# CBC is calling a liberal majority



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

No new TFSA money next year I guess. I'm a one-percenter, so I expect to see my taxes go up, maybe a lot. I expect it's a sign I should retire and get my income down under the wire.

Despite that the "risk" was "priced in" I expect the TSX will be in the toilet tomorrow. Maybe a buying op for some XIC.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

I don't expect too much of a decline as there is a majority government. guess we'll soon find out.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

It's hilarious - if there was a TSX decline with the conservatives in it would have been normal market noise but with the liberals it'll be a reaction from the market. Give me a break. The market give zero shits who is the prime minister of Canada.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> No new TFSA money next year I guess. I'm a one-percenter, so I expect to see my taxes go up, maybe a lot. I expect it's a sign I should retire and get my income down under the wire.


My wife's boss SVP of major Canadian bank said that if Libs win, maybe it's a sign that he should move to another country... 
My wife had a good chance to become VP, now she doesn't want ... tells that there is no reason tp work 12-14 hours per day and have huge stress if on any further raise she gonna pay more than 60% taxes... more than that she says that very likely all qualified candidates will probably decline VP job because of new huge taxation....
I'm personally even more convince that there is no sense to continue working after 55 and may retire even earlier (actually not gonna retire, will wait for layoff that I can guarantee package and 9 months of EI)...
Lumpenproletariat won, country lost  Good luck guys


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You're kidding, right?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Personally, I would take 40% of $250,000 over 100% of $50,000 any day of the week.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> You're kidding, right?


Depends in which part 
Anyway, "in every joke there is a grain of .... joke" :biggrin:


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

sags said:


> Personally, I would take 40% of $250,000 over 100% of $50,000 any day of the week.


sags, to earn $250,000 it's not to win loto 6/49


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

You are wasting time explaining to the 99% they all think it's so evil and easy to earn $250,000. Well only the real 1% knows it comes from either taking business risks or spend years in a professional school to earn that type of income. After all those efforts, why should they pay more tax rate than those people who don't take the same risk?

I see more tax increase ,TFSA getting eliminated, , HST getting hiked.... We will run deficits like Greece..... God bless us all.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Or getting a big hand-out from mom and Dad. Canada needs an estate tax.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> You are wasting time explaining to the 99% they all think it's so evil and easy to earn $250,000.


 I just have impression that many think that money grow on the trees :stupid:



> I see more tax increase ,TFSA getting eliminated, , HST getting hiked.... We will run deficits like Greece..


 more ... tax split is eliminated, UCTB is eliminated (in 18 years living in Canada 2015 was the only year we got something back).... young , smart, hardworking people who earn good money gonna move to other countries.....
Yeap


> God bless us all


P.S. Tomorrow I'm wearing black to work....


----------



## Causalien (Apr 4, 2009)

I am going to take this chance and invite you all to join me and "Go Galt"

Read Ayan Rand's Atlas Shrugged first to understand the reference.

I've been prepping for this for the past decade now. Imaging my surprise when the Liberal's party actually aligned with my strategy (after a decade of execution of course). Every single action they will take based on their promise will propel me tremendously against the average citizen of the country. 

This last part is actually a surprise development for me. I thought they were just a normal borrow and spend bunch. Little did I know that I am going to be the main beneficiary. 

"Go Galt" and be free.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

none said:


> Or getting a big hand-out from mom and Dad. Canada needs an estate tax.


I already paid the tax on my money. Why should my kids have to pay it again ?


----------



## lost in space (Aug 31, 2015)

Most under reported aspect of the election was the collapse of the Bloq Quebecois, the liberals have no returned to being the natural governing party and alas we'll be back to go, why bother voting as the election was decided even before the polls closed out west. 



Causalien said:


> I am going to take this chance and invite you all to join me and "Go Galt"
> 
> Read Ayan Rand's Atlas Shrugged first to understand the reference.


And speaking of going John Galt


----------



## Xoron (Jun 22, 2010)

Mechanic said:


> I already paid the tax on my money. Why should my kids have to pay it again ?


Agreed. I don't have any prospect of a large estate payout, so this isn't coming from a trust fund kid. 

