# Budget coming soon.....woot woot



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Canada's 2021 budget gets dropped on the table on Monday, April 19th and indications are it will be a doozy.

Nothing like a little extra jingle in the pockets to perk people up a little.

Good timing for Trudeau as well. The latest polls show the Liberals went up a little and the Conservatives went down a smidge. 

Trudeau is trending in right direction and a popular budget be helpful to the Liberals.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags, I'm more than a little disgusted. The country racked up a tonne of debt to manage this crisis, and you are just hungry for more.


----------



## diharv (Apr 19, 2011)

Yeah, he's trending in the right direction for his own political self preservation while taking the country down the financial shitter. I'd love to see the idiot gone but the damage he's done is irreparable by now anyways .


----------



## 307169 (May 24, 2015)

diharv said:


> Yeah, he's trending in the right direction for his own political self preservation while taking the country down the financial shitter. I'd love to see the idiot gone but the damage he's done is irreparable by now anyways .


Canada need a competent opposition, we need a conservative government that focus on fiscal and economic conservatism, and not the odious crowd that like to force its will on others.

P.S: Despite I am a religious person, I believe true piety cannot be forced, but have to come from someone's heart voluntarily, so I don't force my social conservative ideas on other people, but instead, I try to persuade others and leave the choice to them.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

diharv said:


> Yeah, he's trending in the right direction for his own political self preservation while taking the country down the financial shitter. I'd love to see the idiot gone but the damage he's done is irreparable by now anyways .


Oh yeah, it will be an election budget.
I'm not sure if he's going to go.
1. UBI because people want money now.
2. Pharmacare, because people care about healthcare.
3. Universal Daycare, because they can promise it, but not deliver for a few years as they complete their "pandemic response"

I don't believe the damage is irreparable yet. He hasn't actually created a massive new structural problem, just piled on debt with one off spending.
I don't even think he's been able to boost CPP appreciably.

The big programs above, those would be structural problems. But I'm not sure he's capable of getting them through, they are much more work, and he's the PM because he's electable, not because he's competent.

If it was competence, Freeland would be in charge, not Trudeau, just like Elliot would be in charge, not Ford.
Of course being competent makes you a really good deputy.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

Crossing my fingers for a small wealth tax on the $10M+ net worth individuals.
A man can dream...


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> Crossing my fingers for a small wealth tax on the $10M+ net worth individuals.
> A man can dream...


Why would you want such a thing?
Do you think capital flight is a good thing? 
You really want to chase investment out of Canada, right when we need to invest to ensure we have adequate resources for the next pandemic?
Destroy family farms and move them to nice corporate factory farms?

Now, don't get me wrong, I understand the appeal of wealth distribution, and how the people who push for it are selfish and greedy, but don't want to admit it.
But just looking at how it will be a negative impact, I don't know why anyone who bothered to get informed would support it.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I don't even think he's been able to boost CPP appreciably.


Huh? CPP expansion is baked in. It just phases in over time.





__





Canada Pension Plan enhancement - Canada.ca


Canada Pension Plan enhancement




www.canada.ca


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Canada suffers from an infrastructure deficit caused in the past by a lack of political will to allocate sufficient spending. We need to prepare for the future and a low interest rate environment is an opportune time to structure long term debt.

The Trudeau government has a vision for the future that requires massive spending now.

I think most Canadians understand and support that vision, and it would be disappointing if the Liberals listen to the naysayers and back off as has happened in past governments.

We can't keep kicking the big expenses down the road. We need to address them now.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

MrMatt said:


> Why would you want such a thing?
> Do you think capital flight is a good thing?
> You really want to chase investment out of Canada, right when we need to invest to ensure we have adequate resources for the next pandemic?
> ...
> _snip snip_


I think if it was done right, say, by having similar measures in the US and by making it a small percentage, capital would not flee out of the country. My problem with people having massive wealth is not that they are rich, it's that this money is mostly sitting there virtually doing nothing while we need to keep raising taxes on the middle class and go into more debt to fund public services.

I'm not sure what you mean with family farms, I'm not talking about taking money from business assets.

Here, this link may help visualize the wealth problem I'm talking about:
Wealth shown to scale


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Walton family (Walmart owners) earn $4 million US per hour......24 hours a day....every day.

The wealth and income gaps have been growing every year.

At some point it is unsustainable for a society to have so few people own so much wealth.

While the middle class struggle to pay their bills, the wealthy spend millions on cardboard sports cards and NFTs.

Meanwhile, the average charitable donation by the super wealthy is pitifully small.

Jeff Bezos gave 0.1% of his wealth to charity and billionaires donate less of their wealth as a % than average Americans. A few.......like Warren Buffet and BIll Gates bring up the overall average to 0.8%.









How much do billionaires donate to charity?


In total, the 20 richest Americans donated roughly $8.7 billion to charity in 2018, just 0.8 percent of their collective net worth.




www.foxbusiness.com


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Alas, we have a very divided, very ineffective Official Opposition who seem unable or unwilling to present a reasonable alternative to the current bunch. The polls indicate that they are as bad as each other in the eyes of the voters. With good reason.

I cannot see much change.. Seems to be more and more of the same. Tweedle dee and tweedle dum. Neither party, IMHO, is deserving of a vote. And the others are non starters. Not very good for we luckless taxpayers. It would be a nice change to vote for one instead of voting against one.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> I think if it was done right, say, by having similar measures in the US and by making it a small percentage, capital would not flee out of the country. My problem with people having massive wealth is not that they are rich, *it's that this money is mostly sitting there virtually doing nothing *while we need to keep raising taxes on the middle class and go into more debt to fund public services.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean with family farms, I'm not talking about taking money from business assets.
> 
> ...


