Canadian Economy - Buoyant

[JohnLarue]

'Common sense' means you just think its true but you have no evidence to back it up.

No common sense Is looking at an issue / problem / opportunity and arriving at the correct evaluation by logically applying intuition, experience and knowledge.

Yawn. Same as they do now, only a little less so.

That's is rather cavalier approach to staking a claim on other peoples money.

And you assume they will not do anything about it

Redistribution through taxation is the only way that works.

.

Well at least you admitted that is your goal

Check US vs Canada life expectancy.

They walk around with loaded hand guns!
Of coarse their life expectancy is lower

they do not carry the hand cannons because of tax policy

 

[Frankfooter]

No common sense Is looking at an issue / problem / opportunity and arriving at the correct evaluation by logically applying intuition, experience and knowledge.

No, common sense means you make decisions based of your preconceptions, as you 'intuit' that you know the answer.

.

Well at least you admitted that is your goal

'Cuz it works.
The Star notes that a Mulroney tax change gave the very rich a break that has neither helped the country or done anything other then increase our debt.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...tax-breaks-that-benefit-the-rich-mcquaig.html
Its not like the country filled up with rich folk because the tax rates were cheaper, either.

They walk around with loaded hand guns!
Of coarse their life expectancy is lower

Life expectancy isn't different because of gun murder rates, its because of lack of health care, poverty and lack of social services.

 

[JohnLarue]

No, common sense means you make decisions based of your preconceptions, as you 'intuit' that you know the answer.

Better than those who do not use common sense or ignore it because it conflicts with their ideology
You know that for every action there is a reaction, yet you totally ignore how the rich may react. You do not want to hear that "common sense"
That implies you value the action of taxing the rich more than you value the result
And that is messed up

Yes, we steal all the wealth from the rich, until we are rich. Then, they can take a turn figuring out how to change the tax rules.
Flippant questions demand flippant answers.

Redistribution through taxation is the only way that works.

Karl would be so proud

Well is it clear that "fairness" is really not the driving issue here for you is it?
Wealth redistribution is

Sorry comrade, that isn't going to happen

'Cuz it works.
The Star notes that a Mulroney tax change gave the very rich a break that has neither helped the country or done anything other then increase our debt.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...tax-breaks-that-benefit-the-rich-mcquaig.html
Its not like the country filled up with rich folk because the tax rates were cheaper, either.

1. That is no justification for wealth redistribution

2. No it will not work
It will damage the economy and not provide the results you seek
I guarantee you that

Life expectancy isn't different because of gun murder rates, its because of lack of health care, poverty and lack of social services.

No it is because of obesity, diabetes (as per your article), lifestyle choices and crime. Thousands of murders in the USA every year
Inequality is not the primary killer in the USA you are making it out to be

How many trillions would you throw at USA inequality only to see very little change
you can not change human nature and you sure as hell do not have the right to demand others money in order to try

 

[Frankfooter]

Better than those who do not use common sense or ignore it because it conflicts with their ideology

No, the alternative is to use research to find what position is evidence or reality based.
Common sense just means you're following your ideology/intuition regardless of facts.

Well is it clear that "fairness" is really not the driving issue here for you is it?
Wealth redistribution is

Redistribution is all about fairness.
When you play monopoly, do you let the banker set the rules?

1. That is no justification for wealth redistribution

That's repeating a claim based on dogma, not facts.
The reality is that governments have been doing redistribution through taxation for close to a century now. Some more then others, and you can compare their successes failures.
Even the states does a bit of redistribution, but not as much as most European countries, which is why there is less poverty and longer life expectancy.

No it is because of obesity, diabetes (as per your article), lifestyle choices and crime. Thousands of murders in the USA every year
Inequality is not the primary killer in the USA you are making it out to be

Thousands of murders doesn't change the life of expectancy of a country, its not that big statistically.
Obesity and diabetes are related to diet, which is related to whether you can only afford cheap fast food/starches vs affording fresh produce and healthy choices.

