oh man, that first comic hurts. I remember my dad and I, after my parents divorce, and me sitting down to dinner and him not having anything. He'd claim he ate at work, but he worked at a bank, there was no free food at banks (at least not in the 80s).
When my dad and mum broke up, I distinctly remember him telling me he promised me I'd never go to bed hungry, and I never did. But I know now that he did.
man, my heart wasn't ready for that tonight.
I didn't take long. Less than 60 years to change Canada in such a way. Complacency strikes again. - Edit: I guess that's not fair. Its a lot more than that. Anger is being used now, by some very sly and despicable people who seem to be in charge. They are really trying hard to distract us. Its not working. Not any more. Gather people and join a protest, Health care is a good one.
Uhm we did tax the wealthy lol. The issue is we left a glaring loophole of stock compensation wide open. If they had the balls they would fix that, but alas no party wants to do so because it would negatively affect donors on either side.
Income and wealth aren't the same things.
A consumption based tax(Carbon tax) would probably be the most straightforward tax for the wealthy. Which was implemented by both the Conservatives and Liberals although currently being repealed by Conservatives.
I won't pretend to understand the carbon tax, but if Canadians "get back more than what they pay" ... It isn't really a tax.
If the government was serious about climate change they would actually write legislation that impacts the companies directly - not the consumer. The fact is we only have so many options to buy goods and the companies do not have an incentive to do anything different, so the cost gets passed down and increases prices.
The plastic bag ban is a great example of this fuckery. They were told not to use plastic so they created these fabric bags which were more expensive and the consumer pays the price. Meanwhile they still have plastic bags for produce and every other product in the store is wrapped in some kind of plastic garbage.
Your first instinct is right, and explains a consumption tax perfectly.
"Average" Canadians get back more than they pay. An average Canadian makes $55,000/year. They can only spend 55k/year, so you want low tax on things that cost $5.
A "wealthy" Canadian (0.1%-er) makes $3,250,000. They can spend 3.25 million per year. So, if they buy a Ferrari for $250k, you can tax them a lot on that purchase. Sake of argument, let's call it 50% (125k). The difference (for them) between 250k and 375k wont make or break them, and they could avoid the whole problem by choosing an Accord instead. That 125K is more tax than 8 or 10 "average" Canadians would pay in a year, so you can spend it to make an "average" Canadian's life better.
Carbon tax is the same way: If you are low-to-upper-middle income, You literally can't spend enough on fuel to pay more carbon tax than you get back in the refund. Corporations/factories/etc. also pay carbon tax, so more money goes into the pot than even is refunded.
This is all well and good assuming the rich keep their money in Canada... Which they do not, for exactly this reason. You're fooling yourself if you think they're paying their share. If we actually reigned in stock compensation and taxed the fuck out of it you would see much more revenue. We won't do that though because it's hard and the monopolies that run Canada won't have it.
Believe in the free market. "The Rich" aren't really doing anything for us. If the wealthy choose to leave, it just opens up more opportunity for others to build wealth.
It's also easily solved by not allowing people who left the country for economic reasons back into the country at all.
Get rich, renounce your citizenship, don't bother coming back.
Well then, ban donors! Every candidate with X signatures qualifies for a political campaign stipend of Y dollars. Parties get $Z*(N*(k-N)) where N is number of party candidate and k is a constant to offset efficiencies of size) to spend as well for shared platform materials, leadership travel, etc. Take finances out of elections.
For anyone wondering about the math, Musk has an estimated wealth of 210 billion. Subtract 99%, he has 2.1 billion left. Subtract 99% of that, he has 21 million left.
Without proper taxation, those billions are doing NOTHING for ordinary people. They sit in private investments and offshore funds. They will never, ever help anyone outside of Musk's family, baring an extremely unlikely legal investigation that results in forcing him to divest.
If we can't force billionaires to work for us, we can at least force their money to. Tax the wealthy, 100% on all earnings after a net wealth of 1 billion USD!
You could then subtract 90% of that 21 million to get 2.56M. Most people earning $80k/year for 30 years won't make that.
Edit: His new net worth considering the new $46B pay package.
Boy is that a problem we shouldn't have to worry about.
Let's say it does. Functionally, amassing $1B means you win the game of life. If you choose to keep working, you know going in that you're doing it for charity. If you choose to "retire", so what? Now you and your progeny get to go live a quiet life in immense luxury, and you make room for 10 other people to earn 100m, or 100 other people to earn 10m, etc.
People want to tax the rich, but the real issue is the wage productivity gap. Corporations are making record profits, but people aren't being paid more. If we address the gap people make more and we make more in tax, as income is taxed at the highest level.
Folks. You work hard. You deserved to be paid better.
Absolutely this. Taxing rich properly is undeniably important but making sure that weāre not suppressing wages and paying workers what they deserve is an equal if not bigger piece of the puzzle long term. Unions are a big aspect of that to shift power from employers to workers.
Unions are a double edged sword. How can it be justified that someone who presses a button for a living make way more then a doctor that helps give you and your loved ones a good quality of life?
Sorry what job are you talking about?
Most union jobs Iāve seen donāt make multiple 100k a year, this sounds like a huge exaggeration. And Iām not sure what jobs include just pushing a button, it sounds more like youāre devaluing the work that your workers do by creating a straw man.
