Do Canadians Want To Pay Higher Taxes?

I would like the Broadbent Institute to pay higher taxes. Nobody else, just them. Double or maybe triple what they pay now would be a place to start. Maybe we could shoot for 80% of their annual income.

They need to feeeeeel our pain. And when I say feel, I mean OW!

From link:
"Tell all the progressives you know to join the Broadbent Institute. Together, we will lead progressives to victory against inequality in Canada."

Remind me again how much MPs make in annual income and let's not forget they Do Not pay taxes on it.
One would almost expect that all those NDP MPs that were elected during the "Orange Crush" would be clammoring for lower pay and the opportunity to pay taxes on it to set an example.

Progessives, heh.

Ed Broadbent, of the Pull My Finger,and the I Got Your Nose' party!

Ah, social justice for Canadians.

Aren't you just thrilled they want to "level the playing field" so that the coffee pourer at Tim Horton's gets paid the same as a physician or surgeon?

Or even better, the crackhead drug addict on his couch at home getting paid the same as an architect...

You might want to nip this in the butt ASAP.

Hard to believe that John is a prof. Smart guy.

A more realistic question - would you pay higher taxes in exchange for a vague promise that health and education might show some noticeable improvement, but probably not, and accept that the extra money might get thrown into general revenues and be pi$$ed away on dumb stuff? Yes or no?

Ed Broadbent has lost any credibility he once had.

People who work for a living or are retired after working for a living are fed up with paying for excess in government. The frills have to be excised, just as householders trim their budgets. This is not rocket science, Ed.

The leftist idiots simply don’t get the big picture.

Thanks to progressive globalism the BIG money simply moves offshore or overseas if you squeeze it too much. Today most people of moderate income earnings in the highest percentile can leave Canada and continue working abroad and doubling their standard of living. Their other alternative is downshifting into a much lower paying job in Canada especially in the last 20 years of your working career once everything else has been paid off, with investments in place, and retirement monies in the bank. Not good for the overall economy, but good for the individual who sees the light.

Most if not many of the so called professionals immigrating to Canada, retain their dual citizenship and continue to pay lower tax’s to their country of origin, and use phantom offshore corporations in places like Hong Kong. They utilize the Socialist Services in Canada, but they pay half the taxes for the benefits.

Wow, thanks for reminding me why my husband and I work so hard, just to be part of those paying 39% of the income taxes. So many people to support...

And I always say, YOU want to pay MORE taxes, just send a cheque to CRA, they'll take it.
I'm taxed enough already.

It didn’t bother Sven the ring barer couscous when he tried to lift that expensive tax free ring now did it.

There is a facebook link at this website. I lovingly left this:

I already pay corporate taxes,45% in personal taxes and over 13% in charitable contributions. How many more of my hard earned dollars do you need? Obviously taking over half my income through taxes means I'm still not paying my 'fair share'. So please enlighten me as to what amount of MY money will make you 'happy'?

I encourage SDA readers to link to the Broadbent Institute's facebook page and let them know your opinion.

I have no qualms about "shrugging" my current responsibilities, buying an XBox and doing nada. Go ahead, make my day:)

Indiana Homez USA >

True, but make sure you’re well prepped for the inevitable economic collapse and fallout that is coming first. People should be digging in and modifying their hard working lifestyles a little at this point regardless.

At this stage things like hyper Inflation, potential stock market crash, devalued currencies, massive government surveillance and security etcetera, should have everyone reprioritizing how hard their working to stuff money into investments and banks instead of hard assets and necessities.

Standard activist statistics. You could take 10 surveys on the same subject and depending on how its worded, get 10 different results. If you asked if you should pay more taxes or should the government cut the incredible waste in their spending, I'm sure I know what the answer would be. The only certainty is that the pigs at the trough will never get enough to satisfy them.

How does Broadbent presume to tackle income inequality without addressing effort inequality?

Many people just see the high equality in the States and assume the same is happening in Canada.

I might get crucified for this, but I think the taxation levels in Canada are pretty darn good where they are right now.

Would you be willing to pay slightly more taxes to ensure our pensions at 55?

I'm happy to pay my fair share of taxes.

.....which means that I'm looking forward to the day that they reduce them.

Democracy is where the majority can vote to steal the wealth of the minority. A true republic has constitutional guarantees to prevent this. Why do people still think democracy is a good form of government?

wyatt ironbridge @ 1:42 p.m. and grok @ 4:41 p.m. nail it, among others.

If societal problems could be solved through higher taxes, they would have been solved decades ago. But they can't be. And inequality isn't even a genuine problem.

The difference between taxes and savings is that far more of the former are inevitably wasted. Savings go into the bank, where they are loaned out to others who want to produce goods and services, and make enough profit (i.e., produce better or cheaper or more numerous goods and services while keeping the lid on costs) to pay the bank interest while still having some left over. Not every bank loan works out, but most are repaid. The standard of living rises.

The vast majority of tax money spent doesn't get this kind of return on investment. Infrastructure spending may be useful in some cases. Cops and military perform an essential service, although it's not really productive in the economic sense and we would prefer to minimize how much of it we need. But most regulators are worse than useless. And "social programs" are largely a transfer from working people to those who are, for whatever reason, not productive. The biggest problem is that the "progressives" try to encourage the latter, by claiming that social programs "define Canada" and other such nonsense. Not only do they try to maximize the number of social program recipients, they also try to drag the economy down by interventionist measures. The standard of living declines.

The real reason this nonsense can go on is the coercive nature of taxation. The fundamental principle of a civilized (and truly progressive) society is that no person has the right to initiate the use of force on any other person, as Ayn Rand phrased it. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not a principle upon which one can found a civilized society. And in fact there is nothing that can destroy a society more inevitably than by giving some people a "right" to the products of the efforts of others.

We should be calling the "progressives" the "destructives".

Polls are fixed to give you an outcome they want.
Combined with unemployment stats that are completely made up, this poll is worthless.
Good example was last month they came out, and stated that unemployment went down, by way more then any expectation.Reading into it I found out all the gains were in the west and Ontario lost some jobs.This is only due to high oil prices that hurt industry further. Ontario continues to loose factories to china and all the job gains cant cover the job losses and jobs needed ie immigration.In my town,the whole town ie downtown core is up for sale.We even have a new dome you can buy, funded by the taxpayer. Our only factory moved to china years ago.The new hotel down the street is being knocked down as they cant rent it, cant afford the taxes, so they want to just keep the land.The church on my street is doing the same, knocking down everything but the church. There is a new Walmart that went up not long ago, doing well, so I guess that's the jobs they were talking about, or is that a new Chinamart.Yes the rich are getting richer Sam Walton has a new store.

Peter >

Yea, bu, but china has a new factory. Globalization is saving one chinaman at a time, what more could we wish for?

Based on the annual growth in the cost in our social programs, health care and education in particular, even if you were to take 100% of everyone's income and paid it in taxes, it would still fall short of covering the cost of these programs within decade. The problem is not the level of taxation. The problem is the level of spending on social programs. The real question is how can we remove the inefficiencies in systems like heath care and education and begin to substantially improve the cost of service per patient and per student. The question that think tanks and politicians should be framing is one based on productivity improvement and not increased revenue. In the private sector businesses routinely improve the level of service and the quality of their product through productivity improvements and innovation. The same should be able to be done with social programs. When can the discussion begin?

When can the discussion begin?

When the government learn to ignore all the tails that wag the dogs. Still a way to go.