 

[bver_hunter]

I am certainly not contradicting myself
What do I set as fair share?
1. A whole lot less taxes for all would be a start. too bad that will not happen because Justin's old man borrow in my name 30 years ago
2. Certainty not 40% paid by 10% . That is inappropriate no matter who they are.

1. Less taxes is okay and that is what Mr. Trudeau imposed for the benefit of the middle class in his first budget. We know you hate the Trudeau family and this piece of garbage is spewed about his Father. Do not worry as you are paying a far higher price with the deficits that Stevie Boy managed to pile up.
2. What the super rich are earning and paying in taxes I know you wish you were one of them. Do not worry as they have got lots more in their savings accounts, shares etc.

1. your choice of words shows you bias and the inability to view this with any objectivity

Your pompous attitude knows no bounds as you are not coming up with any facts.

2. Well if you are going to apply taxes based on what is fair, rather than what is best for the country. Small business directly employ people. The middle class not so much. That is hardly fair now is it?

Sure small business needs the middle class employees to grow it's business. If they could do everything by themselves without giving a dime away they would do it. Does not mean that they should pay any less taxes than the middle class as they need the middle class to BUY THEIR PRODUCTS.

3. Given 10% pay 40%, then remaining 90% of the population pay less than 60%. (the article did not explicitly state if corporate taxes were excluded), so if you insist on making sure the tax system is above all else "fair" , then that 90% population really needs to pony up more.

We are talking about personal taxes etc. I know you conveniently forget to include the tax credits on business travel, entertainment, research etc.

In the real word no politician would do that because he would lose the next election. so political consideration out weight the need to be fair
i.e it is impossible for Justin's definition of "fair" to really be fair
your justification is even more self serving
"They can afford it" does not give you the right to stick your hand in their wallet via taxation

Demonstrating your hatred for the PM once again. Once again say thank you that you have a tax break a under Mr. Trudeau and we all know that you are not in the "10% of rich category who pay 40% of the taxes."

And Stephen lowered the GST, so everyone paid less taxes than under Jean.
Your point is moot
Yes we all know how much you hate Mr. Harper
Give it a rest, the bad man can not hurt you now

It was Brian who imposed that GST tax in the first place not Mr. Chretien. So your point is "moot" not mine. Be thankful that your idol Stevie Boy who sings out of tune was not the PM when the US decided to invade IRAQ. He would have done to the Canadian economy what Bush Junior did to the American economy and your great great grandchildren would have had to pay the price. Stevie Boy was more immature than any other PM and he should have learned one or two things from Mr. Chretien who steadied the Canadian ship and did not buy that Iraq weapons of mass destruction nonsense that was sold to Harpo in a jiffy.
So you give it a rest as Stevie racked up a debt of over $150 billion during his tenure in office.
You just hate the Liberals and do not provide a proper pragmatic approach to what they did on the Federal level.

 

[Frankfooter]

New study notes that education is not the key to a good income in the US.
They study found that:

they concluded that five correlated factors—segregation, family structure, income inequality, local school quality, and social capital—were likely to make a difference. Their conclusion: America is land of opportunity for some. For others, much less so.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/09/education-and-economic-mobility/541041/

 

[fuji]

1. That is no justification for wealth redistribution

This is the sort of stupid thing you say that you assume is true but which is obviously false. This is why I say you got some Ayn Rand books from a yard sale and think that makes you knowledgeable, but it doesn't. It just makes you say wrong things like this.

There's lots of econometric data on the benefits of wealth redistribution to economic efficiency, there are also lots of ethical and philosophical justifications as well.

Let me guess you will reply with a bunch of insults and then just declare there is no justification, while citing your Alzheimer's as the only argument (i.e., you're always talking about how much you've forgotten).

