First time I've thought of Prime Minister in terms of punk. It's usually self aggrandizing dooshbag or variation there of but never the age biased punk. It was bound to happen.
federal election - who are you voting for
- Thread starter LiNK666
- Start date
First time I've thought of Prime Minister in terms of punk. It's usually self aggrandizing dooshbag or variation there of but never the age biased punk. It was bound to happen.
It. Doesn't. Matter.
There aren't enough rich CEOs in Canada for it to make a smidge of frickin difference. The same goes for large corporations. There aren't enough of them for a 2% corporate tax rate hike to make up even a 1% increase in overall tax revenue in this country. This is why Mulcair was full of ****, and this is why Trudeau is full of ****. The entire notion of "closing loopholes" and "taxing rich CEOs" is feel-good garbage that won't even register in the ledgers. We're the ones funding the entire dog and pony show... the average middle classers, small and medium sized business owners, and public sector employees. The onus is on us to pay for the infrastructure, health, education, and security. Any increases in spending will invariably come from our pockets, period.
Yes but it's a question of fairness. If I'm being hassled by the CRA for a few hundred bucks I'm going to feel rightly ****** off if I know some twat is laughing while sitting on a few million on his yacht and paying zip. As for the 1% and large crooked corporations, if they did pay their fair share it absolutely would make a difference.
The rich guy pays more taxes in one year than you will in an entire lifetime, even with loopholes and unfairness - they're certainly not sitting on yachts and paying 'zip'. That's a fallacy.
As to your second point, the tax shelters and 'evasion' so far seem legal, and the frameworks are in place to help Canadian companies stay competitive in the global marketplace to some degree. One group estimated that closing these 'loopholes' would've accounted for $8B in revenue to Canada in 2014. That's 8 billion into an annual pool of approximately $250 billion in collected revenues at the federal level, nevermind the other $600+ billion in revenues at the provincial level. What trickle-down effect would it have on the Canadian workforce and economy if these corporations had to fork over an additional $8B in supposed hidden taxes every year? That's anyones guess. Layoffs, closed factories, higher prices? Certainly all real possibilities.
daught
Well-known member
Wait, are those $8B essential to those corporations survival? Don't think so, since they are stashed overseas.
It's liquid, who knows what they use it for and where it gets funnelled around. Its real money and these corporations have it accounted for, so I have to assume that they would make corporate changes in order to keep the gravy. This is ultimately why the corporate tax rate has steadily been shrinking for quite some time.
Except that men think with their ***** & go F'n around. It weakens family structureI applied to Booze once as well
I think in general that these are victimless vices, if I want to spend $10 on a lottery ticket or spend $100 on a woman who is willing to bang me for cash what's the big deal.
I think it has to be tempered though. Its probably not OK if someone is trafficked from Asia or Eastern Europe and forced into the sex trade. This probably happens today so the checks and balances need to be there when legalized.
reganomics has proven not to work. So if companies are able to hide the cash it's not being leveraged and thus profit.
daught
Well-known member
Enlightening. I don't know why we even have the right to vote these days. The world is way beyond our understanding.
Logical fallacy. A good family man with a healthy sex life in a happy home is unlikely to go out and pay for it.
More realistically:
Guy is messing around because he's not getting any at home, or;
Guy is a ****** and is going to F around regardless.
Either way, said family structure is doomed regardless of sex trade legality.
Well, if he readily have access to it, it makes it easier. No time sitting in a bar to try to get lucky, no time spent chit chatting. Straight to the point
Companies exist for profits. And because many of these are internationals, the cash isn't hidden in the strict sense of the word, its simply moved off-shore. Whether they use it for hookers and blow or to make business moves abroad, its still money they account for and certainly wouldnt be thrilled to give away. Just saying.
Regardless, my original point is that the taxes 'owed' on that money are a drop in the bucket of total government revenues approaching one trillion dollars annually.
Last edited:
Boots
Well-known member
I disagree, go to Jarvis late at night and it's there. No chit chat needed.
