|
Canadian Federal Elections 2011 - Official Thread (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| VDub |
^^
Very good explanation...
But I can hear them now...
Everbody should pay the SAME!!! |
|
|
| jester |
| quote: | Originally posted by VDub
Everybody should pay the SAME!!! |
Federal income tax should be set at 24% for everyone. Plus you would have to add in the Provincial income tax. True it be a bigger burden on the poor.
- Anyone making below $41000 (Ontario) would pay 29.05% instead of 20.05% [$29110 instead of $32779.50, loss of around 12.6%]
- Anyone making above $41001 (Ontario) would pay 33.05% instead of 35.15%
- Anyone making above $128000 (Ontario) would pay 35.16% instead of 40.16% |
|
|
| PivotTechno |
| And why do the poor need to be burdened further, exactly? |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
And why do the poor need to be burdened further, exactly? |
They don't.
They can do what a lot of wealthy people do, and work their asses off til they are no longer poor. |
|
|
| VDub |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
They don't.
They can do what a lot of wealthy people do, and work their asses off til they are no longer poor. |
And I like your tax idea...
It'd work for me... |
|
|
| infinity HiGH |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
They don't.
They can do what a lot of wealthy people do, and work their asses off til they are no longer poor. |
LOL dumbest I've read all week. |
|
|
| PivotTechno |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
They don't.
They can do what a lot of wealthy people do, and work their asses off til they are no longer poor. |
Ah, falling back on that archaic paradigm that if only you *apply* yourself, that you'll be able to work your way out of poverty and then the day will come that maybe YOU'LL own the company!
Right-oh, old chap, I'll have Stevenson in human resources draw up a brief outline detailing your heady rise from bathroom attendant to CEO of Barrick! Pip pip!
Clue in, the number of people who actually worked their way to wealth relative to the whole are the minority. Privilege tends to be passed down generationally, as does poverty. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
They don't.
They can do what a lot of wealthy people do, and work their asses off til they are no longer poor. |
:wtf: You dont actually believe that do you? |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Ah, falling back on that archaic paradigm that if only you *apply* yourself, that you'll be able to work your way out of poverty and then the day will come that maybe YOU'LL own the company!
Right-oh, old chap, I'll have Stevenson in human resources draw up a brief outline detailing your heady rise from bathroom attendant to CEO of Barrick! Pip pip!
Clue in, the number of people who actually worked their way to wealth relative to the whole are the minority. Privilege tends to be passed down generationally, as does poverty. |
I'm not talking about people who work their way up the ladder. I'm talking about people being financially responsible, saving, investing, and starting their own business to become wealthy. If not in their own generation, then at least climbing into the middle class, and passing along their good habits to their kids, who can take the next step forward. Poverty is not systemic, in so much as it's the corporation's fault, it's systemic in that people waste all their money on non-necessities because they've never been taught any better (in fact, have been encouraged to constantly consume), and then complain that it's big business and the government keeping them down.
Too many poor people sit around smoking their cigarettes, drinking their booze, watching their cable TV and complaining on the internet that they have no money while chewing on the pizza that was just delivered to their residence. Well no , they've wasted it all on cigarettes, booze, TV, fast food, and a computer they can't afford. And if they've had kids, it's made worse, because they can't afford those either. |
|
|
| VDub |
Did they actually think you meant that some poor dude will be a millionaire if he just works hard??
Hard work and intelligent living means that you'll be financially stable. Not necessarily rich but def not poor...
Orrrr I guess what you just said..
Lol.. |
|
|
| daves |
| quote: |
U.S. watchdog issues new warning about F-35 design and cost
Published On Fri Apr 08 2011
Murray Brewster
The Canadian Press
VICTORIA—A U.S. budget watchdog is worried the manufacturer of the F-35 stealth fighter keeps making too many late design changes and that Lockheed Martin seems unable to control skyrocketing costs.
The Government Accountability Office released a new assessment Thursday, a follow-up to a report issued last month which showed the purchase price for the ultra high-tech fighter-bomber would be substantially more than the Harper government has estimated.
Most of the public debate in Canada has focused on the eye-popping cost and completely overshadowed the more basic question of whether the highly automated aircraft can fly and live up to its billing.
"After more than nine years in development and four in production, the program has not fully demonstrated that the aircraft design is stable, manufacturing processes are mature, and the system is reliable," said the report.
The assessment also warns that the prime contractor has not had "adequate and disciplined" systems in place to "effectively track costs and control schedules."
Washington's assessment is expected to add fuel to the Canadian election debate and opposition demands that the multi-billion dollar program be abandoned.
The report warns that as many as 10,000 more design changes are expected between now and 2016, the year Canada expects to sign a contract for the 65 aircraft it wants to buy.
The accountability office said the number of changes is alarming because it will take years for those individual modifications to make their way into the manufacturing progress and aircraft already on the flight line will have to refitted.
It said the risk to the program is significant. The numerous design changes indicate a "lack of understanding about the design" and could lead to parts shortages and a messed-up supply chain.
"Some level of design change is expected during the production cycle of any new and highly technical product, but excessive changes raises questions about the (fighter's) design maturity and its readiness for high rates of production," said the report.
The Conservative government has been locked in a battle with parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page over the lifetime cost of the F-35 program.
Both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter MacKay have insisted the government will spend no more than $9 billion to buy the jets and another $7 billion to service them over 20 years. Page says the bill will be nearly twice as high.
The Liberal’s promised before the election to cancel the program and hold an open competition to replace the air force's aging CF-18s.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was asked about the jets during a town hall campaign meeting in Hamilton on Thursday and said there's a big problem:
"Here's the situation I really want to avoid, is having to go to you as a taxpayer and say, 'Mr. Harper stuck us with a deal. He said these planes were going to cost $35 million a pop. I have to tell you, my dear fellow citizen, they actually cost $175 million a pop.'
"No prime minister in his right mind is going to get into a situation where you can't tell Canadians what the darn things are going to cost."
Defence experts expressed frustration last winter that Lockheed Martin was way behind in software development for the highly automated plane. Only four million lines of code out of a anticipated eight million lines have been written.
Earlier this week, junior defence minister Laurie Hawn, dismissed the software development concerns.
A longtime critic of the program, former senior defence official Alan Williams, said the new report is further proof the purchase should be at least delayed.
"It seems to me that if Laurie Hawn is spending his own money he can take as much risk as he wants, but when he is spending the taxpayers' money he better be concerned about risk," said Williams.
"For the last decade, an objective of defence procurement has been to move away from high-risk, high-cost developmental programs. We prefer to buy equipment as close to off-the-shelf as is possible. This kind of glib rhetoric is irresponsible."
The accountability report warns that the program will strain U.S. and allied defence budgets well into the future.
|
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...design-and-cost
Even the USA's own GAO is ripping into the risky delays and rising costs of the F-35 JSF program... I suppose Harper's people are still saying they will get this stuff at their original lowball estimate of a $16 bil lifetime cost? |
|
|
| Jer |
Just ordered a pair of gigantic NDP lawn signs for my corner property in my predominantly Conservative riding.
This should be fun. |
|
|
|
|
