CEO Pay Recession Proof

People who noisily deny that social classes exist at all are part of the problem. It's a kind of capitulation in the face of attack.

Unfortunately, Babble and the MSM as well has plenty of such people - many of whom defend their views with claims about their own "realistic" views and who mock any and all genuine alternatives (especially those that smell of socialist ideas). This is a kind of double capitulation.

Throw all the CEO's in jail for theft!

Anybody notice that rabble got front page notice in the National Post today? They spelled our name wrong, naturally. rabble is all lower case letters, always. Apparently Kelly McParland has become a humour columnist. His take on the CCPA report is here:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/01/03/kelly-mcparland-newsflash...

Question: does this make you mad or is it comic relief ?

But Kelly McParland, blessed with a national soapbox, is incapable of actually addressing the issue. Revealing that in the end, even he had to admit to its implications.

Yeah it's pretty bad the levels people will stoop too keep all the money in their respective corps or family..but this is the way it is everywhere..it's all greed and selfishness...to hell with the poor , underprivildged etc etc...they are God's problem...the meek.

So dummy canuck continues to pay 33% of their money to the government crooks while the real rich go unscathed , untouched and as long as they don't come out saying "let them eat cake" unchopped!...they will continue sipping pina colada's in exotic places ..just laughing at the stupidity and gullibility of the general population... Actually they don't laugh ..it's a given already!

They do know the right balance tho...too many Canadians " sitting pretty" to upset the status quo..and sitting they are ..in front of video games and computers and ipods and ipads and tv sets ..swallowing the latest piece of propaganda like everything is fine and dandy, thank you.

Canadians pay both a provincial and federal income tax rate. The tax you pay on $40k will generally be about a 33% marginal tax rate. Admittedly, there are various credits that lower one's tax liability, and also since it 33% is the marginal tax rate (depending on province of course), the actual average tax rate you pay will be lower (probably about 20%). However, there is also CPP and EI deductions (and possibly other deductions such as union dues) that somebody making $40k will have to pay which impact lower income earners more than those with a higher income (CPP and EI deductions both max out around $50k IIRC). Of course CPP, EI, and other payroll deductions are arguably not a "tax" they are still a payroll deduction and thus reduce an individual's buying power. 

As far as your "29% is more than 15%" argument, the point is that wealthier people are better able to use tax saving strategies, both those strategies designed specifically to reduce an individual's tax liability (RRSP's and TFSA's for example)  as well as other strategies such as incorporating as well as the use of trusts. 

Oh I would love to see a tax calculation form . from one of those elite...maybe they will make one public under a fictitious name for educational purposes one day....you can just hope.

There is no way I am going to believe that the "rich get richer crowd" haven't come up with loop holes and perks to save even more money during this swindle ..err I mean recession...

Just look at the typical Joe paying a federal tax and a provincial tax then tax on all things they purchase plus the taxs on communications and utilities, and their vehicles. Plates insurance etc. I'll bet these ceo's under the guise of business are claiming all expenses and vehicle costs and travelling be it vacation or business all things they purchase and you name it ..There are a lot of expenses made for the so called self employed than there is for the typical worker to enjoy...even the cost of being a worker and all expenses related to it are claimable by the elite

Add it all up and there is no way the super rich are paying their fair share and further the typical worker is being screwed like there is no tomorrow, paying so much in actual plus hidden taxs.

Then there are the investment protection gimmicks that the typical worker can't even fathom...like trusts etc...then there are the resident status gimmicks where you are only taxed if you are a resident, but you can still be a citizen and not pay tax provided you live in Canada during the summer but winter in a tropical paradise somewhere else ..another gimmick the typical Canuck can only dream off. Actually I think they closed that loophole some years ago but I'm sure there is another one that has replaced it.

There are so many ways for the rich to protect their money..The biggest loser of all are the workers who really have nothing in comparison to show....God bless the union .the only real protection the working Joe has from the impetuous rich vultures and their crooked right wing slime bucket government.