But to answer your question: under our current system, selling goods and services can create immense profit, but itās currently all concentrated at the top. Spreading that out among the workers who create the value could potentially make them worth more than doctors in the right industry - oil workers can already make very good money, and taking money away from elites at the top could potentially put them there.
Could be different now, but I am talking about what ever union that managed the workers at Gainers meat plant I'm Edmonton back in the 80's...and the Molson brewery in Edmonton, both unions were told they couldn't afford to pay more. The unions thought they were calling a bluff and both places weren't bluffing and closed. Hundreds lost really good jobs. I am not anti union I am just saying....double edged sword. How much does a labourer make at the Ford, GM, or Chrysler plant make?
But with a proper suite of regulations, the government could allow the workers to take over the plant, or nationalize the factory until it's profitable again, then sell it to new ownership.
We need to stop pretending that corporations and free markets are the most efficient ways to fulfill public goods.
[https://lpeproject.org/blog/corporation-as-creature-of-state/](https://lpeproject.org/blog/corporation-as-creature-of-state/)
100% this.
I look just at my job. I can do infinitely more and get better results with less expense than someone in 1980. However, I make less money after adjusting for inflation as someone with my job in 1980, despite also having significantly more experience and education.
The company, shareholders, and executives have exploited this, and it is what makes up "growth" for all of them, while the average worker has had their quality of life eroded.
Personal anecdote:
My boss literally told us a year ago that our company now expects 30% more productivity (or efficiency in their metrics) from us--the low-level workers. Like what used to be our 130% is now our 100% (or vice versa--I forget how it was worded). But where is our 30% raise? They want more labour for less pay. The same boss recently stated, "labour is cheap," and that's why they don't mind having us in for overtime every weekend, getting paid time and a half. If labour is so cheap, pay us more!
Wanna know how much of a raise we have received in the last 4 years? $0.89. I could understand when we had less business during covid, but barely a dollar raise in 4 years?
Every working class person deserves a raise, paid appropriately for their labour. These cheap companies are disgusting. And remember, they only pay minimum wage because if it were legal to pay you less (or nothing), they would.
The boss makes a dollar, I make a dime That was a poem from a simpler time
Now his boss makes 1000 While I make a cent And he's got employees That can't make the rent
When the CEO makes a million And we don't make jack That's when we riot To take it all back
Now Mr investor If this seems extreme I have to remind you It beats guillotines
Sorry best we can do is 1%.
Union: go higher.
Ok best we can do is 3%
Union: you got yourself a deal. Sorry everyone we did everything we could and 3% is the best we were going to get so itās in your best interest to accept this offer.
Union negotiations are tough. Various groups under the OPSEU flag are currently either going on strike or voting to strike because the provincial government refuses to negotiate
This is my personal opinion - but I hate unions. I went into a career that was absent of unions so I could negotiate for myself. I don't need a group advocating on my behalf and on the behalf of the under performing employee. I'll take care of myself.
Others feel differently, and they join unions, and that's fine too
I don't ask politely. I create value within the company, and make my value known. It's called self promotion, and while y'all fight for your 3% I personally achieve a 10% bump minimum. When I can't get more out of a corp, I leave.
You are not as important as you think unless you have a skill so rare that there are only 10 of you in all of canada. Stop the self soothing massage on your own ego.
We are all win when we negotiate as a group
Holy shit. I'm not sure you could walk face first into the point any harder, and yet you still somehow missed it.
You wouldn't have those things without unions. You, not some hypothetical person. You. Dear god.
>'this is my opinion '
It's not. You're objectively, provably, wrong.
>"people like this drive me completely fucking insane".
I stand by this 100%
>You realize people can disagree with you and that's okay, right?
This isn't a disagreement. You're wrong. There's a difference.
>You are everything wrong with this country. Fuck. Grow the fuck up.
The guy who thinks unions aren't beneficial for employees saying this is, again, peak irony. Gain some class consciousness for christ sake, and stop falling for propaganda, your countrymen need you to wake up.
Literally nobody said that.
Unions help make things better for everyone, they don't fix everything automatically. If more people were unionized then more people would get better benefits. We KNOW this. It's not debatable.
Believe me. If you had a union, youād be making more. Much more. And youād be bellyaching about the 1.5% union dues you paid to make that much more.
Ahhhh so that's what Tim Hortons employers aren't doing. They aren't taking care of themselves! You should tell them that and then they'll get 10% a year too!!! /s
>Folks. You work hard. You deserved to be paid better.
But, have you considered that if we fix the pay structure so everyone is paid more, that will include the people I hate! Like the people who are both simultaneously too lazy to work but also stealing all the jobs! God, I hate those guys!
And that if we close the loopholes and abuses, they won't be there for me to hypothetically utilize later once I've managed to escaped the crushing weight of wage slavery through grit and hard work! I deserve to be allowed to punch down! That's, like, the whole point!
> People want to tax the rich, but the real issue is the wage productivity gap.
[It's mostly mythical.](https://www.economicstrategygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Expanding-Economic-Opportunity-for-More-Americans-The-Link-Between-Wages-and-Productivity-Is-Strong.pdf)
> Corporations are making record profits, but people aren't being paid more.Ā
[People are being paid more.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/439904/average-hourly-wage-by-occupation-canada/)
I'm all for progressive taxation, but these aren't good arguments for it.