I bolded the flaw in your argument.
Lets take Jeff Bezos, or Elon Musk, or Sergy Brin, or Larry Page, or whichever wealthy person you choose.
The vast majority of their wealth is invested in companies doing things.






Wealth tax - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




Read the section on Capital flight.
France implemented a wealth tax, they got 2.6B in revenue, but lost over 120B in capital. Do you any any idea how much tax revenue you can generate off 120B in capital?


In short I oppose wealth taxes because.
1. They're bad for the country.
2. They reduce tax revenue.
3. They're built off a faulty premise.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I have never understood the rationale behind a wealth tax. It seems to me the sensible place for a tax is at the income or profit level.

For those that favour a wealth tax.....how would you like to pay one on your personal wealth after paying as much as 53 points on your incremental income to get that wealth?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

ian said:


> I have never understood the rationale behind a wealth tax. It seems to me the sensible place for a tax is at the income or profit level.
> 
> For those that favour a wealth tax.....how would you like to pay one on your personal wealth after paying as much as 53 points on your incremental income to get that wealth?


Wealth tax is simple, it's greed. They have money, I want it, so I'll send guys with guns to take it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> Here, this link may help visualize the wealth problem I'm talking about:
> Wealth shown to scale


Great illustration, the link doesn't work, well it links to a page that says swipe right, but you can't.
Can you explain what the problem is? 
Don't you think people should get paid what they're worth?\

Wealth taxes are actually hilarious, it punishes people for investing, instead of spending it all now. It's exactly the opposite of what you want in society.
I think it's better to build a car factory than a car, but I guess you disagree.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Wealth tax = communism


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

MrMatt said:


> Great illustration, the link doesn't work, well it links to a page that says swipe right, but you can't.


The link works fine, use your keyboard right arrow or mouse wheel if you got one that clicks sideways.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> The link works fine, use your keyboard right arrow or mouse wheel if you got one that clicks sideways.


Yeah, still doesn't show a problem, explains numbers to people with coloured boxes. But doesn't show a problem.


I understand your problem, you don't like that Jeff Bezos happens to own a lot of the company he built.
So your solution is make it harder to build and invest, then there will be fewer new companies, less innovation, fewer jobs, but at least Jeff Bezos won't be super duper rich.
Some even like to complain how greedy and selfish he is, despite donating billions to charity. 

Do you really think it would be a better world if Elon Musk didn't push electric cars? 
You're so jealous of rich people you're willing to kill the golden goose.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

I'm sure the Trudeau peeps are looking for the best way to p*ss off the CPC, so they can trigger the election for them. This budget will be a checkmate for the cons. I hate trudeau as well, but seeing the CPC going down in flames is such a sweet theater.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, still doesn't show a problem, explains numbers to people with coloured boxes. But doesn't show a problem.
> 
> 
> I understand your problem, you don't like that Jeff Bezos happens to own a lot of the company he built.
> ...


I think that as many cases, you're missing the point. Being super rich is great but then again: give back. Many just hide their assets in safe havens; just to be sure to not contribute to society. yes, I generalize but it's a common theme for sure.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Case in point.........Jargey's post about the guy who sold a Super Mario game for over $600,000.

He probably paid off bills, maybe bought a home or a vehicle, or helped out some family and maybe donated some money to help out other people.

But what about the guy who bought the game for over $600,00 ?

Only a super wealthy person would think owning a game was the most important thing he could do with that kind of money ? They likely bought it so they could brag to their rich friends over dinner.......nah, nah, nah......look what I bought.

And likely none of their miffed rich buddies would think to say.....are you nuts, you could have given that money to the food bank . The super wealthy just don't think that way.

There are studies done by Harvard that proved the more wealth a person has the more privileged they believe they are by virtue of their wealth. During a monopoly game where they got double the money for passing GO and charged double the rent (a huge unfair advantage over the other players)......as they inevitably acquired more wealth they moved the snack bowl closer and closer to themselves until it was right beside them and they were eating all the snacks.

That is how it works in real life too. It is the entitlement of the rich.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> At some point it is unsustainable for a society to have so few people own so much wealth.


Why?
Really, why is it unsustainable?
Jeff Bezos through Amazon created 1.6 Trillion dollars of wealth. 
Over 500 Billion of it in the last year. Lets put that in perspective, 

Jeff Bezos created more wealth than the entire country of Poland over the last year.

He CREATED it, he didn't take it from anyone, he didn't steal it form anyone.

Last year it wasn't there, this year it is.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Case in point.........Jargey's post about the guy who sold a Super Mario game for over $600,000.
> 
> He probably paid off bills, maybe bought a home or a vehicle, or helped out some family and maybe donated some money.


All that for an old video game.
Lucky guy got $600k for almost nothing, that's great.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Amazon depends heavily on publicly funded infrastructure. From airports and ports for offshore goods to roads, highways, hydro, water and sewers, police and fire protection, to the internet from which people shop.

If it wasn't for publicly funded infrastructure, Bezos would selling stuff at a local flea market.

Concluding Bezos owes nothing to the public as compensation is entitlement of the wealthy.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Amazon depends heavily on publicly funded infrastructure. From airports and ports for offshore goods to roads, highways, hydro, water and sewers, police and fire protection, to the internet from which people shop.
> 
> If it wasn't for publicly funded infrastructure, Bezos would selling stuff at a local flea market.
> 
> Concluding Bezos owes nothing to the public as compensation is entitlement of the wealthy.


