Canada's business taxes 2nd highest

[RB]

RB!  Business taxes in Ontario are lower than in any of the contiguous American states.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quoted from Fraser Institute

"Ontario’s economic performance ranges from moderate to miserable

Although Ontario continues to reduce corporate income tax rates, its overall taxation of capital remains high

When ranked against the 50 US states and 10 Canadian provinces across a variety of economic performance indicators, Ontario suddenly doesn’t look so prosperous. Specifically, Ontario ranked:

· 35th in per-capita GDP

· 52nd in per-capita personal disposable income

· 26th in employment growth (1991–2001)

· 53rd in unemployment rates

Furthermore, US firms, on average, invest 10 to 15 percent more than Ontario firms in machinery and equipment, and other competitive and efficiency-enhancing investments.

Ontario even has trouble competing with border states like Michigan and Ohio, whose economies are very similar to Ontario’s. "

[Guest eureka]

That is total nonsense, RB. Complete and utter crap. Yet, it is so typical of the Fraser Institute that has never written a true word since its foundation.

It is about on a par in veracity with its "Tax Freedom Day."

[err]

Quoted from Fraser Institute

(Like asking Karl Marx if captialism is good)

"Ontario’s economic performance ranges from moderate to miserable

Although Ontario continues to reduce corporate income tax rates, its overall taxation of capital remains high

Personal tax rates are too high because they have to subsidise the corporate tax breaks.

When ranked against the 50 US states and 10 Canadian provinces across a variety of economic performance indicators, Ontario suddenly doesn’t look so prosperous. Specifically, Ontario ranked:

· 35th in per-capita GDP

· 52nd in per-capita personal disposable income

if you discount those living in abject poverty, along with the millions that have no health insurance...

· 53rd in unemployment rates

Even though many of the USA's employed make a pittance, well below the poverty line, they can boast that they are gainfully employed....

Ontario even has trouble competing with border states like Michigan and Ohio, whose economies are very similar to Ontario’s. "

That's why GM's most efficient plants are in Canada, Toyota says Canada is a far better place to do business....

The Fraser institute is not a credible source, unless you're looking for contrived propeganda to promote right-wing tight-money policies....

[Riverwind]

· 35th in per-capita GDP

· 52nd in per-capita personal disposable income

An unfair comparision because it probably converted Ontario GDP to US dollars at a time when the Canadian dollar was under value. In other words, Ontarions may have had a lower per capita disposable income in US$ but that income would buy more in Canada.

· 26th in employment growth (1991–2001)

· 53rd in unemployment rates

More generous social programs and a higher minimum wages create a higher unemployment rate. I don't feel the unemployment rate can be used as the sole measure of a society.

Furthermore, US firms, on average, invest 10 to 15 percent more than Ontario firms in machinery and equipment, and other competitive and efficiency-enhancing investments.

A trend encouraged by the lower Canadian dollar. You will likely see that trend reversing with the high dollar.

[RB]

That is total nonsense, RB. Complete and utter crap. Yet, it is so typical of the Fraser Institute that has never written a true word since its foundation.

It is about on a par in veracity with its "Tax Freedom Day."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Alas, if the Fraser institute or other research groups have raw data available for public viewing and no-one if refuting numbers - I think I can work with the analyses of the numbers, and hence I posted it for your viewing.

If you are not economically conservative you can't buy into criticism of high taxes but least you can do is to see where discrepancy lies rather than reject an entirety of research.

The BNA act allows the federal government to make money - and I assumed they can conjure up with the central bank and to do this.

Tell me it is not unconstitutional for the federal government to find ways to tax people and corporations as it is right now.

[RB]

err,Oct 13 2005, 11:08 PM

Quoted from Fraser Institute

(Like asking Karl Marx if captialism is good)

Capitalism is good, so is competition - I mean why do you think you are able to shop around for a better deal

Man, I am having problems replying with all these quotes and following where I am

[Guest eureka]

You work with the Fraser Institute and I will work with reality. Just look at the rankings you posted and ask yoursel if they make any sense. With the Fraser Institue, things don't have to make sense. They just have to reach enough suckers.

Just like any form of advertising.

If you ever read any business sections of newspapers, you would know how nonsensical the rankings are. The real positions have appeared over and over again.

But the lazy thinkers would rather have a paragraph or two from the Fraser Institute.

[Yaro]

Could you provide a link to that Fraser Institute report RB?

[err]

Could you provide a link to that Fraser Institute report RB?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here's another link with similar realities to the Fraser Institute:

Fraser Institute reality.

[RB]

Could you provide a link to that Fraser Institute report RB?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ontario Prosperity, Is Best of Second Best Good Enough?

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary & Introduction

Executive summary

2. Economic Performance

Economic Performance

3. Size of Government

Size of Government

4. Tax Policy

Tax Policy

5. Debt & Fiscal Balance

Debt & Fiscal Balance

6. Recommendations

Recommendations

I didn't think I needed to recreate these numbers - are you folks getting hysterical with the mere mention of Fraser Institute?

[err]

If you are not economically conservative you can't buy into criticism of high taxes but least you can do is to see where discrepancy lies rather than reject an entirety of research.

If you read their recommendations for Ontario, you'll get a pretty good idea whos interests they represent (hint: not the general public)

Reforming delivery of programs in such areas as health-care, education, and welfare can achieve better results at lower prices.