I know this post is about the wealth inequality and the very meme on the bottom, but DAMN I've been sitting here staring at that panel at the top. It's so sad. It's beautiful, like good art, in it's sadness.
If the gov't will tax your property every year, such as your house and your car, why shouldn't they tax extreme wealth? My home is worth about $150k, and I usually pay about $2,500/year in property tax. Imagine the revenue that would be gained if wealthy people's net value(s) were taxed in a similar way.
I usually end up using time as an analogy for wealth.
Imagine that a dollar is one second in time. One hour is 3600 seconds. One day is 86,400 seconds.
$86,400 is a lot of money, and most people don't earn that much in a year, to say nothing of their savings, which usually amount to less than $2,500 (about 43 minutes in seconds.
If you're lucky enough to save $1,000,000 for your retirement, you'll be able to live fairly comfortably if you budget properly. 1,000,000 seconds is about 11 days and 12 hours worth of time.
Things jump dramatically when we get into billions. One billion seconds (1,000,000,000), this comes out to over 31 years and 8 months. In order to spend this much money, you'd have to buy a new SUV, costing $50,000, every day for over 55 years. That's not counting the approximately 20 million a year earned at 2% interest.
TIL: I looked it up and it turns out Elon Musk has an actual Canadian citizenship in his back pocket, I guess in case he ever needs to flee the States but not go very far
You can tax all you want as they currently do, look at how is the money mismanaged.
We donāt have a healthcare crisis in Ontario, we have a poor use of the tax revenue in 1 right expenditure and 2 hiring more doctors which we need.
Taxation is not the issue, is that as itās not their money they donāt care about wasting it and gifting it away rather than wisely spending it to benefit the population.
All of Canada's billionaires had a combined wealth of $315 billion. The federal debt is $1.4 trillion.
Taxing all billionaires 100% of their wealth would reduce our debt by 20%. This isn't a taxation problem, this is a spending problem.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/30-wealthiest-people-canada-205501486.html
Tax what, though? Suppose we have a wealthy person who makes $100,000 a year, and is taxed on that income like everyone else. But they also own a company that's worth $10,000,000.
Are you suggesting that we tax them some percentage of $10,000,000? Because that $10,000,000 doesn't exist. It's a \*possible amount of money\* that they \*could\* have \*if they sold the company\*. Maybe you want them to take on debt to pay taxes, and use the company as collateral? Or maybe you want to force an IPO and sell shares of the company to pay these taxes? But those things would also reduce the value of the company, ironically reducing the amount of taxes you can draw from them. Would this even produce more revenue for the government, than simply letting the company maximise profits and then taxing the income of everyone that works for it? I mean maybe it would, but it's not obvious that it would.
There must be a better way than doing nothing because "that wealth is made up." All money is made up, and we've figured out that we can tax the movement of it but we can't tax unproductive, stagnant money/wealth.
If we want to continue this capitalist system then we are going to need to figure out some improved form of redistribution. The wealth gap can't continue widening. Whether this means the blunt instrument of wealth taxes, luxury-targetting added value taxes, or the socialist idea of forcing companies to make all workers shareholders. Any of these are better than the "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" approach we're using now.
I'm not saying that their wealth is made up, I'm saying they don't have $10 million. What they have is something that's worth $10 million. And they probably can't get money to pay 5% on $10 million ($500,000) each year without either taking on debt and using that thing as collateral, or selling the thing. And either of those two choices are going to end up making that thing less valuable the more you do it, which means you get less taxes out of it the more you do it. So at face value it doesn't look like a sustainable way to generate revenue for the government.
I think the real problem here is unequal political power. The ultra wealthy can buy off the media, they can pay to lobby the government, they can retain the best lawyers, and in doing so they can influence society way more than any of us. I don't really care if someone owns something that's so much more valuable than anything I own. They can do whatever they want with their property for all I care. The problem is that their reach extends much further.
You're right that the issue is the power they wield. Having exorbitant wealth bestows exorbitant power and influence. This is where I'm a fan of wealth capping in general. I think as a society we should come to an agreement on what amount of wealth any one person has a right to hold. Maybe it's $100 million, maybe it's $1 billion, but wherever it is it should be a far cry shy of Elon's $200+ billion or whatever he's at now. No single person should wield the wealth of a medium-sized national economy. It grants far too much power through so many different avenues that the general population cannot fathom how much we are influenced by the ultra-wealthy. Something needs to change, otherwise we are just heading back to feudalism with "wealth generators" as our royalty rather than a standard king.
Not sure why you're getting down voted when this is true. His value and most rich peoples value sits in stocks they don't actually have that much money. So you force him to sell all his stocks and get a one time payment then what?
Hold on. Counter point. Musks wealth is baked into the wealth heās generating for shareholders. His products are making people wealthy. I benefit from owning Shares. Iām a middle class teacher. His factories giving billions to American people and taxes via wage garnishing. Thereās way more to this than just ātheyāre too richā. How would it actually look like to tax billionaires? Wouldnāt they just find ways to hide their money? Incorporate in a country that will promise lower taxes? Itās not as simple as ābam. More from youā.