You're right, and they pay for all that infrastructure, though taxes.
They pay gas taxes, property taxes, income taxes etc, just like every other citizen and company.

You still haven't explained why Jeff Bezos being rich is a problem. It isn't like he took a pile of gold coins and locked them in a safe. It's almost all paper wealth from the growth of Amazon stock.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Amazon doesn't pay taxes. In fact they got a refund of taxes in the US.

Amazon earned $11 billion in profits in 2018 and got a refund of $129 million.

The US corporate tax rate is 21% and Amazon's tax rate is -1%.

They collect sales taxes to submit to the Federal and Provincial government but that is paid by consumers......not Amazon. Most of the "employment" Amazon creates is in China.

I hope Trudeau clamps down on all these corporate welfare freeloaders.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/opinion-personal-corporate-taxes-1.5141398


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Businesses like a buddy of mine owns write off 2 new Ford Lincoln Navigator vehicles for himself and his wife as President and VP of his company. Gas, insurance, cell phones, computers, office space in their large rural home, dinners out and travel for "business"......all write offs. No wonder he laughs when he says his accountant tells him he has to spend money or pay taxes. He is a nice guy and he knows BS when he sees it.

Meanwhile average Canadians going to work by bus can no longer deduct the cost of their bus pass.

Fairness ?.........we are a long ways from anything being close to fair in the current system.

Tear it down, rip it up........and start over. It is time for the Great Reset. Go get em.........Chrystia.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Businesses like a buddy of mine owns write off 2 new Ford Lincoln Navigator vehicles for himself and his wife as President and VP of his company. Gas, insurance, cell phones, computers, office space in their large rural home, dinners out and travel for "business"......all write offs. No wonder he laughs when he says his accountant tells him he has to spend money or pay taxes. He is a nice guy and he knows BS when he sees it.
> 
> Meanwhile average Canadians going to work by bus can no longer deduct the cost of their bus pass.
> 
> ...


I say fix the current system.
But yeah, extremists like you want to tear down the system.

It's funny there are still people who don't understand it's the leftist extremists who want to destroy society, while the Conservatives want to stand up and protect it.


I don't think our government is capable, willing, or even interested in fixing the system. What makes you think the new system they create would be any better?
Look at telemarketting calls, political campaigns are one of the few exemptions.

Also if they wanted to close the tax loopholes, they could, they just don't want to.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

It will be very interesting to see how the Opposition dances around the budget...whatever is in it.

The absolute last thing that O'Toole wants at this time is an election. He will lose. It means he is finished as leader. Will Conservative MPs vote as they are told, or absent themselves from the vote as they are told.....or will they break ranks to defy their leader and trigger a new leadership convention???


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I suspect O'Toole could lose and get another kick at the can, if he doesn't make it a blowout or annoy the base too much.


----------



## diharv (Apr 19, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> I say fix the current system.
> But yeah, extremists like you want to tear down the system.
> 
> It's funny there are still people who don't understand it's the leftist extremists who want to destroy society, while the Conservatives want to stand up and protect it.
> ...


People like them still think Chavez and Maduro were good for Venezuela. The problem is, you run out of golden geese to kill.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

diharv said:


> People like them still think Chavez and Maduro were good for Venezuela. The problem is, you run out of golden geese to kill.


No no, you don't understand, they did a good job with their authoritarian socialist paradise.
Just after a first few years of tearing down the system and destroying all the wealth, they started "doing socialism wrong"

The thing that scares me the most with "the great reset", is that these people don't seem to see that their idealized imaginary utopia doesn't work.


----------



## NewbieInvestor88 (Feb 21, 2021)

gibor365 said:


> Wealth tax = communism


Aren't property taxes a pseudo wealth tax? And nobody is screaming about that?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

NewbieInvestor88 said:


> Aren't property taxes a pseudo wealth tax? And nobody is screaming about that?


People are constantly complaining about it.

Particularly since it's random and unfair.

My house was assessed at 20% more than my neighbour, who has the exact same house on a larger lot.
Same house as in the exact same model, built in the same year, by the same builder, with an identical layout.
I appealed the assessment, they rejected it.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> People are constantly complaining about it.
> 
> Particularly since it's random and unfair.
> 
> ...


What province. I appealed mine and won. In Ontario. Have you used AboutMyProperty ? Not sure if it captures Ontario properties or nation wide.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> What province. I appealed mine and won. In Ontario. Have you used AboutMyProperty ? Not sure if it captures Ontario properties or nation wide.


Aboutmyproperty gives you all the details you need to compare. Size, age, quality of structure etc etc. It’s interesting to see what’s on file for you and your neighbours properties. 5 factors drive approx 85% of the assessment.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> What province. I appealed mine and won. In Ontario. Have you used AboutMyProperty ? Not sure if it captures Ontario properties or nation wide.


Ontario.
Like I said, exact same house design, same builder, across the street, but they have a larger lot.
MPAC don't care, they're a monopoly, and not much you can do about them.

I actually don't have a problem with non-exploitive monopolies. But when they abuse their monopoly power, like MPAC, or Governments, I have an issue.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> Case in point.........Jargey's post about the guy who sold a Super Mario game for over $600,000.
> 
> He probably paid off bills, maybe bought a home or a vehicle, or helped out some family and maybe donated some money to help out other people.
> 
> ...


