Finally, DID you get this idea on your own Richard?

Or did you see the clue I dropped about 18 hours ago on the 1st BIG STORY thread?

Sorry, 19 hours ago for anyone who cares to check.

These corporations have no soul or conscience and as far as I'm concerned should be nationalized now because their bottom line is total greed$$$$ and screw the consumers, US.
There should be a unified total boycott of all their products and show them that the PEOPLE have the power to put them down! Then maybe the shareholders will make their lords accountable.

Arar inquiry
When I was a kid the RCMP were my heroes because they "Always got their man/woman" Lately their head honcho refuses to step down and all the negative publicity about them "RCMP" is like the Gestapo tactics 60 years ago, something for us to be worried about!

I find this story amazing, both because our federal government did the right thing for the good of the citizens of the country and because a Conservative government is making a law whose largest potential downside will be felt by its supporters. Maybe there's hope for our country after all!

I think we need to check yesterdays trading history to see who they forewarned.

Or maybe we need to check the trading history today to see who's shorting the IT's.

Personally, I took a loss as a result of this announcement, and when someone loses, someone else wins.

I would like to know who won so I can acheive some form of payback.

The average Canadian taxpayer won. And it's about time.

You bet the average taxpayer won. This move was long overdue. I just wish the Grits had had the guts to follow through last year. Even if they lost the election on the issue, they would have done the right thing for the country.

All the other G8 countries have moved to stem the tide of companies converting to income trusts.

This is the only move I've liked so far from the Conservatives.

This is going to cost me money, dammit, but it does seem like the proper course for government to take.

Odd that the Tories would bite the hand that feeds them. Perhaps this is part of a backroom deal with another party that will make it possible for some other legislation to pass.

Anybody know something I don't?

What I find interesting in all of this comes from the observations of the groups (political parties) as they stand in opposition.

While 'in government' and therefore under the influence of Federal employees in the CCRA branch, both the LIEberals and CONformers have revealed they only listen to their employees.

The 'yes minister' crowd quietly whisper that the 'income trusts' are not being taxed. OR that they can be taxed 'differently' and therefore spare the ordinary Canadian the cost of paying the tax on the income from the dividend trust.

The money lost was to CCRA, a gangster-like money laundering organization that practices 'legal' extorsion and shakedowns of people, quietly under the guise of 'law'. This is the same group that has managed to come up with $13 BILLION (with a B) in excessive taxation!

There are many models of governance, I am going to point out three that revolve around the idea that the 'government' is like a company providing a service to its customers 'citizens'.

If a government is owned by a single entity it comes off like Brunei, where profits are taken for the benefit of the owner (the Sultan) and the services are minimized to the level that the citizen customers can accept without revolt - or emigration.

If a government is owned by its customers, then the services are maximized and profits are minimized as the citizens take their 'profit' in the form of services from the company 'government'.

If a government is owned by its employees, then the services are 'rationed', just like the single owner model, to the point where they are as minimal as possible while avoiding revolt or excessive emigration. The profits are then converted into benefits to those employee 'owners'. Witness the expansion of the federal civil service, the power of their union lobby, the endless addition of more and more layers of bureaucracy and the total inability to 'fire' any of these mandarins.

These self-same persons are the ones that generate the materials used in analysis by governance, so they will always show what is in the best interest of those employee 'owners'.

This is why both the LIEberals then the CONformers have pursued this revenue source, and will do so with others, until we finnaly stop accepting it and see those mandarins fired.

Until the pink-slips are handed out with forklifts in Ottawa nothing will change.

As much as it pains me to say it - the Tories did the right thing, and it hurt them much more than it would have hurt the Grits who should have done it.

Now don't get me wrong, I think Harper is the devil incarnate, but this move is gutsy and bold. . . or maybe, not so bold, it may just seem so in stark contrast to the spineless, corrupt and hapless Liberals.

Pundits in the USA talked of a listless and impotent Democratic party (before the Mark Foley scandal), but it seems that this characterization is more appropriate to describe the Grits, who lambasted the Tories for doing the right thing. I would normally consider myself a grit, but am ashamed to say that today. Will be interesting to see if any of the potential grit leaders have the balls to break from the party line and recognize this move for what it is: a good thing for Canadians.

Don't give them too much credit. The tax changes won't affect existing income trusts until 2011. The market will take an initial hit but the increase in exemptions for retired people will more than cover any loses for them. The economy just couldn't afford it if big companies like BCE and Telus started to take advantage of income trust treatment - especially over the lost taxation on shares held by foreigners.

In the end, if businesses actually hang on to retained earnings (which they couldn't do as trusts) it will be a short term hit to equity values anyway.

The Liberals looked like idiots in the House today.

not amused:

So far, as with everything else the conservatives have "done", they have talked a good fight.............

The little guy didn't win. This is a tradeoff between bigger tax cuts for the rich coming down the pike. Us lefties don't understand business or finance, so we have been screaming for the trust "loophole" to be closed. But the Conservatives' real plan is to end capital gains taxes - a huge tax break for the rich - and they can back that plan wholeheartedly because they are appearing "tough" on income trusts. In the end, investors get hurt on the trusts, but the big players get a big break because of future capital gains tax cuts.

Tbarnston
I suppose it's possible that the conmen would reduce the taxation (50% of what is paid on ordinary income) on capital gains or eliminate it entirely, but I don't think so.

I honestly think they realized the negative consequences for tax revenue if big integrated highly capitalized and broadly held companies like BCE and Telus moved to become income trust vehicles. The only way to keep tax revenues overall at a level necessary to fund the kinds of projects the conservatives may have in mind (especially given the increase in expenditures on the military) is to keep enough bucks rolling in to the treasury.
As the share of total tax revenue provided by corporations drops - assuming total government budgetary expenditures is either level or increasing at 4 - 5 % per year the only place the conmen could turn to is an increase in taxes on ordinary working people.