It's probably easier to get a hook up from the Internet nowadays. Online affairs are pretty common and ruin family structure.
At the end of the day, this is all going to happen regardless, why not regulate it and make it safer for everybody involved, especially the women. And create taxes in the meantime.
You can't help but think that there is literally no difference between prostitution and the porn industry except for the fact that the latter is recorded and distributed. So why is one legal and the other illegal? Why is one considered dirty and the other clean?
Reganomics, Oh you mean Reaganomics
That's something that Walter Mondale made up as part of his democratic campaign. Read his speech form the Feb New Hampshire primary in the 1984 campaign. It’s on line. You can google it.You seem to be very naive. How can a public company in Canada “hide” cash? I’m a partner at a public company and when I file through Corporate Actions and Events at the TSX and Revenue Canada I submit the balance sheet. It’s assets offset by liabilities. That's the purpose of a balance sheet. It has to balance. Revenue Canada will flag you for being $1 out, ask me how I know.
If that sheet is deliberately wrong its fraud. If cash is hidden its fraud. I get charged, my partners get charged, our CFO gets charged, our accountants get charged. Every year I have to pay for an independent accounting company to come in and scrutinize the books. Are you saying all corporations in Canada are committing fraud by laundering $8bn in money and that the whole accounting profession is in cahoots?
You probably don’t believe that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
I personally find that the fact that you are implying that very insulting.
A company has the ability to do things like offset revenue against future profits, but I can't just take cash from the bank account and spend it without a record. I cant take cash from our corporate account and put it somewhere else. That's a criminal offence. Everything has to be on the books. Even if it’s for Hookers or Coke, it has to be on the books. We have a CFO, he is an employee and he scrutinizes every expense I bring. Why, because he can go to jail. I get the impression you think his job is to hide income.
Maybe we should get rid of RRSP’s as it allow’s you to hide cash and save “tax free”. The reality is its “Tax Deferred” Someday you pay tax on that money, whether it’s an RRSP or deferred corporate revenue.
BTW, Jordan Belforte's expenses are actually published on line. It makes an interesting read. Coke and Hookers went through the books.
The other thing that you fail to grasp is that we are now living in a global economy.
I just moved a Canadian company to Delaware. It now has a US head office and we will now file with the IRS and SEC instead of the CRA. Why - because tax rate is 7%. What does that allow me to do - Hire more people, invest in new equipment, provide better profit sharing, target new markets, in general have more free cash flow to grow the company.
If I grow the company do I get more money, hell yes. But it’s my job. I’m not running a charity or non-profit.
But I’m also responsible to 2 sets of people. Shareholders (i.e. the owners) and 132 employees. People with Mortgages, Kids, Dependants. Those people and their families are my responsibility. Maybe I should pay the 50% taxes. That way I can lay some people off, reduce salaries for those that are left and kill our profit sharing and stock option schemes. With a bit of luck I can maybe even bankrupt the company and put all 132 out of a job.
Oh wait, not doing my best for shareholders and employees is actually an inditable criminal offence.
And BTW, not all shareholders are rich speculators. One of our initial investors was a partners father. He was a Portuguese immigrant that ran a small Stucco business and he took his life savings and invested it with us as he had 7 kids and 13 grand-kids that he wanted to give a better life by putting them through university. He didn't want them out slapping Stucco on the side of a house.
Last edited:
So you think it's better to have men in this situation sitting at a bar, or on Tinder etc. lying to women about their intentions, or even better, meeting someone and having a full on affair, emotional attachment and all?