 

[JohnLarue]

No, the alternative is to use research to find what position is evidence or reality based.
Common sense just means you're following your ideology/intuition regardless of facts.

you mean research published by left wing loonies who rely on government dollars to survive?

Common sense tells us we need to put on more clothing as it gets colder. We do not need to research that
Similarly, when one proposes taxing the rich, it is common sense to consider how they may react and what are the downsides
Your ideology prevents you from even considering 'Your grand plan" may do more damage than good.
I suspect you are Ok with that possibility as well, as long as you see more $ going from the rich to the government
ie your ideology is preventing "Common sense" from being applied.

Redistribution is all about fairness.
When you play monopoly, do you let the banker set the rules?

When I play monopoly I play with the objective of winning.
I do not give away any of my monopoly rental income to the guy who bought the wrong properties
That is a terrible analogy

Speaking of fairness
1. How is it fair to make a claim on someone's income ?
2. How is fair to ask (demand) the 10% paying 40% of the taxes to pay more ?
3. How is it fair for our government to borrow in our names ?
4. How is it fair to borrow without a plan to get back to balance?
4. How is it fair for government employees to receive indexed gold plated pensions when the general public has to fund and plan for their own retirement?
5. How is it fair that those taking risk have to share the rewards with those that assumed no risk?
6. How is it fair that the Ont government cancels a contract at a cost of $1 B, driving up electricity costs while borrowing more per capita than any non sovereign entity.
7. How is it fair this same government is planning a minimum income, despite complete and total mis-management of the provinces finances ?

And you want these same clowns to manage re-distribution of wealth??
Go ahead list all the ways you think the conservatives wasted money

I do not want either set of clowns re-distributing wealth

Not a snowballs chance in hell

That's repeating a claim based on dogma, not facts.

No it is not
You are trying to justify stealing (redistribution) based upon your opinion of taxes changes decades ago
Since we grown our economy over that period of time one could argue those changes were successful

The reality is that governments have been doing redistribution through taxation for close to a century now.

Wrong
Income tax in Canada was initiated as a temporary measure to fund the first world war

It was promised as temporary but here we are
You are confused about the role of government in a free market economy

Some more then others, and you can compare their successes failures.
Even the states does a bit of redistribution, but not as much as most European countries, which is why there is less poverty and longer life expectancy.

Again, Tax policy does not drive either of those statistics
You can not solve those two issues via taxation

Thousands of murders doesn't change the life of expectancy of a country, its not that big statistically.

Just as tight as you bigger assumption, that in equality drives life expectancy

Obesity and diabetes are related to diet, which is related to whether you can only afford cheap fast food/starches vs affording fresh produce and healthy choices.

Only afford cheap fast food?
Making your own sandwich with an apple and a juice is far less expensive and far more healthy than getting supersized at Rotten Ronnie's

Lifestyle choices people make.
You can not fix that by taxation

 

[JohnLarue]

1. Less taxes is okay and that is what Mr. Trudeau imposed for the benefit of the middle class in his first budget.

Why not all Canadians?

2. What the super rich are earning and paying in taxes I know you wish you were one of them. Do not worry as they have got lots more in their savings accounts, shares etc.

???
What the super rich are earning and paying taxes is their business and should not be a constant concern for you
Knowing the top 10% pay 40% of all taxes should really be all you need to know.

Somehow I do not see you showing some respect and appreciation for paying such a significant a large portion

Your pompous attitude knows no bounds as you are not coming up with any facts.

The top 10% pay 40% of all taxes.
That's a fact

I was just pointing out you lack objectivity.
Strange how instead of refuting that you choose instead to incorrectly attack me about facts

Sure small business needs the middle class employees to grow it's business. If they could do everything by themselves without giving a dime away they would do it. Does not mean that they should pay any less taxes than the middle class as they need the middle class to BUY THEIR PRODUCTS.

The middle class need those employers a whole lot more than the small business needs those middle class.
You lack street smarts

We are talking about personal taxes etc. I know you conveniently forget to include the tax credits on business travel, entertainment, research etc.

