About those tax breaks for the 'rich'

[hot enough]

43 minutes ago, PIK said:

I am a conservative rich person and I do. So what am I hearing about the tax shelters this morning .

You, a conservative!!! Perish the thought.

[GostHacked]

On 10/16/2017 at 11:41 AM, SpankyMcFarland said:

You think these tax proposals are designed to go after the poor?

Possibly in the way that the poor don't have money or the resources / knowledge to put money in offshore accounts.

[Rue]

On ‎2017‎-‎09‎-‎20 at 1:04 PM, Argus said:

It seems that if you make more than $250k a year you're rich, and any tax breaks you receive are horrific and unconscionable and damaging to the entire social fabric of Canada!

Unless you're the prime minister, of course. Then it's perfectly fine to use tax breaks for yourself and your family. Nobody quite knows how much Trudeau is worth because of all the careful games he's been playing to hide his wealth. He owns full or partial interest in several numbered accounts as well as land, family trusts, offshore accounts, and personal corporations, and nobody knows how much he pays in tax - if anything. But his PM salary is $340k to start. I wonder if he has to declare that he gets free housing, groceries, heating, hydro, phone service and transportation? On top of that he has millions in assets bringing in nobody knows how much more. And when asked about it, he avoids answering.

Now ain't that just like those filthy rich people? 

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-dodges-questions-about-taxes-on-his-family-wealth/article36319389/

Sine many people call Argus names on this board I am the first to repost the above with the date Sept. 20, and say it took the CBC, BBC and who is it the Star 3 months to catch up with him? Lol. Kudos on being so dead on.

That said, the news now being passed out as if its something new no one was aware of I find strange. People have been putting money off shore in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Isle of Mann, Switzerland, Venezuela, etc. to avoid tax for centuries. No war could have been waged without Switzerland existing as the banker of wars and refuge to place the money of dictators in.

My question is why the story broke on this phony Trudeau only yesterday about the fundraising practices. Moreneau was cearly the tip of the iceberg and someone is leaking crap not just about him but the US Secretary of Commerce, the Queen of England, on and on.

I notice someone is leaking info. The question is who and why. Who is carefully orchestrating and leaking this alleged news which is not news, just a reiteration of what everyone should be aware of.

The finances of the elite have always been reinvested in tax shelters. Everyone of us knows tax laws are such that if you have money you can afford the best lawyers to find the loopholes and create the loopholes through financing politicians and this supposed latest leak no only destroys any semblance of posturing and credibility Trudeau had but numerous past Tory ad Liberal politicians, the Trump administration, and Putin and the Russian mob and their ties to the Bank of Cyprus.

Now who stands to benefit from  this latest cycle of tax shelter news which is hardly news? China? North Korea? Who did the leaking this time?  Someone is orchestrating a deliberate news leak. So the question is who and why.

That said, if anyone could not figure out Trudeau is a two faced lying sack of @#$%  good for you. This notion this trust fund rich boy and a product of the elite was a man of the people was hilarious. Hos boy Morneau is more right wing than any Tory. He's been a champion of tax shelters of CEO's since he has been finance Minister. This lying sob's posing as caring about tax shelters attacked the lower and middle classes quite deliberately and someone has now exposed them but shown what we all know-today's investments follow shelters around the world dodging tax in specific jurisdictions.

Nothing Bronfman did raising money for the Liberals is something not done before. Its been done by every bag man for politicians across the democracies since the creation of banks. Its world-wide and involves cliques of elite circles of financiers playing their networks to keep moving and reinvesting funds.

The question is who is NOT dirty in the sense of avoiding tax?  The poor do it working under the table, the rich do it through shelters.

My question remains, who is now doing the leaking and why?

Edited November 6, 2017 by Rue

[Bonam]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

The poor do it working under the table, the rich do it through shelters.

