Capital Gains Tax vs Income Tax

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, cannuck said:

Fix the free ride on the public of capital gains by taxing it for what it is - nothing but gambling - and move investment money into productive endeavours and THEN we could see "wealthy people" create jobs

I can't possibly answer all your comments which would involve technical expertise.  It is impossible to say whether you are correct or incorrect unless one is a highly trained economist of some sort.  

All I can really tell you is government confiscation of people's wealth through taxation, if it is for the purpose of imposing a Socialist agenda or system, is a form of theft or stealing.  

Government control or intervention in business is Socialist and a denial of personal freedom of those who invest in private corporations and business.  The extent of laws should be to maintain law and order; beyond that, it must be very careful what it does that might be considered Socialism or a invasion of the rights to own private property and invest it as one sees fit.

We do know that there are greedy people or crooked people involved in Capitalism but they have also been involved in Socialist systems that have been tried and failed.  That is because human nature is basically evil and fallen.  However that does not mean Capitalism is wrong.  It only means there are lots of crooked people in the world.  Freedom of the individual must still be respected and private property is a sacred right.  Governments are still made up of corrupt people with a fallen nature to varying extents.  This can be easily proven by looking at the various policies and laws of governments. It is folly to put your trust in government as the solution to economic matters.  There are greedy people in all levels of society who have their own agendas.

Here is a little information on capitalism from a good website:

"One of the major moral arguments against capitalism is greed, which is why many Christians feel unsure about the free enterprise system. Critics of capitalism contend that this system makes people greedy. But then we must ask whether capitalism makes people greedy or do we already have greedy people who use the economic freedom of the capitalistic system to achieve their ends? In light of the biblical description of human nature (Jeremiah 17:9), the latter seems more likely. Because people are sinful and selfish, some are going to use the capitalist system to satisfy their greed. But that is not so much a criticism of capitalism as it is a realization of the human condition. The goal of capitalism is not to change bad people but to protect us from them. Capitalism is a system in which bad people can do the least harm and good people have the freedom to do good works. Capitalism works best with moral individuals. But it also functions adequately with selfish and greedy people.

It’s important to realize that there is a difference between self-interest and selfishness. All people have self-interests which can operate in ways that are not selfish. For example, it is in our self-interest to get a job and earn an income so that we can support our family. We can do that in ways that are not selfish. By contrast, other economic systems such as socialism ignore the biblical definitions of human nature. As a result, they allow economic power to be centralized and concentrate power in the hands of a few greedy people. Those who complain of the influence major corporations have on our lives should consider the socialist alternative where a few governmental bureaucrats control every aspect of our lives.

Though greed is sometimes evident in the capitalist system, we have to understand it’s not because of the system—it’s because greed is part of man’s sinful nature. The solution lies not in changing the economic system but in changing the heart of man through the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ."

For the complete article:

What does the Bible say about capitalism? | GotQuestions.org

[August1991]

On 5/5/2024 at 1:03 PM, CdnFox said:

Your province is on the verge of electing a gov't that is committed to separating by 2030.

We don't get along.  And lying about it only makes things worse.  This is why canada is falling apart. WE can't even be honest about our problems.

1. Separate Québec from this place? It is impossible to take the rocks, trees, people.

We can change the federal State, arrangement.

2. I disagree. We do get along.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, August1991 said:

1. Separate Québec from this place? It is impossible to take the rocks, trees, people.

its entirely possible and we both know it.  You can take the rocks and trees and people out of the federation very simply. 

Quote

We can change the federal State, arrangement.

Sure. You can leave.  Because we don't get along.  Frankly i'd rather you did for that very reason. Quebec the province is a leech on the rest of canada.  See-ya-bye! 

[cannuck]

On 5/6/2024 at 10:48 AM, blackbird said:

All I can really tell you is government confiscation of people's wealth through taxation, if it is for the purpose of imposing a Socialist agenda or system, is a form of theft or stealing.  

Government control or intervention in business is Socialist and a denial of personal freedom of those who invest in private corporations and business.  The extent of laws should be to maintain law and order; beyond that, it must be very careful what it does that might be considered Socialism or a invasion of the rights to own private property and invest it as one sees fit.

You seem to want to categorize everything in some fantasy world of black and white.

Taxation is not simply "confiscation of wealth" it is the obligation of everyone to pay their share of what it costs to build and operate the infrastructure and services that every country must provide.  You need to learn to draw a line between social services (that EVERY government on this planet provides to some extent) and socialISM (a philosophy in which the state owns the means of production).

I could not agree with you more, though, that government should have ZERO interference in the world of business.    If we were ever to get government right (IMHO, of course) government would legislate, regulate and enforce laws that provided a level and workable field for business to operate responsibly and profitably in a free market and deliver the social services that its citizens deserve and need.   Instead, we have governments globally in the business of dispensing privilege, picking winners and losers and generally putting their nose and our tax dollars (and indebtedness) where they should have no right to be.

Edited May 11, 2024 by cannuck

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, cannuck said:

Taxation is not simply "confiscation of wealth" it is the obligation of everyone to pay their share of what it costs to build and operate the infrastructure and services that every country must provide.  You need to learn to draw a line between social services (that EVERY government on this planet provides to some extent) and socialISM (a philosophy in which the state owns the means of production).

Wellllll....  a few errors there. 

First off if it were simply the obligation to pay "their share" then we would have a flat tax payment every year that everyone had to make.  20,000 dollars or something that you'd have to pay to the gov't. You might have it based on the size of land you own or have direct interest in (lease) or the like i suppose seeing as that's a percent but really even that is silly.  How much do we have to pay for service, divide that among the total  people, done.   I mean, a rich person doesn't get more hospital to use than a poor person, right?