You avoided the question by focusing on a footnote

Demonstrating your hatred for the PM once again. Once again say thank you that you have a tax break a under Mr. Trudeau and we all know that you are not in the "10% of rich category who pay 40% of the taxes."

??
This is about what is best for the economy, not about what is best for me

It was Brian who imposed that GST tax in the first place not Mr. Chretien. So your point is "moot" not mine.

Hardley
Justin gave a tax break
Steven gave a tax break
Jean / Paul Martin slay there debt nightmare that ************ created
Brian gave Jean / Paul Martin the GST to do the debt slaying

Not overly relevant to the current question at hand now is it?

Be thankful that your idol Stevie Boy who sings out of tune was not the PM when the US decided to invade IRAQ. He would have done to the Canadian economy what Bush Junior did to the American economy and your great great grandchildren would have had to pay the price. Stevie Boy was more immature than any other PM and he should have learned one or two things from Mr. Chretien who steadied the Canadian ship and did not buy that Iraq weapons of mass destruction nonsense that was sold to Harpo in a jiffy.
So you give it a rest as Stevie racked up a debt of over $150 billion during his tenure in office.
You just hate the Liberals and do not provide a proper pragmatic approach to what they did on the Federal level.

Holy irrelevant rant !

 

[Frankfooter]

you mean research published by left wing loonies who rely on government dollars to survive?

.....
Only afford cheap fast food?
Making your own sandwich with an apple and a juice is far less expensive and far more healthy than getting supersized at Rotten Ronnie's

Lifestyle choices people make.
You can not fix that by taxation

So much repetition in that post, claims you keep repeating as repetition alone is enough to make a point.

The studies are pretty clear about life expectancy, income redistribution and a whole host of metrics.
Taxation is here to stay, the question is how equitable a society do you want to live in?

Take the US, right now the median income of white families is now 10 times that of black families.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/federal-reserve-wealth-survey-1.4309933

Are you going to claim that's all because of choice?
(And I'm assuming your not like some of the other alt-right types here who appear to think its because of race itself)

 

[fuji]

Similarly, when one proposes taxing the rich, it is common sense to consider how they may react and what are the downsides

The economic opportunities don't go away because you tax the rich. They don't react the way you imagine. Somebody is going to supply the demand, and be taxed doing so. Things don't work in the simplistic way you think.

If Rich Guy A gets into a snit over losing a tax deduction and takes his toys and leaves, Rich Guy B will be happy to take his place and profit from the opportunity.

Somebody always will want to make that money.

In short, Ayn Rand was flat wrong on economics.

 

[FAST]

Fantasy econmoics 101,...

The economic opportunities don't go away because you tax the rich. They don't react the way you imagine. Somebody is going to supply the demand, and be taxed doing so. Things don't work in the simplistic way you think.

,..."Somebody is going to supply the demand",.... holy shit,... you can't get any more "simplistic" thinking than that,...!!!

 

[bver_hunter]

Why not all Canadians?

Yes, include the ones exploiting the loopholes, and no exceptions.

What the super rich are earning and paying taxes is their business and should not be a constant concern for you
Knowing the top 10% pay 40% of all taxes should really be all you need to know.

Same old statement over and over again. For heaven's sake why are you making exceptions for those exploiting the loopholes.

Somehow I do not see you showing some respect and appreciation for paying such a significant a large portion

Obviously you do not care for the average middle class who are the ones driving the economy. Why do all ads on TV and in the Newspapers target this group? How often do you see ads exclusively for the multi-billionaires?

The top 10% pay 40% of all taxes.
That's a fact

You should be a spokesperson for this bracket of individuals.

I was just pointing out you lack objectivity.
Strange how instead of refuting that you choose instead to incorrectly attack me about facts

If you have not comprehended the "refuting" then it is like whipping a dead horse.

