Election Day. And Nav politicizing the Raptors Org. ?

[Axel]

Yeah? Well I like T-bone steaks, fancy cars, designer clothes and fancy houses. And I'm willing to work to get them. I sacrifice so I can earn a living that is conducive to th life style I chose to live. So sue me. I like working hard, earning money, saving some, and blowing some. I like buying expensive things and going for expensive steak dinners, I like sitting lower bowl at raptors games and drinking $15 beers.

Maybe one day I'll be as noble as you Snooch.

As far as the tax credits, someone that earns 200k likely pays the equivalent of your salary in taxes. If they get any credits back (of their own money) of course it will be more than what you get because they paid more.

No need to, we can just tax you instead.

They aren't being asked, first of all. They're being forced.

And "rich" people are constantly demonized! Are you kidding me? Just listen to the tone of the people that support taxing the rich. My goodness you'd think they stole everything they have from blind children and the elderly.

They are being asked as a collective, we vote people in who set the tax rates. We obviously can't ask everyone to individual choose whether they want to be taxed, but as a collective country, we decide.

If you simply want your money and no social benefits, then you and your entire family must be blessed to never have need of roads, schools, hospitals, EI, etc. How many trees did you personal cut to build your home?

[raptors999]

So you're implying that that $400 every 2 weeks, of your $250,000 a year salary, is going to be the difference between your family being happy and not happy? Sounds like someone needs a financial planner.

And no one is saying they're not hard working, or providing a service to the country. Sure they are. But that just means they are in a better position to assist the government in bettering our country, then asking someone who makes $45,000 per year to do so.

Canada is already a high personal income tax country but unlike Scandinavian countries there is little to show for it except a bigger government. The extra tax isn't the problem but in ten years the tax will still be there but the service it was meant to create will be cut create an even bigger government

[Joey]

Yes. So after this tax hike on the rich, you would oppose any additional tax hike.

More the merrier at Raptors games! Good for them and good for Justin! I'm all for lower tax rates on the middle class, the poor AND the rich. I guess it's just that last one we differ on, maybe one day we won't lol.

Even if I were making $500,000 I would still happily give more, if it meant a better education for a child, or a better hospital stay for someone who is sick, or an extra bed at a shelter for someone who is cold; assuming my family was taken care of, and if I'm making $500,000 you can bet they would be, then by all means.

[Snooch]

Yeah? Well I like T-bone steaks, fancy cars, designer clothes and fancy houses. And I'm willing to work to get them. I sacrifice so I can earn a living that is conducive to th life style I chose to live. So sue me. I like working hard, earning money, saving some, and blowing some. I like buying expensive things and going for expensive steak dinners, I like sitting lower bowl at raptors games and drinking $15 beers.

Maybe one day I'll be as noble as you Snooch.

As far as the tax credits, someone that earns 200k likely pays the equivalent of your salary in taxes. If they get any credits back (of their own money) of course it will be more than what you get because they paid more.

You are making it sound as though all of a sudden you are going to be taxed 70% more. We are talking about a 2% increase here. that is all. 2%. on 300K a year.

But, you are very fortunate to have been able to get yourself into a situation where you can make lots of money whereas that is not always an option for others. Although, I find it kind of crazy that someone straight out of highschool can go out west and make twice what I make as an accountant who paid for and still is paying for schooling.

But, Like I said earlier, I could move out west, the entire country could and just completely abandon the east coast and the North. Hell, every profession makes more out there than here.

regardless

I did not have any opportunity to become a doctor or a lawyer and make big salary because it was not possible due to financial reasons. I worked and payed my way through Community College and followed up from there. I work hard for my money, I like having nice things, I want fancy cars too...or at least to be able to buy winter tires for the one that I have. And I feel it is not fair for a person making 300K a year to be able to hide money and end up paying proportionally lower taxes than me, all while receiving an equal amount of the benefits given out by the government.