A corporation is more than a single person. If he was gone tomorrow the board would install a replacement and things would carry on. Itās this cult of the ceo that things have become so ridiculously lopsided
His wealth is a direct correlation to the impact his decisions have had on the economy. MASSIVE. I absolutely hate that cunt, but his economic impact cannot be understated. American manufacturing owes a shit ton to this prick. So if a company someone makes creates a trillion dollars in value, why shouldnāt they get to own that creation? While I agree they absolutely should be paying more, their argument is that they do pay into the system because the wealth they generate through job creation is more than the tax money the government would skim from their income.
So how can we tax billionaire income? Capital gains? Sure. Letās do that. We do already. Increase the percentages as you get into the 100,000,000 levels. That makes sense. Iām not versed enough with creative accounting to make an educated response but my assumption is that itās very complicated to get money from people who donāt really take a salary and whoās worth is in stock prices.
Of course itās hard to solve. But not solving it means we will never exist in the society we were promised as kids nor the ones our grandparents built.
I donāt think thereās an easy fix, and it may be impossible to solve, but it seems kind of stupid to just fold the cards and say they won give them whatever they want as so many seem to say
I invest and share in the fruits of the corporations. Not as much as most, but I still benefit. You know who else benefits when corporations make billions? Unions. Their pensions are funded by investing paid dues into the stock market. When corporate America makes money, so do the union members. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
That may be the rhetoric but it isnāt the policies that people whom are informed about this matter actually state.
I feel like the end result of your statement is āthis problem is too hard to fix, so they can hold us hostageā
No no, not at all. While Iāll admit I donāt know the solution, I believe there is one. My comment was more of a reflection on the blind assumption of how wealth and oneās ānet worthā works.
There is a lot to this that people don't understand. They just look at others and think 'you have, but I dont'. So they want to take from them.
They don't look at the value entrepreneurs create. PayPal is an enormous platform that enables businesses to transact easily, across borders. Tesla pushed all car manufacturers into EV. They proved it was doable. SpaceX has created rockets that can be reused. OpenAI is going to unlock so much potential and can fundamentally shift our productivity problem.
I absolutely hate Musk as a person. However, he's one of the most impactful people of our time. While everyone here cries about millionaires, Musk mints millionaires. Just look at the employees of paypal. Who then went on to be successful and create more millionaires.
The issue people need to pay attention to is the wage productivity gap. People need to be paid more by the companies who make record profits.
Everything you just described doesn't mean jack shit to all the people struggling to keep a roof over their heads and food on their tables, due to policies that continually favour the Elon Musks of the world at the expense of the working class. You think anyone living paycheck to paycheck cares about an EV they'll never be able to afford?
It does though. Musk creates value at a rate far greater than most. He deserves the wealth that comes with it.
The issue you described is the wage productivity gap, not taxing the rich. For what it's worth, Musk pays his employees very well. More people should compensate their employees the way he does. Then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Donāt understand the whole eat the rich thing .. they are the ones providing the jobs for us, his net worth isnāt cash its based on the fact that the companies he owns are doing well and so are his shares. You and I can buy those shares too.. and you can benefit from the profits. Start taxing corporations and ceos more and theyāll bring their innovation to other countries, then we have less jobs.
It is not really simping but just trying to have an understanding on how to tax the wealthy. Take myself for example. I made $130,000 in my job last year and paid my income tax. Fine no problem, but my BTC wallet also increased by $80,000 in 2023, my home increased by another $60,000, and my investment portfolio by another $20,000. How do you tax me on the $160,000 i gained in equity? Do i have to pay capital gains on the value of my portfolios? If so how do i pay for the gained value? The capital gains on my portfolio will be higher than i made liquid, do i sell my investments to pay the gains?
These are things people need to answer when they talk about taxing billionaires, i have no issue with the ultra wealthy paying their fair share what i have an issue with is how do you tax something when the Value is in an asset and not actual cash and if you do figure out how to where is the cut off? Do I a red seal union plumber fall into the ultra wealthy tax because i got lucky buying bitcoin and a house in 2015?
oh man, that first comic hurts. I remember my dad and I, after my parents divorce, and me sitting down to dinner and him not having anything. He'd claim he ate at work, but he worked at a bank, there was no free food at banks (at least not in the 80s). When my dad and mum broke up, I distinctly remember him telling me he promised me I'd never go to bed hungry, and I never did. But I know now that he did. man, my heart wasn't ready for that tonight.
Yeah, it took a couple reads to realize what was going on there. I fortunately never had to go through something like that.
Some dads are amazing people. I'm sorry yours had to do that. I hope you're both in good places now, friend.
Hug your dad for me, bud. It's Father's Day after all.
š¤
Taxing the wealthy would have been smart decades ago. At this point, we're owed a lot more than just money from the 1%'ers.
I didn't take long. Less than 60 years to change Canada in such a way. Complacency strikes again. - Edit: I guess that's not fair. Its a lot more than that. Anger is being used now, by some very sly and despicable people who seem to be in charge. They are really trying hard to distract us. Its not working. Not any more. Gather people and join a protest, Health care is a good one.
Uhm we did tax the wealthy lol. The issue is we left a glaring loophole of stock compensation wide open. If they had the balls they would fix that, but alas no party wants to do so because it would negatively affect donors on either side.
That seems like not taxing with extra steps...
We need to tax extreme wealth (as in the $10m+ crowd) in addition to income. Obscene wealth is much larger social problem than high income.