The middle class need those employers a whole lot more than the small business needs those middle class.
You lack street smarts

Really can businesses survive without one or the other? Childish statement.

You avoided the question by focusing on a footnote

?????

This is about what is best for the economy, not about what is best for me

Surely if the economy has grown to 4.5 %, the highest in a decade then this Government are along the right path. What would you have done differently?

Hardley

Are you quoting an individual named "Hardey"??

Justin gave a tax break
Steven gave a tax break

Jean / Paul Martin slay there debt nightmare that ************ created
Brian gave Jean / Paul Martin the GST to do the debt slaying

What language is this??

Not overly relevant to the current question at hand now is it?

Explain yourself!!

Holy irrelevant rant !

Very relevant when you throw Mr. Chretien in the mix and how Cnada thrived under his leadership and he did not BANKRUPT us like Bush did, and it ticked off Steven who wanted to join the war on Afghanistan.

 

[fuji]

,..."Somebody is going to supply the demand",.... holy shit,... you can't get any more "simplistic" thinking than that,...!!!

All sputter. No content.

Yes it's a simple concept. One you have trouble understanding.

The law of supply and demand holds. Unmet demand is opportunity and will be supplied so long as it's profitable.

 

[Frankfooter]

Interesting article the architect of Reagan's tax cuts.

I helped create the GOP tax myth. Trump is wrong: Tax cuts don’t equal growth.
The best growth in recent memory came after President Bill Clinton raised taxes in the ’90s.

...

Wednesday, President Trump argued that “our country and our economy cannot take off” without the kind of tax reform he proposes. Last week, Republican economist Arthur Laffer said, “If you cut that [corporate] tax rate to 15 percent, it will pay for itself many times over. … This will bring in probably $1.5 trillion net by itself.”

That’s wishful thinking. So is most Republican rhetoric around tax cutting. In reality, there’s no evidence that a tax cut now would spur growth.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...uts-dont-equal-growth/?utm_term=.24a1c7ab4199

 

[JohnLarue]

Yes, include the ones exploiting the loopholes, and no exceptions.

You mean the ones who are applying proper tax planning
Yes, all Canadians should get reduced taxes

Same old statement over and over again. For heaven's sake why are you making exceptions for those exploiting the loopholes.

Because they employ people you fool

Obviously you do not care for the average middle class who are the ones driving the economy.

Well if the 10% are paying 40% of the taxes, then they are obviously driving up to 40% of the economy

Why do all ads on TV and in the Newspapers target this group? How often do you see ads exclusively for the multi-billionaires?

My God your stupid
1 Multi-billionaires do not make spending choices based on TV ads
2. Multi-billionaires do not spend a lot of time watching TV

You should be a spokesperson for this bracket of individuals.

Well 10% do pay 40% of taxes
Given you want fairness above all else (or so you said) it is only fair you are reminded of this fact

If you have not comprehended the "refuting" then it is like whipping a dead horse.

With you it more like beating a dumb horse

Really can businesses survive without one or the other? Childish statement.

Again, the middle class needs small business a lot more than business need the middle class.

1. Business can be focused on exports to other countries
2. They may sell to other businesses. Have you ever heard of B2B? (What a dummy you are )
3. They may cater to the more wealthy
4. They may sell to governments
5. etc

Re employees
While a certain level of staffing is required, most business can trim headcount without disrupting their clients.
Technology is making a number of staffing positions redundant
Given the layers of payroll taxes, minimum wage increases, demands for pensions / benefits etc, a small business should be very choosy when hiring if at all

?????

You avoided the question

Given 10% pay 40%, then remaining 90% of the population pay less than 60%. So if you insist on making sure the tax system is above all else "fair" , then that 90% of the population really needs to pony up more do you not agree?

Surely if the economy has grown to 4.5 %, the highest in a decade then this Government are along the right path.

