• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2025 Federal Election - 28 Apr 25

Not at all. He's been very upfront about following the law. It's one of those legally allowable loopholes big businesses take advantage of.

It's the feeling of average people that many of these rules are unfair that lead to movements like MAGA in the US. It's just unfortunate for Americans that they chose a big businessman/extremely wealthy individual as their leader to solve the problem...oops!

It's tax avoidance, which is legal....

You know what else is tax avoidance? Putting money into a TFSA. Putting money into an RRSP.

All allowable loopholes which are not available to corporations.
 
It's tax avoidance, which is legal....

You know what else is tax avoidance? Putting money into a TFSA. Putting money into an RRSP.

All allowable loopholes which are not available to corporations.
The problem is when the general population begins to think that some/many of the loopholes, while legal, favour the already wealthy and big business over the average citizen. When they see the gap between the average working wage and executive compensation diverging year over year it's hard not to understand their feelings.
 
It's tax avoidance, which is legal....

You know what else is tax avoidance? Putting money into a TFSA. Putting money into an RRSP.

All allowable loopholes which are not available to corporations.
Is there a max someone can put in a TFSA?
 
From the horses mouth as he wrote in his book, Values.
I believe his book more than I believe his new found love for Canada. Just more lies from Carney.

View attachment 92642
Actually, NOT from the horse's mouth, AT ALL.

That quote is NOT in Carney's book. That is a quote from a 2021 National Post review of Carney's book by columnist Peter Foster.

Please stop sharing right-wing drivel without fact checking it first.

Hint: if it sounds REALLY scathing about Carney, and hasn't made headline news, do a fact check first.

Stop letting your hatred cloud your judgment, Fishbone. It's the path to the dark side.

 
We now have Stephen Harper's former Chief of Staff, and his former lawyer coming out for team red, interesting


It’s an interesting argument to make that the federal public service can’t ever possibly be shrank.

According to GoC numbers between 2010 and 2023 the federal public service increased by 26.2%. From 282,980 to 357,247. It went from .83% of Canada’s population to .90% increased even faster than our population growth. Public service costs also outstripped GDP growth, increasing by 32.2% during that timeframe compared to a 28.1% GDP growth, interestingly while GDP per capita has shrank.

It would be difficult to argue that the services rendered by the public service have improved for Canadians in that time or that the bureaucracy that slows down Canada has reduced.

I would categorize that post as fear mongering to drive public service voting habits vs anything else.

 
Is there a max someone can put in a TFSA?

An annual maximum, sure... can the median income Canadian at than $43,000/year (in 2022) afford to put anything into a TFSA? Probably not. What about an RRSP? Also probably not.

And yet no one is complaining that the wealthier 50% of individuals who contribute to those in order to avoid tax are doing something immoral, taking advantage of a "loophole," etc., to the detriment of those on the left side of the median who can't afford to use such a scheme?

Note, there is no minimum requirements to do what Brookfield did - so while individuals can do what Brookfield did, Brookfield cannot do what individuals can do (i.e. TFSA, RRSP, etc.).

The fact is, money goes to where taxes are not. If Canada wants to keep the money here, maybe they should think of ways to attract corporations as opposed to squeeze them out. They are quite mobile, it's pretty easy to set up a corporation somewhere else if you don't like a government tax policy. Just ask all of the US businesses currently setting up shop outside the US to avoid tariffs on imports....

Food for thought.... Opinion: Corporate tax avoidance — a tempest in a teapot?
 
Would it be accurate to say the Canadian government doesn't control how much money companies like Brookfield can filter through tax havens like Bermuda?
 
Would it be accurate to say the Canadian government doesn't control how much money companies like Brookfield can filter through tax havens like Bermuda?
It’s trickier to do so directly. The thing is though, by reducing their corporate tax liabilities, the various Brookfield funds are able to pass more back as return on investment to investors. When we receive those returns (and I say we because I and many of us here are directly or indirectly invested in Brookfield), it then gets taxed in the various ways our investment returns get taxed- not at all if in a TFSA; later when withdrawn if in an RRSP or RESP; as income the year of if in a non-registered account.

All else being equal, speaking for myself, it’s in my best interest for the companies I invest in to legally minimize their tax owing so more comes back to me. And that’s part of the fiduciary duty of the board of directors to achieve. An investment fund that doesn’t try to lawfully minimize taxes is a less effective investment fund. That means less for our pension funds, our RRSPs, or our kids’ education funds.

Food for thought.
 
And yet no one is complaining that the wealthier 50% of individuals who contribute to those in order to avoid tax are doing something immoral, taking advantage of a "loophole," etc., to the detriment of those on the left side of the median who can't afford to use such a scheme?
Actually, there is a likely small but vocal cadre amongst Gen x and later, primarily those in the high cost urban areas, who feel that since they have been left a world by Boomers where they will never be able to access RSPs, TFSAs, et al, those tax shelters are inherently immoral. To them, the Boomer generation is the root of all that ails us.
 
From the horses mouth as he wrote in his book, Values.

View attachment 92646
I’m pretty sure that’s a interpretive summary of Carneys thoughts and visions derived from that third persons reading of that book. To be clear, Carney did not write that passage, it’s not in his book even if that’s what he meant. (And it is, in fact, a pretty good summary of what probably could have happened if Trump was not elected and Carney is elected. For better or worse, Trump changed everything. Every. Thing.)

If Carney tries to execute on his book, we are dead as a country in the form we have now. I think he will try, albeit slower and in a more sly way.
 
Exactly.
And a fairly accurate estimation of the outcome of the obscene, punitive, cultist, out of touch, Green Reich mentality of Carney.

From the CCPA...


Mark Carney’s Values: What his 2021 book reveals about the leader he might be​


It’s fair to say that Mark Carney’s 2021 book, Values: Building a Better World for All, was his early application to be prime minister. Values covers a wide swath of economic history and philosophy, and gives us some clues into what makes our new prime minister tick.

At the end of its 531 pages, Carney lays out a hopeful vision for Canada, albeit one lacking a sharper focus on details. We can only conclude he is a very competent centrist whose plans for Canada won’t depart much from the status quo. In the face of the second Trump administration, many will feel that’s enough, but one can’t help wanting more.

For Carney, the banker, resilience has more to do with identifying and preventing systemic risks to the financial system rather than ensuring our buildings and infrastructure can survive fires, droughts, floods and heat domes. Meanwhile, sustainability is about green investment opportunities shaped by a strategic direction set by governments through carbon pricing, regulation and financial disclosure. Ironically, Carney’s support for carbon pricing is among his strongest policy recommendations.

It’s not clear how Carney would come to grips with the massive inequalities in our society, the rapidly declining state of the climate, and the dark side of new technologies and their potential to displace mass amounts of workers. Nor does trade factor in, as the second Trump administration collapses the whole basis for Canadian trade with the United States, and the post-war global order, with the United States as hegemonic power, starting to crumble.

At the end of the day, Mark Carney’s values proposition is not enough to “build a better world for all.” You can take the boy out of Goldman Sachs but the imprint of Goldman Sachs lingers. Carney offers up a solid understanding of how we got here, and the complexities of building a modern mixed economy, but skirts over more fundamental economic challenges. As for Carney the politician, that chapter remains unwritten.


 
Back
Top