Any rational thoughts about taxes? ......

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
There was one on Mitchell Island. Ot so many years ago , I can’t come up with the name right now . Good boats , don’t know if still there .




Oh - THAT IS the argument under debate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Tax slob insists that Cdn environmental regulations have driven ALL Cdn fibreglass boat builders ..............................



OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have responded by supplying the names of FOUR Cdn fibreglass boat builders currently operating in Canada!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And an internet search would FIND OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


One would want to look through the Cdn Boat Builders Association web site to find them.........................


a task I cannot be bothered with as tax slob has already been corrected!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Tax slob appears to be busy trying to BLAME others for the costs imposed in Cdn biz..................................


by our civil service union HOG TAX REGIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Nor does tax slob wish to admit that the Cdn boat market generally IS SHRINKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


People who are having trouble paying rent or mortgage.............................


DO NOT run out to BUY BOATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Oh - THAT IS the argument under debate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Tax slob insists that Cdn environmental regulations have driven ALL Cdn fibreglass boat builders ..............................



OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have responded by supplying the names of FOUR Cdn fibreglass boat builders currently operating in Canada!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And an internet search would FIND OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One would want to look through the Cdn Boat Builders Association web site to find them.........................
a task I cannot be bothered with as tax slob has already been corrected!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tax slob appears to be busy trying to BLAME others for the costs imposed in Cdn biz..................................
by our civil service union HOG TAX REGIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nor does tax slob wish to admit that the Cdn boat market generally IS SHRINKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
People who are having trouble paying rent or mortgage.............................
DO NOT run out to BUY BOATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can you show me where I said ALL Canadian builders of fibreglass boats have left Canada? Didn't think so. Because your comprehension skills are zero.
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
Can you show me where I said ALL Canadian builders of fibreglass boats have left Canada? Didn't think so. Because your comprehension skills are zero.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Can I SHOW YOU WHERE YOU STATED IN WRITING..................................


that "no fibreglass boats are made in Canada now because of environmental regulations"?????????????


NAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have no intention of rifling back through your childish rants just to prove..........................


that some TAX SLOB was wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We BOTH KNOW you are being so HOSTILE because I am right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Run along home now and fume !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Maybe even put me ON IGNORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Since THAT IS STANDARD civil service union HOG policy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


For dealing with anything that crimps their ENTITLEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Bye Bye NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
See post 101. You lied. and you are still an idiot. Now F U C K OFF and maybe we can get this thread back on track.




SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE LIE-beral!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


YOU STATED Cdn environmental laws killed fibreglass boat building in Canada!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I provided you with the names of four fibreglass boat builders still operating!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In addition there are numerous makers of fibreglass tanks and pipes and flanges - that YOU IGNORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And you do not explain how those pipe and tank makers can stay in operation in YOUR VERSION of Cdn law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Names THAT YOU CAN FIND on th internet with a 30 second effort!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Yet you rage and splutter with indignation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Your indignation is LAUGHABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
No Cliffy, 'Consumption' is TB.

I was going to write this earlier but got interrupted by a heart attack. I'm not even supposed to type much because they wounded my wrist when they shoved a wire up it. Anyway ....

There is a novel called "Consumption" by Kevin Patterson. The title is deliberately ambiguous - a kind of pun on the two meanings of the word. The story revolves around those two meanings; around the greed of our consumer society and the prevalence of tuberculosis among the Inuit - the connection being the northern diamond mines and their affect on indigenous lifestyles. As I recall it's well written with an ending I maybe felt was a bit weak.

Worth a read.
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
I was going to write this earlier but got interrupted by a heart attack. I'm not even supposed to type much because they wounded my wrist when they shoved a wire up it. Anyway ....

There is a novel called "Consumption" by Kevin Patterson. The title is deliberately ambiguous - a kind of pun on the two meanings of the word. The story revolves around those two meanings; around the greed of our consumer society and the prevalence of tuberculosis among the Inuit - the connection being the northern diamond mines and their affect on indigenous lifestyles. As I recall it's well written with an ending I maybe felt was a bit weak.

Worth a read.




