Canadians say rich should pay more tax

mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Canadians overwhelmingly believe corporations and the wealthy should pay more tax, but they're split over major economic initiatives such as building more oil pipelines, according to the latest results from Vote Compass, CBC's online voter engagement survey.

Earlier this month, Statistics Canada confirmed the country met the technical criteria for being in a recession (that is, two consecutive quarters of decline), thanks in part to the impact of falling oil prices, though most economists are projecting modest growth in the second half.

The NDP has promised to raise taxes for corporations and cut them for small business, while investing in manufacturing, while the Liberals have proposed raising taxes on the top one per cent of earners to offer tax cuts and higher monthly child benefits for middle-income earners, while investing more quickly in infrastructure.

In response to questions about how much tax corporations and wealthier Canadians should pay, 71 per cent of Vote Compass respondents said corporations should pay more tax, while 77 per cent said the wealthy should pay more in tax.

The findings are based on 309,985 respondents who participated in Vote Compass from Aug. 29 to Sept. 12, 2015.

This sentiment is shared across a number of demographics, including 51 per cent of those who identified as Conservative supporters, who don't typically condone higher taxation.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/vote-compass-canada-election-2015-issues-canadians-1.3229282
 
DaSleeper

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
One more time for NDP supporters...
Tax System explained in beer.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings)
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $ 20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a Dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'
'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, this is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.
In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Such an angry curmudgeon.

Guess that's to be expected when you're constantly wrong.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Say it ain't so old stockers!


Is the ‘tax cut’ line still credible with voters?

Paradoxically, the ever-lowering tax rates have not been stoking up prosperity. “The Tories have a comparative edge on issues related to managing tax dollars but do not have the advantage on prosperity and job creation,” said Nik Nanos, an Ottawa-based pollster at Nanos Research Group.

“Where capital would be trickling in a little bit, it’s not,” said Alex Verge, chief executive of Journey Energy Inc. “What capital hates is uncertainty. The current situation is fairly dire for a lot of companies.”

Canadians’ top economic priority in the campaign is ensuring that the tax system is “fair and progressive,” according to an Angus Reid survey published Sept. 14.

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news...-election-pitch-unthinkable-higher-taxes.html
 
A

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Nah. No increase in tax rates or anything like that, but if they are that rich, what do they need tax breaks for?
Perhaps if they hoarded less money and spent more it might make them more palatable.
As for companies, frack em. If they can't survive through dynamics and abilities, they should drown.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
That's a fair compromise.

Getting rid of subsidy programs is usually safer than just raising taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom