They were and are, as all

They were and are, as all the world's governments, advised by their miseducated economists that those imports from slave labour countries are "cheaper".

They don't have enough brains to figure out that monetary costs are not realities, but perceptions that can be changed at will by the controllers.

When you export jobs, it is the domestic economy that pays the difference in higher costs, in poverty, homelessness, crime, illnesses broken families, loss of homes, loss of education opportunities for children.

These are all well proven, statistical facts.

I'm a bargain hunter myself, as an OAP , out of necessity, but at least I know that here's no such thing as "cheaper", and somebody, somewhere, or the environment, is forced to pay the higher costs.

But, who can contest the words of the great "conservative", Harper, that Canada is built on "conservative values"?

We're now a "service and resource based economy" , selling the country from under our children's feet on the advice of brainless economists, boasting MSc and PhD behind their names, working at the intellectual level of Stalin's "dialectics"..

Ed Deak.

Hows it work at the Tyee?

To bring the background to the fore: how much does the Tyee pay it's contributors? Is it a living wage? Doesn't the Tyee's embrace of digital technology contribute to the demise of traditional newspapers, and dozens if not hundreds of career positions in production and printing? What benefits does the Tyee offer?

As a BC employer, perhaps you could turn your spotlight around, and enlighten us as to how you aren't like the others: that you spurn efficiency, the embrace of cost and labour saving technologies and employment models, with a cataloguing of the extensive and generous benefit package enjoyed by your employees...

I find it funny that a lean, online, pay for piecework company like the Tyee, from whom I doubt a single columnist makes a living wage, engages in so many myth-busting exercises on the topic of corporate efficiency: you're the paragon of doing as much or more with less staff, paid on a crumb by crumb basis. Your entire model affirms the necessity of efficiency; from this advantageous position, you can be the lean and feisty incumbent chipping away at traditional big media, with it's extensive staffs (AKA 'jobs'), decent wages, and extensive benefits.

Ironic, isn't it?

Deluded Economists

Yep, Ed these brainiacs keep listening to each other, admiring their degrees & dense academic papers while continuing to live in cloud-cuckoo land. Almost all of them are paid by either tax-payers (via governments or universities) or they work for giant corporations that deal with a big chunk of the economy. None of them have any idea how a complex system, like a modern economy, works. They write down equations that are built on massive (usually unstated) assumptions & then make further massive approximations so they can solve these modern magic spells.
The only reality is that they are shills who preserve the status quo of privilege for themselves & their paymasters.
Tax the mega-corporations to the hilt - if they leave BC, good riddance. There's an ocean of capital out in the world whose owners would love to get their hands on our (the people's) resources. At the very least, it would cut the strings to their puppets in the BC Liberal party who keep giving them tax breaks in return for election 'donations'.

toquer

Everyone should work piecework. Salaries give a skewed sense of worth. Piecework tends to sharpen the mind regarding the value of one's self to others.

There's no such thing as

There's no such thing as "monetary efficiency", because money is not a reality, but an imaginary concept that can become worthless overnight.

I have hundreds of millions in worthless post war European money. By the time I was 21, I was living under the 5th monetary system, and the 6th by 28.

I was an employer of tradesmen and apprentices in Vancouver from 1957 to 79, or 22 years.

Paid the highest wages possible, all the same, no differences, except lower for the apprentices. Tried to make my guys as happy as possible, as, in my experience, happy workers are the best producers. They were.

They knew exactly how I wanted certain things made and I could call the shop from anywhere, when I got back the jobs were done perfectly.

All major decisions, like the buying of equipment, and bidding on major jobs, were done at meetings, involving the whole shop, with everybody, even the apprentices having equal say.

I made the final decision, but all the guys had the feeling that they were part of the process, not dirt and servants.

Sometimes we had big fights over my mistakes and I appreciated when somebody pointed them out to me.

Never fired anybody,for any reason, but if there was need to let somebody go, it was done the most friendly way, without making any enemies.

The guys were the best producers, as it was in their own interest and not only of the boss.

After I sold out, all my guys were gone from the shop, within a year. Some used to call me for years after and said it was the happiest place they've ever worked in.

I have seen some absolutely idiotic mistakes made by managers and when I suggested they should tell their employees what they had to do and then get out of their way, there would be less waste, they were horrified: "We're paid to be managers, we couldn't do that!"

So they were wasting time, money and resources by being "managers", instead of learners and listeners.

If there's one thing I've learned in life was that I will pay the same attention to the words of a child as I do for a VIP's in any field.

Ed Deak.

Employment Creation

Output is a function of the economy's mix of available resources - land, labour, capital, technology and raw materials.

Lowering corporate income taxes may boost investment in capital intensive industries, but will do little to improve the employment outlook.

Most employment gains come from policies that support smaller, more labour intensive firms.

Sales taxes, be they HST or PST distort the balance of supply and demand, penalize consumers at the expense of producers and are best eliminated, unless being used as a tool of social policy.

Carbon taxes and excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco are examples.