Look at Ashley Madison. These infidelity situations exist in large numbers, again, regardless of sex trade legality. Broken marriages are often broken for many more complex reasons. Your implying we treat the symptom, it will/has had little effect.
eljay
Well-known member
NO! You should see the size of the mattresses needed to stash $8 billion. Some Caribbean islands have huge factories for making corporate offshore cash-stashing mattresses. All run by non-union slave laborers. And the shenanigans they go through to make sure the union pension funds and their home governments never find that cash, my god! But they still pay the dividend to all the other shareholders. Just the evil super rich ones that put money in their TFSAs. They are all shuddering hoping their shareholders and employees never find that cash and ask why it's just being stuffed in mattresses.
eljay
Well-known member
Don't forget that all of the union pension funds plus the CPP are massively invested in the largest corporations, not just in Canada but globally, and on both sides of the balance sheet. Killing corporate profits will kill pensions, end of line.
Just as an example, here's the link to OPSEU's top holdings.
https://www.optrust.com/investments/significant-investments.asp
Top 3 are hundreds of millions invested in the equity of banks. Go look at fixed income. Hundreds more in debt loaned.
Who wants the banks to pay their "fair share"? You want your pension to exist when you retire?
This is just one union pension in just Ontario. There's much more where that came from.
Just as an example, here's the link to OPSEU's top holdings.
https://www.optrust.com/investments/significant-investments.asp
Top 3 are hundreds of millions invested in the equity of banks. Go look at fixed income. Hundreds more in debt loaned.
Who wants the banks to pay their "fair share"? You want your pension to exist when you retire?
This is just one union pension in just Ontario. There's much more where that came from.
Reganomics, Oh you mean Reaganomics
You seem to be very naive. How can a public company in Canada “hide” cash? I’m a partner at a public company and when I file through Corporate Actions and Events at the TSX and Revenue Canada I submit the balance sheet. It’s assets offset by liabilities. That's the purpose of a balance sheet. It has to balance. Revenue Canada will flag you for being $1 out, ask me how I know.
If that sheet is deliberately wrong its fraud. If cash is hidden its fraud. I get charged, my partners get charged, our CFO gets charged, our accountants get charged. Every year I have to pay for an independent accounting company to come in and scrutinize the books. Are you saying all corporations in Canada are committing fraud by laundering $8bn in money and that the whole accounting profession is in cahoots?
You probably don’t believe that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
I personally find that the fact that you are implying that very insulting.
A company has the ability to do things like offset revenue against future profits, but I can't just take cash from the bank account and spend it without a record. I cant take cash from our corporate account and put it somewhere else. That's a criminal offence. Everything has to be on the books. Even if it’s for Hookers or Coke, it has to be on the books. We have a CFO, he is an employee and he scrutinizes every expense I bring. Why, because he can go to jail. I get the impression you think his job is to hide income.
Maybe we should get rid of RRSP’s as it allow’s you to hide cash and save “tax free”. The reality is its “Tax Deferred” Someday you pay tax on that money, whether it’s an RRSP or deferred corporate revenue.
BTW, Jordan Belforte's expenses are actually published on line. It makes an interesting read. Coke and Hookers went through the books.
The other thing that you fail to grasp is that we are now living in a global economy.
I just moved a Canadian company to Delaware. It now has a US head office and we will now file with the IRS and SEC instead of the CRA. Why - because tax rate is 7%. What does that allow me to do - Hire more people, invest in new equipment, provide better profit sharing, target new markets, in general have more free cash flow to grow the company.
If I grow the company do I get more money, hell yes. But it’s my job. I’m not running a charity or non-profit.
But I’m also responsible to 2 sets of people. Shareholders (i.e. the owners) and 132 employees. People with Mortgages, Kids, Dependants. Those people and their families are my responsibility. Maybe I should pay the 50% taxes. That way I can lay some people off, reduce salaries for those that are left and kill our profit sharing and stock option schemes. With a bit of luck I can maybe even bankrupt the company and put all 132 out of a job.
Oh wait, not doing my best for shareholders and employees is actually an indictable criminal offence.
And BTW, not all shareholders are rich speculators. One of our initial investors was a partners father. He was a Portuguese immigrant that ran a small Stucco business and he took his life savings and invested it with us as he had 7 kids and 13 grand-kids that he wanted to give a better life. He didn't want them out slapping Stucco on the side of a house.