Harper knows that would be anathema to his base and, in the end, this change isn't really going to hurt him much with the business and corporate folks in the short term (after today's hit) since the bite won't really begin until 5 years from now on existing income trust structures.

I think, although I'm about as far left as you can get, it was a brilliant move. Far smarter than the changes Goodale tried to bring to the sector a year ago last spring...which have turned out to be a huge failure.

As for people with these trusts in their RRSP portfolios, they may see a short term loss from stock value reductions and , for a year or two some reduction in dividend returns as well. However, corporations will once again be able to hang on to retained earnings (which wasn't the case with the trust treatment) and in the long term this may be good for reinvestment in Canada as well.

All in all, as much as I hate to say it, the first good move these turkeys have made.

In the sense that government revenues would have been hit harder if more vehicles became income trusts, I think working and middle class folks will win in the end because it will be less likely that a general tax increase will be necessary before 2009.

My view.

This is true - but just the statement was enough to stop the pending IT's - so it accomplished the goal of the stopping the trickle from becoming a deluge.

Of course, another use for greater retained earnings is to maybe buy back stock, build-up a war-chest - maybe increase valuation so Canadian companies can stop becoming such vulnerable acquisition targets and maybe do some the acquiring. . . but I fantasize. . .

I don't think many want to return to the days of chronic federal deficits. There still is a lot of debt to be serviced and paid off.

incredulous - at least if the bucks are not out the door there is always a chance! We live in hope.

rotlin

I am not advocating that at all.

I think the federal service employees, especially the ones 'at the top' MUST BE FIRED every time the government changes. Otherwise, only the name of the minister on the door is what is changing, witness the 'flip-flop' of the CONformers here. The 'yes minister' boys in the Finance Ministry have had enough time to make their case to the minister, and the PMO so that the conditions change in their favor!

Regarding the $13 Billion too much taxed, that is just as bad as deficits! IF we were told FROM THE START that this plan was all about paying down DEBT, then fine. Lets do that!

Cut out the stupid expenses!

Like the CBC, like 'official bilingualism', like whole hosts of meaningless mandarins in more ministries than we can count any more.

FIRE THE LOT!

Use the savings to both bay down debt and reduce taxes!

If anyone thought that senators were pigs at the trough, they have nothing compared to the Public Service Employees and the ADM's at the top of those beaurocracies!

It is interesting to see Herr Harper go back so obviously on one of his campaign promises. Clearly it will seal his fate as he has betrayed the oil patch.

Several posters have mentioned that Canadians are overtaxed. Income trusts are a great way of taking money our of the government's hands and into the hands of individual tax payers. Profits from income trusts are still taxed and they are taxed at the highest rate. It is just that the share holder is taxed, not the corporation. Double taxation ceases.

That is pure nonesense. Running a government a little more difficult than spouting drivel on a web board. The dilocation and disorganisation by such an action would create chaos and cost billions.

And G West, you are very astute in your observations. Herr Harper is anything but a fiscal conservative. Given a majority government (shudder) he'll ramp up spending like mad on military hardware as payback to his American masters.

Tax and spend liberals and never the problem.

Borrow, print and spend conservatives are.

G West:

Truly impressed with your epiphanies and your confessions...

When I heard the news, I couldn't wait for the "Washington Post North" ....."Russian Limbpaw" .... ie many un- named TYEE bloggers to editorialize.

No atheists in foxholes...in class warfare or fiscal peacetime , your place in the hereafter is increasingly secured. Consequently, hope springs eternal for the rest...see what a good deed can do?

Congrats.

If they had to close this loophole why did they have to do it like this. It totally reeks of political timing. An announcement of a moritorium on any new Income Trusts until the next budget would not cause the market devaluation this did. Then the government could consult with business and the public (read; prepare the market) and institute changes as part of the new budget. I expect there'll be lots of "Presents" in the next budget and Harper and Co. are going to use that as a lead-in to an election call assuming the publics memory is short.

God dam Garf, all these compliments being bandied about, particularly on your behalf is starting to tug at my heart stings , I think I feel a tear about to drop, yes, yes, I do, oops, its only post nasal drip, oh well my intentions were at least honorable, congrats on your astute observations.

I acually just did some math - this income trust thing presents some real opportunity. These trust are selling for a little less than they should be in 4 years - when the taxes actually kick in.

The units aren't reflecting the 4 years of tax free cash flow! I just doubled down on my position!

When life throws you lemons - make lemonade!!

Bucky,

I agree and I disagree. What he should have done is prevented Telus and BCE from converting. He should have set-up a board whereby corporations must apply for conversion. In many instances, income trusts benefit the corporation, provide immediate cash flow to finance development, which in turn creates jobs, tax revenues, etc. Companies like Yellow Pages would be dying a slow death if it weren't for Income Trusts. The cash flow has kept investors around and as a result, they've been able to migrate to the internet etc.

Though, these companies must have a very valid reason to convert - unlike Telus and Bell - who only cared about dodging taxes.

Finally, they should have exempted energy trusts the same way they did REITs. They should have narrowed what an energy trust is defined as, but this is really dealing a knock-out blow to many junior producers. Trusts are normally around high cost assets. These assets have lower margins than companies like Talisman will touch. However, the tax effect makes it worth-while. As a result, there has been a tonne of economic activity, exploration, drilling, etc. surrounding assets which would have never been drilled had it not been for the tax structure afforded to energy trusts.

This sector is vital to the economy, the investment community, pensioners, etc.

They messed up on this one.

This is like X-Mas for Gavin - the investment community takes one on the chin! He also percieves that there will be more tax dollars for him and his chronies to siphon....

He is wrong - Flaherty wiped out billions in capital gains that will never be taxed. Think about that Gavin! In fact, many people will be taking capital losses and actually deducting these!

He should have put a moratorium on new trusts. He would have kept his promise, preserved gains and not destroyed investor confidence which is vital to the economy.

Working man:
The profits haven't been taxed when the units are held outside the country by foreign investors - no revenue to Canada.

Why do you think there was such a rush yesterday to sell off units in the oil industry?

You missed the whole point of the exercise.

Further, income trust units held in RRSP and pensions portfolios were tax free anyway. You have to read a little more closely between the lines. It was the future damage that the government moved yesterday to prevent.

Mabel,
In the long run, permitting corporations to hang onto retained earnings will be a good thing in itself - as someone else pointed out here yesterday. This is no big deal and investors of the kind you are don't ever help 'build' the country anyway - all you are is a roving gambler.

Who is Gavin? I have no idea who you're writing to.

Not true - there is a 25% witholding tax. Gavin - you clearly don't know anything...

Working Man, misquoted:

was what I wrote in its entirity.

the important part you misquoted was "...every time the government changes."

Darth Cretinous learned the hard way about how difficult it was to get rid of senior civil servants. I think the court cases in Quebec are still either pending or ongoing, all because Cretien had to use rather nasty means to get some of them out of their posts.

If we supposedly elect parliamentarians to make the laws of the land and the Cabinet is to govern, then why do we see the same policies coming out of the PMO, whether the CONformers are in there or the LIEberals? It is because of the mandarins that whisper 'yes minister' in their ears. It is these self-same mandarins that are really running the country, not those we have elected. We have lost any control whatsoever, it is the 'system' that will have its way with us over and over.

The trusts issue threatened an income stream to that cabal known as CCRA, so they are using every trick and tool at their disposal to ensure that the $$$ ends up in their coffers first (so that the needed payoffs to the employee-owners of our nation can be done).

yes and if you don't wipe your bum properly the toilet monster will get you!

what chaos?

Only is the Ottawa real-estate market maybe.

What cost of billions? We are already OVERTAXED by those billions because of the greed of these slimy 'snivvel servants'. With them GONE we do not need to PAY for them anymore!

A smaller federal government is also less likely to interfere with the ordinary Canadian, a smaller federal government will have to concentrate on the real tasks that we, those whom elect them, want them to do.

Less of what the mandarins decide we want them to do.

Cappy - we have a tax treaty with the US - you need to check out the effects of that - the trusts are taxed in the foreign jurisdiction when the terms of the treaty provide for that.

Gavin,

Canada takes a 25% witholding. When an American declares income - he declares the income then takes a foreign tax credit. To put it very simply for you - if the tax rate is 30% - and he's paid 25% to Canada - he would owe another 5%. Thus - the tax treaty.

I know these things - would you like to see my resume?

I know these things too and on income trust payments outside the country Canada makes no net tax gain and that's one of the major reasons the policy is being changed mabel

Arrangements are made, as you well know, to pay out the monthly proceeds in a way that avoids Canadian tax entirely. It's a perfectly legal and simple process and if you know anything about international banking you'll know how its done.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is that corporations paid the equivalent of 60 per cent of all individual taxes collected in the early 1960s, according to national accounts. Since then, the figure has dropped to about 30 per cent. In other words, the relative tax burden on the individual has doubled, while on corporations it has been halved.

If the income trust dodge had been permitted to survive and grow the tax burden on corporations would have reache zero, and, since retained earnings bleed out to the unit holders, investment in new plant and equipment, R&D and new technology would also suffer.

More than a fifth of trust investors live outside Canada and pay only a 15-per-cent withholding tax on their distributions. Compared with what trust holders pay in the foreign country in tax that's a free ride and, by holding the units inside a corporate investment structure the withholding is offset against any available consolidate losses and becomes tax free.

More than a fifth of trust investors live outside Canada and pay only a 15-per-cent withholding tax on their distributions which is LESS than what they'd pay on the income in the foreign country and a lot less than the 30% they'd pay if they lived in Canada. It's the same thing as saying the payoff is tax free relative to this country and represents a 15% tax loss on foreign disbursements.

Gavin,

Everytime you get caught red handed - you try to divert the topic. What does the tax burden have to do with taxing international investors?

You are such a crook. You brag about Sweden and your beloved socialist states. You want to see personal tax burden - look over there! Tax rates on corporations are quite low - personal taxes are sky high.

Contsant rhetoric and hypocricy.

Baloney, you said the withholding was 30%, which it isn't, it's 15 and that is, as I demonstrated less than the tax that the unit holder would pay on the income in Canada. Canada loses the difference between the 15% and the rate the income would generate here - it's billions of dollars out of the economy every year and you know it. And you also know that an astute investor will find a way to reduce that even more.

All cheats and dodges that are not available to the 88 or 90 percent of the hardworking people in this country who do something with their time and their intelligence to build this country. People who aren't sitting around playing games with their stock portfolios.

Denmark's people are the happiest in the world, by a long shot. Surprised?

The effective rate of return on income trust units held by Canadians averages 9% after tax; so for foreign unit holders it's double that. Any question why these dodges are so popular outside the country - especially in the oil and gas industry? You think this sellout should continue?

Just once in the long line of sellouts who've been finance ministers in this country does someone, Flaherty in this case, actually do something to stop the sellout of this country and its resources and capacity for future growth and prosperity to the idle rich and look at guys like you, Capitalism, scream.

Suck it up, it's about time someone made you start to pay a little more for the life of idle privilege you think you've earned.

If only they'd move a little further and start treating capital gains like other income there might be a chance we could make this place into a decent country again where people aren't sleeping in the streets while guys like you brag about your junkets to Vegas.

Hey G West or Capitalism - Seemes like you're either accountants or guys with WAY TOO much time - which is okay. . .

