Vote Mobs!

[The Green Barbarian]

All fine and dandy ... but who ends up paying these increased taxes in the end?

You raise a good point, if do we now raise taxes on these companies (particularly oil companies) are they going to in turn raise the price on the goods they supply? Well in the case of the oil companies, we are in no way getting a stellar deal right now, in fact we're already getting gouged pretty hard in my understanding. But this topic interests me and to be honest I flip-flop on the issue quite a bit between keeping our current rate and raising them, but there's no point which I thought lowering them is a good idea. And that's really the key, not to lower them, as soon as you do that it makes raising them very difficult. And since Harper lowered them, can we just forgive and forget? Even though he wants to lower them more? I fail to see the economic incentive to lower our taxes to the point they're currently at and beyond.

who is telling you that oil companies are gouging us? Other than the NDP and the Green Party?

[UnknownResident]

All fine and dandy ... but who ends up paying these increased taxes in the end?

You raise a good point, if do we now raise taxes on these companies (particularly oil companies) are they going to in turn raise the price on the goods they supply? Well in the case of the oil companies, we are in no way getting a stellar deal right now, in fact we're already getting gouged pretty hard in my understanding. But this topic interests me and to be honest I flip-flop on the issue quite a bit between keeping our current rate and raising them, but there's no point which I thought lowering them is a good idea. And that's really the key, not to lower them, as soon as you do that it makes raising them very difficult. And since Harper lowered them, can we just forgive and forget? Even though he wants to lower them more? I fail to see the economic incentive to lower our taxes to the point they're currently at and beyond.

who is telling you that oil companies are gouging us? Other than the NDP and the Green Party?

Well if you look around... The states pay less then us, why? Plus I think it's widly known that they are not going bankrupt to say the least. Look I'm not trash-talking your sacred oil companies, they're doing what they're suppose to do, making as much profit as possible. The problem is they're driving our economy into the ground, and we have no way to limit how much they can get away with. Is your argument that maybe they aren't making any money? Really? Exxon makes 40billion a year, BP makes 20billion, those numbers may be off though... After all it was just a quick google search. (That's right I learned how to use Google! ;) )

[The Green Barbarian]

The problem is they're driving our economy into the ground,)

really?

and we have no way to limit how much they can get away with.

I am rapidly losing interest in taking anything you have to say seriously.

[The Green Barbarian]

Well if you look around... The states pay less then us, why?

I am assuming you are referring to the price at the pumps. Next time you are gassing up you should look at the pump, most gas stations have a breakdown of what the cost of gas is to Canadians right on the pump. The price differential is simple - we have the purely idiotic carbon tax, the HST, and other consumption taxes levied on gasoline, both federally and provincially. The US also taxes gasoline, but not nearly as heavily. It really has nothing to do with "oil companies". I don't love them, but it's a shame that the younger generation is being taught to hate them so much, especially based almost all on false info.

[grammafreddy]

All fine and dandy ... but who ends up paying these increased taxes in the end?

You raise a good point, if do we now raise taxes on these companies (particularly oil companies) are they going to in turn raise the price on the goods they supply? Well in the case of the oil companies, we are in no way getting a stellar deal right now, in fact we're already getting gouged pretty hard in my understanding. But this topic interests me and to be honest I flip-flop on the issue quite a bit between keeping our current rate and raising them, but there's no point which I thought lowering them is a good idea. And that's really the key, not to lower them, as soon as you do that it makes raising them very difficult. And since Harper lowered them, can we just forgive and forget? Even though he wants to lower them more? I fail to see the economic incentive to lower our taxes to the point they're currently at and beyond.

who is telling you that oil companies are gouging us? Other than the NDP and the Green Party?

Well if you look around... The states pay less then us, why? Plus I think it's widly known that they are not going bankrupt to say the least. Look I'm not trash-talking your sacred oil companies, they're doing what they're suppose to do, making as much profit as possible. The problem is they're driving our economy into the ground, and we have no way to limit how much they can get away with. Is your argument that maybe they aren't making any money? Really? Exxon makes 40billion a year, BP makes 20billion, those numbers may be off though... After all it was just a quick google search. (That's right I learned how to use Google! ;) )

I have absolutely no problem with corporations and people making money. Not even those mega-million-dollar CEO people or the big oil companies. I want them to make gazillions more, too!

Call me nuts if ya like but I look at it this way ...

They don't sock their billions away in some hidden Swiss bank account. They spend it. So what if they spend it on a McMansion or 50 cars in the garage? They create jobs when they buy things. Some company somewhere is employing somebody because these folks are greedy and rich and have to have whatever their little hearts desire ... from fancy food to racehorses to (Bill Gates and CN Rail) to construction and agriculture and manufacturing ... somebody gets a paycheque because these rich people have money and spend it.

And when they have more than they can spend ....... they invest it. They buy stocks in other companies and in venture capital projects - and that creates more jobs - and MORE wealth for somebody else who in turn does the same thing.

And they also donate it to charities - or start their own philanthropic organizations and give it to them. This creates even more jobs as those charities employ people and the charities also spend that rich person's money - or the interest earned on that money. This also increases the amount of money in circulation as those organizations build homes, buy food and clothing and school books. And the people who build those homes, and make that clothing and those books, and grow that food also prosper because they, too, have jobs now.

