If you told me you found that survey even more annoying than I did I'd believe you.
Average Canadian family spending more money on taxes than on food, clothing and
- Thread starter westmanguy
- Start date
If you told me you found that survey even more annoying than I did I'd believe you.
lol. I don't know how irritating you found it. But, if I'd have had a mouthful of coffee or something it would have escaped through my nose when I read that.
14 cent on every dollar --I wouldn't care if our roads were half decent our health care wasn't red taped to death and if you look at Community service staff breakdown there are 9 communication/marketing ministers and 1DISABILITY minister 1 onatiro works --
What the hell do we need marketing for social service --
Our taxes are mis manged ,stolen and I cant see why I need to put up with it anymore so
I buy mostly used ,except for food --lol --shop ebay .ca and try to pay as little tax as possible
we are taxed on used goods from the sally Ann for **** sakes --come on ,all the money and people are still in poverty --wrong, wrong greedy leaders again and again --they just figure out ways to take more and give less
It s got to stop we are heading for Argentina and the social genocide they went thur
What the hell do we need marketing for social service --
Our taxes are mis manged ,stolen and I cant see why I need to put up with it anymore so
I buy mostly used ,except for food --lol --shop ebay .ca and try to pay as little tax as possible
we are taxed on used goods from the sally Ann for **** sakes --come on ,all the money and people are still in poverty --wrong, wrong greedy leaders again and again --they just figure out ways to take more and give less
It s got to stop we are heading for Argentina and the social genocide they went thur
not as much as it used to. the thrill kind of wears off after the first few dozen. its too bad really. I'm a sucker for drama and I've got the wife to prove it.;-)
"Just over 35 per cent was spent on food, clothing and housing. "
Or, to put it another way, the average family makes almost 3 times as much as they need.
Or, to put it another way, our cost of living is relatively low, since we only spend 35% of our average income on the "necessities of life".
How do YOU want to spin these numbers? What agenda do you want to push with these statistics?
Or, to put it another way, the average family makes almost 3 times as much as they need.
Or, to put it another way, our cost of living is relatively low, since we only spend 35% of our average income on the "necessities of life".
How do YOU want to spin these numbers? What agenda do you want to push with these statistics?
A good example of high taxes and prosperity is found in Denmark. Modern economics suggests a choice exists between social services and how comprehensive they must be versus economic growth. Denmark has used taxation to control energy usage, and the resulting taxes benefit the rather extensive welfare state Denmark has become. Energy usage has held stable for the past 30 years while the GDP of Denmark has doubled. The majority of Denmarks energy is in the hands of resident owned and operated cooperatives, which makes government control on energy usage easier than when it is in the hands of corporations. Denmark places a higher priority on healthcare, pensions and education than it does for profitability and lower taxes.
Here in North America, high taxes are viewed as a downside, with low taxes and low prices viewed as a commodity themselves. But how can they be a downside when the Danish people willingly exchange high taxes for improved health, security, leisure time and energy independance with the associated reduced risk?
The Danish people are more than any other country willing to give in to high energy prices derived from clean sources. Their model works very well for them.
Here in North America, high taxes are viewed as a downside, with low taxes and low prices viewed as a commodity themselves. But how can they be a downside when the Danish people willingly exchange high taxes for improved health, security, leisure time and energy independance with the associated reduced risk?
The Danish people are more than any other country willing to give in to high energy prices derived from clean sources. Their model works very well for them.
Doesn't it kind of depend on how much money you're making? People on minimum wage pay a lot more on food, clothing, and housing than 35%. It also depends on what stage of your life you are at. I once had what I thought was a very large mortgage, almost half of my income. That mortgage has been paid off for over twenty years now. Average numbers mean nothing.
It would if you used any sense, but the Fraser Institute etc don't want to make sense, they want to push their agenda, so, like all of these groups, right, left, center, out-to-lunch, they use the average numbers and rationale that support their perspective.
True. The average represented here as 35% is probably quite different from what the typical family sees. Most working families with one or two kids are probably around 50% for housing and food alone. Retirees are likely all over the place. Some have virtually no housing costs, very little except property tax and maintenance. The % variance on food and other things would be fairly significant depending on their retirement incomes, and spent capital is not reported as income so it would skew the numbers even more. There are a lot of seniors who dip into tax-paid capital for income.