Should the ultra-rich pay more taxes?

"Posted by: Claude | Jan 7, 2022 11:42:03 AM

Forget taxing anybody, income taxes we're only suppose to be for the war effort, that's over remember, no taxes I say, consumer taxes only, taxes would be balanced on income then. Purchase a luxury yatch pay the taxes, purchase a canoe pay the taxes, everything is balanced.
Rich or Poor."

Claude, you are totally out of touch with reality. The economic situation has changed dramatically, so with taxing, if you took away income tax, can you imagine how much sales tax etc. would be?
Canadian infrastructure costs is possibly the highest in the world in Canada, for many reasons. One of which is the cost to support a wide infrastructor in a physically large country with relatively few population.

I believe those who make more should be taxed more percentage wise. A real study needs to be done to find out what the minimum cost to live is, and go from there. Realistically, raising a family with 2 children takes a minimum of 50 000. Why should anyone have to pay income tax at that level? Retail taxes, ok, but even there it is high. Waste at the government level has to stop, but I guess I am looking up a pipe dream there.

"Yeah, listen to Warren Buffett, he's smarter than the rest of you schmucks."

Really? Really? Sure Warren Buffet maybe smart when it comes to personal finances and investments, but public policy including tax policy? He's as much of a schmuck as you are!

Warren Buffet when he made that comment was only speaking to his own personal circumstances. The so called "ultra-rich" do include corporations filing income tax as well. Making 24 or 25 million per year does NOT mean that you are NOT in bankruptcy and in need of CCAA or that you are facing a stiff challenge from competitors whose fixed costs are substantially lower than yours. In this latter case, closing down shop and looking to reduce said fixed costs (ie. a lower tax jurisdiction) in latin America, India, perhaps soon Africa (50 some odd countries), is not out of the question, and if enough US based companies do this, a 9 point something per cent unemployment rate would begin to soar!

So cut this "eat the rich" class-war/penis envy rubbish! When you punish companies thru taxes you punish workers, potential workers and consumers who need their products alike! Mr. Obama isn't going find work for the millions of Americans looking for paychecks, it's those "evil" corporations who we foolishly depict as being run by these shady "Enron-style" "Montgomery Burns"-like characters.

So lets everybody cut the rhetoric and take a deep breath. The free market with all of its warts is far superior to the alternatives!

I understand where many of you are coming from. Better than most in fact. Growing up, my parents didn't have much to start with. Only my dad worked, and it was in forestry and he lost his job when I was 13. We had 4 kids in the family. We went on social assistance. I saw what it did to my parents. To my family. Never enough food, shortly after I went to University my parents lost the house. I finished school with big loans to pay. I will be the first to stand up and say social assistance benefits are notwhere near high enough.

I now make enough that last year I paid more in taxes than most of you will ever earn in a year in total. That doesn't even include the money I donate to foodbanks, the United Way ect. I know my family needed them, and I know others do and I have no problem donating. But that is MY choice and it should be my CHOICE. How much more should I be forced to pay ? I have no kids, but I have a nice house so I pay a decent chunk to education...again I used it when I was younger so no complaints. But there are limits.

I am an Accountant. I can easily find work anywhere in the world. I can take my skills and get similar pay in another country with more favourable tax rates. This is what I mean when I say you cannot keep punishing us (and I am by no means the ultra-rich but the points still stand). Doctors, Engineers, Accountants, Nurses ect are all high paying jobs where you can take your skills and go anywhere. If you make cars you can only work somewhere there is a plant. Same for mining, and forestry and oil. You simply cannot continue to punish us for being successful because you were not to the same degree.

Just because I make more than you does not mean I should have anything above what you earn taken away and shared with you.

I believe we should tax people more in general, at most levels. However, this would not be on earned income but at the purchasing level. We could use higher taxes on purchased items as a deterent for people and tax less earnings so people can save. As a world economy, there is great wealth in many jobs held in North America but we are programmed to spend, spend, spend. One method would be to tax more heavily advertizing, telemarketing and junk mail, items we waste vast resourses on that people typically don't like/enjoy.

