Canada loses 51,600 jobs in August, pushing up unemployment rate


White_Unifier
+1
#1
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/can...work-1.4814183

The government should lower the minimum wage, cautiously deregulate (we still need healthy food and stable banks for example), and aggressively seek out free trade with other countries.
 
petros
+5
#2  Top Rated Post
Flossy! Heeeeeere Flossy. Come on boy.
 
MHz
+1
#3
Off-set by the 5 new jobs in the investigation dept.
 
MHz
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/can...work-1.4814183

The government should lower the minimum wage, cautiously deregulate (we still need healthy food and stable banks for example), and aggressively seek out free trade with other countries.

Putting the Bankers on minimum wages would help make them bigger criminals than they already are. Worth a try, when do we start?
 
White_Unifier
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Flossy! Heeeeeere Flossy. Come on boy.

So what do you propose?
 
MHz
-1
#6
Cap the income for the the top at $1M (income expenses cover business expenses) and the money saved goes to the lowest on the pay-scale. Since that would bring sanctions by the parent company you also have to take over the stock market as well and any money made in the country stays in the country.
France and Israel are the two nations who jump the highest at orders from the bankers, unless you are willing to go all the way it is healthier to allow the control to go where they have already determined it will go. They will eventually stumble and fall all on their own.
 
White_Unifier
-1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Cap the income for the the top at $1M (income expenses cover business expenses) and the money saved goes to the lowest on the pay-scale. Since that would bring sanctions by the parent company you also have to take over the stock market as well and any money made in the country stays in the country.
France and Israel are the two nations who jump the highest at orders from the bankers, unless you are willing to go all the way it is healthier to allow the control to go where they have already determined it will go. They will eventually stumble and fall all on their own.

I actually would support a legal personal wealth cap beyond which the Government of Canada could claim it. I'd start high though, maybe at a billion dollars. They might just invest more in their business, give more to charity, etc. to stay within that maximum, but even those actions could benefit Canada.
 
petros
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

So what do you propose?

Alpo.
 
captain morgan
+3
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

I actually would support a legal personal wealth cap beyond which the Government of Canada could claim it. I'd start high though, maybe at a billion dollars. They might just invest more in their business, give more to charity, etc. to stay within that maximum, but even those actions could benefit Canada.


France tried it and it has been a dismal failure.. A 75% tax rate on income over 1 million Euros.The result is that the wealthy have moved their cash out of France and are thereby supporting (via the tax base) neighboring countries.

But hey, if you want to stick it to Da Man and strike a blow for The People, go on and do it, but just don't bitch about how shitty things are when there's no new money in the system
 
White_Unifier
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Alpo.

Alpo?
 
White_Unifier
-1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

France tried it and it has been a dismal failure.. A 75% tax rate on income over 1 million Euros.The result is that the wealthy have moved their cash out of France and are thereby supporting (via the tax base) neighboring countries.
But hey, if you want to stick it to Da Man and strike a blow for The People, go on and do it, but just don't bitch about how shitty things are when there's no new money in the system

That's why I proposed capping it at a billion dollars and limiting it to personal wealth only and not business wealth. That would allow a billionaire plenty of maneuverability by just investing more in his business so as to increase his business assets so as to reduce his personal wealth. That would actually encourage more investment as a way to avoid taxes.
 
petros
+1
#12
You can't tax assets only income.
 
petros
+2
#13
Hence the term "income tax" rather than "asset tax".
 
MHz
-1
#14
You should be more concerned with the 106% tax on printing money instead of it being the 6% taxable income that is should be. They can be fired and you can make more money when only the rich and corporations pay interest on their loans. That is 99% of all banking transactions so why shouldn't they pay the fees a banks runs up over the year?

Money created out of thin air has no expenses and it is done 10 times by every bank as they only need 10% cash on hand.
Make 'money' an essential utility and most of the problems are solved. What will they do, quit and have no other income?