But we don't. So - it IS wealth transfer no matter how you look at it. There's nothing "Fair" about how we tax, we do it that way for wealth transfer reasons. 

AND -  ALL  social programs are socialist.  It's right in the name for god's sake.   The only "services" that a soverign nation MUST provide are defense, law, diplomacy (relations with other countries.  And for many countries in history that's all they DID provide. Those are the necessaries to protect and foster sovereignty 

Everything else is socialist.  Education, health, even roads and infrastructure.  You're taking money from people for 'the good of society', not their personal good. You're charging them for what they personally didn't receive for the 'greater good'. 

 

So - It is more reasonable to say  that most countries and most people (even those on the right) believe SOME socialism. We tend to all agree that public roads are a good idea in general.  Etc etc 

But - it is socialsm.  And it is wealth transfer. Don't mistake it. And how much of that you do is important. 

[Aristides]

When politicians talk about "paying their fair share" they mean someone other than their intended audience.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

First off if it were simply the obligation to pay "their share" then we would have a flat tax payment every year that everyone had to make. 

No we'd have a flat tax rate and the same set of deductions for everyone. As noted, Warren Buffet has a lower rate than his secretary plus a bunch of different ways to squirrel even more away from the taxman.

That's because Buffet also has way more access to tax policy makers than his secretary.

[cannuck]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Wellllll....  a few errors there. 

First off if it were simply the obligation to pay "their share" then we would have a flat tax payment every year that everyone had to make.  20,000 dollars or something that you'd have to pay to the gov't. You might have it based on the size of land you own or have direct interest in (lease) or the like i suppose seeing as that's a percent but really even that is silly.  How much do we have to pay for service, divide that among the total  people, done.   I mean, a rich person doesn't get more hospital to use than a poor person, right?[/quote]

[b] flat tax on earnings yes, speculative gain no frigging way (since it is purely inflationary the "cost" of speculative gain is ten passed on to the whole ratepayer base.[/b]

[quote] AND -  ALL  social programs are socialist.  It's right in the name for god's sake.   The only "services" that a soverign nation MUST provide are defense, law, diplomacy (relations with other countries.  And for many countries in history that's all they DID provide. Those are the necessaries to protect and foster sovereignty 

Everything else is socialist.  Education, health, even roads and infrastructure.  You're taking money from people for 'the good of society', not their personal good. You're charging them for what they personally didn't receive for the 'greater good'. [/quote]

[b]"socialist" to you, "social service" to most.[/b]

[quote]So - It is more reasonable to say  that most countries and most people (even those on the right) believe SOME socialism. We tend to all agree that public roads are a good idea in general.  Etc etc 
But - it is socialsm.  And it is wealth transfer. Don't mistake it. And how much of that you do is important. [/quote]

[b]What about sick care?   Do you really think we would be better off with US style sick care where they mistakenly think a social service should be a business (for some between medicare, medicaid and government employment, a considerable portion of the US population is already covered by government provided sick care)?   Need I remind you that the yanks pay more than double what we do for far worse results and those whose private insurance doesn't cover their problems are likely to go bankrupt from same (largest cause of personal bankruptcy).[/b]

You may want to call it "socialism" but to me it's just plain good business and good for business.

Edited May 11, 2024 by cannuck

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

No we'd have a flat tax rate

Nope.  There's no 'fairness' in a tax 'rate'.   If i pay double what you do, do i get double the hospitals? double the roads? maybe i get double the cbc?  no?  So... i just pay more and get the same amount.

That's not 'fair". That's price gouging. 

And despite the fact that we already allow this, lefties like you try to pretend that the 1 percent of people who already pay 20 percent of all the taxes (not to mention providing a lot of the jobs for the rest who pay taxes) are somehow 'not paying their fair share'.

It's a disgusting like that socialists tell to justify theft. 

Quote

 As noted, Warren Buffet has a lower rate than his secretary plus a bunch of different ways to squirrel even more away from the taxman.

And still paid more. Much more.  So there you go.  More than fair,

Quote

That's because Buffet also has way more access to tax policy makers than his secretary.

That's because buffet was already paying an insane amount of money to get the same things as his secretary and wanted to minimize that. 

Not to mention that's only income tax - now calculate how much more he paid in consumption taxes, property taxes on his residence and his businesses -  it would probably take 1000 of his secretaries to pay as much tax as he did. 

But he doesnt get 1000 times more military, or 1000 times more foreign policy or passports , etc. 

And in canada with our health system he'd get even LESS for all that extra money. 

Sorry kiddo - if we were talking about what's "Fair" - the poor would not even be able to live here. We're already grossly unfair - push it too far and the wealthy will warren-buffet your ass and buy some policy makers  

[August1991]

In civilised Canada, I cannot claim my municipal/provincial taxes as a deduction on my federal taxes

In America, before Trump, this was possible.

Rich people in California and New York reduced their federal tax.

Trump changed the SALT and made America more like federal Canada.

Edited May 12, 2024 by August1991

[cannuck]

23 minutes ago, August1991 said:

In civilised Canada, I cannot claim my municipal/provincial taxes as a deduction on my federal taxes

In America, before Trump, this was possible.

Rich people in California and New York reduced their federal tax.

Trump changed the SALT and made America more like federal Canada.

The banksters literally OWN the government of the USA, so who gives a flying frick WHAT they do.  At $35. Tn USD they are hardly in any condition to be anyone's model of government.

In Canada, our combined Fed/prov debt is about $2.2 Tn, so pay your damned taxes instead of passing the bill on to my grandchildren.   Also: stop electing people who think they can spend their way to the next election and their parliamentary pension.   Anyone parliament and senate that has not left a balanced budget should be sent a bill, not a cheque.

Edited May 12, 2024 by cannuck