The deemed disposition taxes take a large enough chunk of whatever assets are "sold" at the time of death. I think that's a large enough bite without having an estate tax.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

lost in space said:


> Most under reported aspect of the election was the collapse of the Bloq Quebecois, the liberals have no returned to being the natural governing party and alas we'll be back to go, why bother voting as the election was decided even before the polls closed out west.


I could be wrong and I can't seem to find an easy source for this, but the Liberals did need seats West of Ontario to have a majority government. The West does matter.

It will be interesting to see how they decide to reform the electoral system (assuming that they keep that promise). If they go for proportional representation, that could lead to having areas of the country without local representation, or being represented by people who don't come from there. If they go for an instant run-off, then you can pretty much go with majority Liberal governments for the end of time since that essentially unites the anti-Conservative side as most NDP voters will pick Liberals and vice-versa. I doubt that there are many who would pick the Conservatives as their second choice.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Given the right leader, many Liberals would vote Conservative as a second choice.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

none said:


> ... The market give zero shits who is the prime minister of Canada.


I'm not so sure of this is true but in any case, it's one factor of many that the market will consider. Business prospects plus oil prices remaining low will be far bigger factors, IMO.


Cheers


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

lost in space said:


> Most under reported aspect of the election was the collapse of the Bloq Quebecois, the liberals have no returned to being the natural governing party and alas we'll be back to go, why bother voting as the election was decided even before the polls closed out west.


Chip on your shoulder? The fact is that the networks called a Liberal after polls in Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta closed. Many people consider Man., Sask, and Alta. to be part of the west. And they only called a Liberal majority after the BC polls closed. Or at least that's how it played out on TV in Ontario.


----------



## Calgary_Girl (Apr 20, 2011)

^Nope. They called a Liberal majority right after 7:30 PM Alberta time. It was still only 6:30 PM in BC and polls were still open.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

So very refreshing to see Canadians absolutely reject the politics of divisiveness.

Bloc may have lost seats, and their leader lost his seat for the second time, BUT they apparently doubled their percentage of the vote.

The real story is the election of so many Liberals in Quebec...a solid indication of a return to federalism assisted of course by the demographics of the PQ supporters and the demographics of the pro federalists.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

sags said:


> Personally, I would take 40% of $250,000 over 100% of $50,000 any day of the week.


Well it's, what, 66% of 250K vs 75% of 50K or something.

I don't want to come across as a privileged whiner. I actually feel like the tax on higher incomes should probably be higher. It's simply a fact that I will likely take a hit.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The CBC called the minority government earlier, but they were already getting results from BC when they called a majority government. 

It could have been based on advance polls in BC though.

I agree that knowing the results isn't a great solution, but what are they going to do in the age of the internet, when information is already coming out ?

The electoral map shows Conservative support across the country, but concentrated in Alberta.

The Liberals must remember they govern for all Canadians.

The Alberta NDP government will make it easier to work together with the Federal Liberals.

I am confident that Trudeau is highly intelligent, surrounded by a vast well of experience and expertise, and he will govern well.

Good government, with a positive and optimistic attitude and a plan for the future is what all Canadians want..................no ?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

fraser said:


> So very refreshing to see Canadians absolutely reject the politics of divisiveness.
> 
> Bloc may have lost seats, and their leader lost his seat for the second time, BUT they apparently doubled their percentage of the vote.
> 
> The real story is the election of so many Liberals in Quebec...a solid indication of a return to federalism assisted of course by the demographics of the PQ supporters and the demographics of the pro federalists.


They doubled their seats, but their vote share declined. They won those seats as a result of epic vote-splitting (4 way races in Quebec). Another perverse artifact of FPTP.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

fraser said:


> So very refreshing to see Canadians absolutely reject the politics of divisiveness.
> 
> Bloc may have lost seats, and their leader lost his seat for the second time, BUT they apparently doubled their percentage of the vote.
> 
> The real story is the election of so many Liberals in Quebec...a solid indication of a return to federalism assisted of course by the demographics of the PQ supporters and the demographics of the pro federalists.




a hearty plus one!

journalist Wendy Mesley was pointing out that the election saw the most powerful Liberal headwind since Trudeau père was elected in 1980. Last night voters elected 47 liberal seats in quebec, a ringing endorsement of the fact that mainstream quebec supports a federal canada.

