Canada disgraces itself on the enviroment.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Yes, they are expenses. The self-employed take major risks and they get to reap the benefits of it. And you want to take that away? Your proposed "eliminating the loopholes" would effectively shut down all entrepeneurs (spelling?) as starting a business would be nearly impossible. What do you think that would do to the economy? Absolutely destroy it, is what.

I don't think he means ALL loopholes but people who have a lot of income can write off lots in comparison to most middle class folk which, I think, is his point.

Originally posted by Starhawk
There is a spellcheck function. And I have a friends who runs his own comic shop he can't afford to fire an expensive accountant so he doesn't know about allot of the loopsholes he has access to and he still has a decent profit margin.

LOL. Too bad there isn't a grammar check function...

Originally posted by chithappens
I don't think he means ALL loopholes but people who have a lot of income can write off lots in comparison to most middle class folk which, I think, is his point.

Originally posted by chithappens
I don't think he means ALL loopholes but people who have a lot of income can write off lots in comparison to most middle class folk which, I think, is his point.

Chit can I clone your brain, so I can give all these guys a clue?

Originally posted by Starhawk
There is a spellcheck function. And I have a friends who runs his own comic shop he can't afford to fire an expensive accountant so he doesn't know about allot of the loopsholes he has access to and he still has a decent profit margin.

I would say yes but that would require cloning an entire me and I don't think the government would give my clone "human" rights; another subject entirely, I know bangin

Originally posted by Nellinator
Good for him (in the serious way). But that doesn't mean that it won't stop most people. The first few years can kill or make a business. If they can't write off expenses it drowns many people and potentially places even more people in poverty and creates one less tax payer.

If a small business fails its more likely to be poor management or implementation and not taxes.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Good for him (in the serious way). But that doesn't mean that it won't stop most people. The first few years can kill or make a business. If they can't write off expenses it drowns many people and potentially places even more people in poverty and creates one less tax payer.

If business owners can't write off items and/or services which directly make it possible for them to make a profit/living, which in turn they pay taxes on said profit, they'd be essentially paying more or double taxes/expenses, no?

Originally posted by Nellinator
Good for him (in the serious way). But that doesn't mean that it won't stop most people. The first few years can kill or make a business. If they can't write off expenses it drowns many people and potentially places even more people in poverty and creates one less tax payer.

This is more of a discussion now about community development and the corporate model. That's a tough cookie to jump into.

I see your point but taxes probably will not shut down a small business. Corporations receive subsidies all the time (for example); small businesses often do not. That's an issue of legislation, how that affects the community and why the government does not require more corporate responsibility ("pro business"😉.

Originally posted by Starhawk
If a small business fails its more likely to be poor management or implementation and not taxes.

Originally posted by chithappens
This is more of a discussion now about community development and the corporate model. That's a tough cookie to jump into.

I see your point but taxes probably will not shut down a small business. Corporations receive subsidies all the time (for example); small businesses often do not. That's an issue of legislation, how that affects the community and why the government does not require more corporate responsibility ("pro business"😉.

Anyways, Alberta rejecting Kyoto makes it impossible to meet the requirements. Scrapping Kyoto saves Canada billions of dollars that can be put into environmental programs. That fact alone makes scrapping the Kyoto Accord the right thing to do.

If I hear an argument about how the federal government should force Alberta into environmental reform I will laugh because Alberta will simply cut their equalization payments if they try.

So you want to scrap Kyoto to save money to put INTO the environment? Why not just comply with Kyoto then and skip the middleman?

And my comment about small business is far from stupid.

We can't keep Kyoto because of Alberta. I just said that.

And yes, it was stupid. It shows how little you know about business if you think that.

The federal government can force Alberta to comply with Kyoto and a yes I know people who run small business and they succeed due to proper management and not tax breaks.

Originally posted by Nellinator
This is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Now we're getting closer to the gray line between what the government should and shouldn't do in the corporate world... Sometimes subsidies are stupid, sometimes they are good, it depends on the economy at the time. For the life of me I can't figure out why the Canadian government hasn't reduced subsidies for the oil companies in Alberta and Saskatchewan. That would slow down the development (which is needed because of labour shortages) and help develop a more sustainable economy. Small businesses in Alberta are definitely subsidized, but it might be different elsewhere.

Anyways, Alberta rejecting Kyoto makes it impossible to meet the requirements. Scrapping Kyoto saves Canada billions of dollars that can be put into environmental programs. That fact alone makes scrapping the Kyoto Accord the right thing to do.

If I hear an argument about how the federal government should force Alberta into environmental reform I will laugh because Alberta will simply cut their equalization payments if they try.

If the federal government will not cut subsidies, it is likely because of the threat of capital flight.

You said Alberta might cut their equalization payments - what exactly are equalization payments? I might know but I do not want to assume.

Originally posted by Starhawk
The federal government can force Alberta to comply with Kyoto and a yes I know people who run small business and they succeed due to proper management and not tax breaks.

And no the federal government will not and cannot force Alberta to do anything because of equalization payments being cut and the rising threat of Alberta seperation.

Originally posted by chithappens
If the federal government will not cut subsidies, it is likely because of the threat of capital flight.

You said Alberta might cut their equalization payments - what exactly are equalization payments? I might know but I do not want to assume.

The legacy of the recently retired Alberta premier, Ralph Klein, is that Alberta simply ignores the dictates of the federal government and the federals won't do anything about because Alberta holds the equalization payments as leverage.

Oh, and Alberta/Saskatchewan has the second largest oil field in the world and also share the largest uranium deposit in the world (based on recent estimates) that the federals need and that is even more leverage considering the demand for fuel and the movement back towards nuclear power.

Starhawk: What is a better use of government money?

a) Implementation of Kyoto

b) investment in technology to better predict or possibly even control climate or barring that, create a society adaptable to climate changes

Originally posted by Starhawk
No they are not, there is so many tax loopholes and so much they are allowed to write off that they don't pay anywhere near their share. We need to eliminate the loopholes as well as implement the tax increase.

If you have tax loopholes, the only way to get more money from those exploiting the loopholes is to fix them, dumbass.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
If you have tax loopholes, the only way to get more money from those exploiting the loopholes is to fix them, dumbass.

Which is one of the things I have been talking about. Do you have a hard time understanding basic english?

And I highly doubt Alberta will separate, and I highly doubt the Federal government would allow them to. It's not as easy a process as you think it is.

And Inimalist, I would choose the implementation of Kyoto, the other option is basically a gamble on our future.

Originally posted by Starhawk
Which is one of the things I have been talking about. Do you have a hard time understanding basic english?

And I highly doubt Alberta will separate, and I highly doubt the Federal government would allow them to. It's not as easy a process as you think it is.

And Inimalist, I would choose the implementation of Kyoto, the other option is basically a gamble on our future.

you dont consider kyoto a gamble?

do you really think there are scientists out there who are like "I can predict EXACTLY what the climate will be like in 50 years"?

How can helping to reduce pollution be a gamble?