And all these people who now have jobs also need to buy clothing and food and pay rent or mortgages and they also have money to donate to good causes according to their beliefs and inclinations, so their earnings also provide more jobs and benefits.

So, why would anyone want to tax more? Taxes go to governments - and governments do not always spend wisely. Government jobs do not create new wealth. They only recycle other wealth. To place caps on how much wealth any one person or any corporation can have or make is foolish. Why would anyone want to limit wealth? I would far sooner see no taxes for corporations than I would major tax increases. I want their wealth circulating and making more wealth for others.

[Ranger66]

“Call me nuts if ya like but I look at it this way ...

They don't sock their billions away in some hidden Swiss bank account.”

Why yes they do. You are right, they buy mansions not build them; spending $90 million on a Picasso does not create any jobs. More jobs are created by the average person buying an average house. And there would be a lot more average people if a very small percent of the “mega-million-dollar CEO people” made a few mega million less. I have no problem with rich people but you cannot just fabricate a story to support your opinion,

Just another thread way off topic.

[Bagotricks]

Why would anyone want to limit wealth? I would far sooner see no taxes for corporations than I would major tax increases. I want their wealth circulating and making more wealth for others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

No taxes for corperations? So who is paying the bills then? Oh right - the rest of us 70% of people that live payday to payday - sure - we got lots of extra cash!

Just like I said. In the right wing future - we will not be paid with money - but with food, housing and clothing given to us by our "employers" who are heavily subsidized and tax sheltered in order for a "healthy economy" and to "keep creating jobs". What do we need "money" for anyways - just cut the middle man out, pay us with food and clothes and stop pretending we are slaves and buck up and start acting like it! If you work *really really* hard - you can become a manager and get paid with REAL MONEY and maybe buy a house off the company lot one day! Just keep working hard!

[kina]

*spam removed/Jo*

[Smurf]

grammafreddie wrote:

So, why would anyone want to tax more? Taxes go to governments - and governments do not always spend wisely. Government jobs do not create new wealth. They only recycle other wealth. To place caps on how much wealth any one person or any corporation can have or make is foolish. Why would anyone want to limit wealth? I would far sooner see no taxes for corporations than I would major tax increases. I want their wealth circulating and making more wealth for others.

Gramma are you sure they don't just recycle our, their customers dollars into their pockets. They also just recycle money unless some of them have a printing press somewhere they do not recieve "NEW" money. Don't the people in government jobs recieve our same money from their employer, us, and spend it on houses, cars, cloths, education etc. the same as the business owner. Don't they in fact create jobs at the businesses they spend their recycled money in. Does it then suddenly change from recycled money to new money once the business owner has it in his hands. Do government workers not invest in the stock market, pensions, you name it to create your new money or is it only the rich that can do that?

Please explain the difference between a mechanic working in a garage ( what I believe you call a "real" job) and a mechanic in a school bus garage taking the money they have earned into a store to buy goods. Does the school bus mechanics money go into recycling and the garage mechanics money go into the new money bin. Don't the same people pay the store owner who keeps a good portion for himself, as pay the taxes that pay the teachers that educate our young people. Same people in the end right. Exactly the same as saying the same people pay government taxes and a business taxes. Does the recycled money just disappear once it hits government employees pockets or does it continue the circle to make new money as you call it. Is it possible that in many cases it turns into your new money much faster in the hands of a regular government worker than a rich business owner.

Please explain where I have this wrong.

[grammafreddy]

Oh man, do I have to rewrite this all AGAIN??????

*sigh*

[steven lloyd]

Oh man, do I have to rewrite this all AGAIN??????

What "again" ? I'd like to see your counter-argument to Smurf's post. I'm having work done on my house and the money I'm paying the contractors is going into their pockets and feeding their families with food they buy from stores here, etc.

[grammafreddy]

Shucks, Steven, you didn't like it the first, second or fifth time I posted it ... why would I post it again?

[Smurf]

Exactly. If the government puts seed money (recycled money) into a small business is it not a real business. When they give money to GM is it no longer a real business. Are the jobs that business creates with that recycled money (same money government employees receive) also not real jobs.

When the government invests millions of your so called recycled dollars for it's employees pensions along with millions more recycled dollars deducted from the employees not real jobs share, are the businesses invested in then not real businesses providing real jobs. Is it only money that a business takes out of our pockets for products, services etc that supply the real jobs?

If the government takes my tax money (same money they use to pay their employees) and builds a new government office in the process creating jobs, are all those construction workers now not working real jobs or does the money some how become real money when it passes through the hands of the construction company?


EDIT TO ADD:

Granny are you saying that postal service workers are not filling real jobs, but workers at a UPS store are?

[steven lloyd]

Shucks, Steven, you didn't like it the first, second or fifth time I posted it ... why would I post it again?

Because you haven't yet addressed Smurf's point.

[UnknownResident]

Granny are you saying that postal service workers are not filling real jobs, but workers at a UPS store are?

Yes exactly her point. She thinks that if tax dollars are used to pay for a job it is not a real job. In her opinion a 'real' job must create new wealth. The flaw in her logic is that she doesn't understand (apparently) that no companies are making new money, it is in effect all 'recycled' thus none of them are really creating new wealth.