i'm sorry to see Gilles Duceppe go but he couldn't have lost to a better candidate. She's Hélène Laverdière, a former diplomat & gentle instigator of social reform. First elected in the 2011 NDP orange tsunami, Laverdière is a former liberal. It's too bad duceppe didn't run in another riding.

speaking of other ridings, the capable NDP candidate in my district might also have won in another riding. But the district was swept by liberal heavyweight Marc Garneau.

one to watch in my riding - in fact i'll vote for her if, as & when Garneau ever retires - is firebrand journalist Sue Montgomery. She campaigned earlier within the NDP but didn't win the nomination as candidate. 

however, Montgomery is a keeper, i'm hoping she'll stay in politics. She retired from the gazette & the natPost media group only a few months ago following a distinguished career as general news, political & crime reporter & foreign correspondent.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Calgary_Girl said:


> ^Nope. They called a Liberal majority right after 7:30 PM Alberta time. It was still only 6:30 PM in BC and polls were still open.


I don't think that's right. At 7:30 mountain time, the polls had just closed in Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Had just closed. I don't think that CBC or anyone called a Liberal majority before any votes in those provinces had been counted. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

We have time stamps in the federal election thread. They called a Lib government 10 minutes after the polls closed in Alberta... majority maybe 45 minutes later?


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

fraser said:


> The real story is the election of so many Liberals in Quebec...a solid indication of a return to federalism assisted of course by the demographics of the PQ supporters and the demographics of the pro federalists.


Are you serious dude? Quebec voters vote whichever way the wind is blowing and whomever promised them the most stuff. They don't care about greater canada I assure you.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

According to the CBC twitter feed, http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-results-federal-election-2015-1.3278830, it looks like they called Liberal government at 9:43 pm Eastern time, 13 minutes after polls closed in Quebec->Alberta, and Liberal majority at 10:34 pm Eastern, which was 34 minutes after polls closed in BC.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> Are you serious dude? Quebec voters vote whichever way the wind is blowing and whomever promised them the most stuff. They don't care about greater canada I assure you.



ignorant, bigoted replies like the above went the way of the dodo last night

you haven't caught on yet? the new prime minister - he's from quebec - called for inclusion, the conceding NDP leader - he's from quebec - praised inclusion, right now quebecers are more federalist than the flag.

wake up, blade


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

andrewf said:


> their [Liberals'] vote share declined



from the last election? i doubt their vote share declined from 2011, wondering where you got this info


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> ignorant, bigoted replies like the above went the way of the dodo last night
> 
> you haven't caught on yet? the new prime minister - he's from quebec - called for inclusion, the conceding NDP leader - he's from quebec - praised inclusion, right now quebecers are more federalist than the flag.
> 
> wake up, blade


Yeah dude, whatever. Don't get your kid diapers in a knot. 

I am happy he won, great change for the country, but don't get all high and mighty calling Quebec the bastion of democracy and inclusion. It makes you sound childish because they are not, have not and never will be. They vote purely on self interest, nothing more.


----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

Myself, I'm just glad it's a majority. Those attack ads were irritating. Four years before we have to endure them again.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> from the last election? i doubt their vote share declined from 2011, wondering where you got this info


Sorry, the 'their' referred to BQ.


----------



## tenoclock (Jan 23, 2015)

I don't know why people are fear mongering that Liberals will make taxes so high people will wanna stop working. Top personal tax rate in Ontario right now is 49% for income over $136K. It will remain the same. It will become 53% for incomes over $200K now.

Anyone who thinks 49% is low and 53% is high needs to do a reality check. BOTH are high. If people were working hard at 49%, they will still continue at 53%. I am very pro-lower taxation. But this fear mongering is a bit inflated to be honest.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Anyway - they got a 2% tax cut via GST from the conservatives so in some ways it just puts it back to where it was 4 or so years ago.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> It will become 53% for incomes over $200K now.
> 
> Anyone who thinks 49% is low and 53% is high needs to do a reality check. BOTH are high. If people were working hard at 49%, they will still continue at 53%.


I didn't check exactly , but my wife said it will be 68% over $200K ... and there is a limit when people wouldn't like to work too hard in order to get too little....


