Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Income growth since 1980


Recommended Posts

Rich people pay a lot of Tax here in Canada.....Its a myth that they don't......Politicians are always pointing their finger in other directions. The rich are very mobile and government has to be very careful about how much they tax them.....There has been a lot of chatter that the Feds are looking at the principal residence which is a big captured tax base to make up revenue shortfalls.....They need a big number and the homeowner is a big enough to put them in the black temporarily. 

Lets not forget you could have 2 residences back in the 80's.......Government is becoming a bigger percentage of the economy almost every year.....Soon we will go to work and our whole cheques will go to them if they have their way.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

1917: Finance minister Sir Thomas White introduced “temporary” corporate and personal income taxes to finance the war effort. 1943: Finance minister J.L. Ilsley introduced “pay as you earn” measu

Thanks... will sleep better now...  

Government can and does indeed control the economy.  You have already pointed out one component: taxation (THE most powerful influence to human financial decisions), but far beyond that are interest r

5 minutes ago, onlythetruthmatters said:

1. Rich people pay a lot of Tax here in Canada.....
2. The rich are very mobile and government has to be very careful about how much they tax them.....
3. There has been a lot of chatter that the Feds are looking at the principal residence which is a big captured tax base to make up revenue shortfalls.....They need a big number and the homeowner is a big enough to put them in the black temporarily. 
4. Lets not forget you could have 2 residences back in the 80's.......Government is becoming a bigger percentage of the economy almost every year.....Soon we will go to work and our whole cheques will go to them if they have their way.....

1. "a lot" is a meaningless term, and begs a good measure of qualification
2. Very practical and very true.  Also to bring up that foreign capital is always needed, so I would add 'the government has to be very careful about international investors' and yes that includes China
3. "a lot of chatter" where ?  I just Googled and found a single Globe & Mail article exploring a "what if" scenario
4.  Bigger percentage ?    I don't think so.  If you want to talk numbers, you need to be precise otherwise the conversation isn't worth much.

wudbz6w.png

https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/tax-revenue-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

4.  Bigger percentage ?    I don't think so.  If you want to talk numbers, you need to be precise otherwise the conversation isn't worth much.

What does your chart include only Income tax....does it include unemployment insurance deductions, pension deductions, the annual deficit (money borrowed on our behalf)

Then thats only one branch of government we also have provincial taxes and property taxes...also percentage of government is all government and their borrowings too.

The federal government was 20% of the economy in 2019 ....This is revenues plus 2019 borrowing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, onlythetruthmatters said:

1. What does your chart include only Income tax....does it include unemployment insurance deductions, pension deductions, the annual deficit (money borrowed on our behalf)

2. Then thats only one branch of government we also have provincial taxes and property taxes...also percentage of government is all government and their borrowings too.

3. The federal government was 20% of the economy in 2019 ....This is revenues plus 2019 borrowing.

 

 

1. It doesn't include income tax.  EI and CPP are not taxes, but even if you consider them so then the onus is on you to show why you say they are increasing over time.
2. Ok - which government is raising tax rates ?  Which province ?
3. Where did you get that ?  Back it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It doesn't include income tax.  EI and CPP are not taxes, but even if you consider them so then the onus is on you to show why you say they are increasing over time.
2. Ok - which government is raising tax rates ?  Which province ?
3. Where did you get that ?  Back it up.

1917: Finance minister Sir Thomas White introduced “temporary” corporate and personal income taxes to finance the war effort.

1943: Finance minister J.L. Ilsley introduced “pay as you earn” measure, where employers deduct employees’ projected taxes from their paycheques.

The rest is history...up up up.....

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2020 at 1:12 PM, Michael Hardner said:

If you want to talk numbers, you need to be precise

Not really. Not always. If I recall there is a day called "Tax freedom day" or something.

If you google Canada Tax Freedom Day and look at images, you will see it there.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=canada+tax+freedom+day+history

 

Good enough for me...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I try to look for objective information, not just stuff that confirms what I already suspect.

Yup. Me too.

Now that Ive given you a google search link you can fill your boots.

I trust its objective enough for you...

Edited by OftenWrong
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1. Now that Ive given you a google search link you can fill your boots.

2. I trust its objective enough for you...

1. No, proof lies with the claimant.  I provided a counter-example to the claimant and he came back with two historical dates that fall short of proving the claim.  AFAIC my discussion with them is done now.
2. Yes, Google is objective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Huh ?  What is your claim ?

You were jumping in on a conversation between me and only truth, kind of white knighting them... but go ahead - what are you saying then ?  I'm interested.

I said I agree in principle, and I gave a link and showed you how to substantiate that on your own. Didn't I do that?

Yes I did.

Look if you're not going to read carefully and click the links, then we go around in circles and it wastes my time. Among other things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

1. I said I agree in principle, and I gave a link and showed you how to substantiate that on your own. Didn't I do that?

2. Look if you're not going to read carefully and click the links, then we go around in circles and it wastes my time. Among other things.