Here's another way to look at it. What if the person DIDN'T buy the game. The seller wouldn't have the money to do all of those things you are speculating. 

Is the over situation worse or better? Let's take your many assumptions and say they are correct.
Scenario 1: Wealthy person has an expensive game to brag about, or whatever they want to do with it. Seller is has now $600k more to do all those lovely things you say. Both are happy. SAGS unhappy

Scenario 2: Wealthy person doesn't buy game. Wealthy person unhappy, Seller unhappy, SAGS unhappy because he doesn't agree that people should be able to spend THEIR money the way they want. 

Scenario 3: Wealthy person doesn't buy game, and SAGS gets to spend their money for charity. Wealthy person unhappy, seller unhappy, a cause SAGS thinks is worthy and SAGS happy.

Which one is right? The scenario 1, because one should not get to dictate how someone else spends there money. PERIOD. If you disagree, then give back all government benefit you have EVER received, and let people with less money then you decide how you spend your fluffy pension. If you cannot do that, then you have no right to spend other people money just because they make more. 

Your attitude is an entitlement because you believe you should get something you didn't earn.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Scenario 1 is irrelevant. The game was purchased during an auction and the buyer and seller wouldn't know each other. There was no conscious objective by the buyer to "help" the seller.

Scenario 2 doesn't apply because the money was never spent for either a game or charity.

Scenario 3 is closer to the truth. The wealthy person is unhappy they gave the money to charity instead of buying a game for themselves. Maybe in the realm of the super wealthy donating to charity doesn't have the same pleasure factor as acquiring a rare asset.

A decision by a wealthy person to prioritize buying an old game over donating to a worthy cause that could help a lot of people reveals a lack of a moral compass in my opinion.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't understand why some people rush to the aid of a bunch of super wealthy people who hire accountants and lawyers to set up offshore accounts and find novel ways to avoid paying the rightful taxes on their wealth.

Joe factory worker works all week and then gets whats left after the government has already taken their taxes. The wealthy say "catch me if you can" with the tax collector and have their lawyers drag out cases tax courts.

Comparing incomes and wealth for average people to these super wealthy who don't want to pay taxes and donate less of a % of their incomes than average people is a ridiculous comparison.

I think people forget the part that average people need their incomes to live. The wealthy don't.

The wealthy find new ways to waste.....what other people don't have enough of.

It was just announced how much the top wealthy have gained during the pandemic.

The numbers are sickening to anyone who struggles to live.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is proposing to foreign governments a "global tax rate" so corporations can't continue to avoid paying taxes due. I hope she includes the super rich as well.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Ontario.
> Like I said, exact same house design, same builder, across the street, but they have a larger lot.
> MPAC don't care, they're a monopoly, and not much you can do about them.
> 
> I actually don't have a problem with non-exploitive monopolies. But when they abuse their monopoly power, like MPAC, or Governments, I have an issue.


Have you used aboutmyproperty? It lets you can compare the key factors with a bunch of neighbourhood properties. Quality of construction is the big one that differentiates value. MPAC also thought I had a recent Reno. I took pics of the kitchen and baths, along with the date codes on the kitchen appliances to show my kitchen is 12 years old, not the 2 years old they stated.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Have you used aboutmyproperty? It lets you can compare the key factors with a bunch of neighbourhood properties. Quality of construction is the big one that differentiates value. MPAC also thought I had a recent Reno. I took pics of the kitchen and baths, along with the date codes on the kitchen appliances to show my kitchen is 12 years old, not the 2 years old they stated.


At the time I used the MPAC database they give you access to.
It was the EXACT SAME HOME. Same materials, same builder, same model.
Literally the only difference was different shades of "builder beige" paint and tile.

That's how I know it's a BS system.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I don't understand why some people rush to the aid of a bunch of super wealthy people who hire accountants and lawyers to set up offshore accounts and find novel ways to avoid paying the rightful taxes on their wealth.


Who's doing that?
Not anyone here.



> It was just announced how much the top wealthy have gained during the pandemic.
> 
> The numbers are sickening to anyone who struggles to live.


Why?
How does someone getting rich hurt you?
It doesn't. 

You seem to think that there is a fixed amount of wealth, and for there to be rich people gaining, there have to be poor people losing.
It simply doesn't work that way.

Labour MAKES wealth, farmers turn dirt & water into food. The fact that a farmer has a lot of food wealth isn't causing others to go hungry.

I WANT more people collecting wealth, because more wealth in existance makes EVERYONE richer.

Lets say you have a superfarmer, he makes massive amounts of Food wealth, guess what, that means there's more food for everyone to eat. With a bigger supply, the price drops and there is more food for ALL of us to eat.
I don't care what he does with his wealth, in fact I'd be glad for him to trade $600k in food for a silly old video game, wouldn't you?

The problem is you're so angry about the wealthy, you'd rather we all do with less, than to have someone else super wealthy.

It's really your own selfishness and greed, it bothers you that someone else is rich, and your "solution" is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Are you so angry that you'd sacrifice all the progress Tesla has made in electric cars, just to keep Elon Musk from being super rich?
Your level of short sighted selfishness makes me sick.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Your example of the "super farmer" is mumbo jumbo economic nonsense.

Farmers have input costs. If they produce surplus food that exceeds the demand for it and the price drops, the farmer is working each acre for less profit, because his input costs remain the same per acre regardless of the market price of the commodity.

