Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Things to look forward to as a result of the election


Recommended Posts

As Smallc notes, it's a tax on income earned within the 44.7k-89k bracket, which means that it benefits everyone who makes over 44.7k (except for the top 1% of income earners who make over 202k, because of the new bracket) and no one who makes less than 44.7k. This is why I think it is a terrible policy.

The lower bracket encompasses far more people and lowering it by any real amount would have been monetarily prohibitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The lower bracket encompasses far more people and lowering it by any real amount would have been monetarily prohibitive.

So, in order to not lose too much revenue, they're giving a tax break to only the top 1/3 of income earners (except the highest 1%)? How is this defensible (unless you really believe that high earners are overtaxed, in which case, please come out and say that this is what it looks like when you grow the economy from the heart out, Mr. Trudeau)?

Edited by Evening Star
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in order to not lose too much revenue, they're giving a tax break to only the top 1/3 of income earners (except the highest 1%)? How is this defensible

I think it's more that it's a ) possible, and b ) looks and sounds good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle class gets an income tax break, a new top bracket pays a little more and the lowest income families get more help with their children while those earning over 200k get none. Why is that a bad thing? What am I missing here?

Do the wealthy need childcare assistance? I'm not in the 1% but am happy to have my childcare cheques cut and sent to those that could use the help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle class gets an income tax break, a new top bracket pays a little more and the lowest income families get more help with their children while those earning over 200k get none. Why is that a bad thing? What am I missing here?

Do the wealthy need childcare assistance? I'm not in the 1% but am happy to have my childcare cheques cut and sent to those that could use the help.

I think the people who benefit most from this might be better off than the term "middle class" implies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the people who benefit most from this might be better off than the term "middle class" implies.

The middle class gets a tax break and I think they deserve it. Those on the low end of middle class get increased childcare. Those lower than that pay very little in taxes anyway and also get a significant boost in childcare support. This is a more sensible plan than giving childcare money to the wealthy, don't you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle class gets a tax break and I think they deserve it. Those on the low end of middle class get increased childcare. Those lower than that pay very little in taxes anyway and also get a significant boost in childcare support. This is a more sensible plan than giving childcare money to the wealthy, don't you think?

People who over $200k are already paying 54% of their money in taxes. AT what point is enough, enough?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle class gets a tax break and I think they deserve it. Those on the low end of middle class get increased childcare. Those lower than that pay very little in taxes anyway and also get a significant boost in childcare support. This is a more sensible plan than giving childcare money to the wealthy, don't you think?

I would probably scrap the child care benefit altogether but I agree that means-testing it is an improvement. (I'll concede that I hadn't factored this in when I was running my numbers, not having kids myself.) I'm not sure that a tax break is justified for the higher end of what you're calling the middle class (say people making $90K-$200K/year). But maybe by scrapping income splitting and rolling back TFSA limits, they will make up the revenue. If they scrap the Tories' boutique tax credits (and especially if they taxed capital gains more highly), a cut to the nominal rate might actually be justified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People who over $200k are already paying 54% of their money in taxes. AT what point is enough, enough?

People making up to $220K per year (and over $44K) will pay less tax under this plan.

Edited by Smallc
Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to explain, I wrote it in English.

What a childish response. Please explain the calculation behind the idea that those making over 200k pay 54% tax. The highest avg tax rate I'm aware of would be for Quebecers at 40.17%

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

The federal government only controls federal tax rates and currently the highest rate is 29% on the portion of income over $138,586. The Liberal tax plan will add a new bracket with a rate of 33% for the portion of income over $200k. While simultaneously reducing the tax rate from 22% to 20.5% on the portion of income between $44,700 and $89,401.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to all the people on this forum protesting that 61% of votes were against the Liberals and yet they got a majority! Only 26% of eligible voters voted for the Liberals! 74% of eligible voters did not vote for the Liberals. I await these protestations from all those who made the exact same points about the previous Conservative majority....

...

...

...

...

