Social license is generally described as obtaining approval of the local people.
The issue is that it's been co-opted to mean "approval of 100% of the population". Ie. hardcore environmentalist groups somehow have veto power (whether legally or illegally) over any project.
Agreed.
"Social license" isn't a thing, which is kind of what I was getting at, but maybe didn't explain my position well enough. You can't purchase social license by doing things the environmentalists want, because they are insane and are never satisfied. You aren't purchasing a license, you are being extorted by a party that has no intent on living up to its side of the bargain, because the goalposts always get changed.
The way it appears to me, social license is a bunch of arm waving and posturing to warm up politicians to spend political capital on a controversial decision.
__________________
Pylon on the Edmonton Oilers:
"I am actually more excited for the Oilers game tomorrow than the Flames game. I am praying for multiple jersey tosses. The Oilers are my new favourite team for all the wrong reasons. I hate them so much I love them."
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to IliketoPuck For This Useful Post:
Are we comparing personal carbon tax impact against net income small business tax? You'll have to explain yourself.
Also, please explain how "lower taxes on income on the least important level possible" isn't a direct shot at small business owners with lower profits than larger busineses? I'm re-reading that statement 10 times over and I can't see how that's not offensive. You're basically saying that small business and the income they generate doesn't matter.
Are we comparing personal carbon tax impact against net income small business tax? You'll have to explain yourself.
Also, please explain how "lower taxes on income on the least important level possible" isn't a direct shot at small business owners with lower profits than larger busineses? I'm re-reading that statement 10 times over and I can't see how that's not offensive. You're basically saying that small business and the income they generate doesn't matter.
1. Yes. When I said 'Shell game' its because this is a 'bait and switch.'
The Carbon tax will have a significantly higher impact on your business unless you're right up against the 'Small Business' cap and even then it depends on the nature of the business.
The maximum benefit of the 1% tax-rate reduction is $5K.
2. The 'Least Important Level Possible.'
This is because Corporate taxes for small businesses are lower than personal taxes. Anything under $500K gets reductions.
The whole rhetoric of 'Tax the Rich, spare the Poor' stems from this.
The rich pay small tax rates on their incomes and leave money in their companies paying tax on it at much lower rates. The Government gets their bite at the cherry when that money has to move from the Company to the individual.
Because the Corporate rate is lower than the Personal rate. This is their design.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Notice how ol' Notley Hood's help isn't exactly welcome? Kinda similar here.
__________________
Pylon on the Edmonton Oilers:
"I am actually more excited for the Oilers game tomorrow than the Flames game. I am praying for multiple jersey tosses. The Oilers are my new favourite team for all the wrong reasons. I hate them so much I love them."
I'm a business with next to no overhead. My business sells services. Most of my company's expenses is payroll. I have no indication that any of my suppliers have jacked up prices to pass on the carbon tax levies. Maybe they will, but so far I haven't seen it.
That which I do retain - as profit - would be taxed at 14% (combined). I am now being taxed at 13%.
Assuming all things being equal, why would I not enjoy a 1% reduction in small business tax? Even if the monetary number is marginal in a relative sense to larger businesses?
Would you rather the small business rate have remained the same? I feel like the 1% drop in corporate tax serves to infuriate some who believe it's a placating placebo effect for businesses, but that isn't the case for everybody.
I'm a business with next to no overhead. My business sells services. Most of my company's expenses is payroll. I have no indication that any of my suppliers have jacked up prices to pass on the carbon tax levies. Maybe they will, but so far I haven't seen it.
That which I do retain - as profit - would be taxed at 14% (combined). I am now being taxed at 13%.
Assuming all things being equal, why would I not enjoy a 1% reduction in small business tax? Even if the monetary number is marginal in a relative sense to larger businesses?
Would you rather the small business rate have remained the same? I feel like the 1% drop in corporate tax serves to infuriate some who believe it's a placating placebo effect for businesses, but that isn't the case for everybody.
Oh, you havent seen it 4 days after its been instituted, two of which were holidays for most people, no way!
I'm not saying that you shouldnt enjoy the 1% reduction, I'll enjoy it too, all I was saying is that it was done for optical reasons.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul?
Its a political facade rather than a practical solution. Once again evidence to the NDP's preference for Ideology over Practicality.
Although I will admit that offering a lower tax rate to small businesses was very wise, even from a practical perspective. Its just that 1% is a token rather than a commitment.
Your girlfriend just gave you a 'promise ring.'
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Fair enough. I will say though that a 1% reduction is still beneficial to me, without knowing the long-term impact of the carbon tax yet. And even if it's a placating move, any good politician knows that the visual of it can do far more political gain than an accountant could credit them for
In my opinion, it would be better in the big picture to shave 0.25% or whatever off both the large and small business rates (whatever is revenue neutral).
We want big companies that employ lots of people and pay lots of corporate tax to be profitable in Alberta. I don't see why is makes any sense to discriminate against those entities to favour Ozy's and my own company.
I'm also in the services side (mostly digital now) and have most of my expenses as rent and salary. I expect only a tiny increase in cost due to the carbon tax (maybe a % on paper and a tiny flowthrough from the landlord/city). Being in the O&G sector, it's better for me if my clients are more profitable so I'd rather the decrease happened there.
Oh, you havent seen it 4 days after its been instituted, two of which were holidays for most people, no way!
How is Ozy's thinking that the 1% reduction will be a larger positive impact than the carbon tax will be a negative one, any more premature than your "shell game carbon tax bad" stance?
Maybe being so sure of the carbon tax, on either side, is extremely premature 4 days in?
How is Ozy's thinking that the 1% reduction will be a larger positive impact than the carbon tax will be a negative one, any more premature than your "shell game carbon tax bad" stance?
Maybe being so sure of the carbon tax, on either side, is extremely premature 4 days in?
Or maybe....just maybe...as someone who understands basic concepts like:
"Making transporting things more expensive makes things that are transported more expensive."
Seems simple right?
And yet here we are.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
The Following User Says Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Is this the same understanding that lead you to believe conventional drilling suffered under the NDP policy review when the industry is now saying it actually made things cheaper?
My business relies very little on transporting anything. Most everything supplied to my company is via digital means, and with suppliers not from Alberta.
I just cant see the carbon tax impacting my business in any dramatic way, but who knows what it will look like come the next election time. Right now, the 1% reduction in small business tax actually means more on the day-to-day from an accounting perspective. And when you're working with small business numbers, those numbers are magnified.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
My business relies very little on transporting anything. Most everything supplied to my company is via digital means, and with suppliers not from Alberta.
I just cant see the carbon tax impacting my business in any dramatic way, but who knows what it will look like come the next election time. Right now, the 1% reduction in small business tax actually means more on the day-to-day from an accounting perspective. And when you're working with small business numbers, those numbers are magnified.
I'm sorry, you're right. I forgot that anecdotal evidence that relies exclusively on you is the best evidence.
I forgot about macro-economical effects. Alberta is better because Ozy_Flame got a minute tax break.
Show is over folks! Problem solved. All good.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Maybe the price of milk skyrocketed as a result of the carbon tax and he's looking for cost effective ways to go green? Don't judge him for what is the NDP's fault.