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tenoclock said:


> I don't know why people are fear mongering that Liberals will make taxes so high people will wanna stop working. Top personal tax rate in Ontario right now is 49% for income over $136K. It will remain the same. It will become 53% for incomes over $200K now.
> 
> Anyone who thinks 49% is low and 53% is high needs to do a reality check. BOTH are high. If people were working hard at 49%, they will still continue at 53%. I am very pro-lower taxation. But this fear mongering is a bit inflated to be honest.



but _are_ people fear-mongering? the only fear-mongering i've seen so far is the resident Bolshevik


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> but _are_ people fear-mongering? the only fear-mongering i've seen so far is the resident Bolshevik


On opposite, Bolsheviks are happy :stupid: . The slogan "Take from "rich" and give to "poor"" is in action. Many just not realizing that very soon they will be counting as "rich"


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

gibor said:


> I didn't check exactly , but my wife said it will be 68% over $200K ... and there is a limit when people wouldn't like to work too hard in order to get too little....


Yeah, your wife is wrong on that. It won't be 68%. The combined federal-provincial rate in Ontario is 49.5%. Trudeau has proposed introducing a new top rate that would increase the federal portion from 29% to 33% - that's four points. 49.5% + 4% does not equal 68%. I hope she has people at her bank checking her addition.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it's always been so picturesque how the Bolsheviks here are so wretchedly unhappy & they are always complaining about every single aspect of their lives, meanwhile simultaneously bragging how they are rich enough to travel abroad twice a year, spend 100k on household needs, etc


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> The combined federal-provincial rate in Ontario is 49.5%


 This is why I said that I didn't check by myself...  however, as far as I remember, the highest tax rate was from 220K, now JT wants to take it from 200K?! Again, more taxes....
Also add here other "taxes" like EI ...


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

I don't know where the 68% number is coming from...I personally haven't seen that number quoted anywhere.
Only thing I can think of is somehow all the various tax rates are somehow being added up i.e. HST paid on consumption + aggregated income taxes + property taxes, etc.

But even then, there is a difference between _marginal _tax rates vs. _average _(i.e. affective) tax rate.
Even those at $300K+ earned income will not be paying 68% _effective _tax under the Trudeau regime.

That said, my critique of the Trudeau economic plan is that the tax increases proposed are nowhere near enough to fund his plan.
The increase in revenue at the margins (i.e. $300K earned income and above) is not going to be what he is planning for.
These are people that have access to the best income tax planning advice and tools.

It is highly likely that at some point during the next 4 years, the 2% GST cut will be scrapped i.e. GST will go back up to 7%, which implies a 15% HST rate for Ontario.
That is going to be bad for consumer spending, keeping in mind that in the 8 years since 2008 many other taxes (and pseudo-taxes) have gone up in Ontario, such as hydro rates, dividend tax rates, etc.

Anyhow, coming back to Trudeau, the spending plan is massive and very ambitious - infrastructure, transit, refugee support, increased social programs, the new Canada Child Benefit, tax cut for the "middle classes" etc.
The tax increases proposed so far + the "modest deficit is not going to pay for any of that.

That is why I think either the deficits will be more than "modest" and/or there are far more severe tax increases coming in the next 4 years.


----------



## tenoclock (Jan 23, 2015)

If you are making $250,000 your income tax will increase by $2,000 a year in addition to what you are paying right now. If you are making $400,000, the additional tax will be $8,000 a year. 

Sure the rich already pay very high taxes, but I doubt these numbers are going to put anyone off work.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Davis said:


> I don't think that's right. At 7:30 mountain time, the polls had just closed in Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Had just closed. I don't think that CBC or anyone called a Liberal majority before any votes in those provinces had been counted. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.


I was listening going to pick my child from her activity, I pulled up in the parking lot at 7:34 and they announced a Liberal majority. I am in Calgary. I was trying to figure out how they knew that so quickly.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> If you are making $250,000 your income tax will increase by $2,000 a year in addition to what you are paying right now


 plus $2,000 for cancelling tax split + cancelled child tax benefit + TFSA cut and so on.... isn't it too much?!
And you can calculate in other way, for every 50K you make above 200K, you will be paying only in income taxes $26750 ... and to get those 50K, you need to work twice harder, much longer hours, much more stres and responsibility... Does it worth?! idk


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Plugging Along said:


> I pulled up in the parking lot at 7:34 and they announced a Liberal majority. I am in Calgary. I was trying to figure out how they knew that so quickly.


