Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
it should be that the CRA determines how much you pay, and you pay it end of story. No beating around the bush with appeal processes that take years and make it not worth it for the CRA to keep pursuing many of these cases. While due process is an important thing, ...
a too.
|
I could be mis-reading this but are you arguing against due process? Would it be better if the CRA had ultimate power to seize assets with no recourse, I do not think so, that is third-world dictator-esque.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
The answer is I happen to give a damn about others, that's how..
|
How is it that the funds to help others has to come from the rich, or other individuals? Is it more productive to fund government programs by taking money out of the economy, earning 5% than by the government raising funds at 1.5% with debt offerings?
The Government isn't really capital constricted, and I don't think they could necessarily solve the complex problems of helping everybody even if they had free reign to impose judgements on the risk and force liquidation of otherwise productive assets.