I'll tell ya the more you know about the conniving rich the more you realize the people in places like Venezuela , Belarus and Cuba have the politics figured out...unfortunately tho if we start pointing fingers the rich neocon bastard scum will figure out ways to destroy them all. That says lots right there!

Why would you think someone earning $100,000 derives 100% of their income from capital gains? I mean, it is possible that somebody could earn 100% of their income in a single year from capital gains (and depending on their investments that amount could be $100,000 or more of course) but that wouldn't be typical. Such a gain if it occurred year after year, would likely result in the CRA stating that these gains are not capital gains -- as a capital gain is generally a gain as a result of the disposition of capital property (IE: property used to earn income) and if you are never earning income on this property you are selling, CRA is unlikely to continue to accept that it is capital property you are selling. 

IN addition the cons want another method for a tax shelter as flaherty mentioned just a few weks ago regarding pensions. If you and your spouse contirbute to RRSP and TFSA you can shelter an additional 54,000 a year....who the hell has 54,000 dollars of disposable income and not even pinch them. Let alone needing a brand new way of hiding money that doesn't include offshore accounts.

Yes well how many people do this snert? I have seen meals written off on expenses too. Should I report everyone that does that too. Typical though. you make excuses for business class people, but never answer the questions.

Who has money enough at the end of the week to spend on RRSPs, and new boats or another cottage-hint it ain't 75% of the people who shuffle off to work everyday.

Nice sidestep. Why are they bringing in a new pension plan when the current tax deductions already allow for 54,000 a year per couple? How much is enough. Its another ways of squirreling away money that they should be paying taxes on to start with. WHy make a new program. Again I don't know what you consider to be wealthy but yeah if you have 54,000 in disposable income to throw into saving after everything you buy in a year, you can't be hurting too bad. Esp if you are bleating for more ways of not paying taxes on top of that.

Which bring us back to point one. The rich aren't taxed much because of 50% capital gains plus the ability to max out all sorts of tax exemptions while still living far far better than even the uppper middle class of the country. Businesses are only taxed on profits, not earning so tax writeoff are theft from you and I. We make up teh shortfall to programs because they no longer pay their share. And Business tax rate is 16.5 % as of this week. They write off fines for polluting. How does that make sense.Its not a fine if it is written off. It becomes a business expense if you happen to get caught.

I guess the single mom working two job at 11 dollars an hour should just relax because the rich want more tax cuts while cutting her wage becasue of globalization. The poor scrape by to put food on the table but they pay less as a percent of their income or total dollars than the rich. So they aren't doing their share....can't get blood from a stone, unless of course you throw it very hard. Yeah thats great logic there.

I'm done. I know you will continue being obtuse and throwing out horseshit excuses as to why the wealthy deserve everything they got and more because they work OH so effing hard. IN the meantime facts on the ground and even warren buffet admits they pay less than an average earner.

I'm not in agreement with all that GS92 said, but he has a few points, and one in particular: Much more often than not, the guy making 100K worked for his money. Generally much harder than the guy making 600K, and perhaps a little harder (or at least more effectively) than the lady making $11 an hour.

The people making 100K are not the big beneficiaries of loopholes like capital gains. Don't aim for the 10%, aim for the 1% among them. They're hoarding more of the nation's wealth than the other 9% anyway.

I'm not certain what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that if a business, say, has a million dollars in expenditures, but earns 1.1 million dollars (a $100,000 profit) they should be taxed on $1,100,000, and not on $100,000? If so, are you perhaps a bankruptcy lawyer looking to drive up your business? Because I think that would be the natural result of taxing gross earnings that way.

Interesting, though, that you seem to regard freeloaders as "stealing" from the rest of us. In my experience, that's not a common sentiment among the left.