Maybe if governments weren't always so blatantly wasting tax money by the hundreds of billions, people would be less inclined to avoid tax. I don't mind paying towards useful spending done well.. infrastructure, education, scientific research, national defense, etc. I'm sure many people feel the same way, in fact, many of the "rich" give extensively to various charitable causes. The problem is that the government does not spend money wisely or well, funds are wasted in massive corruption, bureaucracy, wasteful programs, and bad decisions. When people feel that their hard earned tax dollars are being wasted or, worse, being used to fund the lavish lifestyles of politicians, of course avoiding taxes will be foremost on their minds. 

To address tax evasion, what the government needs to do is not to go after tax evaders, but to go after its own corruption and wasteful spending. Make people believe in their leaders and governments again, make people trust their institutions. 

Edited November 7, 2017 by Bonam

[Argus]

13 hours ago, Bonam said:

Maybe if governments weren't always so blatantly wasting tax money by the hundreds of billions, people would be less inclined to avoid tax. I don't mind paying towards useful spending done well.. infrastructure, education, scientific research, national defense, etc.

What I don't like to see my tax dollars going to, aside from wastage and overpaid, overbureacratized public servants includes anything like funding for the arts of any kind. That includes money for large institutions like ballet, orchestras and theaters. I'll make an exception for the NAC as something the capital of the country could use. But that's it. If you look around in history at great music halls from previous centuries you find they were mostly constructed with no public money. Hey, if you think you can get enough customers for the ballet to make it worth your while then fine, form one, and set yourself up. Good on you. But why the hell should I pay for it? Same goes for opera houses or musicians, artists and writers of various sorts. If they have the talent to get people to pay them, then great. If not, I don't see why I should.  That goes for television networks, too. I see no reason why we need to fund the CBC. Let it survive or not on how many people are willing to watch it and advertise on it.

You want to have some ethnic celebration? Fine. Just don't ask for taxpayer money for it. I don't care if it's Carribana or St. Patrick's day. Nor do I want to contribute one dime to your kid's special language school so he can keep up his ancestral language. 

[Jariax]

I think there's a growing number of Canadians that don't actually have trouble paying high taxes, they just have trouble paying high taxes for the bullshit that the government spends money on - union employees being the #1 cost. 

But to Argus' point about what government should spend money on, that's an interesting debate. Political leaders are not only chosen for their ability to listen to the people and put democratic voices into reality, but also for their vision of what the city/province/nation should become. 

Sometimes politicians have to lead, even though their is no immediate public appetite for those things, as demonstrated by the free market. The most obvious example is when the government banned smoking in bars.

The businesses were outraged. The libertarians suggested that if such a thing was wanted, the free market would have already established it. Looking back now, does anyone think the government made a mistake when they banned smoking from bars and restaurants? Even the smokers seem to reluctantly agree that it was the right thing to do. 

But aside from a couple of exceptions, I do understand the frustration of politicians spending our money to reflect their values, and the values of the culturally elite.

[GostHacked]

Since it is not illegal, I suggest everyone put their money in offshore accounts! And I guess this is how they manage to make millions and pay pennies for taxes.  But yet MY taxes need to go up because these loopholes are not plugged.  The rich elites and the rich bought politicians want this tax haven. But only for them.

Edited November 7, 2017 by GostHacked

[Rue]

3 hours ago, Jariax said:

I think there's a growing number of Canadians that don't actually have trouble paying high taxes, they just have trouble paying high taxes for the bullshit that the government spends money on - union employees being the #1 cost. 

But to Argus' point about what government should spend money on, that's an interesting debate. Political leaders are not only chosen for their ability to listen to the people and put democratic voices into reality, but also for their vision of what the city/province/nation should become. 

Sometimes politicians have to lead, even though their is no immediate public appetite for those things, as demonstrated by the free market. The most obvious example is when the government banned smoking in bars.

The businesses were outraged. The libertarians suggested that if such a thing was wanted, the free market would have already established it. Looking back now, does anyone think the government made a mistake when they banned smoking from bars and restaurants? Even the smokers seem to reluctantly agree that it was the right thing to do. 

But aside from a couple of exceptions, I do understand the frustration of politicians spending our money to reflect their values, and the values of the culturally elite.

