on Real Time with Bill Maher over a week ago Randy Cohen made a very good point about corporate taxes/government regulations.

"Our corporate taxation policy sends one message, and it's 'Leave!'" - Doug Heye

"It only says 'Leave' if you have no identification with yourself as a citizen of this country and you feel you have no obligation to pay your fair share" - Randy Cohen

What is "fair"?
- Should we buy $500K of meds every year for someone who's going to die soon anyways? while the rest of us struggle to find a doctor?
- Should we give tax breaks to seniors who are living in homes worth more than any 30yo can afford?
- Should we subsidize arts programs that generate crap no-one wants to see?
- Should we pay teachers to work 25 years then live 30 years in gold plated retirement?
- Should we allow immigrants to bring their parents who will ever work, learn our language/culture, or contribute in any positive way to our society yet becomes a drain on our social and health services?
- ...

If government provided just the basic rights and freedoms I'd have no problem paying my fair share. Unfortunate "fair share" and taxes cannot be used in the same sentence. This is why tea party members push for less government - let citizens decide where their dollars go, that's fair.

Why not just kill anyone that's non productive. Child has a mental deficiency end his life. A senior works hard all his life buys a nice house increase his taxes or force him to live in a shit hole. They give large corporations huge tax breaks. Let artist be poor like Vincent van Gogh then after they die sell there works for big money. Your parents live in another country and your father dies leaving he alone. Good she can fend for herself.

the Tea party is just a bunch of slack jawed yokels being controlled by big business with out them knowing it. Who leads or speaks for the tea party? tea Party answer: no one so if some one says something offensive they claim he doesn't speak for the Tea party and they kick the person out and that person joins another group like the: Tea Party patriots, Tea Party Express, Tea Party nation or some other tea Party.

Heard a new talking point on CNN today when the asked a republican about GE paying no taxes "decrease the rate widen the base" Code word for decrease taxes for the rich and increase taxes for the poor. America is messed they give tax breaks to the rich and then borrow money to pay for the tax breaks.

Harper's polices are the same as Bushes.

Jack layton is making alot of sense lately.

I'm not saying kill everyone drama queen - I'm saying $500K to keep 1 person alive is a waste compared to how much good it can do for many others. Those are the tough decisions that have to be made - and lot, a lefty drama queen cannot make the tough decision of what's more beneficial - surprise surprise.

My grandparents moved to Canada from England and Poland, my great grand parents stayed in Europe. Its what families did to live better lives, before they started turning to government with their hand out.

No-one is forcing a senior to live in a shithole. Stop being a drama queen. There's plenty of seniors in Vancouver living in $1M homes would could easily downscale to a condo for $400K and pocket the $600K to live off of - yet that doesn't fit the image you have of seniors, despite them being the highest salary group in Canada, as well as sitting on the most assets. Yet that doesn't add up in your silly moral world where no-one should ever have to sell their house and actually use the money invested in it.

Artists should be treated like any other profession - if you cannot make it it means you suck and you should find other work. There's so many struggling artists asking for funding - cause the reality is that they suck. No-one wants to buy their crap.

You bring up some good points, I just want to point out something. If I purchase a company's stocks, I become a shareholder. That means I'm one of many owners of that company. Corporations have the incentive to decrease their costs and become more efficient in order to maximize shareholder value. When taxes are higher, there's more incentive for corporations to use debt for the tax shield it provides. That means more financing through debt and less through equity. I rather the tax rate decrease so more equity is issued AND that there would be more after tax profit to be distributed as dividends. These dividends are a supplemental income for me in a sense. Also, if the value of the stock goes up, that means the value of my retirement savings go up. I win all around.

I know I simplified the explanation quite a bit but it still stands.

Corporations = shareholders.
Shareholders = us and our parents.

I was just a matter of time before the true dark side of the conservative party came. Harper can control only so many people.

So you want to set up death panels that deny care if it cost to much. It won't mater to the rich because they will be able to afford private care leaving the ones with out means to die or sell everything they have and beg for enough money so they can afford care. I wonder how the pro life conservatives would feel about that.

Forcing seniors to sell the house they have lived in for 30 plus years and then give tax cuts to the rich and large corporations, good one.

Seniors SHOULD liquidate their assets if they're lacking the cash to support themselves. That's the point in investing in a home, so you can turn it into $$ when you need it. Other wise you might as well just rent because you're really not ever going to get an advantage out of it.

I am totally up for spending money to save people, and giving money to low income seniors but the ones who have the money in assets should have to use that money before they get government hand outs, other wise there will NEVER be enough to go around.

He's done a great job so far. Keep up the fear mongering... oh wait, didn't you criticize the Conservatives for fear mongering? PKB

Since you haven't caught on, how about you read the local news. I'm referencing a particular case of a 22yo being denied drugs that cost $500K/yr. Thus these "death panels" are already setup. There was also a case in Ontario where parents wanted treatment to extended their terminal baby's life - yet it was decided against cause it would be a waste.

Thus these hard decisions already happen - yet look at the silly lefties that don't think they do, nor want to make them. This is why you'll never be trusted with my money.