SOUNDS LIKE YOU Have been consumed by BULLSH+T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Tuberculosis and assorted lung diseases are PREVALENT among INUIT..................................


and have been ever since they started living INDOORS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


STANDARD White peoples housing is REALLY NOT DESIGNED for such northern cold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Especially since natives so often treat housing so roughly..............................


and end up with A BIG CROWD bunking in together - with that GREATLY INCREASED level of humidity and mould!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



There is an old book - written by a Toronto guy who graduated from high school in 1967.......................


and he went to work for the Hudson`s Bay Company in various northern posts where THEY STILL OPERATED THE FUR TRADE!!!!!!


And one of his earliest memories - documented in his book "The Bay Boy" mentions an Inuit family in a small boat....................


crossing a river getting choked with ice - bringing their 8 month old daughter who was DYING of some LUNG INFECTION that babies



are uniquely susceptible to - in desperate hope The Bay Boy might have some drugs to aid the kid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have posted on this in the past mentioning TWO BABIES in the New Brunswick area WHO BOTH DIED from lung infections............


WHILE WAITING FOR RATIONED HEALTH CARE in the last couple of years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In the case of the Inuit baby -it was 1968 and snowing heavily and NO AIR TRANSPORT could get through..............................


and in such isolated places there were NO NURSES OR DOCTORS - nor even a small pharmacy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The baby died in its mothers arms in that frozen isolation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


That IS THE PRICE paid for living in the forest like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


There is much to be said for it...................................................


an some serious stuff TO BE SAID AGAINST IT AS WELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have relatives who like their country living.............................


BUT FEAR THE DAY SOME OLDER PERSON GETS SICK .........................................


AND HAS TO MAKE THAT LONG RUN IN A SNOW STORM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


To a hospital!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LIE-berals happily cry RACISM when an Inuit dies in isolation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



But they ARE UTTERLY SILENT when a white baby dies as a result of SIMPLE HEALTH CARE RATIONING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Tuberculosis WAS WIDE SPREAD AMONG NATIVES LONG BEFORE THAT Diamond company showed up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AS ANY HONEST person would admit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
I'm not a doctor, but I'm given to understand that in the medical phenomenon known colloquially as a "heart attack," the heart does not, in point of fact, attack the victim.
Sorry. That is a good one. Most people can not say Mycardial Infarction on the phone to 911 operator. Jammer is a much better description.
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
Sorry. That is a good one. Most people can not say Mycardial Infarction on the phone to 911 operator. Jammer is a much better description.
I want to thank you, taxslave, and all the other folks on here for their tax compliance (willing or unwilling) It helped me quickly get the urgent & expensive medical help I needed to survive my heart attack last weekend. Thank you all. I do hope that all our taxes, mine included, can help get aid to any and all of us who need it in future.

Now, coming back from a 'life threatening episode' which may recur, I wonder why I should waste time on any of the foolish drivel (not to mention ignorant, obnoxious and stupid arrogance) that makes up so much of the forum content. I don't suffer fools very gladly; maybe I should just stop trying to suffer them at all.

(First time I've come across someone proud of just being able to look up a dictionary; and I think that should be myOcardial? :D )
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
I want to thank you, taxslave, and all the other folks on here for their tax compliance (willing or unwilling) It helped me quickly get the urgent & expensive medical help I needed to survive my heart attack last weekend. Thank you all. I do hope that all our taxes, mine included, can help get aid to any and all of us who need it in future.

Now, coming back from a 'life threatening episode' which may recur, I wonder why I should waste time on any of the foolish drivel (not to mention ignorant, obnoxious and stupid arrogance) that makes up so much of the forum content. I don't suffer fools very gladly; maybe I should just stop trying to suffer them at all.

(First time I've come across someone proud of just being able to look up a dictionary; and I think that should be myOcardial? :D )




OH DEAR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You better not spend too much time thinking about the TWO TIER MEDICAL SYSTEM our LIE-berals want to build!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Its al right if you are a civil service union HOG because LIE-berals will cover you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


At the expense of the rest of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





We SHOULD be grateful for the medical aid that is on offer- WHICH WE PAY FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And that is why we should BE SO ENRAGED AT LIE-beral meddling and rationing and two tier SCAMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


CONSIDER the LIE-beral CRAP Doug Ford is trying to fix ::::::






Here is an older article illustrating that Wynne-bag LIE-berals have set all the wrong priorities for health spending- and reminding us of the MESS that Doug Ford must clean up! With some comments of my own in brackets):

Liberals must make more health cuts to meet targets: Budget watchdog

THE CANADIAN PRESS. First posted: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 12:20 PM EST Updated: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 12:40 PM EST

J. David Wake says the government is set to be over this fiscal year’s target by $400 million, rising to $900 million next year and $1.5 billion in 2018-19.

