Taxation and other unethical activities

[Panama Jack]

OK, so here I am planning my first trip to Canada in the first 3 years to visit the folks and I am a little taken aback by taxes here, taxes there, taxes everywhere.

And I stop to wonder "why?"

I have had it pretty good. The last 8 years of my productive life I haven't paid any taxes to anybody (except on the rare occasion where I have purchased stuff in countries where they have taxes). Perhaps that is a reason why I am not entirely lubed-up ready to roll over and docilely accept the concept.

Now don't get me wrong. I am a discerning consumer who doesn't mind spending money as long as I get some sort of value out of it. I also pay my way. If I get a service I am used to paying for that and if I don't want to pay for something then I am OK with not getting the service. That seems fair to me.

But I wonder what the hell people are getting in exchange for spending thousands upon thousands of dollars on tax money? I know the good folks in the US started a little revolution a few centuries ago that started with some guys dressed up as Indians throwing some tea into the Boston harbor, and maybe there is a need for them to have another revolution to clean up the mess of a country that the US has become.

But back to Canada, here we have a country that is very rich in natural resources, and they are exploited. Evidently, so are its people. I recently read something that said that Canada may have more petroleum reserves than Saudi Arabia (besides numerous other resources). The difference is that Saudis don't pay taxes—the profits from petroleum extraction and sales bankroll the entire country’s budget (with enough left to spill a sizable percentage into the Saud family’s private bank accounts).

However, Canada’s noble approach, evidently, has been to let private corporations harvest the resources . . . resources which are the property of Canadians. I am sure that they pay some royalties (how much I don’t know). Of course, they provide employment to Canadians too. But since the companies get to keep a sizable chunk of the money earned from resource extraction, those same employees get to pay taxes to effectively subsidize the large corporations. And so does everyone else. And when the resources are gone, people might wake up and realize that we sold them real cheap and probably have to clean up some of the environmental mess left behind too.

So why is it that I have come to regard taxes as, at best, probably unethical and at best a ponzi scheme for the unemployed and unemployable. For those who want to point out that there are differences between Canada and Saudi Arabia, well there isn’t. There really is a limited about of “democracy” in Canada and for the most part, citizens don’t have a say in how money gets taken from them or where it goes. Somebody else makes relatively easy decision on how to spend millions of dollars of your money. I find it very easy also to make decisions which don’t involve my money. And that is one of the things that have ruined an otherwise good country as well as personal initiative.

Go ahead and agree or disagree. But a bit of a right-wing rant is a good thing for the country. But as I look back across the ocean at the state of hand to mouth existence which working friends and colleagues live (if you are on welfare you might have it a bit better) and think to myself “I should be grateful that I am only coming to visit and am not living there.”

[SuperchargedRS]

OK, so here I am planning my first trip to Canada in the first 3 years to visit the folks and I am a little taken aback by taxes here, taxes there, taxes everywhere.

And I stop to wonder "why?"

I have had it pretty good. The last 8 years of my productive life I haven't paid any taxes to anybody (except on the rare occasion where I have purchased stuff in countries where they have taxes). Perhaps that is a reason why I am not entirely lubed-up ready to roll over and docilely accept the concept.

Now don't get me wrong. I am a discerning consumer who doesn't mind spending money as long as I get some sort of value out of it. I also pay my way. If I get a service I am used to paying for that and if I don't want to pay for something then I am OK with not getting the service. That seems fair to me.

But I wonder what the hell people are getting in exchange for spending thousands upon thousands of dollars on tax money? I know the good folks in the US started a little revolution a few centuries ago that started with some guys dressed up as Indians throwing some tea into the Boston harbor, and maybe there is a need for them to have another revolution to clean up the mess of a country that the US has become.

But back to Canada, here we have a country that is very rich in natural resources, and they are exploited. Evidently, so are its people. I recently read something that said that Canada may have more petroleum reserves than Saudi Arabia (besides numerous other resources). The difference is that Saudis don't pay taxes—the profits from petroleum extraction and sales bankroll the entire country’s budget (with enough left to spill a sizable percentage into the Saud family’s private bank accounts).

However, Canada’s noble approach, evidently, has been to let private corporations harvest the resources . . . resources which are the property of Canadians. I am sure that they pay some royalties (how much I don’t know). Of course, they provide employment to Canadians too. But since the companies get to keep a sizable chunk of the money earned from resource extraction, those same employees get to pay taxes to effectively subsidize the large corporations. And so does everyone else. And when the resources are gone, people might wake up and realize that we sold them real cheap and probably have to clean up some of the environmental mess left behind too.

