Harper never banned unions. If he had these workers would still have jobs.
This is one of the three reasons so many sawmills closed in BC. We managed to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Catalyst Paper is now in the same position and may very well declare bankruptcy because one union in one of the three mills would not agree to concessions required for a refinancing plan. We are not talking huge cuts either and many of these mill workers make over $80 a year.
Salary is important, but meaningless if not put into the context of corporate profit.
There should be no corporate tax because any expenses corporations have are passed on to the consumer.
World War II.
So then, do you have the data in hand to show the reduction in consumer prices as the corporate tax rate has dropped?
No. The corporations first duty is to maximize profit to its shareholders because they are the ones risking their capital. The wages the corporation negotiates with its emplyees cannot be tied to profits because then the workers would get $0 in the years where the company reports a loss. A bonus might be paid in very profitable years but that also would have to be in the negotiations.Salary is important, but meaningless if not put into the context of corporate profit.
Read my post about competition.So then, do you have the data in hand to show the reduction in consumer prices as the corporate tax rate has dropped?
We've been through this before; gov't regs are what caused the mess in the first place telling US banks, through the Community Reinvestment Act, that the banks must make loans to folks who had no way of ever paying them back.The government needs to step in and begin regulating markets a bit more.
There has been no proven causal relationship. Businesses are hoarding their additional profit from tax revenue instead of putting them toward jobs, operations, price cuts or any other economy boosting measures.
The government needs to step in and begin regulating markets a bit more.
When a corporation hoards profit, it not only hurts the economy, but also its own industry in the long run.
And to Walter's point about Government regulation, any regulation must be in the interest of consumers, naturally.
For years, the London plant was what kept EMD alive, but under Progress Rail, they obtained a huge facility inMuncie, 3/4 of which is presently empty. With the incentives given by the US, the move to close London would not have been a surprise to anyone.
They did?Of course.
And the government knew that they would take the tax breaks and run.
I'm not sure I know which tax break Caterpillar was given.And the government knew that they would take the tax breaks and run.
Me neither, but I heard it was in the neighbourhood of $5 million delivered in 2008, by none other than Harper himself.I'm not sure I know which tax break Caterpillar was given.
Got a link?Me neither, but I heard it was in the neighbourhood of $5 million delivered in 2008, by none other than Harper himself.
Thanks. The so-called tax break was not given to EMD, it was given to companies who bought locomotives from EMD allowing them to deduct the depreciation cost of the locomotives at a quicker rate than other capital expenditures and thus, it was hoped, increase the purchase of machines built by the London plant. CNR bought over 40 locomotives after Harper introduced the incentive.
Thanks for clearing that up.Thanks. The so-called tax break was not given to EMD, it was give to companies who bought locomotives from EMD allowing them to deduct the cost of the locomotives at a quicker rate than other capital expenditures and thus, it was hoped, increase the purchase of machines built by the London plant. CNR bought over 40 locomotives after Harper introduced the incentive.
Me neither, but I heard it was in the neighbourhood of $5 million delivered in 2008, by none other than Harper himself.