Exactly how to get more for your buck isn't specified, other than the ridiculous idea of adding private health care...

Taxation

The following provides a priorityized list of tax relief for Ontario:

-Complete elimination of the corporate capital tax

-Harmonization of PST with GST in order to exempt business inputs from sales taxes.

-Complete elimination of hi-income surtaxes

-Further reductions in corporate income tax rates

Make it so that business pay even less tax... and make the plebs pay it all. In Canada's heyday (1950s - 1960s), business paid 50% of taxes collected - citizens paid 50 %... Now business pays 20% and citizens pay 80%. It would appear that their goal is to have citizens (particualarly the middle class) pay 100% and business pay nothing...

Other Recommended Reforms:

Reducing regulation of labour market

Reducing minimum wage.

Privatized health-care.

Need I say more...

The Fraser institute is a far-right-wing organization with no interest in helping the majority... just the business owners....

[RB]

err,Oct 17 2005, 07:30 PM

RB,Oct 16 2005, 02:25 PM]If you are not economically conservative you can't buy into criticism of high taxes but least you can do is to see where discrepancy lies rather than reject an entirety of research.

If you read their recommendations for Ontario, you'll get a pretty good idea whos interests they represent (hint: not the general public)

Did you notice from the graphs that there is a relation of BIGGER government BIGGER spending in the economies and those provinces that rely on support and transfer monies in Canada are even BIGGER?

Did you also notice that Ontario government spending is bigger than most of the States and rank at the bottom 20%

(hint maybe it ain't about the general public interest but, how big we can grow government) or maybe we want to follow economies that actually have successes

Look you want to have an economy that is growth oriented and one that produces, you want a better standard of living, the first thing in to downsize the government. The burden exist with the people when governments are big.

No country can improve their social standards by asking its citizens or companies to pay more taxes which is what this government is doing

Next spending on social services should be less that 20% of GDP current levels are somewhere around 68% (add health, welfare and education) - why would you encourage welfarce and other social hand outs when people need to go to work, plus why not give some options to folks who can contribute and pay for their own services as in health care and education

Re-establish priorities then allocate the spending - very much like businesses we can encourage maximum result with less cost.

[err]

Did you notice from the graphs that there is a relation of BIGGER government BIGGER spending in the economies and those provinces that rely on support and transfer monies in Canada are even BIGGER?

And did you notice that provinces like Ontario rely on large amounts of transfer monies that were taken from Ontario in the first place ???... It's not a "handout" as your Fraser Institute would portray it... In fact if you listen to Dalton McGuilty, Ontario pays $23 Billion more than it receives.... I guess that makes our big government "really dependent"...

Did you also notice that Ontario government spending is bigger than most of the States and rank at the bottom 20% 

And did you notice how their 'objective' report didn't state how many more people in these 'better' states don't have any health care... and how many live in abject poverty... but the rich are richer... that's true...

(hint maybe it ain't about the general public interest but, how big we can grow government) or maybe we want to follow economies that actually have successes.

Is the high death rate of 2000/state per year of people who die just because they couldn't afford the treatment for their afflictions not weigh in as a factor in determining 'success'. Does the number of people working for slave labour rates, living in abject poverty in slums not weigh in in the determination of success ???

Look you want to have an economy that is growth oriented and one that produces, you want a better standard of living, the first thing in to downsize the government.  The burden exist with the people when governments are big.

Your narrow interpretation of a 'better standard of living' applies only to those at the top. Reducing services for those at the bottom is how you are suggesting to improve the standard of living at the top... But it doesn't improve the overall standard of living.... certainly not for the poorer classes....

No country can improve their social standards by asking its citizens or companies to pay more taxes which is what this government is doing

Just what government are you talking about... Ontario's Liberals have only added taxes for citizens, and haven't undone any of Mike Harris' tax breaks for the rich.. or corp Ontario.... Paul Martin has continually cut corp Canada's tax rate... So exactly what country or province is it that you and/or the Fraser Institute refer to in your statement...

Next spending on social services should be less that 20% of GDP current levels are somewhere around 68% (add health, welfare and education) - why would you encourage welfarce and other social hand outs when people need to go to work, plus why not give some options to folks who can contribute and pay for their own services as in health care and education.

Did you come up with the 20% figure... or maybe Preston Manning, or the Fraser Institute, or perhaps the tooth fairy... While some 'think tank' might suppose that should be the case, we have to deal with realities.

At home, we can have the same kinds of goals, putting away, say 30% of our take-home income every month (another tooth-fairy number)... However, when little Johnny comes home saying that the dentist said he needs braces, and the Ford dealership says your car needs new rotors all the way around... Should you forsake your kid's teeth and car safety to adhere to some 'ideal target' or do you 'do the right thing'....

Re-establish priorities then allocate the spending - very much like businesses we can encourage maximum result with less cost.

And should these priorities be some 'ideal target' or should it reflect the reality of our situation and 'doing the right thing'......

[Guest eureka]

I wonder how many times things have to be explained before it gets through to far too many people.

Ontario, as well as every other province, spends far more proportionately than any state of the US. It does that because evry important domestic power is in the hands of the Provinces.

Here, the Provinces are responsible for health, welfar, and education amongst other lesser jurisdictions that are the responsibility of the federal government in the US - and everywhere else.

These have nothing to do with economic performance and only incidentally to taxes.