Ask grain farmers how happy they are when the commodity price of a bushel of wheat doesn't cover their input costs.

Apparently for you, the income and wealth gaps aren't a problem now and never will be.

A lot of economists and government leaders would disagree with you.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As to the wealthy person buying the old game for 600K......there was a story about an 8 year old boy who has spent a year making and selling key chains online to raise money to pay off his fellow students $4,000 "cafeteria debt" so they could buy food for lunch. The young lad has paid off all the student debts in numerous schools as the public is avidly supporting his effort.

He could have sold the key chains and bought video games, but apparently even at his young age he is wiser and has a better developed value system than the rich person with more money than brains.

The rich person will never play the game he bought. They will keep it locked up and only show people they want to impress with the special "achievement" their wealth has made possible.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Your example of the "super farmer" is mumbo jumbo economic nonsense.
> 
> Farmers have input costs. If they produce surplus food that exceeds the demand for it and the price drops, the farmer is working each acre for less profit, because his input costs remain the same per acre regardless of the market price of the commodity.
> 
> ...


No my superfarmer is a pretty clear example.

Farmers create wealth.
A farmer that creates a lot of wealth is doing a good thing. Because we get a lot of food. That's a win for everyone.

You're right, I don't see why income or wealth gaps are a problem.
Honestly, if you have $100 and someone else has $200 or $1000 or $20 000, you still have $100.
The only problem is you are jealous.

In your world the farmer that produces enough food for 10 people is good, and the farmer that produces enough for 10 000 is bad, and should have his farm seized. 
The socialists have tried this, it results in famine and starvation.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Because 20 years ago, average folks could have $10,000 and a rich person had $10,000,000.

Today those average folks have $1,000 left and the rich person has $100,000,000

That is how income and wealth disparity works. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The wealth accumulation by the wealthy during the pandemic while many people lost everything and depended on government support, was a huge transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I read posts that say "SAGs wants government money.....blah, blah, blah".

Tell you what, all our income is our own earned from a combined 80 years of work.

We never collected a dime in "baby bonus" because we earned "too much" and paid taxes on all the earnings. We collect OAS because everyone pays taxes to provide it.....including us who earned more than "average incomes in retirement" and pay taxes each year accordingly

Over 30 years of fundraising, my wife and I have run dozens of baseball and hockey tournaments for 32 teams, ran an NHL alumnus game that filled the local arena with 5,000 people, ran dances for 500 people, raffles, BBQs, ran bingos,.organized employee contributions, went door to door for the Heart & Stroke Foundation, and contributed far more of OUR own money as a % than most of the billionaire class, so until you can match or top our history of giving you likely could be doing a lot more than you are.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Because 20 years ago, average folks could have $10,000 and a rich person had $10,000,000.
> 
> Today those average folks have $1,000 left and the rich person has $100,000,000
> 
> ...


Actually today those average folks have 20k and the rich person has 100M,.
That's how progress works, the rich get richer, but the poor get richer too.

Growing up most families had 1 TV and 1 car, no AC, no computer.
Now we have multiple TVs, multiple cars, AC, and even kids are walking around with supercomputers.

The thing you, and most redistributionists don't seem to understand is the wealthy of today got it by creating new wealth.
it isn't being transferred to them, they're creating it.

If wealth was fixed, and they were stealing it, sure I'd be all for wealth redistribution.
However the reality is that each persons wealth is growing, theirs is just growing more.

A rising tide raises all boats.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The rising tide only lifts people who can afford boats.

Everyone else is up to their necks treading water from the rising tide.

I think people need some perspective on the super wealthy like Jeff Bezos.

He has $177 billion dollars......which doesn't sound like all that much when you say it quickly.

Try saying that Bezos fortune is equal to 177,000 times $1,000,000 for context, and he donated 175 of those millions, which is what .001%

His donation was also tax deductible and about equal to his tax rebate from the government, after Amazon paid no US corporate taxes at all.

Provide some evidence that billionaires getting more billions is creating wealth for everyone else ?

Most of the wealth retained by people in the last year is from government support programs, not being evicted for not paying their rent, subsidized hydro and loan deferrals.

But yea, it is his money and he can spend it as he wishes. 

Maybe he plans to "take it with him" when he croaks.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The rising tide only lifts people who can afford boats. Everyone else is up to their necks in water from the rising tide.
> 
> I think people need some perspective on the super wealthy like Jeff Bezos.
> 
> He has $177 billion dollars......which doesn't sound like all that much when you say it quickly.


No he doesn't, he has a big chunk at a company that someone thinks is worth 170+ Billion dollars



> Provide some evidence that billionaires getting more billions is creating wealth for everyone else ?


I can get millions of products shipped to my house in a day or two, at lower prices than the local stores.
That's real value.

I can rent a computer for pennies an hour, and I can rent pretty much as many as I want.

I can watch movies and TV for free over the internet.
I can store unlimited photos on a backed up server on the internet.

All that for the cost of shipping less than a dozen normal parcels.
Thank you Amazon


You simply don't understand that people can do work and create wealth.
You seem to think that there is a limited amount of wealth in the world, when the reality is that there is unlimited wealth out there, you just have to go make it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags, you really have a negative view.
It's unhealthy.









Steven Pinker: Why Our World Is Getting Better - 52 Insights


Superstar intellectual Steven Pinker talks with us for this exclusive chat on why we are so ungrateful about a world that is getting better.




www.52-insights.com


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

From where I sit in the sunshine of the happy Liberal camp, it seems to me that Conservatives are the ones sitting in the gloomy dark always complaining to unimpressed voters, who happen to pass by.