So why is it that I have come to regard taxes as, at best, probably unethical and at best a ponzi scheme for the unemployed and unemployable. For those who want to point out that there are differences between Canada and Saudi Arabia, well there isn’t. There really is a limited about of “democracy” in Canada and for the most part, citizens don’t have a say in how money gets taken from them or where it goes. Somebody else makes relatively easy decision on how to spend millions of dollars of your money. I find it very easy also to make decisions which don’t involve my money. And that is one of the things that have ruined an otherwise good country as well as personal initiative.

Go ahead and agree or disagree. But a bit of a right-wing rant is a good thing for the country. But as I look back across the ocean at the state of hand to mouth existence which working friends and colleagues live (if you are on welfare you might have it a bit better) and think to myself “I should be grateful that I am only coming to visit and am not living there.”

I think because taxes are generally accepted by the majority, that's the way it will stay. Now if you all of a sudden outlawed TV and fatty foods you bet you would have a revolution.

[straightpilot]

But I wonder what the hell people are getting in exchange for spending thousands upon thousands of dollars on tax money?

Big government? Is this a trick question?

[robertsailor1]

One can debate just how many services are really needed and who is going to pay for them. I like to get around so I know someone has to pay for roads, you get the picture. Once you have decided what public services are needed then of course someone (taxes) has to pay for them. Mixing up free enterprise or socialism or dictatorships in the discussion doesn't really disguise the fact that it appears that while you are currently getting something for nothing your living in a dream world if you think taxes are not required.

[Nark]

My interpretation is that with the vast natural resources that Canada has to offer, taxes aren't necessary, much like middle east nations.

However since multi-national companies are the ones reaping the rewards of these resources, taxes in Canada are necessary to support the "arts" and those who chose to stay at home.

[robertsailor1]

Well pretty hard to have it both ways. If you think that by living in this country it gives us an entitlement, well I guess thats OK. How do you plan on getting it? In your dream world the Government would provide it but then that makes us socialists and on the dole for life or until we run out.
I guess the other choice is we could have a dictator who would spoon feed us on a regular basis until we were unable to look after ourselves.
Maybe consider that you should work hard and buy the oil stocks if that's what you want. The free enterprise system is not perfection for sure but it has been shown to be light years ahead of anything else that has been tried.

[Beefitarian]

Arguably good police, fire and emergency services like hospitals. Roads, schools etc.

Where are you living that there's no tax? If there's a nice airdrome and the hangers are not too expensive I'm interested.


Discuss.

[Panama Jack]

By the argument of some it seems that we should be grateful that we have to pay taxes so that we don't live an idle life where we don't become accustomed to living an idle life. The Catholic Church used the same type of argument in Latin America during the middle part of the 20th century by preaching to their flock it is the will of God that there be suffering and hardship on Earth whilst in collusion with the bad Government that existed and kowtowed to the Church.

One of the problems with citizens is that costs of irresponsible Government programs are never fully appreciated. I feel that clear pricing would be helpful. You want a Gun Control program? That will cost $ XX million dollars, divided by the population of Canadian tax payers that will mean an extra $ XXX to your annual tax bill. You want this program? This is how much that will cost. Even better would be if those who voted in favor of it were taxed but those who didn’t, well, why should they have to pay? If I don’t want this type rating or loaf of bread I don’t pay either. I know it is unfeasible but this would restore fiscal responsibility to both the voters and the officials.

In reality, Canada is too big a country with too many “distinct” concerns. When the partners are not pulling in the same direction sometimes a divorce is the appropriate albeit unpleasant solution. Why should Western Canada have to pay for Official Bilingualism? Why should everybody have to pay for some sort of subsidy in Atlantic Canada and likewise why should somebody in Nova Scotia have to pay for some sort of program in the Arctic? By paying, what is the “value” that they get in return? If they are not getting something in return for it then maybe it’s a bad deal.

I am glad that Nark shows some clarity of vision in this issue. And as SuperchargedRS points out, as long as Canadians have their beer, television, hockey games and potato chips, at least they are proud of their country and it is all OK.

[Beefitarian]

They already took away the transfats and when I showed up to the revolution it
Fizzled out before we even gave one politition a well deserved sack beating.

[Shiny Side Up]

So why is it that I have come to regard taxes as, at best, probably unethical and at best a ponzi scheme for the unemployed and unemployable. For those who want to point out that there are differences between Canada and Saudi Arabia, well there isn’t

Then it begs the question: why don't people move to Saudi Arabia? Are you a citizen there? Have you tried becomming one?

I will agree that the whole current system of taxation is a scam. Its horribly inefficient. I also think we're being robbed by corporations when it comes to resourse extraction. As an Albertan I particularly love when they threaten to pack up and leave - like they can get the stuff somewhere else.