You make it sound like all corporations are scraping by in Canada, they're not. Ottawa's generous corporate tax reductions have helped mainly foreign based energy companies operating in Canada to shovel billions of dollars in profits out of the country while our manufacturing and lumber industries have suffered from US protectionism and high dollar as a result of their very corporate-friendly central planning in Ottawa. Canada is a net exporter of energy and wealth to the billionaire class in the US, banksters and other countries while a large majority of Canadians haven't had real wage increases in decades.

And most Canadians could not afford to contribute to RRSPs last year in 2010. That's not most millionaires in Canada but ordinary working class slobs in the large majority. DAY-O!

Leger Marketing revealed that:

And just 38% of Canadians are covered by registered pensions. Retirement savings is very piecemeal in Canada. Their ideology on the right says that income security for working class slobs and neoliberal voodoo don't mix. It's all about keeping Canadians chomping at the bit and increasing levels of desperation among workers for the benefit of the elite class and concentration of wealth among the top few percent of the population. And it's a general formula for oppressive rule by a few over the many.

As sir Tony Behn said in 'Sicko', a healthy, financially secure and well educated population is more difficult to govern. A large and indebted underclass creates hopelessness - and hopeless people don't vote. And this is basically what they've been up to in Ottawa over the last 30 years. The 2008 election produced 22% of registered voter support for the Harpers. They are pretenders to the throne and despots. They want turfing out of power and into the unemployment line where they belong. Even if they were competent enough to run a lemonade stand, it's not why they were shoved into the halls of power by the elite billionaire class and financially independent millionaires who believe themselves to be worth more than average Canadians in more ways than we might guess.

And I better not need long term care-- if I grow lame shoot me in the head.

Yeah things are fine so long as we have RRSPs and a CPP so small that it will pay perhaps half our rent so long as we don't eat.

I think it's clear that if we don't have the disposable income to salt away in RRSPs, then we won't. Canadians need mandatory workplace pension contributions, and we need CPP shoring up with increased contributions. We will all be older someday, and medical science just isn't able to offer us the life extension drugs or scientific wonders to give us the vitality and health of a 30 year-old when we are 65 and 75. And until that day does arrive, we should all demand to live out the rest of our lives with dignity and income security.

"56 per cent of respondents did not make a contribution . . ." = 44% did (not "about a third").

". . . with 64 per cent citing lack of funds" = 36% [0.64 x 0.56] did not because of lack of funds, and, 20% [(1-0.64) x 0.56] did not for other reasons.

So the numbers you are citing indicate that:

• 44% of Canadians contributed to RRSP's.
• 20% of Canadians did not contribute because they forgot, had other retirement savings plans/pensions or just plain didn't feel like it.
• 36% of Canadians did not contribute because they didn't have the funds to do so.

I guess the usual...didn't want to address this at did they?

IN addition the cons want another method for a tax shelter as flaherty mentioned just a few weks ago regarding pensions. If you and your spouse contribute to RRSP and TFSA you can shelter an additional 54,000 a year....who the hell has 54,000 dollars of disposable income and not even pinch them. Let alone needing a brand new way of hiding money that doesn't include offshore accounts.

Who has 54,000 in disposable income and needs more places to hide money from the tax man as proposed by Flaherty?

Sean its theft in the sense that when they get a tax cuts or are allowed another loophole. I have to foot more of the bill to make up the shortfall. I can't reach an income level that allows me to have right offs(not often in the last 5 years) because the vast majority of my income goes to taxes and necessities. SO when Joe Whatchamacallit say contributes to a politic party and gets X amount of money, or a charity(the fraser institute is listed under the charaties act BTW) then them saving 100 here and 500 there is 600 less the system has to operate under. Then we either cut(lose jobs which is theft of their jobs) or rasie taxes to make up the shortfall-see HST.

The HST really hurt a lot of people who are barely cutting it, but it hasn't effected the well do it much at all. in fact they said it would help out buinesses. SO I am being stolen from on stuff like gas, hydro, food, etc so the wealthy can have another tax break, because they aren't pulling their own weight(the way they did 30+ years ago). Did we see a reduction in prices anywhere? No, they didn't pass on the supposed saving unless  you invested. As fidel mentioned slightly more than a third were able to invest in RRSP- and how many of them did more than a few thousand? It says we are struggling day to day.

