2021+ income tax

[Team_Mclaren]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

i don't get this argument.

would you prefer to lose your job so you can qualify for 2 grand a month? Or would you rather keep your job, keep busy throughout this pandemic, and likely be earning more than the CERB amount?

Dont get me wrong, I'd rather be working making more than the 2k. But my question is how is this fair to the ones working right now? Take a pay cut now, pay more taxes later. Zero benefits. I know the system isnt perfect and i dont have a solution.

[Disoblige]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Dont get me wrong, I'd rather be working making more than the 2k. But my question is how is this fair to the ones working right now? Take a pay cut now, pay more taxes later. Zero benefits. I know the system isnt perfect and i dont have a solution, just bitching...

Maybe think about it more in more than just financial. People who are out of work usually feel more uncertain about their future. Plus if you have a job, you have something to do, something routine. It might be pretty meaningful in times like this.

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I was having a chat with a friend about this the other day...

Make 100,000 a year? 80% tax rate

No sources, just speculating...

How could that even be possible? Am I not understanding something or are you saying people making 100K a year will be left with 20k? If so, my first question stands.


@M.alex here comes one of the bigger Liberal wet dreams to defund the populace - the inheritance tax.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How could that even be possible? Am I not understanding something or are you saying people making 100K a year will be left with 20k? If so, my first question stands.


@M.alex here comes one of the bigger Liberal wet dreams to defund the populace - the inheritance tax.

If they increase tax rates, they would still be progressive. i.e. 0-20k no tax, 20-60k 30%, 60-100k 40%, 100k+ 80%

FWIW i don't think it will ever get to 80%, that's just ridiculous

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they increase tax rates, they would still be progressive. i.e. 0-20k no tax, 20-60k 30%, 60-100k 40%, 100k+ 80%

FWIW i don't think it will ever get to 80%, that's just ridiculous

Oh that makes sense hahaha, need morning covifee! But yeah 80% is fucked. I just see 10% GST, bigger PST, bigger property taxes and the holy grail of theft - the inheritance tax.

Which arguably cumulatively is way worse than the 80% notion.......

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Dont get me wrong, I'd rather be working making more than the 2k. But my question is how is this fair to the ones working right now? Take a pay cut now, pay more taxes later. Zero benefits. I know the system isnt perfect and i dont have a solution.

1st of all, nobody said there will be more taxes later regarding this bail out. It should be covered by QE and question is how many rounds are needed.

When Obama did rounds of QE, I notice prices in US went up around 15%-20% on imported good, less on others. I expect the same will happen here over the next 2-3 years.

As for fairness, I have paid into EI for almost 25 years now and never collected 1 cent (knock on wood that I never have to in the future). But seeing how it helps others to transition between jobs, it's a great program to promote social stability.

[mr2mike]

Not looking forward to 2021.
Pay hasn't kept up with rates of inflation since 2014,
Pay cuts have taken place over time.
Taxes have gone up and now CPP increases.

Happy to be employed Comrades!

[ZenOps]

Nothing a bottle of Russian vodka can't solve.

[davidI]

The joke is that politicians always claim they'll "tax the rich" by raising income taxes. Newsflash, the rich don't pay income taxes as they don't work menial salary jobs but derive their wealth from capital gains, dividends, and often flow it all through complicated tax structures to avoid paying the same taxes on CGs and dividends that 99.9% of Canadians pay.

If they actually wanted to tax the rich (i.e. their buddies and those who helped them get into their cushy political jobs), they'd close all of the international tax loopholes, get rid of all the corporate subsidies, and get rid of complicated tax benefits (flow throughs and similar).

Canada has become anything but a free market that supports entrepreneurs and SMEs - it's all about aggregating power with the Laurentian Elite.