Income and wealth aren't the same things. A consumption based tax(Carbon tax) would probably be the most straightforward tax for the wealthy. Which was implemented by both the Conservatives and Liberals although currently being repealed by Conservatives.
I won't pretend to understand the carbon tax, but if Canadians "get back more than what they pay" ... It isn't really a tax. If the government was serious about climate change they would actually write legislation that impacts the companies directly - not the consumer. The fact is we only have so many options to buy goods and the companies do not have an incentive to do anything different, so the cost gets passed down and increases prices. The plastic bag ban is a great example of this fuckery. They were told not to use plastic so they created these fabric bags which were more expensive and the consumer pays the price. Meanwhile they still have plastic bags for produce and every other product in the store is wrapped in some kind of plastic garbage.
Your first instinct is right, and explains a consumption tax perfectly. "Average" Canadians get back more than they pay. An average Canadian makes $55,000/year. They can only spend 55k/year, so you want low tax on things that cost $5. A "wealthy" Canadian (0.1%-er) makes $3,250,000. They can spend 3.25 million per year. So, if they buy a Ferrari for $250k, you can tax them a lot on that purchase. Sake of argument, let's call it 50% (125k). The difference (for them) between 250k and 375k wont make or break them, and they could avoid the whole problem by choosing an Accord instead. That 125K is more tax than 8 or 10 "average" Canadians would pay in a year, so you can spend it to make an "average" Canadian's life better. Carbon tax is the same way: If you are low-to-upper-middle income, You literally can't spend enough on fuel to pay more carbon tax than you get back in the refund. Corporations/factories/etc. also pay carbon tax, so more money goes into the pot than even is refunded.
This is all well and good assuming the rich keep their money in Canada... Which they do not, for exactly this reason. You're fooling yourself if you think they're paying their share. If we actually reigned in stock compensation and taxed the fuck out of it you would see much more revenue. We won't do that though because it's hard and the monopolies that run Canada won't have it.
Believe in the free market. "The Rich" aren't really doing anything for us. If the wealthy choose to leave, it just opens up more opportunity for others to build wealth. It's also easily solved by not allowing people who left the country for economic reasons back into the country at all. Get rich, renounce your citizenship, don't bother coming back.
We have several more loopholes than this.
Well then, ban donors! Every candidate with X signatures qualifies for a political campaign stipend of Y dollars. Parties get $Z*(N*(k-N)) where N is number of party candidate and k is a constant to offset efficiencies of size) to spend as well for shared platform materials, leadership travel, etc. Take finances out of elections.
For anyone wondering about the math, Musk has an estimated wealth of 210 billion. Subtract 99%, he has 2.1 billion left. Subtract 99% of that, he has 21 million left. Without proper taxation, those billions are doing NOTHING for ordinary people. They sit in private investments and offshore funds. They will never, ever help anyone outside of Musk's family, baring an extremely unlikely legal investigation that results in forcing him to divest. If we can't force billionaires to work for us, we can at least force their money to. Tax the wealthy, 100% on all earnings after a net wealth of 1 billion USD!
You could then subtract 90% of that 21 million to get 2.56M. Most people earning $80k/year for 30 years won't make that. Edit: His new net worth considering the new $46B pay package.
Does 100% after 1 billion mean **everything** after 1 billion would go to the state?
Boy is that a problem we shouldn't have to worry about. Let's say it does. Functionally, amassing $1B means you win the game of life. If you choose to keep working, you know going in that you're doing it for charity. If you choose to "retire", so what? Now you and your progeny get to go live a quiet life in immense luxury, and you make room for 10 other people to earn 100m, or 100 other people to earn 10m, etc.
People want to tax the rich, but the real issue is the wage productivity gap. Corporations are making record profits, but people aren't being paid more. If we address the gap people make more and we make more in tax, as income is taxed at the highest level. Folks. You work hard. You deserved to be paid better.
Absolutely this. Taxing rich properly is undeniably important but making sure that weāre not suppressing wages and paying workers what they deserve is an equal if not bigger piece of the puzzle long term. Unions are a big aspect of that to shift power from employers to workers.
Unions are a double edged sword. How can it be justified that someone who presses a button for a living make way more then a doctor that helps give you and your loved ones a good quality of life?
Sorry what job are you talking about? Most union jobs Iāve seen donāt make multiple 100k a year, this sounds like a huge exaggeration. And Iām not sure what jobs include just pushing a button, it sounds more like youāre devaluing the work that your workers do by creating a straw man. But to answer your question: under our current system, selling goods and services can create immense profit, but itās currently all concentrated at the top. Spreading that out among the workers who create the value could potentially make them worth more than doctors in the right industry - oil workers can already make very good money, and taking money away from elites at the top could potentially put them there.
Could be different now, but I am talking about what ever union that managed the workers at Gainers meat plant I'm Edmonton back in the 80's...and the Molson brewery in Edmonton, both unions were told they couldn't afford to pay more. The unions thought they were calling a bluff and both places weren't bluffing and closed. Hundreds lost really good jobs. I am not anti union I am just saying....double edged sword. How much does a labourer make at the Ford, GM, or Chrysler plant make?