I know this is off-topic on this thread, but your grasps of the Canadian and foreign taxation intracies make me want to ask: can you guys recommend a good accountant? Need some advice about some foreign-held equity in thr form of options listing on London AIM. . .er, sorry to other posters.

We now resume our regular programming

C,mon G West:

( BTW: G.West isn't Danish is it ? )

Not everyone on THIS planet "Officially" works for the Gov't, do not have a safe secure "COLA clause buttressed" Public Pension, and thus does not have access to a safe secure investment vehicle to use towards their own retirement.

The petty little Leftie Ltd. socialist mentality never wants to acknowledge the numerous OTHER cash grabs by Big Brother Ltd.

Sometimes THE best way to help the poor and homeless is first by not beng one yourself, nor your own family ....nor your neighbours.....etc. etc. Then we can look towards solutions, not by dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator..that's been tried elsewhere and failed miserably.

PS you are an admittedly good researcher...check out if the Ontario Teachers(or any Teacher/Public Servants pension funds has any involvement in these Income Trusts. It's a far broader topic than stereotyping / labelling it some neo -con scam. BTW How do you say neo-con in Danish?

Still a good read:
"Behind Closed Doors - How the Rich Took Control of Canada's Tax System" by Linda McQuaig. Might be out of print now, but usually available in libraries and used book stores.

Hey, You don't think a top marginal rate of 15% tax would be an advantage to everyone?

Start taxing all forms of income, however earned, equally, and you'd be surprised how much good we could do maestro. Wise investment decisions are still gonna be around 4 years from now when the new tax rules kick in and the only income trusts left are in real estate (which is the situation in most of the rest of the civilized world now). The sky is not falling and Stephen Harper is still a neoconman.

Personally - I think we should be looking at finding ways to return tax dollars to the people that actually paid them.

Capitalism
As long as the tax system treats all forms of income equitably there would be no complaints, and no free riders. When Gary Bettman is a better avatar of fairness, equity and a level playing field than the people who run the finance departments in the governments in this country that is a sad day for democracy and decency.

Gavin - it is all about the law of averages. In Canada - you add your 1 and my 9 together, we average 5! In Denmark everybody is a 7. The only reason you are a 1, is because it pisses you off too much that guys like me exist!

Sorry mabel, won't wash the average of two 7s is 7; the average of a 9 and a 1 is only 5. You lose again.

I think we should get Bettman to take out citizenship and lead the country to an equitable future where a few people like you and I don't have our hands on the lever that controls the roulette wheel....forever.

It's not your existence that bothers me, it's the fact that you can't see why your arguments are so elitist and unfair. If you actually would admit what a selfish turd you are I'd have no problem with you.

Gavin,

I admit it. It is me and my family first. Though, my selfishness and demand for more creates benefits for society. It is the Capitalistic way - the invisible hand.

You have heard of the insvisible hand - haven't you??

You are selfish too. You see people with more money, more things and more happiness. You don't want to work hard, you don't want to take the same risks, you don't want to join the rat race - you merely wish that everybody slowed down to your lifestyle - more vacation, shorter work days, security and benefits - I understand you....

Let's not use Bettman as an example here. It is more comparable to OPEC than it is to fairness. The NHL has a monopoly and the teams are franchises. The NHL was about to lose 10 teams and presence in those markets. When that goes - so does national television rights.

This is little more than a cartel. OPEC can control oil prices - the NHL can control player salaries. Trust me - these owners are where they are for a reason - and it is not because they learned to share.

You are clearly a smart man Gavin. You interest and passion for these types of issues illustrates that.

Unfortunately, you let your resentment shape the way you are today. You let it control you!

Mabel
I don't think you and your system of playing favourites does anything for society, never has and the gap between the rich and the poor is growing wider yearly since the 1970s.

I don't think you have a leg to stand on.
The point I was making about the NHL had to do with their new contacts -salary cap and redistribution draft - efforts to level the field so that the only successful teams don't come from the cities with the big bucks.

If you couldn't have figured that out on your own I haven't got anymore time for you.

As to selfishness, I don't think so. You'd prefer to throw money at the crooks who run Las Vegas rather than contributing something positive to your fellow man. Your name isn't Abramhoff is it?

I'll use what ever example I please to point out what a moral bankrupt you are.

You haven't a clue how hard I work, how much money I have and you are the last person I envy - trust me on that.

That is your problem Gavin - it is not playing favourites. It is eating your kill and giving enough back, so that everybody has the mechanisms and opportunities to be successful. This is present. Immigrants have been the most successful class of Canadian. They have the motivation to create a better life in Canada - and they damn well work hard for it here.

In the 70s - a bunch of the (now baby boomers) decided that they were entitled to have everything provided to them. Thankfully those days are over!

Nope! Totally wrong. The neocons are not baby boomers and the baby boomers had nothing to do with the changes made in the 70s by a bunch of economists led by Milton Friedman. A complete reversal of Keynesian economics that every serious scholar now recognizes was a huge mistake.

You can't ignore the growing gap between rich and poor and the stagnation in economic mobility. If you start out with 5% of the people holding 85% of the wealth nothing will ever change unless there are effective redistributive and equity assurance mechanisms - there aren't and therefore we have the worsening situation nobody can ignore much longer.

But, continue to lie to yourself. Don't let me stop you. It is of no consequence to me. The majority of the people are gradually learning who their enemy is..And it's not me and the things I believe in.

Harper promised to removed capital gains taxes in Jan 06 during the campaign. see this:
theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060117.wlivecarrick0117/BNStory/specialDecision2006

The trust move is a way to frame Harpers tax reform as a "Tax Fairness Plan".
Step 1 - tax those cheatin' trusts
Step 2 - more tax breaks for the rich (capital gains tax removal!)

In the end, the little guy gets screwed because his income trusts are worth way less and he can't cash in on the capital gains removal.

