[#-3]

Originally Posted by DJones

Then expand your list. I didn't disagree with most of them being poor choices. They are just immaterial. Like ####, if you have to talk about Tylenol for five years at some point let it go.

You just brought up power bars, so this is a little the pot calling the kettle black. For clarity, It is not about the Tylenol, it is not about the money. It's about the method of decision making. It's about making an announcement about something they don't know how to do, because they assume they are smarter than the people who told them it was hard without looking into how to do it. This is just the ideal form of the pattern they repeat.

Originally Posted by DJones

People had been saying Keystone was dead for a decade but governments and private interests kept dumping money into them. If Trump would have won it would likely have proceeded. It was the presidential permit that revived and killed it.

This is a strong assumption for an otherwise very protective government to welcome trade with open arms, but it's nice that your optimistic look on that was it was basically a little worse than coin flip.

Originally Posted by DJones

If corporate taxes are 50%, your dividends are tax free. If Corporate taxes are 0%, your dividends are taxed at 50%. If corporate taxes are 25%, your dividends get taxed at 25%. Obviously a lot more math involved but that's how corporate taxes work. It's not a real tax, its a tax deferral. I think corporate taxes should be 0%. More revenue would end up going to the government. It would just be sporadic. That's why government hate it, if a big windfall comes in for your opponent but not you, the public will destroy you. Terrible for budgeting even if the net value of taxes goes up significantly.

This is almost unintelligible, but if I understand you correctly then you think the think the corporate tax cuts were offset by dividends which didn't increase? Those who know seem to think that the tax cut directly effect Alberta's budget to the tune of $2.2B/year, so I generally prefer to trust them over you.

At it's core your argument basically seems to ignore the reality of leveraged debt, people don't need to realize assets to benefit from owning them, they can leave the money sheltered and benefit from borrowing at low rates against their equity. Basically use the money to earn more money before paying taxes, which as I've explained before is the fundamental cause of the wealth gap.

Originally Posted by DJones

I have been pushing for a PST, more property taxes, more crown corporations and more provincial spending in pretty much all of my posts. But sure, must be a right wing hack because I said #### Trudeau. Yes, I voted for Smith for the strict purpose of fighting the feds and frankly the complete dismantling of Trudeau policies is a bigger win than I could have hoped for. Smith can go #### off. Now we need someone that can align the top 4 provinces to start clawing back federal spending and taxes.

This one, wont play as well with the crowd who's been enjoying me bashing your ideas, but PST is a bad idea, because again allowing those who have the capacity to save money to differ the date at which they are taxed is the fundamental cause of our wealth gap. The person hit the hardest by sales taxes is the person who spends their last dollar first regardless of how much tax they pay, because interest. In a world where investment debt has become so cheap it is almost riskless, whatever amount we decide we are going to tax people they should be taxed as early in the process as possible, otherwise you are ingraining a compounding wealth gap into the system.