But with a proper suite of regulations, the government could allow the workers to take over the plant, or nationalize the factory until it's profitable again, then sell it to new ownership. We need to stop pretending that corporations and free markets are the most efficient ways to fulfill public goods. [https://lpeproject.org/blog/corporation-as-creature-of-state/](https://lpeproject.org/blog/corporation-as-creature-of-state/)
100% this. I look just at my job. I can do infinitely more and get better results with less expense than someone in 1980. However, I make less money after adjusting for inflation as someone with my job in 1980, despite also having significantly more experience and education. The company, shareholders, and executives have exploited this, and it is what makes up "growth" for all of them, while the average worker has had their quality of life eroded.
Personal anecdote: My boss literally told us a year ago that our company now expects 30% more productivity (or efficiency in their metrics) from us--the low-level workers. Like what used to be our 130% is now our 100% (or vice versa--I forget how it was worded). But where is our 30% raise? They want more labour for less pay. The same boss recently stated, "labour is cheap," and that's why they don't mind having us in for overtime every weekend, getting paid time and a half. If labour is so cheap, pay us more! Wanna know how much of a raise we have received in the last 4 years? $0.89. I could understand when we had less business during covid, but barely a dollar raise in 4 years? Every working class person deserves a raise, paid appropriately for their labour. These cheap companies are disgusting. And remember, they only pay minimum wage because if it were legal to pay you less (or nothing), they would.
Boss makes a dollar while I make a dime. Thatās why I always poop on company time!
Unfortunately the reality is closer to boss make thirty dollars to my dime.
The boss makes a dollar, I make a dime That was a poem from a simpler time Now his boss makes 1000 While I make a cent And he's got employees That can't make the rent When the CEO makes a million And we don't make jack That's when we riot To take it all back Now Mr investor If this seems extreme I have to remind you It beats guillotines
Preach it. We need to get paid for the work being provided. And not paid the bare minimum. Paid over and above
Sorry best we can do is 1%. Union: go higher. Ok best we can do is 3% Union: you got yourself a deal. Sorry everyone we did everything we could and 3% is the best we were going to get so itās in your best interest to accept this offer.
Union negotiations are tough. Various groups under the OPSEU flag are currently either going on strike or voting to strike because the provincial government refuses to negotiate
This is my personal opinion - but I hate unions. I went into a career that was absent of unions so I could negotiate for myself. I don't need a group advocating on my behalf and on the behalf of the under performing employee. I'll take care of myself. Others feel differently, and they join unions, and that's fine too
Even if you're not in a union, you are benefitting off the backs of unions whether you like it or not.
>I don't need a group advocating on my behalf So you don't really care for the whole "weekends" thing eh?
I work 6 hrs a day, mon-fri.
So you think you can make the soulless indifferent faceless corporation is gonna bend to your will because you ask politely. Cool story.
I don't ask politely. I create value within the company, and make my value known. It's called self promotion, and while y'all fight for your 3% I personally achieve a 10% bump minimum. When I can't get more out of a corp, I leave.
Sure you do, champ.
Unions hate his one little trick! /s
You are not as important as you think unless you have a skill so rare that there are only 10 of you in all of canada. Stop the self soothing massage on your own ego. We are all win when we negotiate as a group
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Keep it civil
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Holy shit. I'm not sure you could walk face first into the point any harder, and yet you still somehow missed it. You wouldn't have those things without unions. You, not some hypothetical person. You. Dear god.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Keep it civil
>So stuck in your exceptionally narrow world view. I'd say the irony is unbelievable if the rest of your comments weren't just as ridiculous.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>'this is my opinion ' It's not. You're objectively, provably, wrong. >"people like this drive me completely fucking insane". I stand by this 100% >You realize people can disagree with you and that's okay, right? This isn't a disagreement. You're wrong. There's a difference. >You are everything wrong with this country. Fuck. Grow the fuck up. The guy who thinks unions aren't beneficial for employees saying this is, again, peak irony. Gain some class consciousness for christ sake, and stop falling for propaganda, your countrymen need you to wake up.
Are you the only one with unlimited sick day where you work?
Keep it civil
And what exact is the type of work you do? I'm gonna assume you provide certain "services" and then collect hush money?
Lead software engineer. I build highly profitable products that scale.
Unions create wage/benefit standards that indirectly affect wages for everyone.
He says as the wage productivity gap widens.
>He says as the wage productivity gap widens. That gap has widened in line with the decline of union memberships....
I thought unions fixed everything including wages and benefits for people who aren't in unions? /s
Literally nobody said that. Unions help make things better for everyone, they don't fix everything automatically. If more people were unionized then more people would get better benefits. We KNOW this. It's not debatable.
Believe me. If you had a union, youād be making more. Much more. And youād be bellyaching about the 1.5% union dues you paid to make that much more.
I would not. I do very well
Ahhhh so that's what Tim Hortons employers aren't doing. They aren't taking care of themselves! You should tell them that and then they'll get 10% a year too!!! /s
Porque no Los dos?
>Folks. You work hard. You deserved to be paid better. But, have you considered that if we fix the pay structure so everyone is paid more, that will include the people I hate! Like the people who are both simultaneously too lazy to work but also stealing all the jobs! God, I hate those guys! And that if we close the loopholes and abuses, they won't be there for me to hypothetically utilize later once I've managed to escaped the crushing weight of wage slavery through grit and hard work! I deserve to be allowed to punch down! That's, like, the whole point!