Oh I probably have a problem paying high taxes for any reason J but the rest of your statements again well written.

[PIK]

I guess we canadians are on the hook for 10m loan to china, for some resort. China, really?

[scribblet]

There's a 10 million loan to Club Med for building a resort in Quebec...   Quebec's kicking in too.

[Rue]

11 hours ago, scribblet said:

There's a 10 million loan to Club Med for building a resort in Quebec...   Quebec's kicking in too.

Merci. , I can tell you Quebecers like to wear G-strings no matter how fat we get so its important such resorts exist...besides Quebecers already took over the beaches of Florida to the point we Quebecois, like les Juifs, les Cubans,  les gays, les Haitiens, les Sunbirds, have been pushed from our usual migration patterns to Southern Florida due to les floods/hurricanes.

And so this new intiiative to find new sources for our display of les g-strings....

Sil vous plaint, please remember since the waters in Quebec are cold, don't get any ideas, its shrinkage from the cold as George Castanza once pointed out on Seinfeld you will see. Please do not assume this is a general state of affairs as to our size.  Thank you.  Merci.

Real Plummage,

Directeur

Tourisme Quebec

 

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Anybody with mutual funds or a pension that invests in high tech is part of this offshore scam too, so there’s me implicated on two fronts. 

I still think that you should go after the modestly rich and the filthy rich at the same time. Are guys like these really middle class?

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/top-billing-ont-doctors-500-bill-over-1m-one-ophthalmologist-billed-6-6m-1.2870834

Of course, the filthy rich oligarchs are so deeply embedded in the state we’re probably going to lose there but we should try even if it means losing money in the process. Justice demands it. 

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I still think that you should go after the modestly rich and the filthy rich at the same time.

If we simply souveilled Cabinet members to an extent that would make George Orwell blush we would quite likely nip every single mal-governance issue we have in the proverbial bud in one fell swoop...forever.

[Argus]

On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 2:21 PM, SpankyMcFarland said:

Anybody with mutual funds or a pension that invests in high tech is part of this offshore scam too, so there’s me implicated on two fronts. 

I still think that you should go after the modestly rich and the filthy rich at the same time. Are guys like these really middle class?

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/top-billing-ont-doctors-500-bill-over-1m-one-ophthalmologist-billed-6-6m-1.2870834

Of course, the filthy rich oligarchs are so deeply embedded in the state we’re probably going to lose there but we should try even if it means losing money in the process. Justice demands it. 

What makes you think people owe you their money? Because they're successful they need to be robbed to pay you? I don't see the logic behind that.

 

[Jariax]

First, I don't t think Spanky is saying people owe HIM their money, he's saying they should pay more in taxes.
Taxes are necessary, for roads, schools, hospitals, military etc.  
Now, other than a few right wingers, pretty much everyone agrees that the rich should pay more in taxes than the middle-class and poor. 
Few people are saying everyone should pay a fixed amount. However, there are some libertarians suggesting everyone should pay a flat tax rate. 

Progressive tax rates come from a belief, that the wealthy have more money to pay, while the poor and middle class will have a much harder time giving up that income. 
There is also an argument to be made to suggest that more tax dollars are spent on the wealthy than other groups. And it can also be argued that Canadian resources (land, gold, oil, potash) are mostly used by the wealthy, and since those resources belong to all Canadians, all Canadians should get a share of that. 

But beyond these arguments, anecdotes are more effective. It simply doesn't make sense to anyone with compassion that a poor family should struggle to pay for basic expenses, while someone else can spend $2 million on a car, or $450 million on a painting. 

[Argus]

12 minutes ago, Jariax said:

First, I don't t think Spanky is saying people owe HIM their money, he's saying they should pay more in taxes.
Taxes are necessary, for roads, schools, hospitals, military etc.  
Now, other than a few right wingers, pretty much everyone agrees that the rich should pay more in taxes than the middle-class and poor. 

