Home » Babble » from far and wide » ontario
babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

ONDP convention next weekend in Hamilton

128 replies [Last post]

Comments

Freedom 55
Offline
Joined: Mar 14 2010
April 21, 2012 - 1:42am
#121

M. Spector wrote:

Freedom 55 wrote:

So, yes, I think you're correct in saying that the proposed surtax would narrow the income gap.

I don't agree with that at all. In the first place, the term "income gap" commonly refers to pre-tax income, not after-tax income. So taxation levels are irrelevant to the determination of the income gap.

But more important, the income of the super-rich only has to grow at an annual rate of 2% to completely wipe out the effects of the surtax. And at the rate the income gap has been growing over the last twenty years, that's a foregone conclusion. So the income gap will continue to widen without a pause, surtax or no surtax.

 

Makes sense.


Grandpa_Bill
Offline
Joined: Apr 25 2009
April 21, 2012 - 9:32am
#122

M. Spector wrote:

the term "income gap" commonly refers to pre-tax income, not after-tax income. So taxation levels are irrelevant to the determination of the income gap.

There are two common approaches to reduce income inequality:

  1.  reduce differences in pay before tax through high income caps and low income minimums (Japan)
  2. increase taxes on high earners and redistribute the money through benefits to low earners (Sweden)

So taxation levels are NOT irrelevant to Closing the Gap and the term "income gap" does NOT commonly refer to pre-tax income.


Grandpa_Bill
Offline
Joined: Apr 25 2009
April 21, 2012 - 9:44am
#123

I see these potential benefits to the current NDP proposals, both the surtax and the high-income cap

(1)  they open the door to an adult discussion of taxes in this province

(2)  they open the door to a discussion of the entire Ontario personal income tax structure (brackets & rates)

(3)  they open the door to a discussion of caps on high-income earners in the private sector

(4)  they open the door to a discussion of income inequality in general, including wage and benefit minimums and GAI

 


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
April 21, 2012 - 10:06am
#124

Freedom 55 wrote:

Unionist wrote:

every fucking traitor I've ever encountered in the labour movement came from the labour movement. We workers prefer to judge people by where they stand rather than by where they came from. Too often, where they came from is where they left.

 

It's funny how Unionist feels free to comment on Ontario's politics, but nobody from the ROC can comment on Quebec without incurring heaps of scorn.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005
April 21, 2012 - 11:36am
#125

Grandpa_Bill wrote:

There are two common approaches to reduce income inequality:

  1.  reduce differences in pay before tax through high income caps and low income minimums (Japan)
  2. increase taxes on high earners and redistribute the money through benefits to low earners (Sweden)

So taxation levels are NOT irrelevant to Closing the Gap and the term "income gap" does NOT commonly refer to pre-tax income.

So you're quoting yourself as an authority to contradict what I'm saying?

"Income inequality" may be mitigated by redistributing it through the tax system from the richest to the poorest. But that's NOT the same as reducing the income gap. Income remains income, whether it's taxed or not.

Number 2 doesn't apply anyway, unless the tax revenue collected from the highest earners is given to the lowest earners. And even if that were the case, as I pointed out, a 2% surtax on earnings over $500,000 wouldn't even begin to make a dent in the growing income gap.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005
April 21, 2012 - 11:39am
#126

autoworker wrote:

It's funny how Unionist feels free to comment on Ontario's politics, but nobody from the ROC can comment on Quebec without incurring heaps of scorn.

No, it's just you.


Unionist
Online
Joined: Dec 11 2005
April 21, 2012 - 11:52am
#127

autoworker wrote:

It's funny how Unionist feels free to comment on Ontario's politics, but nobody from the ROC can comment on Quebec without incurring heaps of scorn.

I do feel free. It's a blessing!

As for the ROC, it is recognized by only 23 rather insignificant states in the world. Québec is not among them. Neither is Ontario or Canada, for that matter. I've conveniently provided the list if ROC commentators wish to avoid heaps of scorn.

 


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003
April 21, 2012 - 11:55am
#128

Long thread.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments