Raising taxes on the wealthy

[NAB]

Well, there's a pipe dream...

And exactly why would that be Cap'n?

Nab

[Captain Awesome]

And exactly why would that be Cap'n?

Because 10% flat tax with no other taxes of any kind wouldn't be enough.

[NAB]

{quote="NAB"]And exactly why would that be Cap'n?[/quote]

[Because 10% flat tax with no other taxes of any kind wouldn't be enough.

Ahhh, but that depends on making sure all those things I mentioned are all fully taxed at 10% of gross income from Canadian sources too and which currently are not, like corporations wherever in the world they are. I think government coffers would be overflowing with riches at only 10%, so much so we could have low income cutoff of around 35,000 p/a with no taxation at all, full indexed and quality pensions for those over 60, and zero child poverty.

Nab

[maple leaf]

OK, let's just "take away" RRSPs, interest deductability, TFSAs, dividends, capital gains, capital losses, return of capital, corporations, business expense deductability, etc, etc. Then we can all pay our "share".

Why do you feel that your entitled to have those deductions and pay less tax.I know it is the goal at tax time to whittle down the amount we have to pay using every deduction allowed.We all do it.
If my co worker who makes the same as I ,has everything the same ,and at the end of the year he has 3,000 dollars saved and I had to spend 3,000 on a new furnace.Why does he get to pay less tax than me because he bought an RRSP with his 3,000.If everyone paid what they had to with no deductions,the government would be taking in a whole lot more money than they do now.That would allow them to cut your and everyones tax rate,equal to and in line with the next guy.And I bet everyone would be paying less than they do today and the government would have more to use.There are people who make a whole lot more money than people in the middle class, but through deductions ,pay less in tax than the middle class guy does,Why?

[Captain Awesome]

I think government coffers would be overflowing with riches at only 10%, so much so we could have low income cutoff of around 35,000 p/a with no taxation at all, full indexed and quality pensions for those over 60, and zero child poverty.

Well, you're free to think so, I guess.

[NAB]

Well, you're free to think so, I guess.

You should do the math some time ;-)

Nab

[Captain Awesome]

removed off topic - Jennylives

[NAB]

removed - Jennylives

[steven lloyd]

You should do the math some time ;-) Nab

I'd actually like to see the math, because I love the idea.

[Urbane]

I'd actually like to see the math, because I love the idea.

I find the idea very appealing too so i'd like to see the math as well.

[GrooveTunes]

sounds so simple! Why didn't anyone else think of that?? Hmmm....yup let's get rid of RRSP's and let everyone starve to death trying to eeke out a living on OAS. What a great idea!! :127: Man, I wonder how some of you people get out of bed every day without a diagram and an instruction booklet...[/quote]

As if the average working stiff has an RRSP.... :127:

[Captain Awesome]

As if the average working stiff has an RRSP.... :127:

40% of Canadians contributed on average $5000 this year.

Hmmm, I guess working stiffs do have RRSP...

[twobits]

If my co worker who makes the same as I ,has everything the same ,and at the end of the year he has 3,000 dollars saved and I had to spend 3,000 on a new furnace.Why does he get to pay less tax than me because he bought an RRSP with his 3,000.

So you are jealous that your co worker's furnace didn't blow up like yours did and he got to put money into a tax deferred account for retirement and you didn't? My god, it is irrational thoughts like this that scare the hell out of me because there appears to be more and more of you with this level of economic understanding being born every day.
What about the third co worker that instead of a new furnace, chose to spend 3k on a Mexican Holiday. Should he too demand that the guy that saved be denied? Just be honest, you could care less about fair taxation and are only jealous of people that have accumlated more than you even if it's because your furnace blew up and theirs didn't.

[The Green Barbarian]

So you are jealous that your co worker's furnace didn't blow up like yours did and he got to put money into a tax deferred account for retirement and you didn't? My god, it is irrational thoughts like this that scare the hell out of me because there appears to be more and more of you with this level of economic understanding being born every day.
What about the third co worker that instead of a new furnace, chose to spend 3k on a Mexican Holiday. Should he too demand that the guy that saved be denied? Just be honest, you could care less about fair taxation and are only jealous of people that have accumlated more than you even if it's because your furnace blew up and theirs didn't.

well said. My sentiments exactly. There are valid reasons for RRSP accounts to be set up - the main one being giving people a chance to save for their retirements, especially those of us who don't have access to cosy government pensions. Anyone who would be against this form of plan really need to educate themselves on taxation policy, and how these kinds of tax deferral plans, which apply to EVERY Canadian, fit into the overall Canadian taxation environment.

[twobits]

Ahhh, but that depends on making sure all those things I mentioned are all fully taxed at 10% of gross income from Canadian sources too and which currently are not, like corporations wherever in the world they are. I think government coffers would be overflowing with riches at only 10%, so much so we could have low income cutoff of around 35,000 p/a with no taxation at all, full indexed and quality pensions for those over 60, and zero child poverty.

Nab

This is pretty much the 10% plan that was floated recently by the GOP candidate (godfather's pizza owner). It gained some attraction there too initially as it sounded attractive. Once people actually started to crunch the numbers though, it was totally debunked and would not raise even close to what was required. If memory serves me correct, the actual flat rate would have to have been in excess of 20% and apply to all income over 14k. All of a sudden, all the people making between 14 and 50k realized they would be paying tax where they were not previously and the plan went to the toilet where it belonged.