Can Ignatieff distance himself from his past?

[L Gilbert]

The odd deficit here and there is unavoidable and forgiveable when a surplus shows up to counterbalance them. It's the massive debt loads that sticks around for a while.
PET's lovely contribution to the national debt was $178 Billion (from $18 Billion up to $200 Billion when he got turfed out). It's dropped from almost $600 Billion since, thanks to Martin's and Harper's nasty methods of reduction. So pinpointing one dood for Canada's fiscal messes is a bit foolish as several had a hand in it.

 

[Machjo]

One: do you have Iggy's tax records? How do you know where his taxes went?

Two: Many Canadians who live in the USA and pay only American taxes. There are many Americans living here who pay only Canadian taxes.

People generally pay taxes to the country they live in because they use the services paid for by that country's government. I for one would be pretty annoyed to know that there were Americans living here, using all of the things our taxes pay for, who were shipping their money down there instead. How can we not expect the same standards to be applied to Canadians living in America?

I agree with this. Out of respect for the sovereingty of another nation, ou should pay your taxes to that nation. if Ignatieff wasn't living in Canada, why should he pretend to be? That just shows his honesty on that point at least. If he lived in the US, its was a respectful act on his part to acknowledge his being on US soil and so choose to pay into the US system and rely on the US system. If someone breaks into his home in the US, is he going to call the RCMP? NO, the local police of the FBI. Why why not pay taxes to them too. The US is not a Canadian colony after all.

And I fully agree that a US resident in Canada should pay Canadian taxes for the same reason. If he needs help in Canada, the 911 operator at the end of the line is not going to be answering from the US most likely, and if so, the service would still be funded by Canadian taxes, not US.

Personally, I belive that taxation and access to government services should be based on residency, not citizenship. This just as a matter of respect for equality between nations. In that respect, though I have many points to criticize about Ignatieff, I have no issue with his decision to pay US taxes. That just shows respect for his host country.

 

[Machjo]

Its like you never read a thing I wrote.
Just in case its all just above your rebuttal post.
I thought I had rabbited on about residency long enough.

But if you want more info I guess I can fill you in.
Since live with this stuff on a daily basis and all.

Iggy's American residency and Canadian non-residency are a matter of public record.
He has stated he did not file Canadian taxes thus he had to have been non res.

As a Canadian citizen you must apply for a finding of non-residency in Canada in order to be excused from filing a Canadian tax return.
You must cash out all your RRSP's and pay a roughly 30% withholding tax.
Any Canadian bank accounts are iffy and may be used as a reason not to grant non residency.
Canadian drivers license are cancelled.
Canadian based credit card are given up.
Canadian owned property is dodgy and once again may be used by RevCan to deny a non residency finding.
And then you must stay out of Canada for six months and have no financial transactions with Canadian institutions during that time.
And on and on with all kinds of government rules and policies.
And Viola, you no longer have to file Canadian taxes.
RevCan just goes away, its a hard-working taxpayers wet dream come true.
For about two seconds.
The cold truth is you are legally comitted to paying taxes somewhere, and RevCan or the IRS will come after you with a vengeance if they think you are dodging taxes.

So its not somthing that just accidentally happens.
Iggy didnt just wake up and go, Whoa i'm non res.
He thought it out, fufilled the conditions,applied and became a legal non resident of Canada.

As to your statement that I would be surprised about how many Americans are working in Canada and not filing American taxes.
Indeed I would be surprised, because unless they have declared non res status they are filing American returns.
And as to Canadians who work in the USA and pay taxes only in the States.
I lived and worked in the States for two years and I chose to pay my taxes in Canada.
Granted I had to file both American and Canadian tax returns.
But I once again chose to remain a Canadian resident and pay the bulk of my taxes to Canada.
Unlike say, Iggy.

And to repeat myself I now do 100% of my work in Europe.
I am posting from Europe now( if SJP is reading this I got the heck out of Humberside ASAP and returned to my old stomping grounds of Norwich).
I pay all my taxes in Canada.
CPP, OAS, Health care, the whole shmeer.
Been doing it for years.
Thats because I chose to retain Canadain residency.
Unlike say, Iggy.
Nobody over here seems to upset by my only paying Canadian taxes.
The companies and people who I deal with seem fairly happy.
They pay me after all.

Now what I will grant you is that if your job in the United States is not deemed temporary.
And if you are legally living and working in the States for some time, the Americans will do one of two things.