(But what alternative is there? LIE-berals cannot send cancer patients home till times are better? LIE-beral spending priorities are simply WRONG! Which is why Wynne-bag LIE-berals are now no longer doing health care budgets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Ontario agrees to fund Toronto supervised injection sites amid opioid crisis

TORONTO — Ontario’s budget watchdog says the Liberal government needs to make further cuts in health care if it hopes to meet its spending targets.

(Sun writer Christina Blizzard produced a nice article several years back illustrating that the school budget got increases totaling fifty percent MORE money than health care IN SPITE of the number of kids in the school system being steadily reduced while the number of health care users went UP! Isnt that nice- LIE-berals set their spending priorities according to who will most reliably VOTE for them and to hell with those whiny sick people! It`s their own fault for getting sick anyway- right?????)

The government has constrained growth in health spending over the past few years to about two per cent as it tries to balance the budget, largely through freezing hospitals’ base operating funding and cutting payments to doctors.

(And that two percent DOES NOT COVER the wage increases, crippling pension costs, increased numbers of patients PLUS the huge increases in heating and lighting costs- all of which are under LIE-beral control!!)

(Doctors are responding by leaving the province! Ontari-owe now has proportionately LESS doctors than most other provinces! AND Ontari-owe has longer wait times , with less access to prescription drugs!)

But the financial accountability officer says for the government to keep health budget growth to its target of 1.7 per cent over the next three years, it will need to find further savings.

(Yeah how about taking money away from teacher Hogs and using it on actual sick people....instead of using it on sickeningly greedy teachers? But wait- LIE-berals have handed out so much gravy to teachers for so long that our neglected schools are now crumbling and need costly emergency maintenance- along with our neglected roads and rotting not so affordable housing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

J. David Wake says the government is set to be over this fiscal year’s target by $400 million, rising to $900 million next year and $1.5 billion in 2018-19.

(What a yawn- the 2017 Ontari-owe budget is all smoke and mirrors with a one time balancing act that will fall to pieces in the not to distant future- as even former LIE-beral federal finance minister John Manley has pointed out! Yes, the red ink on LIE-beral govt books is deep enough to even frighten those older retired LIE-berals!)

His report comes as Ontario and nine other provinces and territories urge the federal government to pony up more in health transfers than the proposed increase of 3.5 per cent per year.

(This is all that LIE-berals can see now that their faces are planted firmly in the debt wall- that somebody else should help them out! Too bad there is nobody else! Stupid LIE-berals apparently think we have a hidden stock of Leprechaun gold available to bail us out if only they cry pitifully enough for it!!!!!!)

Premier Kathleen Wynne says the report highlights what she and other premiers have been saying, that without new funding, they’re unable to balance the competing priorities of the health system, particularly as mental-health and home-care needs grow.

(LIE-berals do enjoy making dramatic and UNTRUE statements! What it comes down to is that LIE-berals are making a very selfish spending choices such as to suck up to teachers and to cater to Muslim security risks and tend to that deluge of illegals rather than to provide aid to aged Cdns! And its being done in the name of shameless vote buying so LIE-berals can cling to power at any price!)

(Our idiot Boy Justin can find money for terror group Hamas but has trouble finding aid for Cdns! And he can find $10.5 million dollars for terror poster boy Omar Khadr! And he can find $37 million dollars for 3 other jihadist jerks who never even had Cdn citizenship! And the idiot Boy can find it in his heart to commit massive political vandalism by admitting a DELUGE of illegals without being concerned with how these people will survive in Canada due to their lack of education and language skills!)

