*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.
Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds
CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ---->
  |
|
Page 3 of 3
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 5:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Mark L wrote: | | Get more of your taxes from corporations who do not employ Canadians then give those that do a break. |
In order for that to be a viable plan there must be corporations that do not employ Canadians. Can you provide some examples please?
| Quote: | | They in turn will be more prone to hire Canadians and thus our tax based will have been replenished. |
What evidence do you have to support that? How is this any different from corporate welfare where governments hand over millions or billions of taxpayer dollars to entice corporations to re-locate / remain? |
|
|
|
 |
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark L wrote: | | I also suggested that those companies, both big and small, should pay less tax if they produce their goods within Canada, thus employing Canadians who will pay taxes. You gave some ridiculous rebuttal of a $59.99 DVD player. |
Ah yes the ridiculous rebuttal that pretty clearly illustrates why companies are producing less and less in Canada.
We have nearly no nationalistic pride when it comes to locally made product, every company that has marketed a more expensive product under the "Made in XXXX" has failed miserably.
Why would a company build product in Ontario for a menial tax break when their competition pays a tariff and still offers a product at 1/3 the cost?
If consumers of this nation put any sort of value on a "Made in Canada" product then by all means, but they don't.
| Mark L wrote: | | the best you can offer to sway votes toward Tim Who-dat? er . . . . I mean Hudak? If so, you best re examine your priorities. I am not your problem pal. Your agenda is. |
That one actually had had me laughing out loud,
I have been by far one of Hudak's harshest critics, have a look at any thread in this forum, actually don't. It would further derail your futile attempt to paint some sort of silly "Secret Conservative Agenda"
By all means don't vote for him, I sure won't.
The Tories are hugging the center, they tried that last time and they failed.
Perhaps the three elections lost to the Liberals with three different leaders will finally get through to them.
| Mark L wrote: | | You mention this over and over again in an attempt to justify more taxation on the middle and working classes so that there is less upon corporations - even those who exploit third world labour yet peddle their goods here. |
Historically what happens when taxes are raised on business?
Job creation reduces, and personal income tax and sales tax revenue plummet.
Ontario in 1995, British Columbia in the late 1990's, Saskatchewan in the early part of the 2000's, Manitoba & Nova Scotia today.
You talk about a scenario which doesn't exist.
Taxing business both large and small to produce product in this country that no one will pay a premium to consume?
Where has that worked?
I am so tired of text book theory solutions which have zero merit in reality.
| Mark L wrote: | | Guess we won't be hearing any argument against the HST from the conservatives this election. |
Have we heard an argument from any of the opposition parties in BC or Ontario about repealing the HST?
Yikes, you are naive.
This is the Liberals & the GST/NAFTA in 1993 all over again.
Both these provinces need the revenue, be it rightly or wrongly taken from a consumption tax,
I suspect the NDP and Progressive Conservatives will talk tough about the HST, but I would be greatly surprised if either came out in favor of repealing it.
The fact that neither party has made that commitment after spending a year fighting against it all but confirms that.
I hate to say it,
But you are stuck with the HST no matter which party or combination or parties gets elected in 2011, the best you can hope for is a reduction in it on June 1st 2012 which is the first day it can be reduced under the MoA with the Federal Government.
| Mark L wrote: | | the idea came from the federal Conservatives who, some years ago, also brought you the GST and Free Trade which has your job posted in China all while corporate profits shy rocketed. " Of course, that'd be pretty hard to fit onto an election sign. Therefore, some of us will have to help get that message out for the conservatives. Glad to help out. |
As I recall NAFTA passed under the Liberals in 1993 after they ran against it?
But that is neither here nor there, just an example of the principals of the left.
Be against a good idea, let the good idea pass, then take credit for the good idea once its seen as a good idea.
Much like the Liberals somehow being credited for Canada's bank stability even though the Bank Act was passed in 1991.
Ah yes, the threat that my job will be outsourced because of "evil" free trade. The ultimate empty threat.
The year prior to NAFTA Canada's employment rate was 57.9% (1993).
After all the protests and screaming and yelling that went on about how evil free trade was and how all our jobs would be outsourced to Mexico we find that ten years later Canada's employment rate is 62.4%, and we see the highest employment rate in Canadian history occur just five years after that,
Heck even in 2009 at the height of one of the worst recessions in decades we still find the rate higher then it was the year prior to NAFTA.
The average Family income in Canada went from 56,200 in 1993 to 66,600 ten years later.