Chazz, thanks for that last comment you posted about choice. I agree everyone, rich and poor, should have choice. This is why, I prefer the USA. (I live in Canada because circumstance has put me here.) However, in the USA you have choice in every walk of life. You can buy what you want at a fair price from clothes to food to health insurance. I have a strong belief that every human should be given the choice to work as hard as they want to. The USA fosters that belief system, Canada does not. In the same vein, when you have worked very hard all your life, and achieved success, you should have the right to spend that money how you see fit. I believe most would have a conscience to give to the less fortuante anyway. However, the word that rings true with me is "choice."

diden't anybody play monopoly went they were yong, at the end of the game only one persone had all the money , everyone play the game, was given the same chance, but only one won all the money.that what going on now. the rich have all the wealt. all they have to do is put there money in the bank. you the poor take 25000 dollar lown for 25 year whit interess, and before your done you wiil pay 80 000 thousan dollard to somoneelse. but that persone diden't sweat for it he just had a lot of money. they diden't create anything or made somthing new or gave anybody a job . somone cold argue , the fact you got a lone and built a house or wathever whit it .that they create job.but the fact remane your the one who pade 80 000 dollard in interess on that lone and you created job. and if all the company move and go somwere else .who wlill be left to by there pruduct none of us will have job just make a law you move ta a other country no probleme , but you can only sel you pruduct 100 percent more than it cost you make it somwere else. exampelle pair a jean in china may cost 5 dollard

We must also remember that the rich are also the ones that contribute the most to charities. Without these hugh donations, in most cases these charitable organizations would have to rely on goverment grants for funding. (Tax Dollars)

A Chazztbay: I quoted dictator countries because the article quoted them

"Further, the argument goes, raising tax rates among the rich and their corporations is a sure-fire way to scare North American industry into packing up shop and moving to the Indias and the Chinas of the world. You think unemployment is bad now, big companies appear to be saying, watch what happens when we leave."

This isn't Canada v USA, which is North America, it's developed world with governments nearing bankruptcy and the developing world with governments flush with cash.

A reason is because their citizens don't feel the need to starve government to enrich themselves, eventually government is going to have to stop borrowing and tax at rates to sustain themselves. The ultra rich are the ones who have that cash.

And thinking government wont just take it and instead let tax havens hide the ultra rich (and disloyal), suggests you under appreciate that the USA Federal Government alone owes 14.7 Trillion dollars, they ain't getting that by taxing my paltry 30k a year salary a few percentages higher.

@Chazztbay - This might sound like a flame, but you're personal story written above sounds like you placed yourself on a high perch. You don't even bother to argue that the market is Divine, you suggest that since you won a race, that you should forever be the winner. If are capable of making so much money, why can't you figure out ways to make more to compensate for our punitive tax rates are unbearable?

You imply there was no chance at all in your success. Start on the bottom now, exit school with a simple CGA now and see how far you get. I know oodles of classmates whose designations, yes Nutritionists, CNC guys, Engineers, pre-Meds, who still hear how there's no space available. Watch this for an indication "http://www.pbs.org/newshour/video/module_byid.html?s=news01s46c7q101b"

I can say you worked hard and that you earned success, but you ultra-rich never consider chance as being a element to your success. What if war interrupted your schooling, what if you were maimed in Kabul like so many Canadians today? Would that not effect your economic performance?

And if the wealth was generated within the political economy of Canada, why is it solely your individual CHOICE to determine how it should be distributed? Doesn't the political economy get any rightful say in having it's own CHOICE considered?

And it's pretty easy to create your excess profits when lower labour costs is the answer. Why don't we bring over Indian wealth managers, or Chinese accountants, why don't you compete with their labour as a welder is forced to do now?

Again not a flame, but it seems you succeeded, and therefore conclude all is fair and even in the market, but again why not prove that again by running the race, from the same starting line as everyone else, again?

John, maybe you misunderstood me. I was not insinuating that taxes should be raised on the lower or middle classes. It's just the highest earners already shoulder most of the responsibility to pay and there isn't much room to add more.

I fully agree the debts of most of the Western Nations severely limits their choices. I am not sure what generation you are from, but this is 100% the fault of the baby boomers. They borrowed all that money to lavish programs on themseleves like healthcare, subsidized education, CPP, EI ect. Maybe they thought the bill would never come due, maybe they thought future generations would not also want those programs. I don't know. That generation was able to be the most well off in history because they borrowed all the money to pay for those programs while they saved their own money instead of raising taxes to pay for the programs. Now the next several generations get to pay for their greed.