I also don't think we can avoid being taxed. As well, I look at that it is worth while to help out the less fortunate in our society. That I'm aware runs the risk of being taken advantage of by the dregs of society - but I also think that those people are going to be a drain on society one way or another. We lose money being taxed to support welfare type programs, or we'll lose that money by paying for more police (which , by the way, is really the ultimate reason that there is more violence south of the border, take your pick on how the money is spent). Incidentally, in Saudi Arabia, how do they handle these segments of society? I suppose it does make it easier to cut people's heads off than to build prisons, and one must admit that their court system is significantly more expeditious.

[Panama Jack]

Saudi Arabia is an attractive country for immigration to many of the same people who presently find Canada an attractive country for immigration-- namely Third World countries.

No, I have not tried to immigrate to Saudi Arabia because it is not attractive to me. I am not a muslim and unwilling to convert, and that would be one of the requirements. Also, I do not speak Arabic nor have I been a resident of Saudi Arabia for at least 20 years which is another supposed requirement for nationality. Saudi Arabia, unlike Canada, keeps a high fence for immigration.

But when the initial news came out a few years ago that they were initiating a nationalization process they were flooded with hundreds of thousands of applications.

As far as the Saudi system of welfare, it is donation based (this seems to be one of the so-called "pilars of Islam" and giving away a certain percentage of ones income to a charity is high on the list of priorities). I like when I can decide where I want to give my money based on the importance I place on the cause and the efficiency of the organization. So if I want to give it to Cancer Research, David Suzuki, or the Salvation Army during their Christmas impersonation of Santa Clause (as a child I sometimes got unnecessarily excited when I heard the bells thinking that Santa was nearby), that is my business. Not some bureaucrat or even worse, some politico telling me how much I should give and him deciding what is his favorite pet project (so that he can get re-elected).

[niss]

Why should Western Canada have to pay for Official Bilingualism? Why should everybody have to pay for some sort of subsidy in Atlantic Canada and likewise why should somebody in Nova Scotia have to pay for some sort of program in the Arctic? By paying, what is the “value” that they get in return? If they are not getting something in return for it then maybe it’s a bad deal.

It's part of being in a country as large as ours. We have an obligation to the rest of the country. We want to enjoy sovereignty in the arctic and benefit from the resources but you don't want to pay for the programs that keep people up there? Western Canada should pay for official bilingualism because that is part of being in this country, if western Canada doesn't want to be part of it and pay for it, maybe then they can pay back the railroad that was built as part of a condition of confederacy, with interest of course.

It's this unrealistic libertarian attitude. Why should we have anything? Why should we have healthcare, roads, law enforcement, fire protection, etc?

[Beefitarian]

The uh, railroad huh? So that was like a non-profit sort of charitable thing then?

[niss]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_P ... ay#History

Creation of the Canadian Pacific Railway was a task originally undertaken for a combination of reasons by the Conservative government of Prime Minister Sir John A. Macdonald. British Columbia had insisted upon a transport link to the east as a condition for joining the Confederation of Canada (initially requesting a wagon road). The government however, proposed to build a railway linking the Pacific province to the eastern provinces within 10 years of July 20, 1871. Macdonald also saw it as essential to the creation of a unified Canadian nation that would stretch across the continent. Moreover, manufacturing interests in Quebec and Ontario desired access to sources of raw materials and markets in Canada's west.

[Beefitarian]

Sure but they needed to build it to expand the Empire, dominate the french and put the native population into residential schools.

Alberta paid that initial investment back with Trudy's national energy program. Could we get a receipt and our change now?

[niss]

Sure but they needed to build it to expand the Empire, dominate the french and put the native population into residential schools.

Except that this was post confederacy and had nothing to do with the empire. This was strictly the dominion of Canada.

And my whole point was that as a country we pay for things that we will never personally use, because that is what is involved when you are a part of something like this.

[Beefitarian]

Well you certainly made an excellent point of displaying how taxes are used to take everyone's money and build the infrastructure to make the upper classes filth rich by bringing up the rail road. So congratulations there.

[Panama Jack]

Well, I actually wonder how much we benefit from the rich resources in the Northern nether areas considering that big business are exploiting it, getting rich on it, and other Canadians are having to pay taxes to facilitate their doing so.

As far as the railroad goes; what an arrogant eastern attitude that is. What makes "Central Canadians" think that Western Canada has not already paid its dues for a railway system built generations ago which, for the most part, is now obsolute and would under normal accounting methods already have been fully depreciated. And you want interest for it???

