Canadian taxpayers are a docile people.

jacee · April 21, 2016

You do that. It might scare me into moving to Florida and taking my annual $130,000 income tax payments with me, to say nothing of the HST, gas taxes, municipal taxes and other taxes I currently pay here.

Nobody cares.

One less rich whiner.

Most people appreciate living in Canada.

If you're just going to whine about it, just leave.

But pay your taxes first.

Single Mom's need to feed their kids. ?

Edited April 21, 2016 by jacee

Argus · April 21, 2016

The thing is, you could actually make MORE money if the framework was fixed. You ability to sell productions and service depends on a large pool of potential customers with signficant disposable income. In recent history the share of national income that goes to workers had dropped from 75% to 65%.

We're building a modern aristocracy.

You're trying to do away with the Trumps of the world, but sweeping doctors, dentists and software engineers into the same category.

dre · April 21, 2016

You're trying to do away with the Trumps of the world, but sweeping doctors, dentists and software engineers into the same category.

I don't want to do away with ANY of them. I just want to change the way our economic framework allocates wealth back towards workers a bit. You would still have rich people and you would still have super rich people. In fact you would probably have more of them.

Argus · April 21, 2016

Nobody cares.

Nobody cares.

Having already established that the top 10% pays more than half of the bills, just who do you think is going to feed you if they all leave?

Link to support your claim?

Regardless of what measure of income you use (market, total or after-tax) or which threshold you use (top 10 per cent, five per cent, one per cent, 0.1 per cent, 0.01 per cent) you get the same answer: top-end income shares peaked in 2006 and have been declining ever since. These shares are still higher than what they were in 1982, but to say that top-end inequality has “skyrocketed” during the Conservative government is absurd; “cratered” would be a better description.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-despite-what-the-attack-ads-say-incomes-at-the-very-top-have-fallen-since-harper-took-power

The_Squid · April 21, 2016

Having already established that the top 10% pays more than half of the bills, just who do you think is going to feed you if they all leave?

Regardless of what measure of income you use (market, total or after-tax) or which threshold you use (top 10 per cent, five per cent, one per cent, 0.1 per cent, 0.01 per cent) you get the same answer: top-end income shares peaked in 2006 and have been declining ever since. These shares are still higher than what they were in 1982, but to say that top-end inequality has “skyrocketed” during the Conservative government is absurd; “cratered” would be a better description.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-despite-what-the-attack-ads-say-incomes-at-the-very-top-have-fallen-since-harper-took-power

Now you are changing the goalposts to be "income inequality didn't skyrocket under Harper". Who made that claim in this thread??

Argus · April 21, 2016

Now you are changing the goalposts to be "income inequality didn't skyrocket under Harper". Who made that claim in this thread??

I have no idea what you're talking about. The complaint was about inequality and the above clearly states that income inequality peaked the year Harper was elected and declined every year thereafter.

cybercoma · April 22, 2016

Its actually YOU that's playing in to Marxist theory. Marx wasn't interested in stabilizing capital societies.He wanted them to get so out of whack that they imploded. And people like you were his unknowing foot soldiers.

A common misconception is that Marx was prescribing something. He wasn't. He was more like a historian observing change over time. His writing discuss what process he believed capitalist societies would go through and his ideas were exactly true. The Revolution hasn't happened, however, because the system was modified with socialist principles, delaying the Revolution. Capitalism has evolved.

jacee · April 22, 2016

Having already established that the top 10% pays more than half of the bills, just who do you think is going to feed you if they all leave?

If they are paying their tax bills, they should be pissed off at carrying the tax burden for the rich ones who aren't, and ratting them out.

You are paying for their health care and all of their government services, and you are paying their share of taxes on top of that.

.

Bonam · April 22, 2016

The thing is, you could actually make MORE money if the framework was fixed. You ability to sell productions and service depends on a large pool of potential customers with signficant disposable income. In recent history the share of national income that goes to workers had dropped from 75% to 65%.

We're building a modern aristocracy.

What is this distinction between owners and workers? I work. I spend some of the money I make and save the rest. I invest some of that saved money into shares of companies, of which I am now a part-owner. So I am both a worker and an owner, as is most of the rest of the population.

People that work minimum wage jobs and live paycheck to paycheck and can't afford to become owners as well as workers are gonna be living on the financial precipice whether the national worker's share of income is 65% or 75%, so "swinging things back in the other direction" isn't gonna fix their situation. The only thing that could improve their situation is a growing economy which causes labor demand to outstrip labor supply, even for low-skilled labor. That's what economic and fiscal policies should be aimed at... optimizing economic growth. The question should be how to do that not how best to redistribute the products of a stagnant economy.

And the best answers there are investing in infrastructure, education, scientific research, and innovation... fields of investment that are drastically underfunded by governments of every stripe as they instead pander to whatever ideology they happen to subscribe to.

The left wants to redistribute, the right wants to cut taxes unsustainably, and those of us who just want to see pragmatic policy that results in the best economic conditions are left scratching our heads.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Bonam

cybercoma · April 22, 2016

Not that the top10% doesn't have their wealth from exploiting the surplus labour of the proletariat class. Who's going to feed the rich when their farmhands revolt? What a joke.

Argus · April 22, 2016

If they are paying their tax bills, they should be pissed off at carrying the tax burden for the rich ones who aren't, and ratting them out.

You are paying for their health care and all of their government services, and you are paying their share of taxes on top of that.

.

You aren't talking about the 0.01% but the 10%. Ie, those who carry the burden of supporting more than half of all government services in this country.

