealth. That suggests to me that the segment of society that keeps the economy going needs help more than rich businesses or individuals. A shrinking middle class means a shrinking economy; a shrinking wealthy class does not. I'd say that when it comes right down to it, the consumer is more important than the business person.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/canadas-middle-class-now-worlds-richest-study-suggests/article18090490/

[dialamah]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/canadas-middle-class-now-worlds-richest-study-suggests/article18090490/

You'll need to summarize as I cannot access that article.

[Wilber]

Middle class gains

Canada’s middle class appears to be the richest in a new study of incomes in several big countries.

The in-depth report published today in The New York Times, which looks at about 20 nations, indicates that Canadians have bumped Americans out of the top spot they have long held.

Middle-class incomes in Canada – substantially behind in 2000 – now appear to be higher than in the United States,” the report says.

“Median income in Canada pulled into a tie with median United States income in 2010 and has most likely surpassed it since then,” it adds.

The New York Times backs up its findings saying they’re based on 35 years of surveys and compiled by LIS, which runs the Luxembourg Income Study Database. The findings were also studied by LIS researchers, along with colleagues at a New York Times website, and outside economists.

The findings show that median per-capita income in Canada, after tax, matched that of the Americans in 2010 at $18,700 (U.S.), However, as the report noted, it has probably increased since.

(As economics professor Anke Kessler of Simon Fraser University pointed out, the current numbers did not take into account countries that have traditionally been ahead of Canada, such as Norway, Switzerland and Luxembourg. Indeed, according to one of the researchers involved in the study, Luxembourg is higher.)

Here you go. This article was published in April 2014. Since then, then the drop in commodity prices has had a big effect on our economy but that would have happened regardless of who was in power.

There is a lot more to the article but this is the first part of it.

Edited October 17, 2015 by Wilber

[Wilber]

According to Maclean's, the Liberal tax break for the middle class will also provide tax relief for those who earn above $89,000.

According to the graph in that article, people don't actually start paying more tax until their taxable income hits about $220,000

[dialamah]

Here you go. This article was published in April 2014. Since then, then the drop in commodity prices has had a big effect on our economy but that would have happened regardless of who was in power.

There is a lot more to the article but this is the first part of it.

Thanks Wilber. The article compares Canada's middle class with other countries especially the US, and we are doing better than the other countries we are compared against. We can certainly be doing well compared to many other countries, even the majority of them ... but that doesn't mean there aren't problems in Canada. Doing well relative to other countries doesn't mean that the middle class in Canada isn't stagnate. In the States, the middle class is already shrinking, which makes it especially easy to 'beat'. As far as I know, that has not yet happened to the middle class in Canada and I hope it doesn't. But as long as we continue with tax policies that favor the rich, and expect the 'consumer' class to pick up the slack and keep the economy rolling, that's where we'll end up.

Brennan says his latest research confirms what others have also discovered, that while inflation remains relatively low, the benefits of rising prices are going to business and the one per cent while everyone else gets poorer. Today's Canadian numbers confirm it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/current-inflation-is-killing-off-the-canadian-middle-class-don-pittis-1.2711415

In three of Canada’s four largest provinces, wages were stagnant for male workers [] The story was not much different for women, with a median wage decline in British Columbia, slight increases in Quebec and Ontario and significant gains in Alberta.

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/7-charts-on-why-the-middle-class-is-doing-so/

Canada's troubled middle class is holding back economic recovery because families are so cash-strapped, suggest federal bureaucrats who cite the work of a maverick American economist.

An internal government analysis, which has stirred debate about what political party best champions the middle class, approvingly cites the work of Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist who argues that "inequality is holding back the economic recovery."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/24/canada-middle-class-report_n_4849895.html

The Pew Charitable Trust's Stateline blog recently published a studywhich looks at how the number of middle class families in America has changed between the years of 2000-2013.

The study found that the percentage of middle class households (as defined above) has shrunk in all 50 states since 2000.

This is especially significant since the median income has also dropped in most states, due to adjustment for inflation.

http://www.businessinsider.com/americas-shrinking-middle-class-2015-3

“This is a plan to help tackle the challenge of our times,” Van Hollen said, previewing a Monday speech at the Center for American Progress. “We want a growing economy that works for all Americans, not just the wealthy few.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/democrats-in-a-stark-shift-in-messaging-to-make-big-tax-break-pitch-for-middle-class/2015/01/11/d4438468-9999-11e4-a7ee-526210d665b4_story.html

"As to why the top 1 percent have done so well, I think that a key driver has been intentional policy decisions that shifted bargaining power from low and moderate wage workers to corporate managers and capital-owners," EPI director of research and policy Josh Bivens wrote in an email. "The laundry list of those changes is long."

Those changes include everything from a stagnant minimum wage to tax policies and interest rates that favor the wealthy. The Federal Reserve's zero interest rate policy, for example, has helped those with the capital at hand to invest in more capital. That's boosted the fortunes of investors who were able to buy real estate or stakes in businesses, given that they could find loans at very low rates, which made the cost of their investments much lower than in previous decades.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-if-the-middle-class-kept-up-with-the-top-1-percent/

[Wilber]

So what do you suggest, different interest rates for consumer debt and investment debt? Those low interest rates have also allowed the middle class to borrow.

[blueblood]

Some business people and rich people over-rate themselves. Without consumers, which is essentially the middle class, business people are toast. And if the rich people are relying on businesses that are failing because the middle class is failing, then they're toast too. The middle class is currently stagnate in Canada, although the rich continue to increase their wealth. That suggests to me that the segment of society that keeps the economy going needs help more than rich businesses or individuals. A shrinking middle class means a shrinking economy; a shrinking wealthy class does not. I'd say that when it comes right down to it, the consumer is more important than the business person.

A big reason why a lot of business people are doung a lot better these days has been the significant rise in wealth of emerging markets. For what i do, that is tge case as well.

The problem is that people dont realize that this isnt the 1950s anymore and that canada and the usa arent the only game in town. There has been a significant amount of people worldwide that have lifted themselves out of poverty and are entering the middle class. They are producing things essentially for north american customers and hopefully down the road for themselves. The reason why our middle class is "failing" is that our factory workers have prices themselves out of a job and people are now debt financing their increasing consumption. Thats how you have a lot of prices going up while incomes staying the same. The middle class in canada have to help themselves by not taking on so much debt which inflates prices and have to realize that putting a car together might not be worth a 6 digit salary. The agriculture sector is at a crisis for finding workers as the middle class in canada thinks that that kind if work is beneath them, yet people are complaining about being so hard done by?

As for business people not being important, no entrepreneurs taking risk means that likely we would be in the dark ages. Case in point emerginf markets around the world.