Me....I think Trudeau is great, immigration is great, national debt is no problem, ....

But his work is not finished yet. Another term or two should wrap things up nicely.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> But his work is not finished yet. Another term or two should wrap things up nicely.


That is literally what keeps me up at night.

ltr


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> *Tell you what, all our income is our own earned from a combined 80 years of work.*
> 
> We never collected a dime in "baby bonus" because we earned "too much" and paid taxes on all the earnings. We collect OAS because everyone pays taxes to provide it.....including us who earned more than "average incomes in retirement" and pay taxes each year accordingly
> 
> Over 30 years of fundraising, my wife and I have run dozens of baseball and hockey tournaments for 32 teams, ran an NHL alumnus game that filled the local arena with 5,000 people, ran dances for 500 people, raffles, BBQs, ran bingos,.organized employee contributions, went door to door for the Heart & Stroke Foundation, and contributed far more of OUR own money as a % than most of the billionaire class, so until you can match or top our history of giving you likely could be doing a lot more than you are.


Tell you what, you are right, all your income is your own and you earned it. No one else has the right to tell you how to spend your money (or time) nor do they have the right to tell you what you do with your hard earned money or if you have The same goes for you, you have no right to tell someone else how they show spend their money or if they are doing enough, even if they have so much more than you. It's not about percentages or how much one gives. That's only up to the person that earned the money to decide. 

Why should you get to decide on how someone spends their hard earned money, just because you THINK you have done more.

Do I get to decide that you aren't doing enough because I have done almost everything on your list or an equivalent, plus more for longer, even though I am only in my mid 40's, I have more than 30 years of charity and volunteer work. Does that give me the 'right' to say you haven't done enough? I don't think so. You earned your money through the choices you make, you decide how you want to spend it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I agree that people (including the wealthy) can spend their money on anything they want.

But that doesn't mean I have to approve or remain silent (tacit approval) on how they spend it ?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

CMF posters continually lament the spending of some members of their families or the general public, but vigorously defend the right of the wealthy to spend their money anyway they want.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> I agree that people (including the wealthy) can spend their money on anything they want.
> 
> But that doesn't mean I have to approve or remain silent (tacit approval) on how they spend it ?
> 
> *Do you plan on not having any opinion on how your kids spend their money in the future ?*



Feel free to judge away on how others spend their money. That is your right. I don't know what it will accomplish, other than have others judge you on your opinions. I guess I just don't really see the point. It seems really entitled to think we have to right judge others that have really no impact on us personally.

I may have an opinion on how my kids spend future, but I won't be expressing in terms of a judgement. I won't 'approve' or 'disapprove' on how they spend their money unless it impacts me. I have many opinions on how they spend MY money now which I do approve and disapprove because it does impact me.

I will give my guidance to my kids if they are living a lifestyle they cannot afford to maintain. Not being able to afford includes going in to debt, requiring subsidies from anyone include family, friends, or governments. As long as their earned the money with the values that hopefully we have instilled, we have no right to say anything, whether it's $1000 or $187000000000.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> CMF posters continually lament the spending of some members of their families or the general public, but vigorously defend the right of the wealthy to spend their money anyway they want.


Chances are there is more of an impact of family members spending on someone personally than a wealthy stranger. The impact of family spending even though its not my money, could be they can't afford it, there fore rely on people they mutual know. It be even if they do afford it, one see the impacts of their spending in other areas of their life. I could understand why some may complain about family spending because it has a direct or indirect impact on them either financially or emotionally. 

There is no impact from the wealthy being wealthy unless they are family.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I agree that people (including the wealthy) can spend their money on anything they want.
> 
> But that doesn't mean I have to approve or remain silent (tacit approval) on how they spend it ?


Why you didn't earn it?

I always think it's interesting, people think they're somehow entitled to decide what other people should be allowed to do, unless they're hurting you, it's none of your business.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

_people think they're somehow entitled to decide what other people should be allowed to do _

You are getting confused. I don't make the decisions on how the wealthy spend their money.

I expressed my opinion that I thought it was a stupid way to spend money.

My view is consistent that stupid spending is stupid spending......regardless of who is doing it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The CBC At Issue panel say the Liberals are putting the finishing touches on the budget with the help of Mark Carney.

They hope that Carney will make the decision to run for the Liberals in the next election and no doubt he would have a high cabinet position if he chooses to enter the race. Acquiring Carney as a candidate would be considered a real "coup" for the Liberals, considering his background.

Nobody knows for sure and he isn't saying. He just wrote a book so may want to have time off.

Andrew Coyne said the Liberals are very content and confident with their policies and leaders and this weekend's convention will be happy times, but the NDP convention could be a little more interesting.

The NDP faithful want Jagmeet Singh to push the Liberals for more budget concessions, in return for their support.

The Conservatives will likely vote against the budget regardless of what is in it.

The problem for the NDP is the Liberals wouldn't be the least upset about a fall election.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The economic recovery is coming along very fast. The Canadian recovery is looking even stronger than the American one.

The Canadian jobs recovery is projected to bring us back to full employment (pre covid levels) by summer. Employment is now at 98.5% at pre-covid levels! The March employment numbers were recently released, and just as with previous months, the job gains continue to exceed economist predictions.

Maybe one day when I'm a cynical crank, I can claim that the country is falling apart. But the reality is that Canada's economy and recovery appears to be in great shape. Throughout the pandemic, we've also protected more of our population (with lower death rates) than Europe and the USA.

