[Newsbot]

Title: Revenue neutral: Does the promised middle class tax cut really add up'
Category: Business
Posted By: N_Fiddledog
Date: 2015-12-05 10:38:42
Canadian

[andyt]

$1:

Those earning between about $45,000 and $89,000 will see a savings of up to $670 per year under the new plan.

Well no. Anybody earning 89k but less than 200k will save $670 a year. Farking reporters.

And what is the suggestion here? More trickle down shit? Keep taxes low on the !% and it will benefit everybody?

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

$1:

Those earning between about $45,000 and $89,000 will see a savings of up to $670 per year under the new plan.

Well no. Anybody earning 89k but less than 200k will save $670 a year. Farking reporters.

And what is the suggestion here? More trickle down shit? Keep taxes low on the !% and it will benefit everybody?

It's pretty clear.

The plan is supposed to be revenue neutral. It appears it's going to cost 4 billion.

Must have been a rounding error.

This is what happens when you make policy during a campaign without proper costing.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cdhowe- ... -1.3348755

[andyt]

So then, better to not do the tax cut right? I mean you, with your 200k+ income will be better off that way.

[2Cdo]

andyt andyt:

So then, better to not do the tax cut right? I mean you, with your 200k+ income will be better off that way.

Exactly and I'll spend more money thus paying more sales tax for all levels of government. Speaking of income, I've made more than $100,000 since July andy. That's more than you've made in the last 10 years or so.

[Thanos]

Don't taunt him. Him and his friends will figure out a way to "allow" you to keep maybe $10K of that while the rest of it goes towards the interests of The People! (trademark). There's as many Liberals out there as Dippers who think anyone who makes more than $40K a year counts as "rich" which means guys like you (and your bank accounts) are right in their crosshairs.

[Lemmy]

Revenue neutral is a pretty low bar.

[2Cdo]

Thanos Thanos:

Don't taunt him. Him and his friends will figure out a way to "allow" you to keep maybe $10K of that while the rest of it goes towards the interests of The People! (trademark). There's as many Liberals out there as Dippers who think anyone who makes more than $40K a year counts as "rich" which means guys like you (and your bank accounts) are right in their crosshairs.

40k a year is an unattainable dream of andys, I make almost that much just with my pension.

[Jin-Gitaxias]

I've never understood why so much of the tax burden is placed on the middle class. Some people have billions of dollars. Am I just crazy? Hardly anyone seems to realize just how much a billion is.

Yeah, this is where my left-wing sympathies come into play.

[martin14]

Jin-Gitaxias Jin-Gitaxias:

I've never understood why so much of the tax burden is placed on the middle class. Some people have billions of dollars. Am I just crazy? Hardly anyone seems to realize just how much a billion is.

Yeah, this is where my left-wing sympathies come into play.

The people who have billions also have the ears of the politicians.


The middle class pays because:

They can afford it.
They won't complain in a useful way.
They won't be able to generate any sympathy if things get tough for them.
They can't organize themselves.
They have been bred to be non violent.

[andyt]

Because as was just explained to us by the CD Howe institute, if you raise taxes on the rich they just find tax avoidance schemes or move to a different country. And they can afford to hire good lawyers to argue against the CRA.

Also, they are the job givers, so we have to keep them happy.

In the US, the richest 20 people own more money than the bottom half of the country, ie 150 million people. Some argue the rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. It would be interesting to see if these 20 people paid as much tax collectively as those 150 million people.