msj Posted February 18, 2016 Report Posted February 18, 2016 Ok ok, fair enough.... Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
August1991 Posted February 18, 2016 Author Report Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) The problem with Socialists is there is never an end to the number of 'good' things they want to do with other people's money, nor ever an end to their determination to take as much of that money from other people as possible. After all, they can use your money more wisely than you can. But Argus, an increase in the 10 cent federal gasoline excise tax to 20 cents would protect the environment. We would tax carbon dioxide emissions. Like a tax on cigarettes, the purpose is not to increase government revenues - it is to change behaviour.</irony> Edited February 18, 2016 by August1991 Quote
overthere Posted February 18, 2016 Report Posted February 18, 2016 I find it pretty unlikely that the combined taxes a person making $20k a year pays is less than $400. I know at least one senior with a gross income from all sources of about $23,500 who pays a net income tax of $370. I have done her return for several years. At $20K a few years ago she paid about $100 net income tax. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
cybercoma Posted February 18, 2016 Report Posted February 18, 2016 And any time she spends money on nearly anything, she pays consumption taxes. Quote
dre Posted February 18, 2016 Report Posted February 18, 2016 Raise it by 25 cents. Lower the bottom income tax bracket from 15% to 14%. Voila: taxing consumption, taxing carbon, lowing income taxes, gives Trudeau further political capital to build the pipeline out east. I would rather see consumption taxes done away with, and have the money displaced by increasing the graduated personal and corporate income tax. Higher taxes on income/profit encourage companies to spend on tax deductible items and items that can be depreciated over time. Like new facilities, new equipment, etc. For example when they cut the corporate tax hoping companies would invest in new equipment and facilities and hire new workers, all those companies did was increase their cash reserves. They actually cut spending on staff and equipment. Id like to see that as a business owner as well. One tax... one bureaucracy.... simple graduated formula. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
overthere Posted February 18, 2016 Report Posted February 18, 2016 And any time she spends money on nearly anything, she pays consumption taxes. and gets a GST rebate four times a year. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
August1991 Posted February 20, 2016 Author Report Posted February 20, 2016 (edited) I would rather see consumption taxes done away with, and have the money displaced by increasing the graduated personal and corporate income tax. Even poor people save. Smart poor people save by investing in their children. Dre, you would encourage current consumption; rather than a RESP or TFSA. Among other things, the GST makes the choice between present and future less distorted. ===== My OP concerned the federal excise tax on gasoline. It looks like Morneau may be smart after all. Link (BTW, the current 10 cent federal excise tax amounts to a $20/tonne CO2 tax - give or take.) Edited February 20, 2016 by August1991 Quote
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.