Be sure to accept the blame if and when it goes badly if you demand the credit when it goes well

What would you have done differently?

Cut taxes for all Canadians
Reduce spending (headcount) within government
Not give a dime to Omar Kadr
Have a plan for balancing the budget
Do not tax target the heart of the economy in small business owners
Be responsible when spending other peoples hard earned tax dollars

Are you quoting an individual named "Hardey"??

Nope I said hardly not hardey
Do not waste my time





What language is this??
English

Explain yourself!!

You rant about non relevant shit all the time
You should be the one explaining yourself

Very relevant when you throw Mr. Chretien in the mix and how Cnada thrived under his leadership and he did not BANKRUPT us like Bush did, and it ticked off Steven who wanted to join the war on Afghanistan.

You do not get it
You mention steven, which leads to Jean which leads to Bush which leads to Afghanistan
NONE OF WHICH IS RELAVANT TO THE SUBJECT AT HAND
stay on topic or go away

 

[JohnLarue]

So much repetition in that post, claims you keep repeating as repetition alone is enough to make a point.

well you do not seem to be getting the point

The studies are pretty clear about life expectancy, income redistribution and a whole host of metrics.

If I spent the time to properly review your studies, I bet I would find that the majority of them are conducted by left wing loonies who start at their desired conculsion and then wrap some data together to try and justify it

ie. The poor can only afford cheap fast food so they get obesity and do not live long and that is the fault of tax policy?????

wtf ?
Obesity is due to shoving too much food down your gob
and happens rich, poor or middle class

Taxation is here to stay, the question is how equitable a society do you want to live in?

Taxing anyone at 57.7% or 72% is not equitable
As for those who thing they have the right to make a claim on someone else's wealth, well that's stealing and I do not support that! ever !!!!

Take the US, right now the median income of white families is now 10 times that of black families.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/federal-reserve-wealth-survey-1.4309933

Race in the US has always been an issue
At one point it was likely 100 times

Did you want to fix that by instituting a whites only tax?
Could you really be that detached from reality?

Better to try and bring one group up rather than steal from the other

there are something's in life you can not fix

Are you going to claim that's all because of choice?
(And I'm assuming your not like some of the other alt-right types here who appear to think its because of race itself)

no that is largely do to education or the lack of education and opportunities

Again not a tax policy issue

 

[fuji]

You mean the ones who are applying proper tax planning

That's why the law needs to change rather than just audits.

Because they employ people you fool

You tried this before and lost. The companies that get these credits are not growing, therefore they do not create employment. They may have a number of people on payroll, like Grandma, but that's actually destructive.

Well if the 10% are paying 40% of the taxes, then they are obviously driving up to 40% of the economy

Untrue. It's not a linear relationship like that, there are lots of businesses that pay no taxes that are driving the economy because that are reinvesting. Amazon famously lost money for twenty five years before finally reporting profits but it was clearly a huge economic driver.

My God your stupid
1 Multi-billionaires do not make spending choices based on TV ads
2. Multi-billionaires do not spend a lot of time watching TV

You have absolutely no idea what people with money do.

1. Business can be focused on exports to other countries
2. They may sell to other businesses. Have you ever heard of B2B? (What a dummy you are )
3. They may cater to the more wealthy
4. They may sell to governments

This has guy to be one of the stupidest things you have ever posted. 1, 2, and 4 are prizes for the middle class. A world in which 3 is the only viable business should be rejected on ethical grounds.

 

[JohnLarue]

Fuji is being ignored but does not realize it
He has never admitted when he is wrong despite over 8,000 + posts and he lies
I will not waste any more time on him

 

[Frankfooter]

well you do not seem to be getting the point


If I spent the time to properly review your studies, I bet I would find that the majority of them are conducted by left wing loonies who start at their desired conculsion and then wrap some data together to try and justify it

Start with life expectancy.
Its a stat, and not something you can fake.

Do you accept that the life expectancy in the US is declining?