They already do. Far more. In fact, the upper income  earners basically pay for almost all the government services of this country as it is. As I pointed out in this post

earlier in this thread. The problem with taxation as I see it is that there are too many loopholes and accounting tricks for the very rich and corporations to hide their income. Corporations used to be pretty much all the taxes in this country. Now they pay little and the amount keeps going down. .

Quote

Progressive tax rates come from a belief, that the wealthy have more money to pay, while the poor and middle class will have a much harder time giving up that income. 
There is also an argument to be made to suggest that more tax dollars are spent on the wealthy than other groups.

I'd love to see that argument. Rich people aren't likely to be making use of welfare or unemployment, and unlike the poor they are actually paying taxes. There's also an argument to be made that having huge swaths of your population paying no income tax is not healthy for democracy. If you don't have any skin in the game you have no particular incentive to vote responsibly

Edited November 20, 2017 by Argus

[eyeball]

On 11/19/2017 at 4:48 PM, Argus said:

The problem with taxation as I see it is that there are too many loopholes and accounting tricks for the very rich and corporations to hide their income. 

This is strictly a problem related to our governance, the only reason these accounting tricks and loopholes exist is because we have no control over our governments. 

As usual, Argus is touching on the wrong problem - fretting over the effect instead of the cause.

Oh well, outed bitty like this hasn't been pointed out before.

It's just too bad right wingers are so timid when it comes to challenging authority. I chalk that up to their good olde fashioned fear of changing anything.

 

[cannuck]

12 hours ago, eyeball said:

This is strictly a problem related to our governance, the only reason these accounting tricks and loopholes exist is because we have no control over our governments. 

As usual, Argus is touching on the wrong problem - fretting over the effect instead of the cause.

Oh well, outed bitty like this hasn't been pointed out before.

It's just too bad right wingers are so timid when it comes to challenging authority. I chalk that up to their good olde fashioned fear of changing anything.

 

You have come far closer to the truth in this matter than any other post.

The wrangling about rich people and taxes is not just noise, it is based upon a pretty general understanding that something is wrong with wealth distribution today,  The "haves" want to be left alone to maintain the status quo, because they have what they want, or at least feel it is within their grasp.  The "have nots" simply get into the politics of envy because that is how politics is used to lead massive blocks of vote around by the nose.  that, and by comparisson with what they see as displays of wealth on the boob tube every night, the "have not" got their fair share.

Thing is: in a country as wealthy as ours, why is there so much of a divide/spread of levels of wealth?  In a country as flush with social programmes, sick care benefits, pensions, welfare, etc., why the rankor about the 1%?  The answer is that people may be ignorant, but they are not collectively completely stupid.  They KNOW something is wrong, they just don't exactly know what it is.

So, you ask, "what is it?"   We have to look at how money is earned, and what activities result in what kinds of reward.  In a purely capitalist economy, all means of production would be owned privately, and when money is earned by either adding value to a resource, or delivering a service in support of that, wealth is created.  Thing is: in addition to our capitalist economy, we have two more economies in effect:  one, the socialist economy, very visible, uses the power of government to tax and re-distribute wealth according to what is supposed to be the common good of society.  And, we actually DO that, to a great extent.   The third element is the "market economy" that exists to some extent everywhere in some manner, but in our developed and some developing nations, the use of capital for purely speculative purposes has been blown far, far out of proportion (I refer to this as "Casino Capitalism", but others come close with "Corporate" or "Crony" Capitalism).  You see, the really big bucks that come from the activities of "markets" and the world of finance CREATE NO WEALTH, they merely re-distribute it.   BUT: the elephant in the corner of the room is that they do increase the money supply.  With no value being added, that is purely an inflationary force that in turn passes the bill for those with the privilege to play behind the desk at the casino back to each and every citizen in form of either inflation, diminished value or pent-up inflationary forces that will eventually burst the bubble.   Yes, the so-called "right wing" mavens of Wall/Bay Street are absolutely no more productive to the economy than the indigent on the small "s" street.  In fact, they are far, far more damaging to the real economy (Main Street) than every welfare and pension recipient combined.