We still have to be vigilant, and the pandemic isn't over, but these have been very good results by any objective measure. Better health outcomes and strong economic rebound, compared to Europe & US.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

_Canada’s seven-day average of new, confirmed Covid-19 cases per million people now exceeds the U.S.

Data as of Friday and collected by the University of Oxford’s Our World in Data portal show the rolling seven-day average in Canada sits at 205.7, eclipsing the U.S., which is at 205.1._

ltr


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

For everyone who is hyperventilating about how disastrous Canada has been on vaccines, we are exactly 1 month behind the US in terms of vaccinations (ie, we are now where the US was a month ago). And that is without the benefit of captive vaccine production capacity that we could commandeer.









Coronavirus (COVID-19) Vaccinations - Statistics and Research


Our vaccination dataset uses the most recent official numbers from governments and health ministries worldwide. The population estimates we use to calculate per-capita metrics are all based on the last revision of the United Nations World Population Prospects. A full list of our country-specific...




ourworldindata.org


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> For everyone who is hyperventilating about how disastrous Canada has been on vaccines, we are exactly 1 month behind the US in terms of vaccinations (ie, we are now where the US was a month ago). And that is without the benefit of captive vaccine production capacity that we could commandeer.


Virus cases in the US also look like they are trending higher at the moment. As the mutant strains spread in the US, this might rapidly accelerate and the US could be in a lot of trouble.

The US might be complacent because they feel very good about their vaccination levels, but they still don't have nearly enough vaccinated people to achieve herd immunity. And they are also increasing their dangerous behaviours with lots of travel, lots of businesses open, etc.

Let's keep in mind as well that the per capita death rate in the US is still triple Canada's, for the whole range of the pandemic.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

In other news, conservatives came up with their own carbon tax plan, that they say it's not a tax.

Hypocrisy rampant here -- but o'tool is painting the image we've come to expect from these snakes oil salesmen.

Here comes comments from resident CPC fanboys claiming it's a brilliant plan!


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

O'Toole came across very foolishly today. 

Their carbon price is a carbon tax that is not a tax. It will be set at a much lower rate, yet magically be just as effective as Trudeau's plan. All the money you pay in tax goes in your special green piggy bank or O'Toole PetroPoints, that you can spend on supposedly "green" things (and immediately resell). How is this supposed to incentivize anything? The entire policy is a muddle. People concerned about emissions won't be fooled, and his own party is furious at the betrayal on the carbon tax.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

andrewf said:


> O'Toole came across very foolishly today.
> 
> Their carbon price is a carbon tax that is not a tax. It will be set at a much lower rate, yet magically be just as effective as Trudeau's plan. All the money you pay in tax goes in your special green piggy bank or O'Toole PetroPoints, that you can spend on supposedly "green" things (and immediately resell). How is this supposed to incentivize anything? The entire policy is a muddle. People concerned about emissions won't be fooled, and his own party is furious at the betrayal on the carbon tax.


Plus they would need a dedicated team to manage this program and these new accounts. Doesn't that go against cons mentality to reduce the federal government size?

This program is actually to get you to buy more gas.

He's trying to get votes at next election. Good way to alineate the fan base, and left leaning individuals would still prefer income tax return from the liberal plan.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

fstamand said:


> This program is actually to get you to buy more gas.


Yeah, seems crazy to me. The more CO2 I create, the more money I save. Silly.

But it also seems silly to charge me a CO2 tax and then give it back to me a year later when I fill out my taxes. 

All these plans are administratively expensive, and accomplish nothing. 

In Canada, I need to heat my home and drive to work. How will adding a tax on that change the weather?

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, seems crazy to me. The more CO2 I create, the more money I save. Silly.
> 
> But it also seems silly to charge me a CO2 tax and then give it back to me a year later when I fill out my taxes.
> 
> ...


It's a wealth transfer scheme, to suck money and dump it into big urban centers that vote left.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> It's a wealth transfer scheme, to suck money and dump it into big urban centers that vote left.


Why would the CPC want you to vote left?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

fstamand said:


> Why would the CPC want you to vote left?


They don't. They want to win an election and get votes from people who can't think. It's the only route to get into office.

ltr


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

like_to_retire said:


> But it also seems silly to charge me a CO2 tax and then give it back to me a year later when I fill out my taxes.


Trudeau's policy, you get the money regardless of how much you burn/pay in carbon tax. So if you reduce your emissions, you still get the carbon rebate and are better off. That is the incentive.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> It's a wealth transfer scheme, to suck money and dump it into big urban centers that vote left.


Those urban centres are big net sources of tax revenue, so... huh?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The ads write themselves on this, too.

_With O'Toole Points, the more you burn, the more you earn!_ _Fuel up today!_


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Those urban centres are big net sources of tax revenue, so... huh?


Not according to the mayors who don't have the money for all their municipal services.
The big cities tend to have dramatically lower tax rates than smaller centers. But don't worry, the province and feds will be glad to buy votes with handouts.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Not according to the mayors who don't have the money for all their municipal services.
> The big cities tend to have dramatically lower tax rates than smaller centers. But don't worry, the province and feds will be glad to buy votes with handouts.


