anarchy 1.0 - Kriegsanstifter

[vf]

I actually kind of hope you spent a lot of time on that.
good for you. me now learned.
lol

40 seconds maybe? Not sure what would of taken so much time as it was all available in the original link I posted. Had you bothered to spend a few seconds reading it instead of exposing your ever rampant partisanship you could have saved somebody else learning you and learned something yourself.
lol

the sky is blue.
I'm glad we all agree.
since you are so well versed in what a straw man argument is maybe you should take another look at the conclusion you made in your original sharing is caring post. that conclusion and you calling the sky is blue resolution 'bipartisan' was quite funny. still is.

I read it, still not so sure you have.

You're still arguing about what colour the sky is...and struggling with what bipartisan means. I'm sorry the Nova Scotia Department of Education has failed you, it's not too late though. You can actually learn things all on your own, all you have to do is read slowly. Sound the big words out and if they still don't make sense just ask or be a big boy and 'google it'.

[akiberg]

40 seconds maybe? Not sure what would of taken so much time as it was all available in the original link I posted. Had you bothered to spend a few seconds reading it instead of exposing your ever rampant partisanship you could have saved somebody else learning you and learned something yourself.
lol

the sky is blue.
I'm glad we all agree.
since you are so well versed in what a straw man argument is maybe you should take another look at the conclusion you made in your original sharing is caring post. that conclusion and you calling the sky is blue resolution 'bipartisan' was quite funny. still is.

I read it, still not so sure you have.

You're still arguing about what colour the sky is...and struggling with what bipartisan means. I'm sorry the Nova Scotia Department of Education has failed you, it's not too late though. You can actually learn things all on your own, all you have to do is read slowly. Sound the big words out and if they still don't make sense just ask or be a big boy and 'google it'.

you have a resolution that almost *every* human on the fucking planet would agree to and not only do you keep prattling on about the 'significance' of this 'historic political bipartisan blah blah blah' occurrence you then made a 'strawman argument' when you drew your sweeping (idiotic) antifa conclusion. just a quick question for you there super NB educated boy, can you honestly think of one politician that wouldn't of signed that resolution? do you think they would all agree the sky was blue, too? you now see why the resolution isn't worth the paper it was printed on?

I've now explained why I'm laughing at you, thrice.

i truly hope you have been appeased/vindicated now that trumps improper denouncing has been properly dealt with. you are exactly the screeching harpy it was written for.

[vf]

I never once said it was significant or historic. The antifa comment is a follow up on Trumps calling both sides bad and you jumping on his knob about how right he is. That the resolution doesn't include it shows the disconnect between almost all of the countries politicians and people who defend Trump from such dumb comments.

Keep making insults though, anybody who disagrees with you is a screeching harpy or a little drummer boy or whatever insult you can make. Lord knows you can't debate the issues so you attack the person. So very sous-chef like. lololol yawn lololo yawn

Kellie Leitch wouldn't of signed that resolution.

[akiberg]

I never once said it was significant or historic. The antifa comment is a follow up on Trumps calling both sides bad and you jumping on his knob about how right he is. That the resolution doesn't include it shows the disconnect between almost all of the countries politicians and people who defend Trump from such dumb comments.

Keep making insults though, anybody who disagrees with you is a screeching harpy or a little drummer boy or whatever insult you can make. Lord knows you can't debate the issues so you attack the person. So very sous-chef like. lololol yawn lololo yawn

Kellie Leitch wouldn't of signed that resolution.

....a resolution directed at Donald Trump and the comments he made after Charlottesville doesn't mention antifa.
4 times.....

Kellie leitch the person may not of signed that resolution but Kellie the politician most certainly would have.

[Curry Rage]

Akibot can count. Encouraging that there's sentient intelligence in there somewhere.

[akiberg]

Akibot can count. Encouraging that there's sentient intelligence in there somewhere.

you can be so cute and so small.
a true double threat.
did you not have a good weekend banging, courage?

[paulster]

Remember when we just cared about a hockey team?

[paulster]

Yes. Yes. A very modest amount.

But now, between pension payments, retirement TFSAs, 'just for fun' TFSAs, RRSPs, and additional mortgage payments the wife and I are saving about 20% of our income for an early-ish retirement.

It's partly because Aki made fun of me a year ago.

you're welcome?

Indeed.

[akiberg]

http://business.financialpost.com/opini ... ments-area

[paulster]

So much whining from the tax cheats.

My old man owns a small business, and has had my mom on the payroll for years. If he's okay with these changes, then I just dont get the outrage.

[akiberg]

So much whining from the tax cheats.

My old man owns a small business, and has had my mom on the payroll for years. If he's okay with these changes, then I just dont get the outrage.

many do understand.