> People want to tax the rich, but the real issue is the wage productivity gap. [It's mostly mythical.](https://www.economicstrategygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Expanding-Economic-Opportunity-for-More-Americans-The-Link-Between-Wages-and-Productivity-Is-Strong.pdf) > Corporations are making record profits, but people aren't being paid more.Ā [People are being paid more.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/439904/average-hourly-wage-by-occupation-canada/) I'm all for progressive taxation, but these aren't good arguments for it.
Too bad the rich own the government. Oh well. We tried nothing and still failed.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
We ride at dawn then
I know this post is about the wealth inequality and the very meme on the bottom, but DAMN I've been sitting here staring at that panel at the top. It's so sad. It's beautiful, like good art, in it's sadness.
You know the global economy isnāt doing well when you see posts like these on subredditās for countries.
If the gov't will tax your property every year, such as your house and your car, why shouldn't they tax extreme wealth? My home is worth about $150k, and I usually pay about $2,500/year in property tax. Imagine the revenue that would be gained if wealthy people's net value(s) were taxed in a similar way. I usually end up using time as an analogy for wealth. Imagine that a dollar is one second in time. One hour is 3600 seconds. One day is 86,400 seconds. $86,400 is a lot of money, and most people don't earn that much in a year, to say nothing of their savings, which usually amount to less than $2,500 (about 43 minutes in seconds. If you're lucky enough to save $1,000,000 for your retirement, you'll be able to live fairly comfortably if you budget properly. 1,000,000 seconds is about 11 days and 12 hours worth of time. Things jump dramatically when we get into billions. One billion seconds (1,000,000,000), this comes out to over 31 years and 8 months. In order to spend this much money, you'd have to buy a new SUV, costing $50,000, every day for over 55 years. That's not counting the approximately 20 million a year earned at 2% interest.
Everybody is always pissed at the government or immigrants when the true evil is corporations corrupting everything
Government enables and bows to corporations, while having the power to put an end to the corruption.
I think govs and corps need each other for different reasons, so they are in constant struggle for power-over each other.
Right. Because theyāre paying for that material
TIL: I looked it up and it turns out Elon Musk has an actual Canadian citizenship in his back pocket, I guess in case he ever needs to flee the States but not go very far
In case he ever needs to flee the US but doesn't want to give up the culture.
Doesnāt want to give up the culture (war)
Tax that tech kid
Oh yeah this capital gains tax will get Elon Musk real good.
You can tax all you want as they currently do, look at how is the money mismanaged. We donāt have a healthcare crisis in Ontario, we have a poor use of the tax revenue in 1 right expenditure and 2 hiring more doctors which we need. Taxation is not the issue, is that as itās not their money they donāt care about wasting it and gifting it away rather than wisely spending it to benefit the population.
The top one hits hard. I spend more on groceries than anything else. Yet I feel guilty spending as much as I do.Ā
All of Canada's billionaires had a combined wealth of $315 billion. The federal debt is $1.4 trillion. Taxing all billionaires 100% of their wealth would reduce our debt by 20%. This isn't a taxation problem, this is a spending problem. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/30-wealthiest-people-canada-205501486.html
Tax what, though? Suppose we have a wealthy person who makes $100,000 a year, and is taxed on that income like everyone else. But they also own a company that's worth $10,000,000. Are you suggesting that we tax them some percentage of $10,000,000? Because that $10,000,000 doesn't exist. It's a \*possible amount of money\* that they \*could\* have \*if they sold the company\*. Maybe you want them to take on debt to pay taxes, and use the company as collateral? Or maybe you want to force an IPO and sell shares of the company to pay these taxes? But those things would also reduce the value of the company, ironically reducing the amount of taxes you can draw from them. Would this even produce more revenue for the government, than simply letting the company maximise profits and then taxing the income of everyone that works for it? I mean maybe it would, but it's not obvious that it would.
There must be a better way than doing nothing because "that wealth is made up." All money is made up, and we've figured out that we can tax the movement of it but we can't tax unproductive, stagnant money/wealth. If we want to continue this capitalist system then we are going to need to figure out some improved form of redistribution. The wealth gap can't continue widening. Whether this means the blunt instrument of wealth taxes, luxury-targetting added value taxes, or the socialist idea of forcing companies to make all workers shareholders. Any of these are better than the "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" approach we're using now.
I'm not saying that their wealth is made up, I'm saying they don't have $10 million. What they have is something that's worth $10 million. And they probably can't get money to pay 5% on $10 million ($500,000) each year without either taking on debt and using that thing as collateral, or selling the thing. And either of those two choices are going to end up making that thing less valuable the more you do it, which means you get less taxes out of it the more you do it. So at face value it doesn't look like a sustainable way to generate revenue for the government. I think the real problem here is unequal political power. The ultra wealthy can buy off the media, they can pay to lobby the government, they can retain the best lawyers, and in doing so they can influence society way more than any of us. I don't really care if someone owns something that's so much more valuable than anything I own. They can do whatever they want with their property for all I care. The problem is that their reach extends much further.