Beginning in 1968, coincident with the election of Pierre Trudeau, our elites adopted contemporary left-leaning economic and social policies. Federal government spending mushroomed from 16 percent of the economy in 1967 to 25 percent of a much larger economy by 1984 when Trudeau Sr. left office – a vast increase in dollar terms. The spirit of the times favoured enthusiastic expansion of government agencies, provincial and municipal governments, resulting in a Canadian public sector comprising almost 50 percent of the economy. The programs implemented and institutions created during those years are too numerous to mention, which itself makes the point. A robust civil society and private-sector economy were being supplanted by an expanding state.
All came to a head in the 1990s. Canada’s debt to GDP ratio was approaching 72 percent and, in 1995, the Wall Street Journal called us “an honorary Third World country”. After two credit rating downgrades, and with prodding from the decidedly non-Laurentian Reform Party, the Liberals acted.

Sound familiar?

Source: https://c2cjournal.ca/2019/11/fbp-th...-ruling-class/

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The joke is that politicians always claim they'll "tax the rich" by raising income taxes. Newsflash, the rich don't pay income taxes as they don't work menial salary jobs but derive their wealth from capital gains, dividends, and often flow it all through complicated tax structures to avoid paying the same taxes on CGs and dividends that 99.9% of Canadians pay.

If they actually wanted to tax the rich (i.e. their buddies and those who helped them get into their cushy political jobs), they'd close all of the international tax loopholes, get rid of all the corporate subsidies, and get rid of complicated tax benefits (flow throughs and similar).

Canada has become anything but a free market that supports entrepreneurs and SMEs - it's all about aggregating power with the Laurentian Elite.




Sound familiar?

Source: https://c2cjournal.ca/2019/11/fbp-th...-ruling-class/

You can't close loopholes on the rich unless *everyone* closes those loopholes. Closing loopholes ourselves would just move the rich elsewhere, even if it's just on paper, unless we have a huge competitive advantage against our neighbours, which we don't. It's a case of we should be happy with a little, than to lose it all.

End of the day, taxing the rich is just a narrative to make people feel warm and fuzzy inside. In reality it's taxing the middle and upper middle class, which has a much harder time just moving elsewhere like the rich.

[rx7boi]

Best way to win is to play the game.

[killramos]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Best way to win is to own the game.

ftfy

[davidI]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can't close loopholes on the rich unless *everyone* closes those loopholes. Closing loopholes ourselves would just move the rich elsewhere, even if it's just on paper, unless we have a huge competitive advantage against our neighbours, which we don't. It's a case of we should be happy with a little, than to lose it all.

End of the day, taxing the rich is just a narrative to make people feel warm and fuzzy inside. In reality it's taxing the middle and upper middle class, which has a much harder time just moving elsewhere like the rich.

The smart play would be to reduce taxation across the board but under more of a free-market system.

I also expect the world to move towards taxation based on Citizenship, just like in the US, but it will take a while until all of the KYC/CRS compliance mechanisms are in-place across the OECD.

[ZenOps]

Technically I do expect the powers that be - to try a universal currency.

Assuming USA money printing in the last 10 months equalling 35% of all US dollars printed since the beginning of the US dollar. San Francisco low income should actually be closer to $150,000 US per year (2021). But thats not really what is important, what is important is what is the rest of the world doing. At $290 US per month wages, a post secondary engineer in India is content, but at $250 US per month, the riots start happening.

When the USA gets to the point where $1 million is low income (which I now fully expect instead of half a milly, before I hit retirement age 20 years from now) its actually exponentially more than the rest of the world, the larger you make the numbers. People in India are not fools, they will play the game only for so long as it feeds their bellies. If you are making less than $200,000 in SanFran - you probably won't be able to afford rent or taxes, as a guess for the future.

BTW: The India engineer that makes everything more efficient is arguably much more valueable than the Buzz Aldrins of the world, especially to the billionaires. But its still up to the Billionaires to maintain the illusion of consumption as growth. IE: If you are in the business of selling oil, you can't let the people know that there is an electric motor that can do the same thing for 1/50th the cost.

What changed everything was the internet. Too many woke people nowadays, which means you can never go back.