Try to punt you out for taking up an Americans job and not being American(this is the usual one)

Or B, they tell you that you are more than welcome to stay and work in the States as long as you like but you WILL be getting a green card and you WILL be filing American taxes. This is the one that happened to me and because I really didnt fancy becoming an American or living my life in the states I left and no longer do any work in the States.
Plus the dual accountant thing was killing me.
The Americans I am sure offered Iggy the same deal: "Stay as long as you want, here is your shiney new green card, by the way have you considered becoming an American citizen?.
And Iggy was all over that like a bad rash.

And thats why he became non res.
He held on to his Canadian passport because he could.

But he publicly stated several times during press interviews: "The United States of America is my home".

When asked about Canada he stated: " They have nice parks".

Iggy considers himself an elite citizen of the world.
And far more American than Canadian.

Once again.
Does anybody really believe this guy is gonna hang around if he doesnt get to be PM?
Really?

Trex

So you live in the UK, use their roads, would rely on their police in an emergency, and yet refuse to pay taxes to them? Some respect for your host that is!

Iggy did the right thing there. For whatever reason, he'd chosen to remain in the US and pay taxes there. It could be for greedy reasons (more money?) or altruistic (make make a greater contribution to his fellow man in the job he had there?) or neither (habit? Used to living in that town? I've lived abroad too, and if you live abroad for awhile, it's not easy to just pack your bags and move back to Canada.).

Whatever his reasons, I don't see how it's any worse to move from country to country than it is from town to town. No difference. Only the motives could be quesitoned, but the moving out per se is neither good nor bad in its own right. We must live our lives. This ain't orwell's 1984. We should be free to go where we want when we want.

If Iggy thinks he has something to offer Canadians, then he should be free to present it. It's a democracy after all, and people in his riding will make the decision, no one else. Even I won't get to vote for or against him. Thus is democracy.

If Iggy thinks he can

 

[Machjo]

Iggy is the man who will force Harper in loosing his job.

They're not even in the same riding.

 

[Trex]

So you live in the UK, use their roads, would rely on their police in an emergency, and yet refuse to pay taxes to them? Some respect for your host that is!

Iggy did the right thing there. For whatever reason, he'd chosen to remain in the US and pay taxes there. It could be for greedy reasons (more money?) or altruistic (make make a greater contribution to his fellow man in the job he had there?) or neither (habit? Used to living in that town? I've lived abroad too, and if you live abroad for awhile, it's not easy to just pack your bags and move back to Canada.).

Whatever his reasons, I don't see how it's any worse to move from country to country than it is from town to town. No difference. Only the motives could be quesitoned, but the moving out per se is neither good nor bad in its own right. We must live our lives. This ain't orwell's 1984. We should be free to go where we want when we want.

If Iggy thinks he has something to offer Canadians, then he should be free to present it. It's a democracy after all, and people in his riding will make the decision, no one else. Even I won't get to vote for or against him. Thus is democracy.

If Iggy thinks he can

You say you have lived and worked abroad and yet you show no understanding of how international taxation, residency and emplyment legislation works.
When you criticize me for not showing respect for my host it becomes obvious you really dont know anything about it.
The EU wants my services; I abide by all tax, legal and residency requirements that they have.
It has nothing at all to do with my respect for a host and everything to do with fufilling to the letter of the law every legal and ethical requirement the EU has of me.

I would tend to suspect Machjo, that you were a military transfer overseas.
I grew up as an army brat and am well aware of foreign military postings.
Foriegn military postings bear no relationship to actually living, moving, working and actually dealing with foreign rules and regulations on your own.
But enough about a little chunk of Canada inside a foreign CF base.

What it is about however is loyalty to ones country.
And personal ethics.
Iggy in my opinion hasn't shown it in his life to date( loyalty that is).
When you accept foreign work you may have the legal option of deciding where all or at least some of your taxes get paid.
It varies from country to country according to tax law.
I am somewhat familiar with the Canadian and American systems having been there done that.

So, when Iggy first went he probably went on contract and he would then have the option of paying taxes in Canada, in the States or both.
Depending on his residency claim.
He chose to pay his money(tax wise) into the States.
In a very similar situation I chose to pay my money into Canada(tax wise).
I'm not looking for any Brownie points here.
It was my personel decision and lots of other people make the same decision.
I supported Canada tax wise as best as I could because the money had to go somewhere.
As a Canadian I felt those tax funds could go into general revenue for the betterment of Canada and its people.
Iggy chose to fund the States.
So Iggy did the wrong thing there according to my ethical principles.
Therefore I feel he was not a particularly loyal Canadian.
He was in fact, a loyal American.
And there was a choice make no mistake.

