Canada is headed in the wrong direction, majority says
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Seen this kind of pap far too many times to bother again.
All of this noise about wealth inequality but the analysis only completed on a highly selective basis and after-the-fact... I always have to chuckle when I've asked folks of the 'authors' ilk what an acceptable level of income is considered too much... By in large, that number is usually just North of the income level of the commenter - somehow, they never make too much.
The only thief in this equation is the gvt via the multiple levels of taxes that they assess, and the biggest beneficiary by far are those that sit back and demand their entitlements from gvt all the while railing against anyone that has excelled and acquired wealth
Well, if "wealth inequality" is bad, clearly "wealth equality" is the desideratum. So, near as I can tell, that'd be GNP/population. I propose a system whereby the government confiscates all private property on 31 Dec each year, and issues cheques to every citizen (or legal resident) on 1 Jan for her "fair share."
Generally I agree, but I would point out that many of those who have acquired wealth have done so by demanding entitlements or special breaks from the government. I have no more sympathy with welfare recipients than you, but I include billionaire welfare recipients in my contempt.
I am a big fan of a flat, single, easily comprehensible tax. As I've said before, in any tax code that is more than five pages long, the remaining pages are a series of scams on the public. Mostly benefiting the rich.
That will work in the first year of implementation. After that, no reason to acquire or build anything as it evaporates in 12 months.
I wonder how long it would take for the jurisdiction in question to evolve into a Detroit-like scenario
The folks that I know that have acquired significant wealth did so through hard work, taking high(er) risks, being lucky (of course) and had a comprehensive plan and understanding of the tasks at hand.
Direct gvt subsidies don't really exist here excepting extreme cases. By in large, tax breaks are used as bait to big companies to encourage them to undertake large cap projects wherein they have to have (and spend) the money in the first place.
Too bad that more folks (and gvts) don't adopt your tax-philosophy... I can easily get behind that proposal and would also support the multi-layer system between entities provided that the rates were not so egregious throughout
Kind of agreed, as long as it's on material resources and not human resources. After all, a brain can function indefinitely without depleting our mineral resources. Resource extraction companies can't. So why penalise someone for not using any crown resource?
In fact, I kind of like the Saudi 'tax' model. In short, Saudi Arabia has no taxes at all. It may have fines as a source of revenue, I don't know. But it's main source of revenue is the sale of its crown resources.
Of course the problem in Canada is that while this could work at the provincial level, the Federal Government has no corwn resources of the sort. Not sure how to work around that one though.
Unfortunately, "fair" is a word without an effective definition. In other words, it's a matter of opinion. Seeing as how you and I are of different opinions on damn near everything else, I'll just assume we have different notions of what's "fair."
Happy New Year, Walter. I hope the year brings you good health, prosperity, and happiness. And when your time comes, as it must to all of us, I hope the "Cause of Death" line reads "Crushed under a pile of Victoria's Secret models."
Canada just came by my place, looked a little lost, asked for directions. I said, "No worries just go up this road and turn right, look for the rooster with the crooked neck and then drive for approximately two kilometers. When you see the the barn with every second board painted yellow veer to the right and then take a hard left. After a kilometer you'll find a pub called The Gooseneck, they'll serve you a Canadian beverage and get you back on your way."
The author of that video, is a former 1%er who has forsaken his heritage to expose the inequity of his inheritance and those who bilk the rest of humanity fro themselves. He is the heir to the Proctor & Gamble fortune. Not exactly someone who is jealous of the rich. He is an insider who got sick of what he was born into.
Not necessarily. There is also a more moderate option. The elimination of the extremes of wealth and poverty.
I always knew you were a closet Marxist. Join the club... er... oops... Did I just out myself?
Damn you Walter!
Therein lies his whole problem. He was born with a gold spoon in his mouth. It is a lot different for those that are self made. If his forefathers were that useless there would not be a Proctor and Gamble employing thousands of people either.
And it would seem the solution to that would then be an inheritance tax. What would that have to do with income tax?
We already have an inheritance tax. The object of it is to steal from the semi rich. The rich have spent the necessary funds to protect their wealth from government theft.
All an inheritance will achieve is that the assets will be bound in a corporation or Trust in which case the individual inheriting these entities will become the decision-maker and be able to allocate the resources as they see fit.
You will have accomplished nothing
WEll not to gain anything from the rich but it does cut into what the average person can leave to their kids since they won't be able to afford to protect themselves.