What needs to be scrutinized and audited is HOW the money is getting spent that's coming in. Budgeting has always been simple. Make more or spend less, to make things work. Trying to find new ways to generate revenue for the government will eventually reach a boiling point.
Reganomics, Oh you mean Reaganomics
You seem to be very naive. How can a public company in Canada “hide” cash? I’m a partner at a public company and when I file through Corporate Actions and Events at the TSX and Revenue Canada I submit the balance sheet. It’s assets offset by liabilities. That's the purpose of a balance sheet. It has to balance. Revenue Canada will flag you for being $1 out, ask me how I know.
If that sheet is deliberately wrong its fraud. If cash is hidden its fraud. I get charged, my partners get charged, our CFO gets charged, our accountants get charged. Every year I have to pay for an independent accounting company to come in and scrutinize the books. Are you saying all corporations in Canada are committing fraud by laundering $8bn in money and that the whole accounting profession is in cahoots?
You probably don’t believe that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
I personally find that the fact that you are implying that very insulting.
A company has the ability to do things like offset revenue against future profits, but I can't just take cash from the bank account and spend it without a record. I cant take cash from our corporate account and put it somewhere else. That's a criminal offence. Everything has to be on the books. Even if it’s for Hookers or Coke, it has to be on the books. We have a CFO, he is an employee and he scrutinizes every expense I bring. Why, because he can go to jail. I get the impression you think his job is to hide income.
Maybe we should get rid of RRSP’s as it allow’s you to hide cash and save “tax free”. The reality is its “Tax Deferred” Someday you pay tax on that money, whether it’s an RRSP or deferred corporate revenue.
BTW, Jordan Belforte's expenses are actually published on line. It makes an interesting read. Coke and Hookers went through the books.
The other thing that you fail to grasp is that we are now living in a global economy.
I just moved a Canadian company to Delaware. It now has a US head office and we will now file with the IRS and SEC instead of the CRA. Why - because tax rate is 7%. What does that allow me to do - Hire more people, invest in new equipment, provide better profit sharing, target new markets, in general have more free cash flow to grow the company.
If I grow the company do I get more money, hell yes. But it’s my job. I’m not running a charity or non-profit.
But I’m also responsible to 2 sets of people. Shareholders (i.e. the owners) and 132 employees. People with Mortgages, Kids, Dependants. Those people and their families are my responsibility. Maybe I should pay the 50% taxes. That way I can lay some people off, reduce salaries for those that are left and kill our profit sharing and stock option schemes. With a bit of luck I can maybe even bankrupt the company and put all 132 out of a job.
Oh wait, not doing my best for shareholders and employees is actually an inditable criminal offence.
And BTW, not all shareholders are rich speculators. One of our initial investors was a partners father. He was a Portuguese immigrant that ran a small Stucco business and he took his life savings and invested it with us as he had 7 kids and 13 grand-kids that he wanted to give a better life by putting them through university. He didn't want them out slapping Stucco on the side of a house.
Yes...but you're not a large multinational with presence globally and using that corporate structure to avoid totally paying taxes in one country a la Starbucks or GE for example. While those exact scenarios might not have played out in Canada similar loopholes allow for funneling of cash out the country in the name of profit. While legal it doesn't really smack of being a decent corporate citizen to do so and if your average Joe on the street sees the big boys doing it with millions then Joe on the street is going to feel a bit ****** off come tax return time. To state that this doesn't happen is also naïve.
..lets also add the Chinese millionaires buying properties in BC and avoiding paying any taxes by nefarious means too. This is all about optics...if the general public see one rule for one type of citizen and another for others than they get disillusioned pretty quickly. The worst case scenario is that you then get a society who habitually defaults on taxes like in Greece...the mentality is "they don't pay, why should I?" and you can see what happens next as part of the fallout from that.
Cleaning up the tax laws would be a good start.
Cleaning up the tax laws would be a good start.