I see another one of Cappy's likely heroes, the former co-chief executive at Computer Associates (also owner of the New York Islanders) was just conviced of a massive accounting fraud ----> off to jail with him and a fie of $8M.

If Harper ever removes the joke of a tax on Capital Gains he deserves to be ridden out of the country on a rail - if not worse.

Should be 'fine' not 'fie' but fie on him anyway!

So Australia pointed out the problem of income trusts 20 years ago, and efectively killed them off down there.

How come Canada bought the (defective) package anyway?

Because we bought the neoconservative nonsense that the only thing you had to do, relative to the economy, was throw it all open to the market and there would be enough trickle down from the captains of commerce and banking to feed the rest of us and keep us consuming at a fantastic rate.

The government just had to reduce taxes on corporations and wait for the dawn of a new day.

The masters of the universe theory.

It is slowly being shown to be a terrible lie and a dark nightmare. But don't be too convinced that anything has changed - pee wee is still a neocon; he just wouldn't have had any government revenue left (except personal income taxes and personal income - relative to corporate income and inflation - is on its way down).

He knew he could only screw the middle class so hard and still have any chance of forming a government. He decided he'd rather fight an election against the banks and mig investors.

We'll see if he was correct in his judgment.

Pot calling the kettle black:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/11/02/trust-harper.html

Rick W:
Good point

The next thing you're going to hear is a lot of crying because this move will put the damper on foreign investment in Canadian enterprises; All BS - they'll clatter on about how low rates of tax explain the Irish 'miracle'...This is an insane race to the bottom - built on the backs of working people - nothing more.

Tbarnston - very good point. If Harper changes the capital gains tax - he will regain my vote.

Remember, this is not eliminating the tax. It is deferring it until you take your money out of the market entirely. So, say I made $100K on Telus and decided to sell. I wouldn't be taxed the $20K if I didn't cash out. It is like an investment in the market - not individual stocks. Pretty fair if you ask me.

The Capital Gains tax should be reduced to 10%.

Low tax rates are vital to the economy - look at Ireland. They slashed taxes and boom! Virtually every information technology company has their European Headquarters in Dublin - including Microsoft!

Real Estate and income levels have soared and Irelend is much better off - a miracle actually!

Garbage, as usual. I guess you haven't been following the news from Ireland lately. Firms there are now starting to move to even lower-tax jurisdictions...in places like the Netherlands. As I posted here yesterday, robbers like you won't be happy until there is no tax on corporate earnings and the masters of the universe have ALL the chips.

You might want to have a look at what the future is like by spending some time looking and listening to the news from Mexico. There's another economic miracle (Maquiladoro) whose wheels are coming off and whose tires are burning.

Race to the bottom - Ireland's miracle may well be short lived - and is more a result of the European Union's targeted investment policies than anything else - as has been observed on this site several times in the past months.

It's time for the 88% of the people who actually still give a shit about each other and their families some of the time to start putting their feet down on this corrupt thievery.

You need to pay a lot more attention to Ed Deak’s posts and a lot less to the advice of your broker – I see the market’s already recovered 100 points against the close yesterday…and the dollar’s up 20 basis points. Some crisis!

Gavin,

If you were smart like me - you would have bought when they opened down 300 points!!

You are a funny fella!

And you are such a fine example of why our system isn't working. Just another klutz who thinks he's a master of the universe when he's really just a rat on a sinking ship.

Way to go Mabel

Also interesting that, Capitalism/mabellbs, when you're not here defending corporate thievery and the inequitable treatment of the majority of tax payers, you're on another thread here bashing the homeless..pathetic.

Alcibiades:

I don't recall ever bashing the homeless - though I am not their biggest fan. I merely said there is more to running a city than poverty....

I don't have a very high opinion of any city government that can't do a better job of dealing with poverty in the midst of indecent wealth than Vancouver has done.

Your comment condemns you for what you are - without me doing anything but nod my head.

And, mabel, if you're still thinking about income trusts this morning, you might want to read what the best political columnist (in my view) in the country has to say:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1162507816535&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907622983

What is your point G West - I never said this wasn't the right move. It probably was - and Flaherty is right, we don't want an income trust economy.

I think energy trusts should have been given exemption. The Alberta oil patch will suffer as these aging fields are no longer profitable.

That is besides the point for now. He lied and lulled Canadians into a false sense of security. Businesses and citizens acted in good faith and he betrayed us for votes - simply that - he betrayed us for votes.

I am a conservative supporter and truth be told, I've pretty much made the money back on day trades. I bought in on a bunch of trusts last night and they all rebounded 5% this morning. I've pretty much sold out entirely. I'm barely down at all (if at all) - god I love capitalism!!

Who knows how this will play politcally. If he couples this with a nice tax package - he may even win his majority.

G West:

Seriously....

When I read your blogs I see a lot of thought and due diligence, , but then they can, at times, get into a bile filled vitriol that makes me feel Marx and Lenin have partnered.

You admitted in a past blog you are about as " left" as it gets, which is fine and your absolute "right"...but it seems that you feel anyone that earns above minimum wage is evil/selfish/ corrupt....and that equality is via the lowest common denominator. Clarifying that further,...it seems we are Under- taxed and more taxes = "tax and spend" will solve societies problem.

The commond ground is "the best bang for the buck"...is it not? ....some seem to assume the money is actually wisely spent and distributed when it is collected by Gov't , and thus the formula for some is further extrapolated into " the MORE money that is collected will be even MORE wisely spent ".

The other blog re the homeless protestors, someone said "social housing"...I simply asked to clarify WHAT they mean...as these terms tend to spin into motherhood generic terms.

However, I am more of the view that Gov'ts waste a lot of money, (vivid recollection by some who work for Gov't who say Gov't could do a far better job with a lot LESS money....) and when the poor need help,...this creates this usual friction of those who say they pay enough taxes, VERSUS those who rant with class warfare " tax em till the puke or die" , whichever comes first. The poor and homeless are caught in the middle and stay at the periphery.

That Leftie rhetoric and $1 won't even even give a poor homeless person a pot to pee in....and I think too many on the TYEE just mask a detest for the middle class and higher...as they never submit any rational and practical solution...rant ran rant some more....and cry wah wah when the attacks are reciprocated.

maestro - good point.

Gavin is a passionate guy - and hasn't lived up to his potential. You've pretty much hit the nail on the head.

The bottom line is that Gavin has the tools necessary to be successful in this world. However, the growing rift between the rich and the poor angers him. He wants to see the redistribution of wealth, which is why he advocates high taxes.

I am sure he cares about the poor - but it is more about equality. He is as far left as you can go without being a full blown commnie. He would like to see a society where everybody has the same size house, car and access to all the same services.

Fair enough - we understand that.

Cap:

I have never met anyone in my middle- age life who fits the Daddy Warbucks stereotype the Left have seemed to generically tag many with. Many people realize success is due to both good luck and good management, but MOSTLY perserverance... I don't personally know any old money or royalty types.

Most of these people didn't have a pot to pee in to start, and some of the better off ones have staved off near- bankruptcy a few times through no fault of their own, but again perservered. Most of these have been very generous and donated back to the community...via fiscal donations, volunteer time etc. etc. What goes around positively comes around positively .

What I have also noticed is many Lefties tend to intellectualize poverty,...rather than be more pro-active pragmatic , analyze it, and treat it like the intricate spider web it often is. Their so-called solutions are more hammer and less sickle. This ultimately turns people off...just check the election results...and again the poor are failed by those who claim to represent them.

I think it is far better, and in all societies best interests, to try and bring everyone up to the highest common denominator as is possible... THAT type of equality. Even public schools attempt to bring all their constituents UP the grade scale, not actively create a society where everyone gets "C" or "C-".

PS If I recall correctly Karl Marx was a failed newspaper employee... couldn't make it in the private sector....the rest is history.

BS

Maestro that's nonsense. First error, as I've pointed out to you several times this is NOT a blog.

Wise up.

Second of all, I have no idea who Gavin is.

Third: If you want to associate with Capitalism (the current incarnation of a poster here once called Mabellbc) who changed his name after he exposed himself on a thread here last spring as someone whose idea of a good time is getting shitfaced and gambling his life away in Vegas, I won't stop you.

As to who has lived up to their potential, well, if the standard is that kind of behavior, I'd say almost anyone with a job who gets to work on their own without a guide dog would exceed Cappy's level of competence.

If you want, I'll post some more of Cappy's musings about economics some day when I have nothing better to do.

Today I have.

Capitalism: what's a commnie? Where do I join?

G West:

( Blog schmog......OK....posted comment on a website - blog). Nomenclature vs accepted slang...things evolve.

I've read many comments by various TYEE commentators....I think I know them well enough, either fortunately or unfortunately , to get a handle on where they stand on many topics.

Personally I am not interested in posts of TYEE commentators old musings, under the premise they are often made in heat of the battle and within certain contexts....and not into a cyber-lynching.

What's with this "associate with" comment ???....because I choose to make a comment directed at a given commentator and their given comments ....???? Many of us have different takes, adding dialogue to the broader issues. Cappy or anyone else " may " agree with me in some/none/ or all fashion ....in Venn-diagram overlap fashion to varying degrees.

I don't even remotely consider him ....or YOU .... or anyone with "666" tatooed somewhere.

What I have noticed, (and I have mentioned previously)is that those that can be reasonably perceived via their TYEE comments as "left of center" are the LEAST tolerant on non Leftie mob sanctioned party-line views , and also whip out the tar and feathers in a cyber mob mentality.

Those that don't engage in this, which may, if nothing else than by non mob participant default,... be deemed centrists or right of center, and thus many of us seem to stand alone and don't form mob attack alliances. This is not that we don't agree with each other... but more a sign of objective and independent takes on the given topic yet much on the same
wavelength.

Otherwise,...C'mon G West...I do sincerely have faith in ya.

You miss the point entirely.

Just look up the thread a few steps and you'll see what I mean. Capitalism/Maybelle is busy associating himself with your remarks about something I posted.

If you want to associate with someone who posts the nonsense he writes here - for a lark no doubt - go ahead. Just don't be surprised at the result. There is a small group of mind-numbed neo-cons who do nothing but come here to be pests and cappy is one of the worst – you have been around here long enough to have observed the phenomenon.

Put yourself in whatever category you want to. I know, in the bigger scheme of things where I sit - and it's on the side of people not things. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a little playful now and then. After all, there are other places on the internet where I meet and discuss serious things with serious people who are convinced that action is more important than words. We generally don’t argue there at all.

People with beliefs in something do fall into categories. I don't believe much in the idea of completely objective and independent thought. If it were actually true that people were like that I doubt we'd treat our fellow humans the way we do because we’d understand as a matter of course that demeaning, denigrating and neglecting any of our brothers and sisters is a wound inflicted on the whole body of a culture – not just a question of having priorities which permit such immorality.

Because, in the end, Frank is right – we have let commerce usurp the real needs of our fellow citizens, here, and around the world. Slot machines and income trusts are so insignificant in the matter of actually being human.

In short, maestro, I freely admit my bias. I'm on the other side of the street where the poor, the wage-slaves, the single mothers, the abused kids, the unemployed and the disrespected, the immigrants and the DPs, the lonely, the downtrodden and the dispossessed hang out. Moreover, I'll be there as long as they'll have me and I remain an honest man.

I wear that bias like a crown.

The rich, the greedy, the on-the-make or on-the- take clowns, the capitalists and the masters of the universe - the minor irritants like cappy and Gordon Campbell and Carole Taylor and their ilk - they walk the other side of the street and their idea of success is my idea of abject failure.

G West:

To start...Objectively speaking...the TYEE provides a venue where we can speak freely , on or off topic, and without being limited to a 30 second sound bite or an overly -edited Letter to the Editor. I am also at the point where I will listen to/read a given topic in the traditional media...and increasingly come to the conclusion its same -old same -old story with same- old same -old comments. One gets very bored and jaded.

Cappy or anyone else is simply commenting on their take of how they see the universe unfold and how they react to it as individuals. As long as Cappy is not breaking the law...but actually working within the rules...that's not Cappy's fault.

Beyond that, it becomes a quasi moral -ethics argument...which is fine, but then I am sure many people of various beliefs and backgrounds tread the same path as Cappy...or can also choose not to. Then we get into a quasi-church vs state soap- box discussions, and some portions of the political spectrum now get lathered up and want to force their BRAND X of morals and ethics onto others, "demonizing" them and finding ways to punish them...(the usual higher taxes , wealth distribution, targetting patronage to their own ilk, etc. whoopeee )which often ends up a disaster.

Lifes' and society in general's issues are far too complex for simple solutions... which the Left never has and likely never will grasp. Their so-called solutions are often a blend of delusional and draconian.

I threw a loaded -hint earlier about the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund...a huge player in the Market...I don't recall Fast Ferries in their portfolio, but presuming they are a professional group tradionally left -of -center, they do have their right- wing side and will invest in the capitalist economy for the ultimate benefit of their members....call it the pragmatism hat.

As I have also said, no one has a monopoly on virtue...nor for that matter no monopoly on sinnin' either . In the bigger scheme of things, and all the past political evidence has suggested, the Left side of the spectrum can be an effective conscience to the relative Right of center or the Centrist position.

However, when they, the Left, have actually acheived power, they have certainly created equality, they have traditionally failed EVERYONE....and very often have failed their own supporters and especially those they claim to represent,... like the poor and disenfranchised .

Really...Why continually re-invent the same broken wheel AND listen to the same old broken record?

My advice G , based on a LOT of practical experience, is be pro-active and thus pick, choose and fight the smaller winnable battles...we have all had our soap box moments, but the crowd inevitably disperses and life goes on, much like the lyrics in " Eleanor Rigby " . The good " little deeds " do add up, and I am sure as a compliment to you, via extrapolating where your mind and heart is, you have done plenty.

I'll bet Cappy and most others on the TYEE have done likewise...I have found most of my fellow man, regardless of political stripe, are decent, reasonable and generous as best they can.

maestro, “Do you know what you get, when you rub up against people who have money”.

Until I see the right wing acting with some virtue, instead of side deals for their friends and moving the actual benefits from the booming economy in this province going into the hands of people who actually need it (and not just to kleptomaniacs like Cappy who are only concerned with their own profits and their own selfish, self-admitted fun)I am not concerned about where virtue lies.

It is obvious. The pathetic handouts from the wealthy to the poor are 'charity' - meant mainly to make the wealthy feel better about what they know in their heart of hearts (if they have one) is a system that continues to play with a marked deck.

As long as the NHL has more to teach us about fairness, equity, redistributive justice and a LEVEL playing field than our governments do, this country and this province are a joke.

On the environment, especially, if citizens don't soon do their civic duty and demand that government take a real leadership role in providing effective ways to repair and remediate the damage of the last 50 to 100 years, the rest of these arguments are pointless. Thank heaven at least that Harper’s precarious situation in the house has forced him to reconsider the terms of the irresponsible legislation that Rona Ambrose tabled in the house earlier this month.

All the individual good deeds in the world will not save this society and this world as a decent place for my children to live. Even the utterly compromised Ottawa government currently in power recognized this and acted to change the rules on Income Trusts.

We are at a crossroads and that last sentence of yours is just plain useless window dressing. That's why I'm active behind the scenes and why this nonsense here at Tyee is really pointless. The objective of the original Tyee was to provide ‘alternative media’.

How much of that goes on around here of late could be called journalism. Simply count the number of BIG STORY icons and you’ll understand –, it’s become nothing more than a news review – a compendium of links to stories that, for the most part, have already been covered in the comments section here as much as a day, a week or even a month earlier

It isn't happening, It ain’t enough, and if we don’t call people like Cappy by their real names we are done for. We have to decide on which side of the fence we belong. Period.

maestro I guess you thought that dam woody is trying to set you up with his silly question game, I assumed G West would have also taken a kick at it by now, any how,

Question, What you get, when you rub up against people who have money”.

Answer, A hole in the elbow of your shirt.

Woody...

I missed ya dude

Still recall the old Quebec issue...a TYEE classic.

Sorry I didn't catch your question- comment sooner, just wasn't near the computer for much of yesterday.

PS I tend to wear short sleeve shirts....except at weddings, and funerals... and board meeetings.

G West:

One man's window dressing is another's album filled snapshots of personal experience.

As you allude to " I'm active behind the scenes"...pray tell....what sorts of actions art THOU partaking in to address what you percieve as the ills of society ?

The Right of center or Centrists (ie non left wing) seem to be more Pro-active in what what may be reasonably perceived as "left-wing " initiatives. Ie the Fed tories re: income trust,... Prov. Liberals re funding initiatives to assist low income parties for houing....yesterday the $1000 in trust for every new BC baby towards education ie a solid 16 years + of compounding interest....simple grassroot pro-active initiatives like those to address the problems.

It seems to be a given in the Canadian poli -psyche that in the Leftie's opinion the right can do no right, but the left can do no wrong, which creates a lot of yawwwwwwn to those of us at or near the Centrist position.