Someone making that kind of salary is easily able to max out both RRSP and TFSA rooms, get kids involved in all the tax credit programs etc. those more than offset the additional 1.5 percent, especially considering that others are doing with far less.

[Snooch]

Asking the government to find 4% in savings so they don't have to take my 4% should be just as easy then. Unless you think the government runs at optimal efficiency when it comes to spending tax payers hard earned money.

I don't want to sit 500 level. I work and sacrifice so I can sit lower level, because I like it.

You still never answered, at what point is it enough? If I make 300K. What percentage of my income should go to taxes? What is the max number you think is "fair"?

after credits an equal portion to mine.

Unless our country and her people need more.

[Bendit]

Canada is already a high personal income tax country but unlike Scandinavian countries there is little to show for it except a bigger government. The extra tax isn't the problem but in ten years the tax will still be there but the service it was meant to create will be cut create an even bigger government

There is no question in my mind that the bureacratic model of large government has to change. There is much too much waste especially from bloat of expansion to manage certain new initiatives which after completion still retain the same numbers of employees and management. A private entity would/could never operate that way.

[Axel]

There is no question in my mind that the bureacratic model of large government has to change. There is much too much waste especially from bloat of expansion to manage certain new initiatives which after completion still retain the same numbers of employees and management. A private entity would/could never operate that way.

Private entity is supposed to make money. Government is supposed to make life better for people in the country.

[Snooch]

They aren't being asked, first of all. They're being forced.

And "rich" people are constantly demonized! Are you kidding me? Just listen to the tone of the people that support taxing the rich. My goodness you'd think they stole everything they have from blind children and the elderly.

actually, the only major complaints and irrational accusations are coming from those falling into the new tax bracket who are going to have to pay the additional 4% tax.

But I can tell you, that 1.5% savings for me will mean the difference between me putting my daughter in Dance Lessons like she has been begging me for without having to take on a second job.

[Snooch]

There is no question in my mind that the bureacratic model of large government has to change. There is much too much waste especially from bloat of expansion to manage certain new initiatives which after completion still retain the same numbers of employees and management. A private entity would/could never operate that way.

I agree, the government is bloated, and alot of resource gets wasted.

I hope that Trudeau's implicated words hold true that he wants to start to remedy that.

Government needs to run like a business, imo.

[Uncle_Si]

So you're implying that that $400 every 2 weeks, of your $250,000 a year salary, is going to be the difference between your family being happy and not happy? Sounds like someone needs a financial planner.

And no one is saying they're not hard working, or providing a service to the country. Sure they are. But that just means they are in a better position to assist the government in bettering our country, then asking someone who makes $45,000 per year to do so.

You're not factoring in what the person that makes 250K already pays in taxes. that's an additional 10K over what they are already paying. Would you be OK with a 4% deduction in pay for doing the same job?

Its not the difference between a family being happy or not happy, but I might be the difference in building up a retirement fund, or buying a cottage, or maybe a car, or family trip. And I realize that you don't care about any of that but some people do. And they are not bad people for it. They have personal goals in their own lives that they want to achieve, it pushes the country forward. And no I don't think it should be done at the cost of the poor, but I also don't think that taxing the rich to give to the poor accomplishes that anyway.

[Uncle_Si]

Private entity is supposed to make money. Government is supposed to make life better for people in the country.

I disagree. Government is supposed to create an environment for people to make a better life for themselves, so they aren't dependent on the Government. If you depend on the government to make life better for you, you are in for a world of pain.

[Uncle_Si]

actually, the only major complaints and irrational accusations are coming from those falling into the new tax bracket who are going to have to pay the additional 4% tax.

But I can tell you, that 1.5% savings for me will mean the difference between me putting my daughter in Dance Lessons like she has been begging me for without having to take on a second job.

I'm all for lowering your tax bracket and I'm happy that your daughter will get dance lessons that she's been begging for. But I'm sorry, I don't think that someone else should have to pay for your daughters dance lessons, which is essentially what is happening. Your tax burden is being passed on to someone else.