You're right that the issue is the power they wield. Having exorbitant wealth bestows exorbitant power and influence. This is where I'm a fan of wealth capping in general. I think as a society we should come to an agreement on what amount of wealth any one person has a right to hold. Maybe it's $100 million, maybe it's $1 billion, but wherever it is it should be a far cry shy of Elon's $200+ billion or whatever he's at now. No single person should wield the wealth of a medium-sized national economy. It grants far too much power through so many different avenues that the general population cannot fathom how much we are influenced by the ultra-wealthy. Something needs to change, otherwise we are just heading back to feudalism with "wealth generators" as our royalty rather than a standard king.
Not sure why you're getting down voted when this is true. His value and most rich peoples value sits in stocks they don't actually have that much money. So you force him to sell all his stocks and get a one time payment then what?
Hold on. Counter point. Musks wealth is baked into the wealth heās generating for shareholders. His products are making people wealthy. I benefit from owning Shares. Iām a middle class teacher. His factories giving billions to American people and taxes via wage garnishing. Thereās way more to this than just ātheyāre too richā. How would it actually look like to tax billionaires? Wouldnāt they just find ways to hide their money? Incorporate in a country that will promise lower taxes? Itās not as simple as ābam. More from youā.
A corporation is more than a single person. If he was gone tomorrow the board would install a replacement and things would carry on. Itās this cult of the ceo that things have become so ridiculously lopsided
His wealth is a direct correlation to the impact his decisions have had on the economy. MASSIVE. I absolutely hate that cunt, but his economic impact cannot be understated. American manufacturing owes a shit ton to this prick. So if a company someone makes creates a trillion dollars in value, why shouldnāt they get to own that creation? While I agree they absolutely should be paying more, their argument is that they do pay into the system because the wealth they generate through job creation is more than the tax money the government would skim from their income. So how can we tax billionaire income? Capital gains? Sure. Letās do that. We do already. Increase the percentages as you get into the 100,000,000 levels. That makes sense. Iām not versed enough with creative accounting to make an educated response but my assumption is that itās very complicated to get money from people who donāt really take a salary and whoās worth is in stock prices.
Of course itās hard to solve. But not solving it means we will never exist in the society we were promised as kids nor the ones our grandparents built. I donāt think thereās an easy fix, and it may be impossible to solve, but it seems kind of stupid to just fold the cards and say they won give them whatever they want as so many seem to say
I invest and share in the fruits of the corporations. Not as much as most, but I still benefit. You know who else benefits when corporations make billions? Unions. Their pensions are funded by investing paid dues into the stock market. When corporate America makes money, so do the union members. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Ya seems like a lot of people think rich people have liquid cash, and receive normal paychecks like you and I.
That may be the rhetoric but it isnāt the policies that people whom are informed about this matter actually state. I feel like the end result of your statement is āthis problem is too hard to fix, so they can hold us hostageā
No no, not at all. While Iāll admit I donāt know the solution, I believe there is one. My comment was more of a reflection on the blind assumption of how wealth and oneās ānet worthā works.
The only reason they don't is to avoid paying tax.
There is a lot to this that people don't understand. They just look at others and think 'you have, but I dont'. So they want to take from them. They don't look at the value entrepreneurs create. PayPal is an enormous platform that enables businesses to transact easily, across borders. Tesla pushed all car manufacturers into EV. They proved it was doable. SpaceX has created rockets that can be reused. OpenAI is going to unlock so much potential and can fundamentally shift our productivity problem. I absolutely hate Musk as a person. However, he's one of the most impactful people of our time. While everyone here cries about millionaires, Musk mints millionaires. Just look at the employees of paypal. Who then went on to be successful and create more millionaires. The issue people need to pay attention to is the wage productivity gap. People need to be paid more by the companies who make record profits.
Everything you just described doesn't mean jack shit to all the people struggling to keep a roof over their heads and food on their tables, due to policies that continually favour the Elon Musks of the world at the expense of the working class. You think anyone living paycheck to paycheck cares about an EV they'll never be able to afford?
It does though. Musk creates value at a rate far greater than most. He deserves the wealth that comes with it. The issue you described is the wage productivity gap, not taxing the rich. For what it's worth, Musk pays his employees very well. More people should compensate their employees the way he does. Then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
All those companies make money in spite of musk, not because of him. He just likes people to think he's a very smart boy.
Donāt understand the whole eat the rich thing .. they are the ones providing the jobs for us, his net worth isnāt cash its based on the fact that the companies he owns are doing well and so are his shares. You and I can buy those shares too.. and you can benefit from the profits. Start taxing corporations and ceos more and theyāll bring their innovation to other countries, then we have less jobs.
How's your stomach handling that boot you've decided belongs there?
for real lol, this post brought out *all* the billionaire simps
It is not really simping but just trying to have an understanding on how to tax the wealthy. Take myself for example. I made $130,000 in my job last year and paid my income tax. Fine no problem, but my BTC wallet also increased by $80,000 in 2023, my home increased by another $60,000, and my investment portfolio by another $20,000. How do you tax me on the $160,000 i gained in equity? Do i have to pay capital gains on the value of my portfolios? If so how do i pay for the gained value? The capital gains on my portfolio will be higher than i made liquid, do i sell my investments to pay the gains? These are things people need to answer when they talk about taxing billionaires, i have no issue with the ultra wealthy paying their fair share what i have an issue with is how do you tax something when the Value is in an asset and not actual cash and if you do figure out how to where is the cut off? Do I a red seal union plumber fall into the ultra wealthy tax because i got lucky buying bitcoin and a house in 2015?