[Expat]

This tread started about taxes. Is there a better way to tax people than taxing them on consumption? Like the Europeans do? You do not want to pay taxes? Then stay home and save. Too bad that BC did not understand this, and voted against the HST. The HST was a tool to bring the European tax scheme here in Canada. But no, we do not want this socialist way of taxing people... The alternative is income-based tax, which discourages workers from earning.
Seriously, which is the best alternative? Tax income, or tax consumption?

[Shiny Side Up]

This tread started about taxes. Is there a better way to tax people than taxing them on consumption? Like the Europeans do? You do not want to pay taxes? Then stay home and save. Too bad that BC did not understand this, and voted against the HST. The HST was a tool to bring the European tax scheme here in Canada. But no, we do not want this socialist way of taxing people... The alternative is income-based tax, which discourages workers from earning.
Seriously, which is the best alternative? Tax income, or tax consumption?

I would tend to agree that a consumption tax is very desireable. The problem with the HST is that you can't also have a consumption tax if you already have an income tax. That's really the big problem with Canada, is that the government is trying to catch you comming and going everywhere so you're essentially paying tax on taxes a lot of the time. If we can't have a pure consumption tax system, I would rather have a pure income tax system. A mixture of both seems horribly inefficient and has the disadvantages of both, rather than capitalizing on the advantages of either.

The worst part I feel about Canadian taxation is its inefficiency. To me it seems a lot of money is just tied up in the huge bureacracy of tax collection. One wonders how much money our government takes in, just to fund the tax collecting apparatus. Canadians it would seem get a triple hit since you're paying three different tax collecting apparati - Federal, Provincial and Munincipal

[JakeYYZ]

Panama,
The Trudeau liberal’s implemented the National Energy Program (NEP) in 1980. I won’t try to explain
what went wrong, you can read about it yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program
The Liberal’s should have followed the Saudi model and done things at a slower pace and should have negotiated with Alberta a more generous revenue sharing agreement. The Province does own the resource.
There’s more to it, of course. ..plenty of info on the net.
Taxes are an issue that the Federal Conservatives have been addressing slowly. I am generally optimistic, that during the next 3 years we will see significant progress on the spending side and a subsequent reduction in personal tax rates. Corporate welfare cuts have already begun in the oil sector.

[. ._]

Why don't we just abolish private property?

Hehehehehe!

[North Shore]

which, for the most part, is now obsolute

WRT the railway - completely false. 2/3 of all Canadian surface freight is carried by the railways: http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazi ... ilways.asp

The alternative is for it to be transported by road, and a simple drive across some of the prairies will show the damage (rutted roads) caused by transport trucks. I somehow doubt that the extra fuel taxes paid by those trucks comes anywhere close to paying for the repairs needed.

I don't, as a rule, feel particularly hard-done-by in the tax department. Sure, I'd like to pay less - who wouldn't? But as Holmes said, "Taxes are what we pay for living in a civilized society." If it costs me a little money to have national pollution standards so I can breathe clean air, and drink clean water out of a tap, or not have to worry about my sons breaking bones while they are playing, or have a public education system, then I'm glad to pay.
However, what I am beginning to object to, and on my children's behalf also, is the continual overspending coming from government. As a rule, the cause of the current economic turmoil is debt levels, and yet governments keep piling it on like we don't have to pay it back. Newsflash! We do, and we can't continue to rely on economic growth to pull us out of the hole we are in.
If the government came to me tomorrow and said that they were going to cut spending by 5%, and raise taxes by 10%- with the goal of paying down the debt on a (say) 50 year time frame, I'd be all over it. But they won't.

The flip side of all of this, of course is that to pay and complain about taxes, you have to have a job and money. In that regard, on a global scale, even the poorest of we North Americans are incredibly wealthy

Edited to add: another argument might be made to say that we are actually under-taxed, given that, by and large, our debt has developed since the 1950s (well within the lifespans and working careers of most on this board.) Debt/deficit, of course, being the difference between that money collected in taxes, and that expended by the government on our behalf..

[Expat]

Saudi Arabia is an attractive country for immigration to many of the same people who presently find Canada an attractive country for immigration-- namely Third World countries.

As PJ, or any other expat will tell, liking, or choosing a country is not that simple. There is no one country that is the absolute best.
For example:

Pakistanis come work in Afghanistan, because the salaries are much better.
Afghans try to move to Uzbekistan, because the country is structured, and security better.
Uzbecks move to Russia to make more money.
Russian emigrate to England, because...football?
Brits move to Serbia and Spain, because of the weather, and cheaper houses.
Spaniards and Serbians move to Canada, because???
Canadians emigrate to the Dominican Republic, because life is cheap, and weather sunny.
Dominicans move to Canada because of the free welfare system...

Indians and Bengladeshis go everywhere...