(It is enough for the idiot Boy that the illegals will be dependent on LIE-beral charity for many decades to come and can thus be relied upon to support their LIE-beral benefactors and THAT IS the LIE-beral priority!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,362
9,531
113
Washington DC
I want to thank you, taxslave, and all the other folks on here for their tax compliance (willing or unwilling) It helped me quickly get the urgent & expensive medical help I needed to survive my heart attack last weekend. Thank you all. I do hope that all our taxes, mine included, can help get aid to any and all of us who need it in future.
Now, coming back from a 'life threatening episode' which may recur, I wonder why I should waste time on any of the foolish drivel (not to mention ignorant, obnoxious and stupid arrogance) that makes up so much of the forum content. I don't suffer fools very gladly; maybe I should just stop trying to suffer them at all.
(First time I've come across someone proud of just being able to look up a dictionary; and I think that should be myOcardial? :D )
One of my favorite terms for "head up ass" is "recto-cranial infarction." Always fun to watch the look on their faces when the penny drops. . .
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
My cousin builds glass boats, he is in Canada. He has several thousand sold to his credit.
;)
He also builds kevlar air boats/scoots.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,362
9,531
113
Washington DC
Anyway, for you, VIBC, here are my rational thoughts on taxes.

Tax corporations.

Reasons this is a good idea from highly philosophical to downright practical. . .

PHILOSOPHICAL: Mitt Romney notwithstanding, corporations are NOT "people too." They are not mentioned at all in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution (nor, I believe, in the Charter, but I'm better with the American documents). They are not citizens, they cannot vote, and I don't think anybody who believes in an immortal soul or salvation thinks corporations possess the former or are eligible for the latter. The Declaration of Independence say "all men. . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . ." The idea being that only the Creator can take away your rights, not men or governments of men. Well, a corporation's creator is the state, literally. A corporation is created by a charter granted by the government. Hence, the government is free to kill a corporation for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all, or to take any action it chooses short of killing it, like taking 20% of its revenues.

HUMANITARIAN: Nobody will be put in peril of starvation or poverty by taxing corporations, as some people would be by any sort of flat tax that applies to the poor. Obviously, corporations will raise their prices to account for the increase in tax, but that just means people who are short on money will have to make smarter spending choices.

EASE OF ADMINISTRATION: Just think how much easier it would be to keep track of 1.7 million C corporations and 4.6 million S corporations than 326 million individuals. It would also be much easier to simplify the laws and accounting procedures. Corporation comes up with a tricky dodge to avoid taxes? Easy. Make it illegal. Add in the threat of seizing ALL of the corporation's assets and winding it up (effectively "killing" it). They'll laugh right up until it happens to the first one. Then they'll get religion. And fewer of taxslave's hated bureaucrats would be needed to enforce the tax code.

ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES: Sure, prices to consumers go up, but so does their effective income, because they're not paying taxes anymore. And assuming a 20% corporate revenue tax would automatically lead to a 20% price increase across the board is naive. Pricing is incredibly complex, but in short form, if a corporation responds by raising its prices 15% instead of 20%, its profit per sale will be lower, but its sales should increase.

Further, in some ways it would be good for corporations. Their revenues would go up. Granted, the increase would go out as taxes, but you'd be surprised how many will overlook that simple fact.

So. . . no infringing on "rights," no increase in real prices (adjusted for income), ease of administration and regulation, and in a real sense we'd be taxing "the fat of the land," i.e., discretionary income, more than essential spending by people.

Of course, people could evade the tax by giving up their corporations and setting up as sole proprietorships or partnerships, but don't forget why corporations exist in the first place. A shareholder's liability is limited to the money she has invested in the corporation. In a sole proprietorship or partnership, the owners' liability extends to everything they own. People will have to adjust to that reality, and take that chance if they want to.

Questions? Comments? Curses?
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
Anyway, for you, VIBC, here are my rational thoughts on taxes.

Tax corporations.

Reasons this is a good idea from highly philosophical to downright practical. . .

PHILOSOPHICAL: Mitt Romney notwithstanding, corporations are NOT "people too." They are not mentioned at all in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution (nor, I believe, in the Charter, but I'm better with the American documents). They are not citizens, they cannot vote, and I don't think anybody who believes in an immortal soul or salvation thinks corporations possess the former or are eligible for the latter. The Declaration of Independence say "all men. . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . ." The idea being that only the Creator can take away your rights, not men or governments of men. Well, a corporation's creator is the state, literally. A corporation is created by a charter granted by the government. Hence, the government is free to kill a corporation for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all, or to take any action it chooses short of killing it, like taking 20% of its revenues.

