Kevin O'Leary will invest $1 million if Notley quits.

waldo · January 13, 2016

Whatever happened to the industrial heartland in Ontario and Quebec?

do tell, do tell

overthere · January 13, 2016

I'm asking you. You know, how did they diversify when it became obvious that their base was gone/going and still is. But the world is back to where it should be for Ontario: cheap energy, cheap loonie, and superb leadership in Wynne and Trudeau to guide the comeback. I'm going to make some popcorn and watch us succeed.

ASnother fun fact about O'Laery. He is the New Black, Conrad Black to be specific.

Just mention his name and the 'progressives' start sunfishing in a paroxysm of snit. He has bumped Ezra Levant I fear.

waldo · January 13, 2016

I'm asking you. You know, how did they diversify when it became obvious that their base was gone/going and still is. But the world is back to where it should be for Ontario: cheap energy, cheap loonie, and superb leadership in Wynne and Trudeau to guide the comeback. I'm going to make some popcorn and watch us succeed.

ASnother fun fact about O'Laery. He is the New Black, Conrad Black to be specific.

Just mention his name and the 'progressives' start sunfishing in a paroxysm of snit. He has bumped Ezra Levant I fear.

and I'm asking you - you made the statement but somehow you can't even frame it in the context of this thread. You gives O'Leary any time/consideration? He gets a headline and people respond to it - otherwise, he's a noBody that was feeling ignored!

GostHacked · January 14, 2016

Whatever happened to the industrial heartland in Ontario and Quebec?

Gutted and sold to foreign corporations. Prime example being the mining operations in Sudbury.

-1=e^ipi · January 14, 2016

Whatever happened to the industrial heartland in Ontario and Quebec?

Energy prices.

Topaz · January 14, 2016

I just came across this online....could O'Leary get the leadership of the Conservatives? Is someone dreaming? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/kevin-oleary-circling-key-conservatives-100031916.html

msj · January 14, 2016

Let's hope so!

Canada's Donald Trump for PM!

ReeferMadness · January 14, 2016

Let's hope so!

Canada's Donald Trump for PM!

OMG....

O'leary himself is inspired by Trump.

Mr. O’Leary also said he was inspired by the Donald Trump campaign in the U.S. Republican race, saying he thinks Mr. Trump is “smart as a fox.”

I don't even know what to say.

Topaz · January 14, 2016

If Kevin got to the PMO, he would probably be in an conflict of interest of everything he did because he would do everything he could to improve business to improve investments and not necessarily being good for the worker.

PIK · January 14, 2016

The media is just using the last part of his rant, the 1st part explains why he is saying it.

jacee · January 15, 2016

I would love it if we all had good stable jobs and nothing ever changed....especially if we all worked equally hard and were all paid the same so that no disparity would ever come between us. However this doesn't exist and will never exist.

Nor is that the intention, as you well know. This red herring argument against equitable wealth distribution is phony.

Obviously there is a balance that needs to be met in order to have environmentally sound practices and stability for long term gain

We agree on that. It got me thinking about how we evaluate contributions and progress in our national wellbeing (beyond Kevin O'Leary's sassy quip), so I started another thread on appropriate measures of national wellbeing:

GDP Alternatives

.

Edited January 15, 2016 by jacee

Accountability Now · January 19, 2016

Nor is that the intention, as you well know. This red herring argument against equitable wealth distribution is phony

I can agree that a mechanism should be in place to allow wealth to become more equitable (if desired) however keep in mind the vast majority of people don't prioritize money the same way and therefore don't care for equitable wealth. Some people choose to have careers that offer more intangible benefits over money with the very understanding that they won't be equally rich but are just fine with that.

To be honest, most of the people I know that complain about the rich or the fact they aren't rich made specific choices that put them in the spot they are in. Whether they are doing it consciously or subconsciously, people make decisions for what is important in their lives. So if having money is not important to some then why would equitable be plausible?

Accountability Now · January 19, 2016

I'm asking you. You know, how did they diversify when it became obvious that their base was gone/going and still is. But the world is back to where it should be for Ontario: cheap energy, cheap loonie, and superb leadership in Wynne and Trudeau to guide the comeback. I'm going to make some popcorn and watch us succeed.

The Liberal Peso certainly helped the Cretien government back in the day as it was primed for all that Ontario manufacturing. However, I don't know if that will help them now. When the manufacturing jobs left they went to places that operate for less than the Liberal Peso and it doesn't look like it will return anytime soon as Mexico now outproduces us for NA vehicle production. I don't think those jobs are coming back anytime soon.

jacee · January 20, 2016

I can agree that a mechanism should be in place to allow wealth to become more equitable (if desired) however keep in mind the vast majority of people don't prioritize money the same way and therefore don't care for equitable wealth. Some people choose to have careers that offer more intangible benefits over money with the very understanding that they won't be equally rich but are just fine with that.

To be honest, most of the people I know that complain about the rich or the fact they aren't rich made specific choices that put them in the spot they are in. Whether they are doing it consciously or subconsciously, people make decisions for what is important in their lives. So if having money is not important to some then why would equitable be plausible?

"Mechanisms" are in place to distribute wealth equitably, to ensure that a country's resources and benefits are shared fairly. It's called taxation.

This isn't about which 'job' people choose.