If the Government ran efficiently and wasn't bloated, as you pointed out in another post, none of this would be necessary. Except that it would be under a Liberal Gov. because no matter what "rich" people pay in taxes, its never fair and its never enough because they don't need it anyway.

[Joey]

You're not factoring in what the person that makes 250K already pays in taxes. that's an additional 10K over what they are already paying. Would you be OK with a 4% deduction in pay for doing the same job?

Its not the difference between a family being happy or not happy, but I might be the difference in building up a retirement fund, or buying a cottage, or maybe a car, or family trip. And I realize that you don't care about any of that but some people do. And they are not bad people for it. They have personal goals in their own lives that they want to achieve, it pushes the country forward. And no I don't think it should be done at the cost of the poor, but I also don't think that taxing the rich to give to the poor accomplishes that anyway.

As I said, I would've voted Liberal either way, so with that in mind, I would accept whatever tax implications came with it. Even if it meant readjusting my goals. A better government offering a more environmentally responsible policy, and looking out for those teachers, and nurses, and single mothers and fathers, and offering a better future for myself, and my future children means far more to me than achieving some arbitrary personal financial goal like buying a boat. Not to say that makes someone who wants a boat any less of a good person, but it certainly does speak to their priorities in life.

But again, its not about "taking" and "giving". Its about shifting the responsibility from those who CAN afford to shoulder it, from those who CAN NOT.

[Axel]

I disagree. Government is supposed to create an environment for people to make a better life for themselves, so they aren't dependent on the Government. If you depend on the government to make life better for you, you are in for a world of pain.

And how do you create that environment? By investing in education, health care, infrastructure and innovation. It's not a direct to pocket link.

[Uncle_Si]

You are making it sound as though all of a sudden you are going to be taxed 70% more. We are talking about a 2% increase here. that is all. 2%. on 300K a year.

But, you are very fortunate to have been able to get yourself into a situation where you can make lots of money whereas that is not always an option for others. Although, I find it kind of crazy that someone straight out of highschool can go out west and make twice what I make as an accountant who paid for and still is paying for schooling.

But, Like I said earlier, I could move out west, the entire country could and just completely abandon the east coast and the North. Hell, every profession makes more out there than here.

regardless

I did not have any opportunity to become a doctor or a lawyer and make big salary because it was not possible due to financial reasons. I worked and payed my way through Community College and followed up from there. I work hard for my money, I like having nice things, I want fancy cars too...or at least to be able to buy winter tires for the one that I have. And I feel it is not fair for a person making 300K a year to be able to hide money and end up paying proportionally lower taxes than me, all while receiving an equal amount of the benefits given out by the government.

Someone making that kind of salary is easily able to max out both RRSP and TFSA rooms, get kids involved in all the tax credit programs etc. those more than offset the additional 1.5 percent, especially considering that others are doing with far less.

1. No I'm not, Im saying that if they already pay 60% and now they're moving closer to 70% at what point is it enough?

2. You find it crazy that someone right out of highschool can go out west and make more money than you as an accountant? Ok, then don't be an accountant and go out west. You have that same option, no one said you can't go and do the same thing. You made a personal choice to be an accountant, you can't look at what someone else makes and say "that doesn't make sense" or "that's not fair" when you yourself are not willing to do the same thing they did. It was never an "option" for me. It was a goal, people don't just decide they are going to make X income and get it.

3. I don't know that people earning 300K "hide money" or that they end up paying proportionately lower taxes than you. There is a place for sound financial planning and paying the least amount of taxes though. Especially if it is investment income.

If someone wanted to be a doctor or lawyer that bad they could sacrificeda year or 2 out of highschool, go out west, make as much money as possible and pay their way through the schooling they needed. It's not easy, its not for everyone and I know its not always the most convenient or ideal way to do things but its at least a way.