Thread: If Canada did it why cant we?

Andrewl
As a percentage of GDP the US tax rate at all levels is ~27% and in Canada it is ~32%.

So given that Canada already takes in more revenue than the US through taxation at all levels as a percentage of GDP one could use this to argue that the US needs to raise taxes.

Except for one oh so inconvenient fact. The highest marginal tax rate on individual in Canada is 29%, which is LOWER than in the U.S (35%). Their corporate tax rate is 18%, whereas ours is 35%.

So, one could use this to argue that the US needs to LOWER marginal tax RATES (preferably through massive simplification of the tax code) in order to boost revenues.

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Except for one oh so inconvenient fact. The highest marginal tax rate in Canada is 29%, which is LOWER than in the U.S.

So, one could use this to argue that the US needs to LOWER marginal tax RATES (preferably through massive simplification of the tax code).

ahoy Marcus1124,

hmmm.

Marcus1124, i make ye a deal. ye can lower the highest marginal rate in the United States to match Canada's....all i ask in return is that our great nation also matches the capitol gains tax that our northern brethren have.

okies dokies?

this really be a fascinatin' thread...it must be difficult fer certain folks here on USPO to extoll the virtues 'o Canada whilst carefully tip toein' around the many, many, many facets 'o Canada's political/economic model that them same folks would find abhorrent.

aye!

- MeadHallPirate

It doesn't matter how high their taxes are.Why? Cause their taxes where that high when they were drowning in debt. They cut spending and amazing as this is for liberals They got out of debt.They did not raise the taxes to do it ether. We dont have a tax problem here in the US we have a spending problem.

Originally Posted by thanatos144

It doesn't matter how high their taxes are.Why? Cause their taxes where that high when they were drowning in debt. They cut spending and amazing as this is for liberals They got out of debt.They did raise the taxes to do it ether. We dont have a tax problem here in the US we have a spending problem.

ahoy Thanatos144,

though the posters here generally disagree with much 'o yer analysis, i think we're agreed on one point;

the United States should, in many ways, attempt to emulate Canada. in light 'o this, i think our rightwing swabbys here on USPO ought to extend a bit more courtesy to the Canadian members 'o USPO.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Except for one oh so inconvenient fact. The highest marginal tax rate on individual in Canada is 29%, which is LOWER than in the U.S (35%). Their corporate tax rate is 18%, whereas ours is 35%.

So, one could use this to argue that the US needs to LOWER marginal tax RATES (preferably through massive simplification of the tax code) in order to boost revenues.

Not sure why that is inconvenient. It does not change the fact that Canada takes in more revenue as a percentage of GDP that the US, IOW, Canadians pay more taxes. This is an indisputable fact.

Also you are neglecting the fact that Canada's debt is miniscule compared to the US debt. The US situation i more sever so it requires looking at both spending cuts and higher taxes.

Originally Posted by thanatos144

It doesn't matter how high their taxes are.Why? Cause their taxes where that high when they were drowning in debt. They cut spending and amazing as this is for liberals They got out of debt.They did raise the taxes to do it ether. We dont have a tax problem here in the US we have a spending problem.

One could just as easily argue that Canada was in a better position to cut spending since Canada was already generating more revenues from taxation.

And look at where canada gets so much more in taxes - on cigarettes and booze. Are you guys prepared to emulate that in an effort to balance the books?

Why do you take such a fundamentalist approach? Why are you so opposed to tackling the US debt with a mixture of both spending cuts and letting at least some of the Bush tax cuts expire?

Andrewl
Not sure why that is inconvenient.

Because it is the exact opposite of what democrats want to do, and exactly what Republicans want, a lower, flatter, simpler tax code.

This is what the left just doesn't get, which is that higher marginal tax RATES (particularly on income, savings, and investment) do not neccesarily result in higher tax REVENUES in the long run.

The problem in terms of the discussion is that when Republicans say lower taxes, they actually mean lower marginal tax RATES not lower tax revenues. Hell, Barack Obama himself said in an interview that even IF it were shown that hire tax RATES on the wealthy would result in lower tax REVENUES to the government, he would still favor them as a matter of "fairness". There is no rational way to take that other than his interest being more in punishing the wealthy, rather than having an efficient and effect tax system to provide revenues for the government.

Originally Posted by FearandLoathing

I have never seen anything that took away banker's rights to say no to bad loans. In fact it was the banks lobbying to relax regulations that led to the sub prime catastrophe.

The there are a few good sources for this, the most comprehensive is the film "Inside Job".

You will also see how derivatives removed accountability and how the mega-banks lobbied intensely to prevent congress from regulating derivatives.

You've never heard of the Community Reinvestment Act?

Originally Posted by thanatos144

If doing this helps a country like Canada which is not set up the way ours is them fhe world us Americans need to pay heed. Our country was founded on small government and balanced power between a United States. How else did you think we became the most powerful country in the world in such a short time?

War profiteering and ruthless foreign policy?

Originally Posted by SupPackFan

This is a telling comment, as it was the fed who forced US banks to relax borrowing requirements as they tried to influence Canadian banks to do as well.

The inaugural Clinton state of the union address laid out a goal to expand minority home ownership. Since racial preference via affirmative action may have invoked a constitutional fight, the simple answer was to simply make home loans more accessible for everyone. Forced to give loans to those who did not qualify, US banks created the sub-prime category creating higher profits to offset their increased risk. Even then, the banks bundled and sold them like a hot potato hoping not to be stuck with pile of worthless paper when the day of reckoning were to arrive. To their credit Canada did not allow feel-good political correctness to override tried and true financial qualifications for borrowing.

I don't know where this myth of banks being "forced" to write sub prime loans came from. The lessening of restrictions came about as a result of intense lobbying over decades.

Please have a look at the documentary "Inside Job."

Originally Posted by Andrewl

The source is the heritage foundation and wall street journal, so it is their assertion, not mine. The numbers are apparently revenues from all levels of taxation, including sales tax.

And that is my point. In Canada a very large percentage of the tax burden is on fuel, cigarettes, booze and general sales tax on everything including new homes.

That reduces the burden on corporate and personal income taxes.

I think where you get push back to tax increases in the US is that it has always been on income tax and in this case a tax on the rich.

To conclude, I agree with you, the US needs to drastically cut spending and marginally increase taxation that will not detract business and job creating investment.

Originally Posted by AdrienXII

War profiteering and ruthless foreign policy?

War profiteering? Have you seen our defense debt? Oh I forgot in Europe they make war with flowers and rainbows. As for your ruthless foreign policy that is call not taking it up the ass or surrendering at the first smell of danger.

Again all their taxes they had before they cut spending as was still wallowing in debt....They cut spending and shockers they are not in debt. Now if they are smart they cut taxes.