Yeah, we have been in such a funk since NAFTA.
Yet I keep being told how bad a deal it is, yet I never see any data to back it up?
| Mark L wrote: | | Get more of your taxes from corporations who do not employ Canadians then give those that do a break. |
Such as?
Of Canada's top ten largest domestic corporations none of which have less then a 50% Canadian employed base, and if I back out the two oil giants that number jumps to nearly 70%.
Most of the manufacturing in this country is as a result of foreign companies doing business here. General Motors, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Siemens etc etc.
How exactly do you force a company headquartered elsewhere in the world to employ more Canadian labour? Threaten to shut them out of our mighty 32m consumer market?
| Mark L wrote: | | There’s enough right there to get started on. Get Tim on the horn and get to work. Same old same old is not going to cut it this time around. |
This is where you and I are tragically on the same page. (shocking)
The Liberals will not be re-elected in October of next year, my fear however is the election of Progressive Conservative party that is no different then the Liberals they will be replacing.
The same old is not going to work, however the "new" that you and I seem to be angling for are on very different extremes.
Last edited by cosmostein on Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Northern Ontario Tory wrote: |
What evidence do you have to support that? How is this any different from corporate welfare where governments hand over millions or billions of taxpayer dollars to entice corporations to re-locate / remain? |
Its the double sided meaning Northern Ontario Tory,
When Conservatives do it,
Its called Corporate Welfare.
Harris did it in 1996 and created one the largest growth periods in Ontario history, and he was a shill to Corporations,
Jean Chretien effectively did the same thing, and it was called creative job creation.
I seem to remember a factory opening somewhere in Ontario where the federal minister of labour was in attendance (Alfonso Gagliano? I believe) as was Ernie Eves.
Its amazing how different the story read,
The Liberals were working within NAFTA to find creative ways to find Canadians high paying sustainable jobs by working with American Car builds,
Whereas the Conservatives were selling out Ontario to Corporate interests.
Honestly I don't care what you call it, as long as it creates jobs.
Last edited by cosmostein on Mon Oct 25, 2010 2:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Mark L
Joined: 07 Oct 2010
Posts: 14
  
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Northern Ontario Tory wrote: | | Mark L wrote: | | Get more of your taxes from corporations who do not employ Canadians then give those that do a break. |
In order for that to be a viable plan there must be corporations that do not employ Canadians. Can you provide some examples please?
It's called "out sourcing". With all due respect to the question, have you not heard of this? Yes, I can provide examples: Go out and buy just about anything then check the product information. They used to joke about all things made in Japan. Now you'd be lucky if it were a Japanese product. The point is, we can produce products right here and maintain the capitalistic trend we are presently on. However, those capitalists who take it that further step, that is, to sell here while exploiting off shore slave labour, should either be disqualified from selling here (as it does nothing to generate domestic growth) or be subject to a greatly increased tax on their profits. This is something I've suggested time and time again to this other blogger but he or she is simply interested in maintaining corporate profits and share holder growth. What happens to that when no one can afford to buy anything?
| Quote: | | They in turn will be more prone to hire Canadians and thus our tax based will have been replenished. |
What evidence do you have to support that? How is this any different from corporate welfare where governments hand over millions or billions of taxpayer dollars to entice corporations to re-locate / remain? |
What evidence? Well, in a word, logistics. First of all, this would not be a scenario in which goverment "hands over" millions or billins of taxpayers dollars. It's simply a reduction in corporate tax for those who hire Canadian. Companies have moved production over seas to avoid the cost of domestic labour and taxes (e.g. they are spoiled fat cats who want it all). If we at least offer up a lower tax rate in exchange for hiring domestic based labour at reasonable wage they "might" be inclined to do business here the way they once did - before Mulroney's Free Trade that is. This in turn will temporarily stave off the impending class revolt that is inevitable.
It would seem that it is the right that is bringing on the class struggle that Marx wrote of. I see so much of what he predicted coming to reality now. I'd prefer to avoid this. However, the corporate agenda with their drones on hand appear even now to be far too cemented in their ways to either recongize or prevent this. I think it's too late. You need only read the other blogger still commenting on this blog to understand what I and others are pointing out.
The masses have the vote and they are not a happy bunch of campers. If Who-dat (Hudak) does not come up with something very creative and believable, I think we could end up with another Liberal government in this province. I think a Liberal minority is likely. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 3 of 3
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Tim Hudak to scrap eco-tax if elected |
|
phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB |
|