To LTJ. I really don't think that people earning 100,000 a year work harder than someone who earns 11 an hours. Who's job is tougher, middle manager who walks around to intimidate people into working harder, or the person who takes 1 subway and 2 buses to clean an office at night while away from their family? Not a fair example but an example none the less.

I know many people that make around $100,000 a year and none of them gained any of their income from capital gains. I don't know where you're getting this idea that suddenly at the $100,000 a year threshold an employee suddenly is welcomed to some "club of the rich and elite" and is showered with stock options and bonds to make capital gains on, so your idea that somebody that makes $100,000 a year will unequivocally pay less income than somebody making $20,000 a year is just silly. It would almost never occur that way.

I was using 100,000 as an example for payment on capital gains, not their sole income or as an arbitrary cut off of rich and poor. Again the obtuse factor. And yes some people don't have jobs other than being daytraders-where does their income come from?

I earned 80,000 a few years ago with a lot of OT. I was taxed around 24,000 dollars because I wasn't putting anything away in RRSP or TFSA or charities etc. I still had more money left over than the average canadian earned. I wasn't hurting. In fact I was spending it like water because I had more money than I knew what to do with. So imagine people earning more than that and often times people marry to their social status meaning 2 incomes of say 80,000 plus a year. Yet if married you get a bunch of other tax exceptions. Including discounts in insurance.

These people could carry a greater burden and not have it effect their lifestyles.

With the rising cost of necessities seniors, people on assistance, EI, working poor etc have a much harder time making it as their earning are not keeping up with even the bullshit number they use for inflation, let a lone real inflation. Gas and food aren't counted in inflation numbers---hmm wonder why?

And if you think someone making 11 dollars an hour has more benefits than someone earning 100,000 I don't know what to say. They get a gst check..woopdee do . They can't right off their kids because its a tax credit. They can't claim the sports credit because they can't put their kids into sports, If you aren't paying taxes how do you benefit either from tax credit. How about the home reno tax credit? Who has 10,000 dollars lying around while earnign 11 an hour, and you needed a mim of 1000 in order to get tax credit. Obtuse.

And as an example the year I earned 80,000. Say I had put 6,000 into RRSPs. I dropped my income level to a lower tax bracket, get charged less in overall taxes and further more now have money, that i am told surely has to go up, for my retirement. Win win win. And it wouldn't have changed a thing in my daily life.

But thats ok gang, go ahead and keep thinking that the more you earn the more you pay. It doesn't effect how you live! And that is the point. You can't drive 7 cars at once, nor live in 3 homes at the same time while driving any number of boats. Its the fairness of our system that is in question. But a small increase to someone on disability in the form of HST or a senior could very well mean a few less meals a month.

While warren buffet is american our tax structure is close enough to the american that if a right wing nut bar ackowledges he benefits from the system in place more than the poor. I think I will take the billionaires word for it. Even if our system isn't the exact same.

What was the thread title...oh yeah CEO PAY Some are going off on semantics of the example of 100,000 that I gave(to show tax structure) and ignoring how the high earners aren't pulling their weight. And each year their burden shrinks. AS was shown by the CCPA study.

Universality is a first principle for me. Take medicare as an example - very few Canadians don't recognize the benefits. Even Conservative voters punish the party for messing with it.

Fair enough but medicare isn't an issue. CEO pay or public officials with salary well into 6 figures or even well off individuals with income into six figures is. I doubt any Canadian has an issue with the universality of medicare or even pension benefits for those of moderate means.

Such "clawing-back" is the reason why pension benefits are so tenuous and constantly under attack. Create a pension that benefits the 98% of Canadians who aren't the ruling investor class, and you'll see support rise to the same levels as medicare.