one-time GST rebate increase

[Butler1000]

by definition 50% of the population is less intelligent than the other 50%
its been that way since there were two


Above average intelligence is not a perquisite for being innovative or assuming the responsibilities of risks
it is certainly not a prerequisite for assuming the responsibility of taking care of themselves and their families
nor is it a perquisite for assuming the responsibility to better one skills



let them assume the responsibility of successfully navigating through life



That is a funny way to describe the right who oppose the the welfare state & who are not looking for a handout. They are not in the streets as they are busy working and taking care of their responsibilities.
You must describing the left.



spend some fraction what you can earn.
if you desire more consumer goods & services than you can afford, then upgrade your skills so you can command better compensation

vs your plan to encourage all to believe they are entitled & can get others to pay for their consumer goods & services

I guarantee your society will crumble quickly as you will always run out of other peoples money


less important?

Measuring the Distribution of Taxes in Canada: Do the Rich Pay Their “Fair Share”? (fraserinstitute.org)

Families in the top 10 percent pay 39.6 percent of all taxes and earn 33.1 percent of total income.

If they are paying a disproportionate % of the taxes, they are also very likely to be spending a disproportionate % of the total consumers spend
and on high margin goods(ie boats, planes, etc) and local ( construction, professional services)
And they also invest , start companies, employ people and make consumer goods better in search of a margin

they are also a driver of charitable donations

StatsCan finds high-income earners donate the most to charity | Advisor's Edge

Seems to me a few thousand railway workers are far more important than a bunch of ceos recently......

As were all the essential workers during the pandemic. CEO's spent their time moaning while real people did real work.


calling wealthy people less important, shows your lack of understanding of what drives an economy.
it is also very unproductive identity politics

BTW- The US is a consumer driven economy , Canada is far more dependant on resources

 

[bver_hunter]

Giving money to anyone fuels inflation. However, given it to poor people fuels it more because they will spend them all. It is not "Conns logic", it is basic Macroeconomics (AS/AD model) that all politicians should be familiar with.

Then giving generous tax cuts to the elitist and Corporations is "giving money". So in other words the Conns do not have a solution to the inflation........ just scare tactics!!

 

[fall]

Have you ever thought that 50% of the population is below average intelligence and perhaps can't? So what to do with them? Eugenics? Perpetual poverty?

What you end up with is a shitload of disgruntled people with low intelligence easily swayed by populists making stupid decisions at the ballot box and in the streets.

As well they are the consumer class that a capitalist society most relies on to spend and consume. Take away their capability to do that and the whole thing collapses. Which leads to civil unrest, mass migration, and even war, as leaders seek to distract.

Wealthy people don't spend money on mass. They are in fact less important.

Now you start to realize that voting should be a privileged and only people who are willing to pay taxes above a certain threshold should be able to vote.

 

[JohnLarue]

Seems to me a few thousand railway workers are far more important than a bunch of ceos recently..

....

That is a value judgement based upon your biases
Both are important & have an interdependency

However a good CEO is very difficult to replace
while railroad workers no doubt have skill and experience they are not irreplaceable

do you lump the a few thousand railway workers into the lower 50% which need to be taken care of by society.
They would be quite offended and have choice words for you

As were all the essential workers during the pandemic. CEO's spent their time moaning while real people did real work.

That is a clueless statement

CEOs work 70+ hours a week, and have responsibilities you can not begin to understand

 

[fall]

Then giving generous tax cuts to the elitist and Corporations is "giving money". So in other words the Conns do not have a solution to the inflation........ just scare tactics!!

Giving money to low income people -> increase demand -> increase inflation. Given tax break to corporations also increases the demand (for investment goods) and, through higher employment, increases people's income, and, thus, demand. However, it also increase the supply and reduces the costs of production, thus, leading to lower prices. So, as you can see, tax cut to corporations increases both AS and AD, while money to low income people increases only AD. Stimulating production throughout corporate tax cuts is the best way to avoid recession without fueling up the inflation.

 

[bver_hunter]

Giving money to low income people -> increase demand -> increase inflation. Given tax break to corporations also increases the demand (for investment goods) and, through higher employment, increases people's income, and, thus, demand. However, it also increase the supply and reduces the costs of production, thus, leading to lower prices. So, as you can see, tax cut to corporations increases both AS and AD, while money to low income people increases only AD. Stimulating production throughout corporate tax cuts is the best way to avoid recession without fueling up the inflation.