Next up Iggy decided to take a long term career position at Harvard.
Thats kinda the same as immigrating in my book.
He comitted his future to the Americans.
Say as a surgeon you took a two year contract to teach transplants in Australia.
Thats one thing.
You could remain primarily a Canadian.
But if you moved lock, stock and barrel to Australia, declared non residency in Canada. And then bought a house. And then took over as the department head of transplant surgery at a major hospital. And then signed up for Australian pension plans.
Welllllll now it gets pretty iffy loyalty wise.
And thats pretty much what Iggy did except he went to Harvard.
And he just happenedto hang on to his Canadian passport.

Its like when Paul Martin allowed his company, Canada Steamship Lines to be 100% registered outside of Canada to save on taxes.
I just dont consider that kind of thing loyal to ones country.

I seem to hold myself to a higher standard than some politicians feel is required.
perhaps I am nieve.
Maybe it explains why I never got rich.
Whatever.

So I, personally, do think what choices people make do reflect their own moral compasses.

Does anyone really believe this guy will remain in Canada if he doesnt get the Big Chair?
Really?

Trex

 

[Polygong]

Yes, I believe he will stay.

 

[Walter]

By MICHAEL HARRIS
Last Updated: 22nd May 2009, 1:17am
I am furious with my former Conservative colleagues for launching an advertising campaign featuring Michael Ignatieff that doesn't accentuate the positives.

After all this is Canada. We don't behave like those awful people in the United States of America which, in case you hadn't heard, is the very place where Ignatieff chose to live for so many years!
But why dwell on the fact that he dwelled away from Canada for 34 years. If he ever does become prime minister he can pick up the Canada thing as he goes along.
My real point is that raising things that Ignatieff has said in unguarded moments during decades of living in the United States and the U.K. is obviously unfair.
Of course it was absolutely fair when the Liberals ran attack ads against Stephen Harper when he became the leader of the Conservative Party.
I mean it was clear at the time that a smart, ambitious resident of Canada like Harper could potentially be the prime minister, and therefore his past views could be relevant.
Apply the same brilliant logic to the case of Ignatieff and you instantly see that it is unfair to hold him to the same standards.
Unfair because who could ever have expected that a Canadian who lived in the U.S. for eons and spoke of the United States as his country could ever hope to be prime minister?
Free to speak
In his mind Ignatieff was free to say whatever he wanted to say about Quebec and he certainly took advantage of his freedom. He was free because he couldn't imagine himself being taken seriously as a political figure in Canada after choosing to live his life in voluntary exile in the U.S.
That's why he spoke candidly about not missing Canada at all, except for Algonquin Park. So actually it's not his fault. If he had known that he would be taken seriously as a Liberal leadership candidate he would have never said those things in the first place.
OK, so here is my real, real point. My realest point of all is that we shouldn't focus on those old comments at all.
Ignatieff may have said these things in an awkward attempt at humour, or his views may have changed, or perhaps he had just bumped his head on an anvil.
Obviously the readers of this column are the most sophisticated people in Canada and as such it is beneath us to engage in "gotcha" politics.
We would much rather debate and dissect policy ideas.
Sadly there aren't any Liberal policy ideas so we are left to try and divine Liberal intentions based on a hodgepodge of Ignatieff writings, musings and ponderings, though I question whether "ponderings" is actually a word.
Unfortunately in trying to figure out who this man is, and what he believes, we run into his own words and sometimes they are a tad surprising.
The lesson is that if you have lived away from the country for a generation, have said unfortunate things, and your business card says, "Public Intellectual" then you might want to display that intellect by sharing your ideas on how to make Canada a better place.
Then you'll actually have some credibility when you say that this debate should be about ideas.

 

[El Barto]

So what if he was for the war in Iraq.
I bet if the question was asked again , those politicians that were for it in the past would deffinately change their stance knowing how it turned out.
You know , its not uncommon to make mistakes and to be on the wrong side of the issue. We hold politicians with a very narrow of margine of error.
We deffinately have the easy part of sitting back and critisizing things.
It's easy looking smart critisizing but given the chance could you do better?

 

[Walter]

We hold politicians with a very narrow of margine of error. We deffinately have the easy part of sitting back and critisizing things.
It's easy looking smart critisizing but given the chance could you do better?

I'm not running for elected office; he is.

 

[Francis2004]

I'm not running for elected office; he is.

Maybe you should.. Your opinion of politics may change and so may your views..