It's about the super-rich predators who own politicians and countries, suck up an increasing amount of the world's wealth and resources, and don't pay taxes.

http://m.voanews.com/a/oxfam-62-people-own-same-as-half-of-world-population/3151198.html

We cannot continue to allow hundreds of millions of people to go hungry while resources that could be used to help them are sucked up by those at the top,"

...

Tax havens, she said, are at the core of the rigged system that allows big corporations and wealthy individuals to avoid paying their fair share of tax.

This isn't about charity for the poor.

It's about wealthy predators ... thieves ... crooks ... sociopaths.

.

Argus · January 20, 2016

Nor is that the intention, as you well know. This red herring argument against equitable wealth distribution is phony.

What is 'equitable' wealth distribution?

Argus · January 20, 2016

"Mechanisms" are in place to distribute wealth equitably, to ensure that a country's resources and benefits are shared fairly. It's called taxation.

This isn't about which 'job' people choose.

It's about the super-rich predators who own politicians and countries, suck up an increasing amount of the world's wealth and resources, and don't pay taxes.

Name these super rich predators who don't pay any taxes? Just a few Canadians, please.

Bob Macadoo · January 20, 2016

Name these super rich predators who don't pay any taxes? Just a few Canadians, please.

Blacks, Irvings, Bronfmans, Martins......how many is a few?

msj · January 20, 2016

Blacks, Irvings, Bronfmans, Martins......how many is a few?

And how did you see their tax returns to determine that they are paying no taxes?

Accountability Now · January 20, 2016

"Mechanisms" are in place to distribute wealth equitably, to ensure that a country's resources and benefits are shared fairly. It's called taxation.

This isn't about which 'job' people choose.

It's about the super-rich predators who own politicians and countries, suck up an increasing amount of the world's wealth and resources, and don't pay taxes.

I agree with taxation. By definition, I fall into the top 1% and I have had countless schemes brought forth to me where I could avoid paying taxes and I refuse them all mostly because I do feel its my duty to contribute to society. With that said, how much is enough. When I get taxed I pay a LOT more than the average person. When it comes to equitable taxation, shouldn't we all contribute the same? Or do you believe we we should all make the same net money and have some pay more in taxes. This was brought up in an other equitable tax thread so I suppose it doesn't belong here.

The key thing to remember is that the equation for taxation is not always direct. When a jurisdiction lowers its taxes for various people or corporations its most often because that jurisdiction is now able to collect in other areas because that corporation is doing is operating there. Today's taxation is all about being competitive with other jurisdictions whether its a municipality, province or country. These corporations evaluate the full scope of doing business and will pick and choose the location that makes them the most profitable. As such each jurisdiction competes by lowering various taxes which draws them into their area which also brings taxation from income, property tax, and in some cases royalties. Yes....the give up some on the corporate tax side but in the end its to get more on the whole.

We can't control how other countries are taxing but I do think our local jurisdictions (municipalities/provinces) would be helping themselves if they didn't keep cutting each others throats on taxes. You look back at Alberta in the 80s and 90s and their taxes were higher than Notley's today, however they were lower than Sask and BC. Those two started driving down their taxes in the 2000s which forced Alberta to lower again. If the provinces could agree to keep a base tax rate then they would be able to have these companies pay the higher rates with out risk of losing them....that is of course assuming they wouldn't move internationally (which most can and do)

Accountability Now · January 20, 2016

Blacks, Irvings, Bronfmans, Martins......how many is a few?

I'm also curious as to what the net taxation income for the involved governments is with these companies based on the other taxes brought in by running these operations.

jacee · January 20, 2016

What is 'equitable' wealth distribution?

Where the super rich pay taxes owing, instead ofillegally hiding money in offshore tax havens.

Why do Canada Revenue Agents not clamp down on that, Argus?

Are they taking bribes?

Under political pressure of some kind?

.

Edited January 20, 2016 by jacee

On Guard for Thee · January 20, 2016

Since O'Leary so likes Trump and wants to play the "Trump North" game, any guesses on who he might get to fulfill the Sarah Pallin role?

Boges · January 20, 2016

Since O'Leary so likes Trump and wants to play the "Trump North" game, any guesses on who he might get to fulfill the Sarah Pallin role?

Just because he sounds like Trump and was on a few TV shows, doesn't make him Trump.

Was he Trump-like when he had a business show on the CBC?

Apparently Squid thinks Rona Ambrose is Palin of Canada. Until there's another woman leader of the CPC, then that'll be the Palin of Canada. :rolleyes:

Edited January 20, 2016 by Boges

The_Squid · January 20, 2016

Just because he sounds like Trump and was on a few TV shows, doesn't make him Trump.

Was he Trump-like when he had a business show on the CBC?

Apparently Squid thinks Rona Ambrose is Palin of Canada. Until there's another woman leader of the CPC, then that'll be the Palin of Canada.

If she sounds as dumb as Ambrose, then yes.

I have heard Rempel speak on the CPC behalf many times and I don't think that of her at all. So that wrecks your silly theory.

bush_cheney2004 · January 21, 2016

Just because he sounds like Trump and was on a few TV shows, doesn't make him Trump.

Was he Trump-like when he had a business show on the CBC?

Apparently Squid thinks Rona Ambrose is Palin of Canada. Until there's another woman leader of the CPC, then that'll be the Palin of Canada.

Agreed, but that's how some Canadians define and understand what is going on in their own country...comparisons to foreign political and pop culture personalities. I guess domestic figures just don't work for them.