So pushing those on the lowest income into poverty is a solution to "tackling inflation"? Which online playbook are you religiously following? How are Corporations going to earn the income if those on the lowest income cannot afford to buy their products, and the middle to lower income families are refraining from purchasing goods at once upon a time affordable to them? But if they can just about be able to afford these items due to supplemental Government grants etc., then automatically that causes inflation according to your story book. How about essentials like food and rental prices that are getting beyond the reach of those on the lowest incomes. Without Government Credits etc how are they supposed to put the basic food on the table? We know that Corporations will only give the elitist higher and higher bonuses like the scandals when the automobile industries were bailed out by Federal and Provincial Governments. The CEOs travelled in personal jets to meet with the various Government bodies and then expensed the Governments from their bailouts!!

 

[Butler1000]

....

That is a value judgement based upon your biases
Both are important & have an interdependency

However a good CEO is very difficult to replace
while railroad workers no doubt have skill and experience they are not irreplaceable

do you lump the a few thousand railway workers into the lower 50% which need to be taken care of by society.
They would be quite offended and have choice words for you


That is a clueless statement

CEOs work 70+ hours a week, and have responsibilities you can not begin to understand

CEO's are just as replacable as anyone else. Happens all the time. As for hours worked look up what the railroad workers were expected to do.

 

[Butler1000]

Now you start to realize that voting should be a privileged and only people who are willing to pay taxes above a certain threshold should be able to vote.

Lol. Next you will advocate for the return of feudalism.....

 

[Frankfooter]

Giving money to low income people -> increase demand -> increase inflation. Given tax break to corporations also increases the demand (for investment goods) and, through higher employment, increases people's income, and, thus, demand. However, it also increase the supply and reduces the costs of production, thus, leading to lower prices. So, as you can see, tax cut to corporations increases both AS and AD, while money to low income people increases only AD. Stimulating production throughout corporate tax cuts is the best way to avoid recession without fueling up the inflation.

No, that's just incredibly wrong.

Tax breaks for corporations never leads to higher employment or investment and never lower prices.
Money to lower income people never leads to inflation.

 

[JohnLarue]

CEO's are just as replacable as anyone else. Happens all the time. As for hours worked look up what the railroad workers were expected to do.

a line worker can be replaced within a week, or even in a day if the HR department identifies a turnover risk

CEO's require a full blown succession plan that can take years and see a candidate excluded for a misstep which occurred decades ago
CEOs have responsibilities you can not begin to understand

As for hours worked look up what the railroad workers were expected to do.

Health and safety restriction limit their hours
look up the Hinton Alberta accident to see why

 

[james t kirk]

Giving away money to a select group of people is just wealth redistribution. Simple as that. And frankly, it's a waste of money.

If the government wanted to truly make a dent in inflation, they could try to increase productivity. Canada is an absolute laggard when it comes to productivity. But doing that will not buy you any votes will it? Increasing Canada's productivity would help to lower inflation in theory, but its not as easy as cutting a few cheques. It required a lot of hard thinking and planning on how to best invest the money in our country's future. Future dividends.

But none of that is sexy, nor easy, nor does Justin have a fucking clue what productivity from an economic point of view even means.

 

[fall]

No, that's just incredibly wrong.

Tax breaks for corporations never leads to higher employment or investment and never lower prices.
Money to lower income people never leads to inflation.

Wow, you must have skipped basic Economics class in college. I think, jtk in teh above posts explains how tax cuts to corporations help in terms that even you can understand

 

[fall]

So pushing those on the lowest income into poverty is a solution to "tackling inflation"? Which online playbook are you religiously following? How are Corporations going to earn the income if those on the lowest income cannot afford to buy their products, and the middle to lower income families are refraining from purchasing goods at once upon a time affordable to them? But if they can just about be able to afford these items due to supplemental Government grants etc., then automatically that causes inflation according to your story book. How about essentials like food and rental prices that are getting beyond the reach of those on the lowest incomes. Without Government Credits etc how are they supposed to put the basic food on the table? We know that Corporations will only give the elitist higher and higher bonuses like the scandals when the automobile industries were bailed out by Federal and Provincial Governments. The CEOs travelled in personal jets to meet with the various Government bodies and then expensed the Governments from their bailouts!!

How about getting a job? And corporate tax cuts increase investment -> increase labour productivity -> increase employment -> increase money in pockets of poor people.

 

[Frankfooter]

Giving away money to a select group of people is just wealth redistribution. Simple as that. And frankly, it's a waste of money.

Letting the people with all the money make the rules just means they will take more of the money. Simple as that.
It works in the EU, its a disaster in the US.
Yet still people push for the rich to get richer.