And your response betrays a venomous jealousy towards that group.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Argus

?Impact · April 22, 2016

10% --- half

Would you prefer 8 oranges, or a bag of oranges?

eyeball · April 22, 2016

The left wants to redistribute, the right wants to cut taxes unsustainably, and those of us who just want to see pragmatic policy that results in the best economic conditions are left scratching our heads.

Pragmatism includes a policy that addresses the ecological hole in your simple prescription for achieving "the best economic conditions". The economy needs real physical grist for it's mills in addition to economic and fiscal policies. Much of the 'grist' our economy grew on in the past is just gone - this is a deep fundamental deficiency that makes crumbling national infrastructure look like slightly faded paint.

Making more with less can only carry us so far and in fewer and fewer numbers. Simply put we need more planets and much sooner rather than later if we're to continue following the same endless growth curve in a manner that carries us all forward peacefully.

jacee · April 22, 2016

Not that the top10% doesn't have their wealth from exploiting the surplus labour of the proletariat class. Who's going to feed the rich when their farmhands revolt? What a joke.

The top 10% in income aren't the issue. That's a trick to include ordinary professionals, distract and confuse the issues.

The top 1%in wealth are the issue.

And most don't appear in Stats Canada data ... because their money is hidden offshore to evade Canadian taxes.

eyeball · April 22, 2016

The top 10% in income aren't the issue. That's a trick to include ordinary professionals, distract and confuse the issues.

The top 1%in wealth are the issue.

And most don't appear in Stats Canada data ... because their money is hidden offshore to evade Canadian taxes.

Who am I to care if the 10% insist on lumping themselves in with the %1? If they feel so strongly about being excluded I'm okay with taxing the living snot out of them too. Depriving them of their precious self-esteem is just mean and beneath us.

August1991 · April 23, 2016

Not that the top10% doesn't have their wealth from exploiting the surplus labour of the proletariat class. Who's going to feed the rich when their farmhands revolt? What a joke.

It's a democracy.

Right-handed people vote against the left-handed people.

Poor-people against the rich-people.

Brown-eyed against the blue-eyed.

Dark-haired against the blondes.

Edited April 23, 2016 by August1991

Big Guy · April 23, 2016

It's a democracy.

Right-handed people vote against the left-handed people.

Poor-people against the rich-people.

Brown-eyed against the blue-eyed.

Dark-haired against the blondes.

Now I understand that as a left handed, rich, blue eyed blonde I have had an uphill fight all of my life!

Argus · April 23, 2016

The top 10% in income aren't the issue. That's a trick to include ordinary professionals, distract and confuse the issues.

The top 1%in wealth are the issue.

And most don't appear in Stats Canada data ... because their money is hidden offshore to evade Canadian taxes.

You only need to be making about $220k a year to be in the top 1% in Canada. So that includes doctors, and other professionals.

The top 1% paid 20.3% of federal and provincial income taxes last year.

You are trying to refer to the top 0.1%, that very tiny segment of the population who make millions or tens of millions ever year.

And such people generally have skills which can fairly easily be transplanted to other jurisdictions.

Edited April 23, 2016 by Argus

jacee · April 23, 2016

You only need to be making about $220k a year to be in the top 1% in Canada. So that includes doctors, and other professionals.

You are referring to the top 0.1%, that very tinyl segment of the population who make millions or tens of millions ever year.

And such people generally have skills which can fairly easily be transplanted to other jurisdictions.

Yes, I'm talking about obscene wealth, not high income.

.

Edited April 23, 2016 by jacee

Argus · April 23, 2016

Yes, I'm talking about obscene wealth, not just income.

But there's not much you can do about it. If you want to see what a real doctor shortage looks like increase the tax rate to 90%.

You think people like the CEO's of corporation are going to turn over all their money to the government? They'll simply move out of Canada, and take a lot of their companies with them.

jacee · April 23, 2016

But there's not much you can do about it. If you want to see what a real doctor shortage looks like increase the tax rate to 90%.

You think people like the CEO's of corporation are going to turn over all their money to the government? They'll simply move out of Canada, and take a lot of their companies with them.

I'm not talking about them.

Wealth, not income.

The ones who don't ever pay taxes ... so you're stuck paying their share.

How do you like paying taxes for people with obscene wealth?

.

Argus · April 23, 2016

I'm not talking about them.

Wealth, not income.

The ones who don't ever pay taxes ... so you're stuck paying their share.

How do you like paying taxes for people with obscene wealth?

.

Then clean up the tax code. My tax rate is already over 50%. The only tax break I use is my RRSP and a little for a home office.

And not everyone is cheating. The 1% already pays over 20% of income taxes.

Shady · April 23, 2016

About 35% of Canadians pay no federal income tax at all; about 30% of Canadians receive a GST refund.About 30% of the electorate don't listen to a politician who promises to cut taxes since the promise (honest or not) is irrelevant. These voters don't pay any tax.As they say, such people are choosing how to spend "other people's money".

That's the base of the Liberal/NDP support. People that want stuff, but don't have to pay for it.

waldo · April 23, 2016

That's the base of the Liberal/NDP support. People that want stuff, but don't have to pay for it.

#shadyMath

jacee · April 24, 2016

Then clean up the tax code. My tax rate is already over 50%. The only tax break I use is my RRSP and a little for a home office.

And not everyone is cheating. The 1% already pays over 20% of income taxes.

Not everyone is cheating ... true.

So you don't mind paying extra for the ones who are?

.