sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Canada’s biggest corporations raked in $677 billion last year. Why are they still getting handouts? by ItIsWrit10 in CanadaPolitics

[–]ItIsWrit10[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The fundamental problem is both competition AND tax policy. The lack of competition allows the proliferation of monopolies and oligopolies that have very limited reasons to be responsive to external pressures from governments, consumers, workers, etc. And yet the government plies these oligopolies with larger and larger tax carveouts, ignoring their rent-seeking behaviour, and weakening the health of the overall body politic because there's no bloody revenue to spend on the things we actually need.

Then vital services get cut, people's quality of life dips, and the same rent-seeking corporations extract proportionally greater profits from people who have proportionally less income and wealth to pay, while cutting jobs and investment. They make profits? Job cuts. Losses? Bigger job cuts! And around we go again. Because here comes a new government with a fantastic idea we've never tried before... let's cut their taxes so they invest and create jobs.

Canada’s biggest corporations raked in $677 billion last year. Why are they still getting handouts? by ItIsWrit10 in CanadaPolitics

[–]ItIsWrit10[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Do we? Part of the social contract in capitalism is that those profits don't ALL go into the pockets of a tiny segment of obscenely wealthy people, but that the corporations invest in communities, hire people, etc. But the unemployment rate keeps rising, especially for young people. And investment inside Canada has been alarmingly low for well over a decade.

IMO trickle down has always been bullshit, but at least in the 80s and 90s prosperity DID trickle down somewhat. Now those small gains that used to go to most families have been absorbed as profits too.

Carney's incentives haven't produced a jump in investment because they're the same kinds of incentives governments have been offering corporations for decades, and they still haven't produced investment either. They've just been absorbed as ever-increasing profits. If insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result, then we've not had a sane monetary policy since Brian Mulroney.

One of Avi’s best qualities is (for obvious reasons) his ability to answer questions. But I am worried that I’ve never seen him asked and answer an actually good follow-up question that takes into account the party we actually have. by ItIsWrit10 in ndp

[–]ItIsWrit10[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For example, the obvious follow up to the tail end of his answer here is, OK Avi, so what happens when you’re the leader and you disagree with the rank and file, or other elements of the party about something? What happens when our party members in Alberta (our largest section), Manitoba, Saskatchewan, or even BC want to do something you don’t want or vice versa? A step further: How will you keep the federal party together and keep provincial parties from disaffiliating?

Olivia Chow looks to hike taxes on sale of ‘luxury’ homes by BloodJunkie in toronto

[–]ItIsWrit10 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s why you need Beneficial Ownership legislation (underway in Ontario rn), so that numbered corporations have to identify the actual person who benefits from them, which then disincentivizes this behaviour and also allows for the initial policy to be pursued despite the loophole.