The Lefties just never seem to get it through their spin -cycle heads that they need to form a VIABLE alternative...and that they actually could if they got their heads out of their ying yang. These parties of protest create a fear-mongering and negativity that turns people OFF, other than the "odd" issue they may get some brownie points for pointing out.

As I have mentioned ad - nauseum...when the Lefties do get a chance in power... the vast majority ultimately regret it...the purge of 2 elections ago was as much an endorsement of that FACT as was Guinness WBOR possible.

The Left (Alfred E. Neuman party)is stuck shite-ing on the pot , and it can't get up.....and all-the-while the various societal line -ups are getting longer and longer....

Single-note conductor:
You implied the left was nothing but a talk shop. I countered by letting you know that talking isn't all I'm up to.

The $1G could be put to better use for childcare programs. Do you know what percentage of Grade XII students actually go into post secondary programs?

I already gave the neocons in Ottawa credit for the Income Trust thing. If 'they' use some of the bucks that generates for proper ends I'll give them more credit. But I won't be treading water in the meantime - that's your specialty.

I keep it 'behind the scenes' for a reason and that's where it'll stay.

As to power - not so important; change is what I'm after.

G West:

Good on ya...you seem to be where I am at also.....it's a healthy balance of (i) doing the due -diligence , hacking through the BS... to the core of the given issue and (ii) decisively making public what needs to be made public. Sometimes dealing with the public is first dealing with those empowered to deal with the public.

One has the right to do both to varying degrees in each.

Sorry, I like the $1G idea...its more of a setting the bar higher, a goal to strive for, plus, like any NEW initiative,...it can be tweaked and its uses dare -I- say " liberalized " over time.

National etc. child care , other than vouchers, in my view is a bad idea...people have found ways to fill these needs...and will continue to. Big Brother will screw that up as usual....

The income trust issue will generate its own backwash...for me the jury is out till I hear about the downside...given they were legal...regardless of the Leftie arguments which can be best summarized as a sheer detest for anything that avoids less Tax Grabs, regardless of the "devil is in the details" . Having a rug pulled by ANY party is not a good thing for many reasons.

Leftie Ltd. guru Jack Layton doesn't really give a shite...he's just looking to keep his own public teat/golden pension... if he can keep his job in this minority gov't and play the class warfare boogeyman game...that's his own " income trust"...err..."trusted income". Who's the REAL capital -seeking capitalist ?

Adding to that from my albums' snapshots is the ol bromide "Follow the money" , which is far more apropos to the Leftie side of the political spectrum. Oink oink.

Me treading water ??? If ya want to believe it...that's your right, but strategically speaking, that suits my own purposes and initiatives even more. If one "appears" to be treading water..you simply mimic the thrashing, and encourage many of the Lefties to dive in head first....but in their political zeal in not taking the time, as usual,to see the big non - ideological picture, ... they realize far too late the water was only 2 feet deep and one was baiting em' by sitting down on good solid ground the whole time .

(Ooops....and ouch !!!)

Have a good one, comrade...and good luck.

G West & Maestro:

I do admit that I take a little pleasure in getting under G West's skin. He is pretty predictable and often picks the fights. I merely give him what he wants. I think Gavin's mind is blurred by too much bong smoke and he has his vision. Unfortunately, he doesn't really understand anything about finances and economics. He'll spend some time to grab the odd statistic, but he hardly has an appreciation for it. When he does, he will understand where people like you and I come from.

As far as the income trusts - Gavin doesn't get it. He talks about using the increased tax revenues for child care and social programs. What he doesn't understand is that Harper botched it. There will not be any more tax revenues. If trusts avoid 1 - 2B in taxes annually - he washed away 40 - 60B in capital gains. Those gains will never be taxed.

This has nothing to do with taxes and more to do with productivity. The government was worried about Canada becoming an income trust economy and paying out all of its profits - as opposed to reinvesting them.

Again - Gavin doesn't get it - he is just happy that a few rich guys got burned and that "greedy" corporations aren't able to exploit the system.

Capitalism/ mabellbc

You know absolutely nothing about me Cappy. You never engage on actual issues and come out of every conversation looking like an idiot.

AS to bong smoke, I have never used drugs of any kind, cigarettes or alcohol. I don't gamble and I value the advantage a clear head gives me over someone as compromised as you are.

I get you exactly. You are a dinosaur - it has absolutely nothing to do with productivity and your analysis fails to even address the long term effects of income trust asset stripping because the method over-emphasizes cash flow and the income statement and de-emphasizes the balance sheet.

A time will come when the majority of the people you and your friends in government and the banks have been exploiting will rise up and turn you all out.

Only then will I be 'happy'.

G West I'm with you all away on that one It sure would be nice to see one day very soon the whole of the justice system of Canada get together and take out these criminal elements that are intertwined in our Federal and Provincial Governments.
We the People Have Got to Take a Stand and Show These Creeps That They Can't Screw with Canadians! Every Community Should Get Involved in This Our Very Future and Our Children's Future Depends on Us!
What the Hell Are Our Men and Women Fighting for and Dying for in Afghanistan I Thought it Was for Democracy?
We the People Have Not Look after the Front Lines That Means Our Home and Native Land We Stand on Guard for thee and a Great Date I'd like to suggest is November the 11th 2006!

BCDude:
Check out the latest issue of Walrus magazine.
http://www.walrusmagazine.com/print/politics-stephen-harper-and-the-theocons

G West that is one scary scenario mixing politics with religion!
Sounds a lot like the Bush cartel.
Now you've got politics, religion and corporations involved in our democratic system and the only way to beat these vermin is for the people of Canada to get out in their communities and start forming coalitions against this evil that is taking over our lives.
They are raping our homeland Canada, with mining, dragging the bottom of our oceans, clearcutting our forests, polluting our environment and so on, where does it stop?

Eternal Question # 2371 :

Is G West simply BC Dude "Lite" ????

" Peace bro "