Better to raise corporate taxes, even to the point of making them progressive, and thereby stimulate the domestic economy at the level that promotes employment - at the small business end of the spectrum.

Finally, the global economy is likely to remain weak. Better to focus policy toward stimulating the domestic economy where it matters, by tipping the playing field in favour of small, locally owned, labour intensive firms.

Our economy is now grossly

Our economy is now grossly overcapitalized, with the servicing the demands of imaginary capital killing jobs.

There was a time, not too long ago, when economics textbooks were warning against the dangers of overcapitalization, claiming that capitalization should never exceed 1 wage year per job.

That was also the time, when top executives were taking home, I hate to use the word "earning", the time honoured distribution of about 10 times the wages of the lowest paid.

Today capitalization, in the large corporations, is up to 50 or 100 wage years
per job and executives are stealing literally hundreds of times the wages of the lowest paid from their workers and the public, with the fraud of "competitiveness".

Not to mention the imports from slave labour countries, claimed by economist as being "cheaper" and "cost efficient".

A certain way to economic self destruction.

Ed Deak.

Note to the

Note to the editors:

Bringing all postings in single, solid blocks on the screen is bad policy, as they're difficult and boring to read.

This is something new and hopefully, not done in the interests of "cost efficiency" ?

Who would read Hugo's "Les Miserables" printed in one solid block/caption?

This is about the same.

Ed Deak.

Taqx Cuts

The article states:
"When the federal rate falls to 15 per cent in four months, corporations operating in B.C. will pay a total income tax rate of 25 per cent."

I would be fascinated to know if the authors are aware that once we get down to the rate of 25% we will then match the rate which Sweden and Denmark tax general corporate income.

@John Corman, all

If anyone is interested in seeing how Canada (and B.C.) corporate income tax rates stack up against other OECD countries, check out the OECD Tax Database website. Follow the URL below and then select the first available link (this is the "basic" rate, which doesn't apply to small businesses or other exempted business structures).

When looking at the spreadsheet, be sure to focus on the "Combined corporate income tax rate" column. This combines the rate levied by the federal government and an average of any sub-national (i.e. provincial, state-level or local) tax rates.

As John correctly points out above, the combined B.C. rate matches that of Denmark and a number of other countries.

http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,3746,en_2649_34533_1942460_1_1_1_1,00.html#C_CorporateCaptial

BChristopher

Thanks for pointing out the important distinction that:
...the "basic" rate, (which) doesn't apply to small businesses or other exempted business structures..

Furthermore, in the BC context - which is the one under discussion - the combined 'average' is not terribly relevant.

The rates of BC tax on corporate structures is readily available and the lower rate applies to all businesses with a taxable income of less than $500,000 per anum.

Furthermore, even when a business HAS taxable income of more than $500G in a year, they only pay the higher rate on that excess - not on the whole income package.

Here are the relevant details - which make a lot more more sense than relying upon OECD figures which are often seriously out of date.

[b]Lower rate[.b]

The lower rate of British Columbia income tax is 2.5% effective December 1, 2008. The lower rate was 3.5% effective July 1, 2008.

The income eligible for the lower rate is determined using the British Columbia business limit of $500,000. Before January 1, 2010, the business limit was $400,000.

Higher rate

The higher rate of British Columbia income tax is:

11% effective July 1, 2008;
10.5% effective January 1, 2010; and
10% effective January 1, 2011.
The higher rate applies to all income not eligible for the lower rate.

The tax is prorated based on the number of days in the year when the tax year straddles these dates.

Furthermore, it is these small businesses - who pay the lower corporate tax rate - that employ most British Columbians and they have a very attractive tax structure in this province (we can ignore the federal tax since it across the country) when compared with any other jurisdiction.

In 2009 Small Businesses made up 98% of the total businesses in this province so I think it can be said without much fear of contradiction that this sector is:
1. The most significant business sector in the BC economy, and;
2. In no danger from the high tax bogeyman that John Corman (who should know better) is exercised about.

You can find the BC business statistics here:
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/bus_stat/busind/sm_bus/SBP2010.pdf
2.

@G West

We chose to focus on the General Rate (what the OECD site calls the "Basic" rate) since so much of the political rhetoric about corporate income tax (namely, the concern that businesses will just pick up and move in the face of higher rates) applies, presumably, more so to larger companies with larger markets and larger incomes.

It's an important distinction though. Thanks for pointing all of that out.

@BChristopher

Appreciated. The 'threat' that the largest corporations (2% of the total businesses in the province) are going to pack up and move their very profitable operations out of BC is nothing more than political rhetoric.

We have a very attractive tax structure here - when compared with any other jurisdiction in the west; factoring into the mix the fact that corporations here are not (and have never been) saddled with the kind of health benefits costs that have crippled some entities in the United States makes it even more obvious why the fairy tales of business spokesmen and women (in and out of government) about the potential of a 'walk-away' is complete and utter nonsense.

brainless? no. psychotic? sure.