That's your morals, not mine. I see it as creating jobs for struggling unemployed people, while cutting off the outstretched hand of someone sitting on tons of $$$.

People are such hypocrites, especially Vancouverites. On one hand real estate is an "investment", makes everyone rich, separates the rich from the poor - until they are forced to sell in which case real estate becomes a "home" that the poor should subsidize them to afford.

That's the problem with GIS and tax credits, it only takes into account income, not assets.

There's lots of "poor" seniors in Vancouver that take advantage of a program to defer paying property tax, although they live in SFH worth on average > $1M as of today. Why should my taxes subsidize them to stay in their million dollar homes?

Looking forward to hearing how that's "fair". TheNewGirl, that's not a shot at you, its towards the others who know who they are :)

there is alot of seniors that liquidate when they retire. Just look at the greek migration out of kits.

Thanks Revscene, This thread got me even more interested in Canadian Politics, in addition, got me researching what the issues are and how each party will respond to it. Just got my Election Card, this will be my first federal election :thumbsup: Anyone going to watch the political debate today? Starts at 4:00pm.

Link to live streaming
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/#

Anyone see the somewhat fail hand written signs; heading North on Knight Street between King Ed and Broadway regarding direct attacks to Harper?

Well everyone who pays into CPP gets CPP but for the 'top up' it SHOULD be more like when you apply for welfare and EI where they make you list not only all your income but all your assets and savings.

I'm SOOO against giving money out to those who don't need it (like the current and ridiculious child care benefit that sends $100/month or what ever it is to all parents of kids under 5 regardless of if they are rich or poor or even have their kids in childcare). I'm very pro social intervention personally but these need to be targeted and efficent or they're wasting everyone's money.

Taylor I know we don't agree on much but it burns me too if someone is living in a million dollar property and yet MY hard earned money are supporting them while I pay for my rental apartment and we can agree on that.

ANOTHER thing is, that allowing older people to hold their property longer than they should is part of the reason for rapidly inflating housing costs. If we had all our seniors liquidating their homes when they needed to for the $$ (rather then taking loans out against their homes) we would have a far higher turn over in the market and a healthier, more buyer oriented climate.

Once again this falls unto peoples different meanings of 'fair'

I *MASSIVELY APPLAUD* everyone getting a child care benefit. Personally speaking, my mother was a stay-at-home mother, and not once did she ever get any 'benefit'. I'm glad that future generations of parents will all get it.

And you can't say that the rich are getting all the breaks. What do they compromise, like 1% of the population? so 99% of the population benefits as well. seems fair to me.

Awesome! :thumbsup:

As much as we razz each other in this thread, the important part is that we want to discuss politics. Maybe some of it will be wrong, will be biased, ... yet anything that gets more Canadians interested in politics is great!

Your mother got a child tax benefit if your family's income dictated that she needed it.

The problem with the current 'child care' program is that $100/month is NOTHING in offsetting the costs of childcare for those who need and use it (Childcare for a child under 5 in the GVRD is between $600 and $1200/month. For a child under 3 it's more in the $1000 - $2000/month range).

For those families that are truly poor, you can get a provincial subsidy, but I have to be clear when I was making $12.15/hour and the only income in my household I was making too much to qualify for it except for a couple months a year (and then I got a petty $35/month).

For the families that are above the poverty line but not by much, the fact that the government believes $100/month solves all their problems is well... insulting. Mean while they waste hundreds of thousands of dollars a year giving this same benefit to families that are high income and not in need of it.

The government could instead, redistribute the money, by adding it as a $200 additional to the child tax benefit for families under a designated income threshold (I would even be generous and say something like 80k).

It's not money that's meant to pay stay at home moms (though I applaud them and believe they totally deserve some sort of financial reward). But the money is SPECIFICALLY to offset the high costs of childcare.

This is clearly one of those 'someone who's never had the problem invented a band-aide solution that didn't help anyone' situations. There are MANY of these when rich white guy politicians try and tackle poverty issues.

I receive pension till I'm 25. Not going to lie. That 220 dollars a month actually helps.

I wish they would have a real debate instead of getting a question and then repeating one of the speeches they have memorized.

They are so prepped that a real debate is not possible. If you want to hear a real debate, watch what happens in Parliament, its awesome when they start bickering with each other across the room.

Anyone watching the debate??

http://www.facebook.com/newscbc?sk=app_210790438933545

I'm watching.

Jack Layton got some SWEET punches in tonight!

I only caught the tail end of it. I was less then thrilled.

I think Layton was the only one who was engaging or really on the ball.

+ 1

I'm sick of hearing old people complain about how they are "taxed" out of their properties that they bought 10-20 years ago.

These seniors basically hit the lottery. They basically own a home that's worth $1 million ++. Even if they don't want to buy that 400K condo, they can just rent a home nearby. They can easily live off that cash and GIS/ OAS payments for the rest of their LIVES plus have room for inheritence to give to their kids.

If I made $50,000 after taxes, it would take me 20 years to save up $1million. thats assuming I don't spend ANYTHING at all!

These seniors basically hit the lottery.