I would favor a debit card be issued at birth with the amount a person needs to reach 'old age' and have any surplus go back to the 'pool'. (including 'babysitting fees; to mom and dad. More $$$ if it is the smarter one that stays home.

At some point where a person is born will be a big hint as to what his future will be and how much it will cost him and how much he will make can be estimated and the longer that happens the better the predictions will be. It eliminates the advantages that go with 'inherited money' rather than 'natural talents'.
 
White_Unifier
-1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Hence the term "income tax" rather than "asset tax".

I would actually prefer a personal wealth tax since it means a lower tax rate. For example, a 20% tax on accumulated personal wealth minus personal assets and debt would be nothing compared to a 20% income tax since even a wealthy person will not convert all of his income into assets (such as eating out at a restaurant, watching a concert, traveling, etc.).
 
MHz
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Hence the term "income tax" rather than "asset tax".

The World Bank collects $30B as interest on the National debt. That should be taxable as it is income, how much tax is owed?
 
Walter
+1
#17
The only fair tax is a consumption tax.
 
petros
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

The World Bank collects $30B as interest on the National debt. That should be taxable as it is income, how much tax is owed?

We owe the World Bank? Are you sure it's not domestic institutions?
 
petros
+3
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

I would actually prefer a personal wealth tax since it means a lower tax rate. For example, a 20% tax on accumulated personal wealth minus personal assets and debt would be nothing compared to a 20% income tax since even a wealthy person will not convert all of his income into assets (such as eating out at a restaurant, watching a concert, traveling, etc.).

Why? How the f-ck would you be able to save for retirement?
 
MHz
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

We owe the World Bank? Are you sure it's not domestic institutions?

Quite sure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbACCGf6q-c
Oh Canada Movie - Our Bought And Sold Out Land - Full

This 2009 entertaining documentary film explores the history of banking, the selling out of the prosperity of Canada, the clearance sale of Canadian businesses and the political liquidation of public infrastructures to the multi-national corporate oligarchy. How has this led to the biggest economic crash / recession / depression in Canadian history? Could it have something to do with our politicians listening to international bankers and corporations instead of the people Canada? How does the Canadian banking system really work? How does the central Bank of Canada compare with the American Federal Reserve? This movie presents these issues that affect every Canadian from the perspective of and delivered by concerned youth in a astute and colourful manner. This is a serious journalism piece that asks the tough questions directly to such politicians as Former Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin, Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, Ontario Gas Man Dan McTeague, NDP Leader Jack Layton, Mayor of Oshawa John Gray, Former Prime Minister of Canada John Turner and many more!
 
White_Unifier
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Why? How the f-ck would you be able to save for retirement?

Are you serious? If someone had to pay a personal wealth tax on any wealth above one billions dollars not counting business assets, essential assets, and subtracting debt, and maybe even subtracting necessary savings for retirement, I think he'd be more than okay.
 
petros
+1
#22
Why should they pay twice? Because you're jealous?
 
White_Unifier
+1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Why should they pay twice? Because you're jealous?

No, I ws proposing instead of income tax. That would probably mean an even lower tax on them.
 
petros
#24
Then you're right back to "how the f-ck do you save for retirement?" Do you think you should be excluded?
 
Walter
+2
#25
The only fair tax is a consumption tax.
 
petros
+1
#26
And user fees.
 
Walter
+1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

And user fees.

Almost the same thing.
 
Mowich
-1
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

Alpo?


Arf........Arf!
 
pgs
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

I actually would support a legal personal wealth cap beyond which the Government of Canada could claim it. I'd start high though, maybe at a billion dollars. They might just invest more in their business, give more to charity, etc. to stay within that maximum, but even those actions could benefit Canada.

You obviously have no real assets or the incentive to acquire them .
 
White_Unifier
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

You obviously have no real assets or the incentive to acquire them .

Are you telling me that once you subtract your business assets, necessary assets, debt, and a billion dollars of personal accumulated discretionary wealth, you would still have money left over to give to the government?

Damn you're wealthy!