Where Eyeball got it wrong: the really wealthy have absolutely no reason to challenge authority.  In our political system of "rule-by-special-interest" they OWN it.  What we really need is for the ignorant to become informed and participate in democratic debate and restructuring of government.  At this point in time, it is in the business of dispensing privilege.   What it needs to be doing is writing rules (especially tax law) that rewards productivity, not simply accomodating greed and privilege.   It needs to govern, instead of distort.

John Q. seems to be oblivious to these facts, but he/they KNOW there is something way out of whack.   The kind of money that makes billionaires seldom any longer comes from producing anything (i.e. actually creating wealth), but from the privilege of being able to cash in the chips from the casino.   The struggle is who gets to re-distribute - the socialists or the casino capitalists - leaving the real economy, the capitalists on main street stuck out in the cold.

(on edit)  I should add: the Main Street crowd are the very ones the Liberals targetted with these tax measures, and as within their ranks are the majority the people and businesses that acutally create most of the wealth in our economy, they have every right to be outraged.   Oh: before anyone gets on their high horse that doctors don't "produce" anything, go back to my definition of how wealth is created.  They deliver a service that is VITAL to the funtion of society and people - sick care, and some even go way outside of their box and contribute to health care.

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by cannuck

[eyeball]

The problem is the distribution of power not wealth.

Right wingers fear doing anything about that more than they loath the left. It's almost like all the focus on the left is intended to blur the reality that the distribution of power is so badly out of whack.

Edited November 21, 2017 by eyeball

[Bonam]

3 hours ago, cannuck said:

 What we really need is for the ignorant to become informed and participate in democratic debate and restructuring of government. 

 

If the ignorant could become informed, they wouldn't have been ignorant to begin with. When ignorant people think they've become "informed" of something, they aren't any more informed than before, they've just been persuaded to believe something by someone else. That's how ignorant people become "informed" that homeopathy works, or that vaccines cause autism, or that an undead dude in the sky is watching them. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 2017-11-19 at 8:50 PM, Argus said:

What makes you think people owe you their money? Because they're successful they need to be robbed to pay you? I don't see the logic behind that.

 

Nobody 'owes me their money' and, given my tax bracket, I will not be getting any of their loot because I am not middle class. What I do object to is laws being abused by pseudo-entrepreneurs who take little or no risk. That's where I don't see the logic. Laws should do what they are intended to do. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 11/6/2017 at 6:20 PM, Rue said:

 

The question is who is NOT dirty in the sense of avoiding tax?  The poor do it working under the table, the rich do it through shelters.

The big difference there is between truly, madly, deeply legal tax avoidance for the upper crust and evasion for the lower orders: the poor break the rules; the rich make them. 

Edited November 21, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[Argus]

11 hours ago, cannuck said:

The wrangling about rich people and taxes is not just noise, it is based upon a pretty general understanding that something is wrong with wealth distribution today,  The "haves" want to be left alone to maintain the status quo, because they have what they want, or at least feel it is within their grasp.  The "have nots" simply get into the politics of envy because that is how politics is used to lead massive blocks of vote around by the nose.  that, and by comparisson with what they see as displays of wealth on the boob tube every night, the "have not" got their fair share.

Thing is: in a country as wealthy as ours, why is there so much of a divide/spread of levels of wealth?  In a country as flush with social programmes, sick care benefits, pensions, welfare, etc., why the rankor about the 1%?  The answer is that people may be ignorant, but they are not collectively completely stupid.  They KNOW something is wrong, they just don't exactly know what it is.

There are a variety of reasons why some people are poor and others are not. Not everyone is created equal in terms of intellect or ability. Not everyone has the same luck. Not everyone has the same perseverance and temperament. The 'poor' in Canada have it better than at any point in history, better than most of the world's population, in fact. There are a number of ways they're kept poor. First, we don't teach our kids much about finance. People, even intelligent, university educated people are preyed on by financial institutions who know they aren't going to read, much less understand those long contracts. They get screwed over by payday loan companies, credit card companies and banks,  insurance companies and car dealers, all engaged in siphoning just a little extra cash each off the unknowing. "Hey, psst, kid, want to try out this seven year car loan? It'll get you high!" Then again, the fact is a lot of people just kind of settle. They have a fatalistic viewpoint, and they keep going to their shitty job every day and complaining about it, but do they take any courses to upgrade their skills and maybe get something better? Mostly, no.

I am the only person I know who is directly involved in the stock market. The bravest of my friends has some generic ETFs in their RRSP that were suggested by their bank (and even then only because I pointed out how much their overpaying on mutual funds). Nobody else owns stock. Why? Because it's a great mystery to them and they're afraid of it. If I say something like "Apple's only 14 times earnings" they'll look at me like I'm speaking Italian. But the rich get richer on the stock market while the poor and middle class shrink away in fear.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Argus

[Matther]

agreed on the 1%, but they ARE down at the "entry level" mostly sub $200k for GPs and half mil for specialists.  That is not big coin.  I know a few medical types in the chips, but they sure as hell didn't get there from their practice.

 

[cannuck]

On 11/21/2017 at 7:30 PM, Argus said:

There are a variety of reasons why some people are poor and others are not. Not everyone is created equal in terms of intellect or ability. Not everyone has the same luck. Not everyone has the same perseverance and temperament. The 'poor' in Canada have it better than at any point in history, better than most of the world's population, in fact. There are a number of ways they're kept poor. First, we don't teach our kids much about finance. People, even intelligent, university educated people are preyed on by financial institutions who know they aren't going to read, much less understand those long contracts. They get screwed over by payday loan companies, credit card companies and banks,  insurance companies and car dealers, all engaged in siphoning just a little extra cash each off the unknowing. "Hey, psst, kid, want to try out this seven year car loan? It'll get you high!" Then again, the fact is a lot of people just kind of settle. They have a fatalistic viewpoint, and they keep going to their shitty job every day and complaining about it, but do they take any courses to upgrade their skills and maybe get something better? Mostly, no.

I am the only person I know who is directly involved in the stock market. The bravest of my friends has some generic ETFs in their RRSP that were suggested by their bank (and even then only because I pointed out how much their overpaying on mutual funds). Nobody else owns stock. Why? Because it's a great mystery to them and they're afraid of it. If I say something like "Apple's only 14 times earnings" they'll look at me like I'm speaking Italian. But the rich get richer on the stock market while the poor and middle class shrink away in fear.

You speak as if intellectual ability was a gift that bestows wealth (it can) and all poor people are somehow short on common sense.  I can tell you from my experience, some of what we credit with being "most intelligent" (a very bad choice of phrase, as it usually is measured as those with best recall, NOT intelligence at all) are some of the poorest managers of their personal finance.  They just have more money to waste than those in lower income stratae.

I agree, that the status quo for ANYONE in Canada is far better than most people outside of the G7 could ever hope to achieve, but that is due to our ability to waste a finite gift of natural resources and our ignorance in allowing our governments to rack up trillions in debt that is not being reduced at all.  Because we consume without balancing production, and imitate the US by wasting our finite capital on speculative ventures instead of investing in wealth creating industry, we are just digging a deeper hole.

We do indeed teach our children about "finance" - by our example.  The very notion that you can run an economy on speculation is total bullshit.  You can, just as government can plump up a very sick economy with debt inflate your position within the diaspora by redistributing weath by speculative gain - while passing the bill on to your fellow citizens from current or future inflation.   What we do NOT teach is how wealth is created, and the value of actually doing so.   You boastful participation in the very instrument of that abuse is a perfect example.

There is a HUGE difference between intelligence and just being smart enough to screw over the system without enough intellectual discipline to have a conscience about it.  Being successfully greedy is very, very different from being successfully productive.  THAT is why very few genuinely brilliant people are ever very wealthy.

Edited November 23, 2017 by cannuck