Because Alberta votes didn't/don't matter.
Quebec & Ontario pretty much sealed it for the Liberals.
BC was just icing on the cake.


----------



## tenoclock (Jan 23, 2015)

You are counting recent conservative tax measures into your analysis gibor which just happened this year. People weren't sitting at home before that because taxes were high.

I agree with you - taxes on the rich are already VERY high. The problem is that you are missing the forest for the trees, they were high under the conservative government too.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor said:


> I didn't check exactly , but my wife said it will be 68% over $200K ... and there is a limit when people wouldn't like to work too hard in order to get too little....


This is total nonsense. Maybe she's been reading one of your favourite 'reputable news sources'.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Is it not possible that imbedded in the Liberal economic strategy is that oil prices will rise significantly during the next 3 years of deficit spending, and a growing economy will provide additional revenues? If oil prices haven't recovered by then, I think we will face a whole lot of problems.

Additionally, of the many billions they will be spending on infrastructure, social spending, etc.........much of it will flow back to the government at some point in some form of taxation.

If people are taxed at 60% totally...........that is a huge chunk of spending returning to various forms of governments.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> I agree with you - taxes on the rich are already VERY high. The problem is that you are missing the forest for the trees, they were high under the conservative government too.


I don't tell they were not high before.... my point that there is a limit ...at some point it just won't make financial sense to work more ... like we say in Russian "last drop overflowed" or in English "the last straw to break camel's back" ...


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> This is total nonsense. Maybe she's been reading one of your favourite 'reputable news sources'.


My "news sources" don't give a sh** about Canadian taxes :biggrin: maybe she read some article about accumulative taxes as HC mentioned...it's not the point... point (see my previous post)


----------



## livewell (Dec 1, 2013)

gibor said:


> I don't tell they were not high before.... my point that there is a limit ...at some point it just won't make financial sense to work more ... like we say in Russian "last drop overflowed" or in English "the last straw to break camel's back" ...


Income tax is taxed progressively in Canada, thus on the first $50k you are taxed like everyone else earning just $50k, same at $100k same at $150k. I don't think the increases above $200k are very hard at all. The fact is they are only going up a few % above $200k. When I was earning $200k+ income I was happy to pay more tax, as I knew I was very privileged to be earning that. If it doesn't make financial sense to work more than stop working.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Livewell, Gibor isn't concerned about "facts" or "evidence" or any information provided by the mainstream, credible media. It is much more fun to gather hearsay and anecdotes that reinforce one's prejudices.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> I was earning $200k+ income I was happy to pay more tax, as I knew I was very privileged to be earning that.


 depends where and how hard you worked  My point that this reduces motivation to earn more and to work harder....


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

if one is so depressed by having to pay a tax dollar or 2, asks the fly on the wall, then why bother working in the first place


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> if one is so depressed by having to pay a tax dollar or 2, asks the fly on the wall, then why bother working in the first place


By "fly on the wall" did you mean youself?! Nice to meet you :stupid:


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

gibor said:


> By "fly on the wall" did you mean youself?



no, i meant parties who are so depressed by/fearful of/stressed about/angry over/obsessed with what they claim is unfair taxation that one wonders a) why they continue to work here or b) why they continue to live in canada


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> one wonders a) why they continue to work here


 "fly in the wall" , this is why you don't work?! I understand now


----------



## ashin1 (Mar 22, 2014)

back to the underground lair of evil conservative elites to brew creative and conniving ways to dodge the tax man and bring down our taxable income MUAH AHAHA.....

the negative: We no longer have a conservative PM

the positive: I am looking forward to profiting greatly if we get deeper into a recession. 

gotta love capitalism


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

gibor said:


> On opposite, Bolsheviks are happy :stupid: . The slogan "Take from "rich" and give to "poor"" is in action. Many just not realizing that very soon they will be counting as "rich"


Sadly this will probably end up being true as it has in the past.


----------