 

[coldstream]

I've been reading his book, True Patriot Love, about his family and career, and i have to say that he is a very good writer. He makes a compelling case for his knowledge of Canada and his nationalism.

I think his patriotism is genuine, his intellect flexible and rigorous, something i would never ascribe to Harper. He undoubtedly has deep roots here.

The character of an expatriate, through opportunity elsewhere or some type of wanderlust, in terms of ideas or geography, is not necessarily exclusionary to high political office. In fact it might provide a constructive objectivity to his perspective and decision framework.

I can't see myself voting for him. He's too invested in the liberal culture of our times, in morals and economics.. but i think he probably is going to be our next Prime Minister. I hope he uses that flexibility of mind to distance himself from the downward spiral our economy and society is in.. but i'm not that hopeful.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

They're not even in the same riding.

Machjo good day to you, I meant his job as PM

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Harper by far is not an intellectual, his 2 term minority confirms that, the man lacks charismatic energy, while Iggy possesses the correct charismatic energy and to top things up he is a confirmed intellectual.

And that lives Harper way back, Harper will loose Quebec because of Iggy, Quebec is going to be the decider for the next Prime Minister of Canada and the Conservatives will loose the next election because of Quebec and Iggy.

 

[Francis2004]

Harper by far is not an intellectual, his 2 term minority confirms that, the man lacks charismatic energy, while Iggy possesses the correct charismatic energy and to top things up he is a confirmed intellectual.

And that lives Harper way back, Harper will loose Quebec because of Iggy, Quebec is going to be the decider for the next Prime Minister of Canada and the Conservatives will loose the next election because of Quebec and Iggy.

Good day Soc, to think Harper is not an intellectual is by far under estimating him.. He maybe over controlling and have bad advisers but Harper himself is by far not intellectual.

Also Ignatieff has by far not won Quebec. The Bloc will make sure neither Conservative or Liberal add make further gains and in fact will try to wedge back the seats they lost. It will be left to be seen if Iggy or Harper can make gains again.. But by far I would not count either out..

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Good day Soc, to think Harper is not an intellectual is by far under estimating him.. He maybe over controlling and have bad advisers but Harper himself is by far not intellectual.

Also Ignatieff has by far not won Quebec. The Bloc will make sure neither Conservative or Liberal add make further gains and in fact will try to wedge back the seats they lost. It will be left to be seen if Iggy or Harper can make gains again.. But by far I would not count either out..

Good day to you Francis2004l, I have not once heard Harper give inspirational or intellectual speeches, as for Quebec it is fact that Harper messed up in the last federal election in Quebec and that will carry over on the coming up election. Quebeckers will remember that during the coalition storm they were called by Harper separatists.

 

[Risus]

Harper by far is not an intellectual, his 2 term minority confirms that, the man lacks charismatic energy, while Iggy possesses the correct charismatic energy and to top things up he is a confirmed intellectual.

And that lives Harper way back, Harper will loose Quebec because of Iggy, Quebec is going to be the decider for the next Prime Minister of Canada and the Conservatives will loose the next election because of Quebec and Iggy.

Electing Iggy as leader will backfire on the Liberals. His american background and close ties to them is going to bite him in the butt. You used to complain thet Harper was Obama's puppet, but you haven't seen a puppet dance until you see obama pulling iggy's strings... Look out!

 

[Francis2004]

Electing Iggy as leader will backfire on the Liberals. His american background and close ties to them is going to bite him in the butt. You used to complain thet Harper was Obama's puppet, but you haven't seen a puppet dance until you see obama pulling iggy's strings... Look out!

If this is true then you will be very happy as policy will not have changed from Harper to Ignatieff..

 

[L Gilbert]

Iggy charismatic? lmao That's funny. Any time I see him talk, he looks like he's a little pained having to explain things to the poor, stupid peon who was asking questions. I'd have loved to see Jack Webster ask him a few. Rafe Mair maybe, too.

 

[El Barto]

I'm not running for elected office; he is.

Like I said , it's easy to lay back and critisize.
Politicians make mistakes just like we do.

 

[Polygong]

Electing Iggy as leader will backfire on the Liberals. His american background and close ties to them is going to bite him in the butt. You used to complain thet Harper was Obama's puppet, but you haven't seen a puppet dance until you see obama pulling iggy's strings... Look out!

He lived in the USA 5 years. That's it. There are many people we consider to be Canadian icons who have lived down there for even longer, e.g Wayne Gretzky, Neil Young and Mike Meyers.

And if anything, Ignatieff is clearly a man who can think for himself. He will influence other leaders more than they will influence him.