You seem to be confused about the difference between the taxpayers of cities, and their municipal governments. Urban taxpayers pay far more in provincial/federal tax than flows back to cities in services and transfers. It's similar scale to Alberta, but far less moaning is involved.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I mean, what do you think is happening? Each rural resident is carrying 10 urban residents? And all the bridges and roads in rural areas are paid for with rural municipality taxes? That is a really funny one! The rural munipality I used to live in got shedloads of cash from the province to rebuild a bunch of bridges. Without it, we would have had to get our hip waders out if we wanted to go somewhere.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The steady hand of the Liberals on the vaccine has been a "right party at the right time' scenario.

Their willingness to immediately support Canadians financially saved the economy and even today allows people who are forced out of work due to COVID infections in their workplace, to collect benefits to get them over the 2 week quarantines.

My son's work had a COVID scare when one employee had unknowing contact with someone who was infected. They reported it to the workplace and due to the fact the person had contact with many other employees due to safety meetings and other reasons, they decided to lay off all the employees for a 14 day quarantine. They were eligible to collect the CRB of $500 a week less $100 for taxes so a net of $400 a week.

Securing vaccines has been a federal issue, but the government did sign contracts with all the suppliers and there isn't much more they could have done. The US became "protectionist" and it affected the vaccine deliveries to Canada. There is nothing the Trudeau government can do about that except what they have been doing, which is calling repeatedly for more vaccine.

There was criticism for Canada sending some PPE to China, but the critics don't mention the air flights full of PPE that Canada secured in China, stored in a warehouse and then flew to Canada. We badly needed that PPE and good relations with China helped pave the way for the flights. Anyone who thinks the Chinese didn't know about the shipments underestimates the Chinese intelligence agencies.

All in all........the Trudeau government has performed well and deserves continued support.

We shall see what the budget brings 3 days from now on Monday.

I suspect Canadians will support the direction for Canada that the budget lays out.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> All in all........the Trudeau government has performed well and deserves continued support.


It's a year in and he still isn't enforcing the quarantine.
Many of the new cases are the UK variant, which is only here because of his failures.



> I suspect Canadians will support the direction for Canada that the budget lays out.


I suspect that it will be a masterpiece of electioneering.

He's going to be daring the opposition to force an election during the pandemic.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> O'Toole came across very foolishly today.


His scheme is ludicrous, I almost fell off my chair laughing.

So O'Toole wants a carbon tax too. This is after the Conservatives have been blasting the whole idea of a carbon tax for years.

_And_ he's going to use some ridiculous points club card membership, administered by a third party? Is he high?

These Conservative Party guys are such a joke. Harper is now hanging out with Mossad guys and CIA torturers while O'Toole thinks up club points membership programs.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Conservatives and their media got everything wrong about the pandemic.

They have complained non stop about restrictions, lock downs, school closures, vaccines.......

I don't think they get much of anything right. They are blinded by their decades old dogma.

They need to change leadership and get someone younger....with nice hair and yoga training.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Conservatives and their media got everything wrong about the pandemic.


Not quite, Ford implemented lockdowns, and has set up hundreds of COVID19 vaccination clinics across the province.
They were also calling for travel restrictions when Trudeau and his experts said they wouldn't stop a pandemic.



> They have complained non stop about restrictions, lock downs, school closures, vaccines.......


Actually that's a non partisan issue. 
I know lots of super hardcore liberals who are furious about the lock downs, and school closures.

There are legitimate concerns with the restrictions, and how they are implemented, and the fairness. I don't think it is fair that ToysRUs is closed, but I could go buy the exact same product at Walmart. It's annoying, but I'm glad they addressed that during the most recent lockdown.


The whole argument regarding school closures is just a balance of the harm of social isolation, vs in class learning.
For children, the change in their attitude and mental health is absolutely shocking. 

I think we should have full remote learning for everyone, and in person learning for those who feel comfortable with it, assuming the local situation isn't too dire. 
Since kids aren't spreading COVID19 in school, we're inflicting a lot of harm on them for little gain.
But that's because I'm a parent, who cares about their kids. I'm working from home, and it's pretty nice having them here all day. I have no concerns except what is best for my child, and the low level depressed attitude during online learning is concerning. 

I've had one kid go in, while the other stayed home, because that's what they felt comfortable with. It's not as simple as "you don't care about COVID", it's my overall perspective on my childrens health. Too many people discount mental health because it's not as obvious as something like a broken leg. 

So yeah, balancing a low likelihood physical risk against an observed mental harm makes it pretty obvious to me.


Never thought a leftie would actually accuse "conservatives" of being too concerned about mental health, but COVID has brought about a number off surprises.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

I would be ashamed of being a conservative today.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> Not quite, Ford implemented lockdowns, and has set up hundreds of COVID19 vaccination clinics across the province.
> They were also calling for travel restrictions when Trudeau and his experts said they wouldn't stop a pandemic.


Oh yeah, Ford has acted spectacularly during this pandemic (rolleyes).


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The budget is tabled and the NDP say they will support it...........so all systems are lit green.

It is a historic budget and is comprehensive not only in volume (700 pages) but in breadth and depth.

No doubt about it being a budget for an election called for sometime between September and November.


----------



## Retired Peasant (Apr 22, 2013)

sags said:


> ... an election called for sometime between September and November.


Likely after October 19 (gotta secure those pensions, see)


----------



## newfoundlander61 (Feb 6, 2011)

They should have raised the TFSA contribution limit


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

newfoundlander61 said:


> They should have raised the TFSA contribution limit


TFSA contribution limit is close to the maximum benefit for lower middle, any higher and it's really a benefit to the middle/upper.
I'd much rather they raise the basic personal deduction to $30k.


----------