HUMANITARIAN: Nobody will be put in peril of starvation or poverty by taxing corporations, as some people would be by any sort of flat tax that applies to the poor. Obviously, corporations will raise their prices to account for the increase in tax, but that just means people who are short on money will have to make smarter spending choices.

EASE OF ADMINISTRATION: Just think how much easier it would be to keep track of 1.7 million C corporations and 4.6 million S corporations than 326 million individuals. It would also be much easier to simplify the laws and accounting procedures. Corporation comes up with a tricky dodge to avoid taxes? Easy. Make it illegal. Add in the threat of seizing ALL of the corporation's assets and winding it up (effectively "killing" it). They'll laugh right up until it happens to the first one. Then they'll get religion. And fewer of taxslave's hated bureaucrats would be needed to enforce the tax code.

ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES: Sure, prices to consumers go up, but so does their effective income, because they're not paying taxes anymore. And assuming a 20% corporate revenue tax would automatically lead to a 20% price increase across the board is naive. Pricing is incredibly complex, but in short form, if a corporation responds by raising its prices 15% instead of 20%, its profit per sale will be lower, but its sales should increase.

Further, in some ways it would be good for corporations. Their revenues would go up. Granted, the increase would go out as taxes, but you'd be surprised how many will overlook that simple fact.

So. . . no infringing on "rights," no increase in real prices (adjusted for income), ease of administration and regulation, and in a real sense we'd be taxing "the fat of the land," i.e., discretionary income, more than essential spending by people.

Of course, people could evade the tax by giving up their corporations and setting up as sole proprietorships or partnerships, but don't forget why corporations exist in the first place. A shareholder's liability is limited to the money she has invested in the corporation. In a sole proprietorship or partnership, the owners' liability extends to everything they own. People will have to adjust to that reality, and take that chance if they want to.

Questions? Comments? Curses?
Tecumseh;
I'd started a response, anticipating discussion of past/present indigenous and invader relations - an attempt to get inside each others heads (maybe I should rephrase that); but you'v'e dived - dove? diven? - into socio-econo stuff, and quite a lot of it. You had this already composed somewhere, ready to launch? It'll take a while to answer.

Meantime I had written this:
--------------
Let's 'go public' and we can use PM for anything we feel sensitive about - like any personal details we might want to share.

Past sharp exchanges could have been facilitated by your perception (largely justifiable) of my race's treatment of yours. Also by my perception of a hostile element in your posts at the time. See, there could be a twinkle in my eye or yours when I say this - a nudge and a wink - but the other can't know. Tricky, as you say.

The gap between our backgrounds could hardly be much bigger. What a gulf in history and culture. I'm a Canadian immigrant raised elsewhere and you're an American-born 'native.' - Is 'Amerind', or 'American Indian' a useful term? (Damn that Columbus, not knowing where he was!.) In your own mind how would you refer to your 'race'?
----------------
Now, starting from the top of your comments:

Re. taxing corporations:

PHILOSOPHICAL: Firstly I don't believe in approaching problems by applying ideologies with 'ism' labels, that substitute for actual thinking; but as far as possible by simply trying to find the solution with least disadvantages - which will often be a compromise between belief systems. Then, in common with most of the world's population, I have no special reverence for the US' Independence Declaration* or for its politicians - for almost any politicians in fact. Lastly I think the defining of corporations as persons is an abomination so gross and bizarre that I don't have words for it.

HUMANITARIAN: I don't have the expertise to predict the effect on financially disadvantaged people, of taxing corporations at any particular levels. I suspect neither do the alleged experts. When 'smarter spending choices' don't cut it I would want social safety nets for all who really need them; but that's another subject.

EASE OF ADMINISTRATION: Well again I don't have the expertise to make much comment. Don't know beans about C or S corps but I'm all for simplifying law & accounting procedures so long as they stay(?!) - become! - honest. ESPECIALLY that. fear of big penalties for 'tricky dodges' might spur shareholders to keep corporations in line too.

ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES: "prices to consumers go up, but so does their effective income, because they're not paying taxes anymore." OOps - I missed that bit - not paying taxes anymore. Is it part of the flat tax you mentioned. I've never been clear what people meant by flat tax but I guess it's not what I thought. No personal income tax? That's a great big rethink I wasn't ready for. As usual I doubt I have the expertise or even patience to try & predict the outcomes. Unlike many I don't hate the idea of 'paying my way' via risk-splitting, graduated personal taxes. Clumsily expressed I know but you get my drift? The efficiency and 'fairness' of how the govt spends/redistributes our money are open to serious question, but a somewhat separate issue.

Sorry, I have more opinions & leanings than expertise. Sometimes a good thing? Emperor's clothes etc.

Flat tax - dunno. I'd have to study it; not what I thought.

*I say this as one who grew up singing Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory (still a wonderful piece of music without the lyrics**); reveling in the Glory of the British Empire** and buying all its high-flown rhetoric; so I know how addictive and hallucinatory nationalist pride can be.

**"By freedom gained, by truth maintained" - can you believe it?
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,362
9,531
113
Washington DC
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. We'll work on it. I value your perspective and your insights.

As you said earlier, I'm about typed out for the night. We'll get at it tommorow or later.

I'm OFF THE BOARD tomorrow evening and Sunday afternoon/evening. Playoffs!

GO RAVENS!
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
I want to thank you, taxslave, and all the other folks on here for their tax compliance (willing or unwilling) It helped me quickly get the urgent & expensive medical help I needed to survive my heart attack last weekend. Thank you all. I do hope that all our taxes, mine included, can help get aid to any and all of us who need it in future.
Now, coming back from a 'life threatening episode' which may recur, I wonder why I should waste time on any of the foolish drivel (not to mention ignorant, obnoxious and stupid arrogance) that makes up so much of the forum content. I don't suffer fools very gladly; maybe I should just stop trying to suffer them at all.
(First time I've come across someone proud of just being able to look up a dictionary; and I think that should be myOcardial? :D )
Always gad to help someone that deserves it. It is the freeloaders that never contribute to the system and the government employees that ilk it that bother me. I don't know exactly where you live but I'm betting some of y brother and sister firefighters were there to assist you?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Anyway, for you, VIBC, here are my rational thoughts on taxes.
Tax corporations.
Reasons this is a good idea from highly philosophical to downright practical. . .
PHILOSOPHICAL: Mitt Romney notwithstanding, corporations are NOT "people too." They are not mentioned at all in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution (nor, I believe, in the Charter, but I'm better with the American documents). They are not citizens, they cannot vote, and I don't think anybody who believes in an immortal soul or salvation thinks corporations possess the former or are eligible for the latter. The Declaration of Independence say "all men. . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . ." The idea being that only the Creator can take away your rights, not men or governments of men. Well, a corporation's creator is the state, literally. A corporation is created by a charter granted by the government. Hence, the government is free to kill a corporation for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all, or to take any action it chooses short of killing it, like taking 20% of its revenues.
HUMANITARIAN: Nobody will be put in peril of starvation or poverty by taxing corporations, as some people would be by any sort of flat tax that applies to the poor. Obviously, corporations will raise their prices to account for the increase in tax, but that just means people who are short on money will have to make smarter spending choices.
EASE OF ADMINISTRATION: Just think how much easier it would be to keep track of 1.7 million C corporations and 4.6 million S corporations than 326 million individuals. It would also be much easier to simplify the laws and accounting procedures. Corporation comes up with a tricky dodge to avoid taxes? Easy. Make it illegal. Add in the threat of seizing ALL of the corporation's assets and winding it up (effectively "killing" it). They'll laugh right up until it happens to the first one. Then they'll get religion. And fewer of taxslave's hated bureaucrats would be needed to enforce the tax code.
ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES: Sure, prices to consumers go up, but so does their effective income, because they're not paying taxes anymore. And assuming a 20% corporate revenue tax would automatically lead to a 20% price increase across the board is naive. Pricing is incredibly complex, but in short form, if a corporation responds by raising its prices 15% instead of 20%, its profit per sale will be lower, but its sales should increase.
Further, in some ways it would be good for corporations. Their revenues would go up. Granted, the increase would go out as taxes, but you'd be surprised how many will overlook that simple fact.
So. . . no infringing on "rights," no increase in real prices (adjusted for income), ease of administration and regulation, and in a real sense we'd be taxing "the fat of the land," i.e., discretionary income, more than essential spending by people.
Of course, people could evade the tax by giving up their corporations and setting up as sole proprietorships or partnerships, but don't forget why corporations exist in the first place. A shareholder's liability is limited to the money she has invested in the corporation. In a sole proprietorship or partnership, the owners' liability extends to everything they own. People will have to adjust to that reality, and take that chance if they want to.
Questions? Comments? Curses?
I can follow your reasoning but not sure I agree with a lot t. The simplified tax laws is a definite plus. After all if it wasn't so complicated there would be no need for all the bureaucraps, lawyers and accountants that feed off it. No idea what C & S corps are. There are also significant differences between Canadian and US law so what works for one may not work for the other. I think in effect what you are advocating is a value added tax except you are building it into the retail price , while most of us would like the tax applied separately so we can see how much governments are taking
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,551
8,148
113
B.C.
I want to thank you, taxslave, and all the other folks on here for their tax compliance (willing or unwilling) It helped me quickly get the urgent & expensive medical help I needed to survive my heart attack last weekend. Thank you all. I do hope that all our taxes, mine included, can help get aid to any and all of us who need it in future.

