Are you all ready to start paying about $15 for a Big Mac?
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
I think you have to be careful when taxing corporations as corporations are actually "you and me", the shareholders and pretty well every person in the country is a share holder. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of our Canada Pension Fund isn't invested in corporations like R.B.C.
Let me answer this for you, the pension (gvt and private) do invest in RBC among many other Canadian corporations.
There is a reason why large Canadian (American, etc.) incorporate wholly-owned subsidiaries in tax havens and that is to (legally) avoid the tax man in Canada. Make no mistake, by in large, these companies aren't diverting cash earned in Canada to offshore accounts to evade taxes, they are pursuing operations elsewhere from these tax havens and keeping the profits away from Canada such that they aren't gouged.
The effect is that places like the Caymans reap the benefit of the (lower) taxes that they impose on the RBC subsidiary as opposed to Canada/Canadians seeing that benefit if the earnings were repatriated.
There is a delicate balancing act, however, if the system is too punitive, you discourage investment and that has a direct impact on jobs, tax contributions and all of the other economic ramifications associated with increased commerce.
You can't find rent anywhere for that much.
Nope but you can buy a ski hill Condo high above the crack line in the Okanogan on minimum wage now.
That may be OK if you don't mind 9 months of winter and 3 of tough sledding! :smile:
For some winter never ends and they are happy it doesn't. It beats 365 days of crack heads and jib rats stealing everything from copper pipe to your pink flamingos.
Yeah. The crack heads and jib rats and burn out's girl friends blow them off for guys with jobs and warm dry homes.
Why do taxes need cutting here? Businesses have gotten tax breaks, which means lower taxes, the idea is that they will get more business and pay more tax.
The upping of the min wage is separate from tax cuts or tax breaks. Many businesses consider it a tax hike, which it is, but it is one of the best stimulants for the economy as lower wage people tend to spend more of their money locally than the better off who spend it on imports.
Just so you know. the largest economic growth periods in US history have been when taxation on corporations have topped 60% and taxes on the wealthy have reched up to 90% and personal taxes on the poor and middle class have been below 15%. Periods when these corporate/wealthy taxes have dropped below 35% and middle class taxes have risen above 20% have immediatley preceeded the great depression and 2 recessions.
Under the current Canadian government corporate & wealthy taxes will drop to 15% next year and middle class taxes will rise to 22-25%, not counting all the other sales taxes etc.
FYI - you have to be aware of terminology...tax 'avoidance' is done within the current law, tax 'evasion' are actions that contrevene the act and are illegal. Remember also when talking about 'legal' tax avoidance, the commitee that recommends changes to the tax act only hears from the financial sector and corporations, they basically write their own tax laws.
It is not by cutting taxes on the corporations that their business will increase but by cutting taxes on the poor and middle class. You have to create more spendable income for the masses to allow them to purchase the products or services that the corporations sell.
Sorry, guess I misunderstood your other post. Thought you were suggesting that low income people need a break on taxes.
Just how big a share? How much is enough?
It is safe to say that if by some magic all the world's wealth were evenly and equally distributed and everyone had equal wealth, within two years or five years, maximum, everyone who had been poor before the re-distribution would be poor again, and everyone who had been rich would be rich again.
Simply saying that people are NOT equal and do not deserve to have equal rewards.
Up to a point. From what I can see the wealthy generally do pay their share (I definitely don't think it hurts them to pay their "share" plus 10%), but it's not fair to hit them for $thousands and $thousands simply because they have it. Middle class should pay enough to pay their "wear and tear"- poor folks deserve a break on some things BUT still should contribute something towards their "wear and tear"- it's good for them to know they are contributing and it and I suspect most of them don't want a "free ride". Where possible they deserve subsidization on what it takes to move them up from "poor" to "middle class".
No one but a f******g idiot would suggest they are not left with enough to cover the bare necessities.