<crickets>

NDP got half the votes of LPC and one quarter the seats. That's outrageous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to all the people on this forum protesting that 61% of votes were against the Liberals and yet they got a majority! Only 26% of eligible voters voted for the Liberals! 74% of eligible voters did not vote for the Liberals. I await these protestations from all those who made the exact same points about the previous Conservative majority....

...

...

...

...

<crickets>

The most common sentiment I hear from progressive voters is worry that JT did too well to honour his electoral reform promise. Most still want PR.

NDP got half the votes of LPC and one quarter the seats. That's outrageous.

Yet last time around Dipper vote efficiency was far greater than the LPC. I think it's time to move to something fair and proportional. Where one vote always equals one vote and percentage support equals percentage of the seats. Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful imagination.

How does the reply above relate to the original post?

Why would you ask that? You've already decided the 'top 3 or 4 in every department' have to go, even without any evidence any individual, let alone all of them, have done anything wrong. Collective punishment for an alleged bias which has not yet been demonstrated! Talk about brutally autocratic!

Edited by Scotty
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lower bracket encompasses far more people and lowering it by any real amount would have been monetarily prohibitive.

More importantly, it was assumed those in lower brackets were already likely to vote Liberal or NDP. The tax break was designed to win votes from the middle class.

Anyone who doesn't understand that 100% of the reason behind this was to secure votes is simply being dishonest with themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Jake Ziegelbauer
      Anyone get a good laugh out of this per stage rehearsed for 9 day clown show. Reading from cards to see who he would call on, questions like what ice cream do you like, How is live in the White house, what time are you taking a nap. I laughed so hard it made me want to call in with Americas Questions like 1 Illegal Immigration, why can no Journalist see whats going on two , covid19 not the fake numbers the White house3 and the media publish their are still 2,000 Americans dying a day, CDC says in 2021 they expect another 900,000 to die, North Korea, China, Russia nuclear threat US economy is now 3 rd in the World and Failing, NO Jobs people dying no money for rent, Stimulus checks for $1,400 not received by more than 10 % of Americans Riots gun deaths People killing people for Food 2020 was a great year compared to 2021 which is not even a 1/4 old. Were is Congress they are on Vacation till April 12/2021
    • By Randyjohnson71
      Joe Biden was inaugurated President, but I didn't watch the inauguration. I'm not a Joe Biden supporter. He didn't win because of me. I voted against him in both the primary and the election. I voted for Mike Bloomberg in the primary and Donald Trump in the election.
      I hope that Biden will be a one term President. I do not like Joe Biden. If this offends some readers, I apologize. But I have to be honest. I'm not a Joe Biden supporter.
    • By JimZiegelbauer2
      Authorities in Pittsburgh, Pa., said they were investigating a newly released video that appeared to show protesters confronting outdoor diners in the city’s downtown on Saturday, a report said.
      FLORIDA PROTESTERS RELEASED FOLLOWING NONE Peaceful DEMONSTRATIONS AGAINST EXONERATION OF OFFICERS INVOLVED IN SHOOTING
      One of the videos that were posted online appeared to show a man holding a megaphone calling diners at the establishment an “embarrassment.” Some of the diners can be seen getting up from their seats.The videos show Blacks Threatening Whites like when Sen Paul and his wife left the DC Republican party Were is the Police?
    • By JimZiegelbauer2
      Obama/Biden/Harris/Pelosi/care law forced on America 2011, COST 1,500.000 medical jobs, 458,000 American deaths, 36 million people unemployed, 29,000 smal Business closed at a cost of 1 trillion dollars and when COVID 19 hit the USA we had no healthcare plan in place in the USA WHY?
    • By Hussain
      All over Ontario, people have been quarantined for weeks in order to flatten the curve and save lives, for the majority of places it has been working. Health officials are now saying that some places in Ontario have reached their peak and the daily number of cases are slowly starting to decline. However, long-term care homes are still at high risk and are being closely monitored to prevent a wide-scale outbreak.
      READ MORE AT
      https://www.youthinpolitics.net/post/leading-death-of-covid-19
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...