 

[Butler1000]

a line worker can be replaced within a week, or even in a day if the HR department identifies a turnover risk

CEO's require a full blown succession plan that can take years and see a candidate excluded for a misstep which occurred decades ago
CEOs have responsibilities you can not begin to understand


Health and safety restriction limit their hours
look up the Hinton Alberta accident to see why

But CEO's don't do that anymore. They look to the next quarter to increase stock prices as well as buybacks to incease the share price for themselves. Thats all they fo now. They don't stay. Don't look to put money into development. Its about pleasing activist share speculators now.

 

[bver_hunter]

How about getting a job? And corporate tax cuts increase investment -> increase labour productivity -> increase employment -> increase money in pockets of poor people.

How is $15 an hour going to pay for the rent, food on the table and other essential necessities of one's daily lives?
Again in theory that sounds ideal, that cuts on big Corporations would automatically "increase investment". More often than not it just gives larger bonuses to the CEO and top management. How is it then going to increase labour productivity? But in the past The Liberals and even Conservatives targeted specific investment in the Research that created the new products etc and held the big Corporations accountable in that respect. But just giving tax huge cuts to Corporations while pushing more of the lowest incomes into poverty does not make sense at all. Tax cuts to the lowest incomes instead helps in this respect!!

 

[JohnLarue]

But CEO's don't do that anymore. They look to the next quarter to increase stock prices as well as buybacks to incease the share price for themselves. Thats all they fo now. They don't stay. Don't look to put money into development. Its about pleasing activist share speculators now.

There are lots of companies with a long term record of continuous dividend growth (20 to 50 years).
That is impossible to achieve with a short term focus on quarterly earnings.
You see a headline and automatically paint all with the same brush

Its about pleasing activist share speculators now.

Like the environmental activists on Exxon's board who's goal is eliminate FF ?
How in the world are they acting in the best interest of shareholders ?

 

[james t kirk]

Letting the people with all the money make the rules just means they will take more of the money. Simple as that.
It works in the EU, its a disaster in the US.
Yet still people push for the rich to get richer.

I don't believe I advocated for giving people with all the money more money did I.

I advocated for increasing our productivity and investing money now that will pay dividends on the future for the country. Canada is ridiculously unproductive. Even Australia, a country I admire a lot, is hugely more productive than Canada. Simply put, productivity is the ratio of the amount of dollars produced by an economy divided by what it cost to produce. Output over input.

The key to improving productivity is to increase output and one of the best ways to do that is to have succesful high value added industries. (Or to reduce the cost of production.)

Canada just likes to dig shit out of the ground and sell that shit at whatever the market value is for shit. We need to support high value added industry. Just giving away other people's money to guys who don't work accomplishes nothing. (Well unless you're Molson's.)

 

[james t kirk]

How is $15 an hour going to pay for the rent, food on the table and other essential necessities of one's daily lives?
Again in theory that sounds ideal, that cuts on big Corporations would automatically "increase investment". More often than not it just gives larger bonuses to the CEO and top management. How is it then going to increase labour productivity? But in the past The Liberals and even Conservatives targeted specific investment in the Research that created the new products etc and held the big Corporations accountable in that respect. But just giving tax huge cuts to Corporations while pushing more of the lowest incomes into poverty does not make sense at all. Tax cuts to the lowest incomes instead helps in this respect!!

How about developing your skill set so you're not working for 15 bucks an hour? Get off your ass and learn a trade, whatever that might be. But that's hard work and too many people would rather just sit on their asses and drink beer and demand a government handout.

To quote Chris Rock: "Do you know what making minimum wage is? It means that if I could pay you less, I would. But I can't because that's the law."

 

[bver_hunter]

How about developing your skill set so you're not working for 15 bucks an hour? Get off your ass and learn a trade, whatever that might be. But that's hard work and too many people would rather just sit on their asses and drink beer and demand a government handout.

To quote Chris Rock: "Do you know what making minimum wage is? It means that if I could pay you less, I would. But I can't because that's the law."

If there are no $15 bucks an hour workers, then the likes of you and the alt right will be screaming about the high prices on stuff like fast foods. a clean environment in Malls and unaffordable stores like Walmart and other corner stores. The fact that even those with degrees and a sky high student loans that have to be paid, have resulted in many of them building further and further debts due to the rent, food and gas prices. That presumption that if one falls in that category automatically to some brainwashed individuals means that they are "sitting on their asses and taking Government handouts". Utter and complete drivel in that respect!!

Again we are discussing those who have taken out loans to get them through Universities and having to work in fast food outlets like Tim Horton's on a part time basis, only to realize that obviously they are going to accrue a huge debt to pay down for several years of their lives. Most other advanced nations around the Globe do either fund higher education or it is free to get themselves through Universities without the stress of high debts. Of course it is "Socialism" to the likes of the alt-right!!