As far as saying the wealthy have the ability to pay this off, please look at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4276302.stm

The top 400 have a combined net worth of "only" 1.2 Trillion. Yes that is a staggering number, but it pales in comparison to the total debt.

Those developing nations have cash because they do not have the social programs we have. And again we are back to square 1. There is no reasonable argument to suggest a billionaire should give half his wealth to the government for social programs when he or she does not use anywhere near that much of the program resources. There are billionaires in both India and China and the average incomes there are much less than here, and they have far fewer social programs. The wealth gap in those countries is much greater than it is here. Our billionaires pay far more than their fair share right now.

Think of it this way. Would you be okay with giving a homeless person half your salary because he has less than you ? It's the same argument. A wealthy person looks at you and asks why he has to pay for your hospital, school, roads ect.

There really is two sides to this question. I would hazard a guess that the comments for taxing the rich are made by bloggers who have limited themselves due to their attitude and ambition and look for ways to justify their situation. On the other side, there are bloggers who are ambitious and motivated to accomplish more and increases their financial stature. That being said, the fact is the government has gotten to big, they waste money and gain votes by promising the low income masses what they will do for them and how they will take care of them. If you let them they will keep you poor so you need to vote for them. In other countries people don't get to vote and are kept poor. We actually are voting in governments for the same end result - it's sad. We as a society have become too complacent. It is easier for Canadians to suck money from the government then to take lowly jobs. Look at the nationalities of people that own the convenience stores, that take the low paying jobs, that live below the means of most Canadians. They do this because it is much better than in the country they came from. What they are doing is what is right for their families and not just complaining about someone who has more than them. I would also hazard a guess that people in this blog who are complaining, have cell phones, probably better than what they require, if in fact they need one. They probably have a Facebook account that gives the Ultra-Rich more ideas on how to create wealth selling them products they don't need. They probably have a TV, with a monthly cable cost. Do they watch this TV instead of going to the local library and utilize a facility that they pay tax for?If you are so against the rich making money, boycott these luxuries and electronic gizmos that cost you money. Oh, we can't do that we work hard and this is our escape. Rich people have gotten to where they are because they have chosen to serve the masses, instead of serving the classes. If it was the 1950's most of the bloggers here would be carted away and labeled a communist. There should be some choice responses to this blog..............

The super rich are not paying their fair share. Historically the top rates have been much higher, e.g. 1917 - 67 % 1933 - 63 %, 1945- 94 %, 1950 - 84 %, 1960 - 91%, 1970 - 70-%, 1980 -70 %. A reduction in top rates started under the Reagan Administration, from 50 % down to 28 % rising again under Bush Sr/Clinton years, to 39.6 %, to pay down the Reagan deficits, and down again under Bush Jr., 35 % as of 2003, in spite of the Bush Jr. declaration that the US was at war. Rates were high during times of war recession and depression to help get the country through economic adversity but this trend stopped under Reagan and Bush Jr. And for now under Obama. The average worker around the world is not getting paid any where near what they are worth and corporations are profiting by it. Money moves to low wage countries regardless of tax rates. The US cannot deal with its debt and deficit problems without a significant increase in taxation to the super rich and a major reduction in its military commitments around the world.

John, I don't take that as a flame. I sincerely hope you do not take what I said as such either. I am a rational person (I think) and am certainly open to hearing the ideas and thoughts of others.

I fully admit that being extremely wealthy (I am not) does take a certain degree of luck. Bill Gates is the richest man in the world, but if his parents could not afford to buy time on the computer in University (akin to someone today being able to rent a plane for their childs' flight lessons) he certainly would not be. You cannot move up in your job if the person who holds the position you want never leaves. Someone finding gold, oil or other minerals is luck. Buying property or stocks, even though risk can be reduced can not be considered guaranteed so yes you can call that luck too. I can turn that around somewhat however and say that you are already lucky since you live in Canada and not somewhere like Bangladesh or Somalia. What if we held an exchange program and randomly chose people to switch places with people in those countries ? Would you go without at least raising some objections ?

I didn't claim the system is perfect, nor do I claim to have the fix (or I would be one of those billionaires). I am simply trying to encourage discussion and asking to people to view both sides and not just the one they are on.

The right answer has always been - a flat tax.