Ed, I totally agree with you. Vox.Pop too. You keep referring to the robber baron scumbags as brainless and idiots, etc.. That's a big mistake that progressives make. Actually, they're very intelligent and know exactly what they're doing. The proof is in the pudding. Look at our deteriorating societies, the widening income gap, the loss of liberties and freedoms, the destruction of public services and the attacks on civil society. These are not accidents or bad management. This is all part of the grand design. Well thought out and executed. And like the "Arab Spring" of 2011, I wonder if the people of the West will finally say "enough is enough" and take back the power. Or is it that we haven't been crapped on enough yet.

toquer -- tyee pay

Good questions, and ones we agonize over at The Tyee given the fact that we want to publish good journalism and not exploit those who produce it. That's why we fundraise from readers and, through the tyee solutions society, philanthropies to support ongoing, in-depth reporting projects. Those on staff at The Tyee are paid a living wage and more, and are represented by the UFCW union with benefits. Contributors -- i.e. freelancers -- are paid a rate comparable to what large corporate media pays per piece. We are always trying to pay more. As of now, given that the tyee does not make a profit, that is difficult.

We also allow contributors to keep all rights other than first time publishing rights, a very different model from the contracts corporate media forces freelancers to enter into, giving the corporations all ownership in every media form henceforth.

What would you suggest toquer? we are always open to suggestions for creating a better business model for creating and publishing independent journalism in the public interest.

Where did the money go?

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/faultlines/2011/08/201181125338194522.html

great report.

Businesses need customers not tax cuts

From writing of Dave Johnson at Campaign for America's Future:

A job is created when demand for goods or services is greater than the existing ability to provide them. When there is a demand, people will see the need and fill it. Either someone will start filling the demand alone, or form a new business to fill it or an existing provider of the good or service will add employees as needed.

So a demand creates a job.

Demand also creates businesses.

Many people wrongly think that businesses create jobs. They see that a job is usually at a business, so they think that therefore the business "created" the job. This thinking leads to wrongheaded ideas like the current one that giving tax cuts to businesses will create jobs

Businesses want customers, not tax cuts.

http://northerninsights.blogspot.com/2011/09/demand-creates-jobs.html

Screw business!

Our government needs to be about people: the living, breathing individuals whom collectively make up our country. It needs to operate in a fashion that has the betterment of them all in mind, not only the financially ambitious, those paraded about as self-made men of honour and respect by the propaganda and the meme of our times.

Look after the people and the business enterprises will find a home; but look after business first and the people invariably get left behind. How much more proof do we need before we can actually see it?

It's not about the economy, stupid; it's about the people.

20% only

20% of people make everything we use, grow all food, service all things like cars. Care for our health, cut our hair.
Today 80% of all peole are not needed in the work force.
Of the 20% of needed workers, 5% now work in other countries.

jobs, jobs, jobs...

When they want to persuade the public that building a pipeline, a mine, a toxic mill, or some earth destroying project is necessary, corporations chant jobs, jobs, jobs. Yet, in every other facet of their corporate lives they strive to downsize labour through the adoption of technological sophistication, pay lower wages, and embrace globalization, which allows them to outsource labour. Is this Ideological schizophrenia or just a big con job?

Corporate Tax Cuts

If corporations want our logs and other resources, they will stay in BC. If they want oil, they will go to Alberta. If they want cheap labour, they will go to China. If they want you to take a cut in wages and benefits, and you have the temerity to balk, they'll threaten to take your job away. Sounds like extortion to me!

But we let them get away with this strong-arm stuff, so they can be "competitive." Poppycock. You could eliminate the corporate tax altogether, they would still move production jobs overseas where possible to save on wages, which is by far their biggest expense, not taxes.

The historical record is clear: unemployment goes down during a boom, up during a bust. Regardless of corporate tax giveaways.

If corporations want to be treated as "people," they can be taxed as people. The top marginal tax rate in BC (federal and provincial) is 43.7%, not 25% (as of Jan'12).

If corporations get a tax break, do they pass the savings onto you? When the HST came into effect, did they reduce prices for consumers, or increase wages for their workers, or hire more workers?

Beware of gingerbread houses, and catchy slogans about income tax cuts. What you save in income tax, you will more than lose in increased fees, decreased services, and higher consumption taxes. Your tax cut is an illusion, a farce.

Wealthy corporations and individuals prefer income tax cuts because they have more income, so they will save more. They don't mind passing the tax burden onto you through higher sales taxes. Even if it means paying a little more for their football-field length yachts.

And make no mistake. Sales taxes disproportionately affect middle and lower income groups, the ones who can least afford them. The rich man driving a new Porsche pays the same for a litre of gas as a single mother with two kids earning minimum wage. (BC still has the lowest minimum wage in Canada, while Vancouver is the most expensive city in the world in which to live.)

And anyone who tells you that corporations are only "capitalizing" on sweatshop labour overseas just so they can pass the savings onto you (like those "Tea Potty" people), doesn't have a clue. In fact, they wouldn't be able to sniff out a clue if it crapped on the end of their nose.