Now, coming back from a 'life threatening episode' which may recur, I wonder why I should waste time on any of the foolish drivel (not to mention ignorant, obnoxious and stupid arrogance) that makes up so much of the forum content. I don't suffer fools very gladly; maybe I should just stop trying to suffer them at all.

(First time I've come across someone proud of just being able to look up a dictionary; and I think that should be myOcardial? :D )
That is to bad , I should have withheld my taxes . Win some lose some .
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,551
8,148
113
B.C.
Anyway, for you, VIBC, here are my rational thoughts on taxes.

Tax corporations.

Reasons this is a good idea from highly philosophical to downright practical. . .

PHILOSOPHICAL: Mitt Romney notwithstanding, corporations are NOT "people too." They are not mentioned at all in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution (nor, I believe, in the Charter, but I'm better with the American documents). They are not citizens, they cannot vote, and I don't think anybody who believes in an immortal soul or salvation thinks corporations possess the former or are eligible for the latter. The Declaration of Independence say "all men. . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . ." The idea being that only the Creator can take away your rights, not men or governments of men. Well, a corporation's creator is the state, literally. A corporation is created by a charter granted by the government. Hence, the government is free to kill a corporation for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all, or to take any action it chooses short of killing it, like taking 20% of its revenues.

HUMANITARIAN: Nobody will be put in peril of starvation or poverty by taxing corporations, as some people would be by any sort of flat tax that applies to the poor. Obviously, corporations will raise their prices to account for the increase in tax, but that just means people who are short on money will have to make smarter spending choices.

EASE OF ADMINISTRATION: Just think how much easier it would be to keep track of 1.7 million C corporations and 4.6 million S corporations than 326 million individuals. It would also be much easier to simplify the laws and accounting procedures. Corporation comes up with a tricky dodge to avoid taxes? Easy. Make it illegal. Add in the threat of seizing ALL of the corporation's assets and winding it up (effectively "killing" it). They'll laugh right up until it happens to the first one. Then they'll get religion. And fewer of taxslave's hated bureaucrats would be needed to enforce the tax code.

ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES: Sure, prices to consumers go up, but so does their effective income, because they're not paying taxes anymore. And assuming a 20% corporate revenue tax would automatically lead to a 20% price increase across the board is naive. Pricing is incredibly complex, but in short form, if a corporation responds by raising its prices 15% instead of 20%, its profit per sale will be lower, but its sales should increase.

Further, in some ways it would be good for corporations. Their revenues would go up. Granted, the increase would go out as taxes, but you'd be surprised how many will overlook that simple fact.

So. . . no infringing on "rights," no increase in real prices (adjusted for income), ease of administration and regulation, and in a real sense we'd be taxing "the fat of the land," i.e., discretionary income, more than essential spending by people.

Of course, people could evade the tax by giving up their corporations and setting up as sole proprietorships or partnerships, but don't forget why corporations exist in the first place. A shareholder's liability is limited to the money she has invested in the corporation. In a sole proprietorship or partnership, the owners' liability extends to everything they own. People will have to adjust to that reality, and take that chance if they want to.

Questions? Comments? Curses?
Prior to income tax that was basically governments source of income .