Nothing wrong with loopholes, petros, I look for loopholes all the time. Loopholes are a legitimate way of reducing one's tax, as long as they are legal. Indeed, that is where an accountant comes in handy.
Liberal phobia and the cause….
- Thread starter Socrates the Greek
- Start date
Nothing wrong with loopholes, petros, I look for loopholes all the time. Loopholes are a legitimate way of reducing one's tax, as long as they are legal. Indeed, that is where an accountant comes in handy.
But I have 50,000 in cash and only budgeted 10,000 so if I gave a $5000 tax cut will I still have my 45,000, 40,000 in savings and $5000 in my budget for the year? yes or no?
Well, in your example, at the end of the day, you wind up with $0. Which isn't a bad place to be, unless you believe that the function of a government is to take money from the citizens, and keep it....
They also reduced the capital gains tax. Previously 25 % of capital gain was tax free, now it is 50%. It was simply a trade off. You will use any excuse to mouth off against Liberals, and praise your Messiah to high Heaven.
I have given a cogent, logical explanation, but your conservative philosophy probably clouds your thinking. I know many conservatives don’t’ understand the concept of budget deficit, but let me try once again.
When Harper came to office, he had a budget surplus of 10 to 12 billion $. He increased spending every year he has been in office, gave tax cuts mostly to the rich and now he has a deficit in excess of 30 billion $. That is frittering the money away, in my opinion, though I realize you probably consider it sound economic management. To me, it is the classic borrow and spend philosophy.
Quite so, and the government is 10,000 $ in debt. But debt and deficit doesn't matter, it will only affect the rich, right?
Then more power to you. Why should you (or anybody) pay more taxes than they have to?
If he had asked me in '97 how much tax I would have had to pay without that change I would have told him $0.00 but I will not give him the satisfaction of knowing how much I had to pay...
The old regulations used to help those starting out investing and getting a bit of a windfall.....the new ones only help out those already established in business and have already reached the limit...Liberal Bah!
I only wish he would read my Sig...the second one
Last edited by a moderator:
And you claim you are not a Harper acolyte? He is going to deliver you to the Promised Land of majority, isn't he?
And then baby, watch the debt and deficit really soar, you ain't seen nothing yet. To satisfy acolytes like you, he will borrow even more from your kids and your grandkids and return part of it to you. People like you will be tickled pink to get the check from the government.
So, when do you think we can expect this paradise in Canada? When do you think your Messiah will deliver you to the Promised Land of majority?
ANY "BODY" you say? For some BODY taxes are a non concern. Harper lowered corporate (a type of BODY) income tax to 6% which is the TRUE gift to the rich. GST is bupkis compared to having my corporate taxes slashed by 50%. THAT is why Harper has a deficit not from GST, not from economic downturn, not from a slower resource sector. It's all 100% because he dropped Canada's corp taxes to the lowest on the planet.
What type of BODY are you?
He hasn't figured out the difference between assets, income and "working budget".
i never said he owes her anything you are changing the subject. I said that GST disproportionately benefits the rich and you seem to agree with that.
She does not benefit as much as the billionaire. Most of her minimum wage (which you would freeze forever, causing her to literally starve in a few years) goes for essentials of life, like food, rent etc. There is no GST on those, so she saves very little.
Quite so, the same theme seems evident in your posts. Surplus is bad, deficit is good. That makes you a typical conservative. Liberals believe that there should be a budget surplus. Conservatives believe that there should be budget deficits and sky high debt, apparently the higher the better (that is why you are ticked pink by Harper giving huge tax cuts and racking up the biggest deficit in Canadian history).
Last edited by a moderator:
I assumed that if the gov't had $10,000, gave away $5,000 in tax reductions, and on top of that ran a $5,000 deficit, that at the end of the day, the gov't had $0.
But I'm told by an 'accountant' that the gov't would have a debt of $10,000.
Glad I'm not an accountant, I guess.
But I'm told by an 'accountant' that the gov't would have a debt of $10,000.
Glad I'm not an accountant, I guess.
Quite so, that is the famous conservative trickle down philosophy. Reward the rich, and the benefits will trickle down to the poor.
Conservatives took out a mortgage to build the CPR. Liberals took out a mortgage to bail out GTR and CNoR. Appropriate for the train wreck this thread has become.
I don't think it is 6%, petros, we have a corporation. I think it is 16%, check with your accountant. But you are right, he has reduced corporate taxes, benefiting people like me and wife tremendously.
And do you think the deficit is mostly due to corporate tax decrease? You may be right I don't know. It certainly is a contributing factor.
Anyway, we have benefited substantially from it. He still won't get my vote though. In my opinion, any politician how gives tax cuts to the rich and as a result runs the biggest deficit in Canadian history is beneath contempt.
It went from 16% to 12% to 6%. We now have the lowest corporate taxes AND the lowest resource royalties with some of the highest personal income tax out of ALL the G nations.
Why?
OK, let me explain it to you.
You have 10,000 $. You give away 5000 % as tax cuts for the rich. Now you have only 5000$.
You spend 15,000 $. Since you only had 5000 $, that leaves you with a deficit of 10,000 $. That is conservative economics for you.