If Bob makes twice as much $ as John, then Bob should pay twice as much $tax as John paid. If John paid $20k in tax, Bob should pay $40k... end of story. This is common sense.

Asking Bob to pay 3x as much as John paid will slowly destroy our entreprenurial spirit and our productivity.

Of course the ultra-rich should pay far more. There is no justification for this extreme level of income inequality. In fact, it has been shown to be highly damaging to society by undermining democracy and contributing to various social problems. Everyone should read the new book "The Trouble with Billionaires" by Linda McQuaig and Neil Brooks.

My generation is the most educated in history yet our incomes are the same or lower than what our parents made at our age, while that of high-income earners has skyrocketed. We need to look at how successful the economy was in the post-war years. Equality and prosperity went hand-in-hand. Since then only the rich have prospered at all. People should be angry about this!

My problem is with large corporations and their disgusting compensation packages for the executives. Those are the people we need to be brought down a peg or so. Not by taxing them more, but by regulating some sort of pay scale that their pay should be tied to actual results (and laying people off to get numbers does not constitute results!)

These "I rub your back and you rub mine" attitude of executives, and the boards they sit on, have gotten out of control, and it is the workers and consumers who are suffering. If you are not giving the workers an adequate pay increase, how can they justify one amongst themselves? This is what is causing the big gap between the middle class and the rich. And if those people want to move south or over to Europe to keep making those big bucks, good ridance. That opens up positions that skilled workers with actual experience in their company could fill, and they would be happy with 25% of what those executives are taking home now.

TAX THEM TO THE TOP!!!!!!!
I agree most of these self centered CEOS and CFOS have not earned their way to the top.
they stroll in to work at 10 11 am and start dictating, then its liquid lunch at 12-2 pm come back sloshed and irritable. ive seen it many times..

So what if Bill Gates etc gave money to schools etc. How does that help me as a middle class guy. Cost of housing, gas, hydro, food etc all keep on shooting up, does my salary go up??? The Corporations keep on asking us to work overtime, and most of the times we are not even paid overtime. We have to do it to keep our jobs. Where does all the money go. In the pockets of the rich guys in forms of dividends, stocks, inflated bonuses etc.
So really these top rich guys can get away with blackmails. You tax us higher we move to China, India??
The Govt. said by implementing HST it will create more jobs and cost of products should have come down as the companies get reimbursed for the full tax amount. But guess what, didn't see any increase in jobs. The cost of products increased.
A person running a small business like a realtor can write off his car expenses. Why can't we?? We use it to go to work too. A realtor can run around in a bus for what I care.
A doctor shouldn't be taxed higher as its essential. Everything is essential. I have studies hard, worked hard. Not wanting to be a doctor so what's the big deal. Can a doctor do my job? I created all their softwares and hardwares with which helps them to perform all the miracles. So my job is essential too. Without my knowledge doctors would still be in stone age.

it doent seem right right that one person can make millions in a year and thier business can also receive government hand outs while another working person scrambles to pay for basic medical coverage , this is from a Britsh Columbia government web site " HST will save buinesses about two billion " in tax savings who has this short fall of taxes been passed on to but us "consumers.. " take a look at the the Bc Hydro web site a buiness can receive up a million dollar FREE to upgrade their electical system
Corparation and big business get massive hand outs every year private business do have a place in our society but they are not our saviors and its time this is realized ..

Greg, you have no idea about what you are talking about. CEO's do work hard, at least most of them. If the CEO of my company, which has a revenue of about $800 billion per year, behaved the way you described, we would not survive. I come to work when I feel like it, sometimes I sleep in to 10:00 am. I am not in management. My company lets me work at home and I have no supervisor staring over my shoulder. Yet, I produce results and make huge amounts of money for my company, and I mean HUGE. I get paid accordingly and get stock optinjs and other perks that would make you choke. My income tax last year was the lowest ever at $96,048. The only reason it was this low was that I have hired a terrific financial planner to find tax shelters for me. Sometimes I wonder why I should work this hard, just to see so much of my hard earned money taken as taxes. Sometimes I wonder if I should just beome like you and sink into mediocity, but eventually I come to my senses. I'd rather be taxed to the hilt than be at the bottom, and griping at how the rich or "well off" are sooooo lucky (which, by the way the are not. They just work harder and especially smarter). It seems that we live in a society where the smart people and gifted people are ridiculed and penalized for their talent.