1. Oh, ok.  I'm good - I provided a backup to my counter claim and I know about Google.  Thanks for agreeing with me.
2. Please give me the benefit of the doubt, as I do with you.  I'm going to accept that you actually thought posting a Google link substantiates a claim, and that you're not trolling me - for example.  A Google link is a list of sources, not a single source.  I could find a bunch of low-quality sources that disagree or agree with the claim from that, so it doesn't help the argument.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

A Google link is a list of sources, not a single source.  I could find a bunch of low-quality sources that disagree or agree with the claim from that, so it doesn't help the argument.
 

I knew you would come back with that. Please read my post above carefully, where I said to click the google link, then go to the images tab and look at the graphs that show the trend in date.

You can see the data there visually. No need to get too deep into the numbers. Make sense now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidently I need to be very clear with you MH, because we are on different planets. Let me try going back to the numbers thing.

On 8/17/2020 at 1:12 PM, Michael Hardner said:

4.  Bigger percentage ?    I don't think so.  If you want to talk numbers, you need to be precise otherwise the conversation isn't worth much.

This is where I quoted you, but I only quoted the last sentance. I hope you are clear on what we are discussing.

The movement of tax freedom day is the example I gave. The data I showed is certainly good enough, no need for precision on that one.

You seem to have counter-notions, but so far I haven't seen any data. Rather than give date you seem to be lashing out in all directions at anyone who counters you, irregardless. Maybe you should attend some kind of protest, get it out of your system...

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Not really. Not always. If I recall there is a day called "Tax freedom day" or something.

If you google Canada Tax Freedom Day and look at images, you will see it there.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=canada+tax+freedom+day+history

Good enough for me...

Who is the Labour Party in Canada again?  Because the graph that appeared at that link tracked the Labour party as well as Conservatives and Liberals.

I couldn't find the claimed info on that page, seems to be primarily the UK and America.  The few graphs I found related to Canada measured different things.

Found this link from the Fraser Institute more informative, though it lacks easy acces to historical information - I didn't dig too hard  admittedly.

Edited by dialamah
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

 Make sense now?

No.  Here's the claim "Government is becoming a bigger percentage of the economy almost every year.....Soon we will go to work and our whole cheques will go to them if they have their way....".


You can give a link that shows that, to support it.  A google link, plus instructions to go to the images tab and look for 'tax freedom day' is a distraction at best.
 
Quote

This is where I quoted you, but I only quoted the last sentance. I hope you are clear on what we are discussing.

The movement of tax freedom day is the example I gave. The data I showed is certainly good enough, no need for precision on that one.

You seem to have counter-notions, but so far I haven't seen any data. Rather than give date you seem to be lashing out in all directions at anyone who counters you, irregardless. Maybe you should attend some kind of protest, get it out of your system...

The claim is that government is a bigger share of GDP.  I posted a graph that shows it goes up and down.  And a link to the source.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:
 

The claim is that government is a bigger share of GDP.  I posted a graph that shows it goes up and down.  And a link to the source.

I was not addressing that particular claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing about the tax picture vs. income, while we pay and pay, services get clawed back. We get less for our tax dollar than two generations ago. That is how the government tries to move the money around and give people the impression there's no tax increase. But reality is, services decrease, incrementally and bit by bit. It's called slipping it to ya a little at a time.

Consequences? Citizens who need those services have to pay for them out of pocket.

Used to get chiropractor and physio services under OHIP. It's not a tax, I know. So what blah blah. My as well be a payroll tax, it's a mandatory deduction.
Any doctor will tell you how important regular physio is to a person's recovery. It makes a huge difference to the quality of life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/19/2020 at 2:12 PM, Michael Hardner said:

No.  Here's the claim "Government is becoming a bigger percentage of the economy almost every year.....Soon we will go to work and our whole cheques will go to them if they have their way....".


You can give a link that shows that, to support it.  A google link, plus instructions to go to the images tab and look for 'tax freedom day' is a distraction at best.
 

The claim is that government is a bigger share of GDP.  I posted a graph that shows it goes up and down.  And a link to the source.

MH your data is flawed....Government is what they spend and what they borrow...money they borrow is future taxes.....Then you have the crown corporations, bank of Canada balance sheet.

Governments are tricky they purposely hide figures and produce fake numbers.....There is no way I can prove to you that governments percentage of the economy percisely without taking months to compile the evidence.....Government is growing every year and you have no common sense if you think otherwise. Think hidden liabilities like government pension plans etc..MH think outside the Box!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Singapore personal tax rates start at 0% and are capped at 22% (above S$320,000) for residents and a flat rate of 15% to 22% for non-residents. To increase the resilience of taxes as a source of government revenue, Goods and Services Tax (GST) was introduced in 1994. The current GST rate is 7%.

 

MH do you think its a coincidence Singapore has a higher standard of living then Canada without the resources Canada has......Could it be the efficient lower tax rate!!!!....

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.




  • Tell a friend

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