[Curry Rage]

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/gwyn-morgan-how-trudeau-can-clear-these-dark-tax-reform-clouds-and-get-sunny-again#comments-area

A whole lot of trickle-down orthodoxy bullshit in that article. Not to mention all the household fallacy deficit hawkishness which presents gov't spending as a simple case of taxes collected and spent, which it most certainly isn't for the federal gov't who have the ability to print money. Plus some really spurious claims about "high" taxes effecting taxes collected and growth. How high? To what degree? Even with the tax rate in Canada where it is (the Fraser Institute don't calculate accurately for rebates, etc. to fluff the number higher, BTW) it's not relatively "high" compared to a lot of other OECD countries where growth and tax revenue are just fine. I don't really have a dog in this fight, but it'd be good if FP presented a thoughtful view.

[clawfirst]

Wait wait wait soooo the only detail in the article is tye 4% increase in tax. And im assuming here that in order to pay less small businesses will have to pay the flat fee to incorporate to then save like 9%ish using the flat corporate rate.

K.

[clawfirst]

Which if i remember correctly is like 500 dollars.

[akiberg]

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/gwyn-morgan-how-trudeau-can-clear-these-dark-tax-reform-clouds-and-get-sunny-again#comments-area

A whole lot of trickle-down orthodoxy bullshit in that article. Not to mention all the household fallacy deficit hawkishness which presents gov't spending as a simple case of taxes collected and spent, which it most certainly isn't for the federal gov't who have the ability to print money. Plus some really spurious claims about "high" taxes effecting taxes collected and growth. How high? To what degree? Even with the tax rate in Canada where it is (the Fraser Institute don't calculate accurately for rebates, etc. to fluff the number higher, BTW) it's not relatively "high" compared to a lot of other OECD countries where growth and tax revenue are just fine. I don't really have a dog in this fight, but it'd be good if FP presented a thoughtful view.

more thought went into that article than got put into the proposed tax changes.....
imagine if you would the fallout if dumb and dumber went after federal pensions. yeah, picture that for an entitled second.
these entrepreneurs took the risk and paid the price. they took that risk within a framework of rules that have *long* been in place. the rules are now suddenly changing and the risk takers are now tax cheats.
it would be no different calling idiot a tax cheat because he maxes out his TFSA at his local bank. you can call him an idiot, but he's not a tax cheat.
no pensions. no job security. no UI. ...and to top it all off someone that hasn't had to work a day in his pompous idioitic life has just labeled you a 'tax cheat'. beautiful.
let the games begin

[clawfirst]

Do you have an itemised list of the changes? Cause tge top tax bracket change isnt exactly a problem to me. If youre able to pull 150k a year in salary the startup phase is over. However they should allow...a certain recoup window for those first years where you do three of your five jobs for free and barely survive

[clawfirst]

Calling it tax cheat is just not fair either. Neither is calling anything a write off...Thats just inaccurate until youre immensely successful. Its a deduction. And for good reason usually.

[vf]

A solid article that does their best to avoid politicking. https://globalnews.ca/news/3758607/trud ... nges-rich/

[tbm]

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/kelly-m ... so-nervous


https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/20170256

[akiberg]

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/kelly-mcparland-why-do-fair-tax-crusaders-trudeau-and-morneau-suddenly-look-so-nervous


https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/20170256

lovely. I dearly hope dumb dumb has the money his father stole from Canadians hidden somewhere offshore, too.
champions of the middle class!!!

[akiberg]

http://moodysgartner.com/liberals-came- ... d-problem/

[Curry Rage]

Wow, a firm that specialises in avoiding tax thinks a tax scheme is crooked. Shocked.

[Curry Rage]

Plus the usual factless smear and innuendo from Captain Canuck. The world is unfolding as it should.

[Curry Rage]

Funnier still that our adorable little tax libertarians are working at cross purposes. One posts links from companies who help guys like Morneau get their money into places the gov't can't find it and the other posts articles complaining about it. What a dynamic duo!

[Curry Rage]

So much whining from the tax cheats.

My old man owns a small business, and has had my mom on the payroll for years. If he's okay with these changes, then I just dont get the outrage.

There are vested interests rolling out propaganda/marketing schemes that snowflake on about the supposedly inflammatory language used by the gov't and making a business out of telling the *middle class* the bureaucratic bogeyman is out to get them. But they're largely just using those folks as cover and support to relieve high earners of any tax burden. Trickle down voodoo. Afterall, high earners pay more fees.

The FP and NP articles above are examples of PR masked as journalism while aki's article is just flat out PR from such a business. It's lucrative stuff. Like the Fraser Institute, their view of tax is inherently adversarial and their ability to frame discussion of tax - often in highly misleading ways like the household fallacy - has created deep misunderstanding in the population about how taxation and gov't spending actually works and what its benefits and drawbacks really are. It's make-work for ambulance chasers and accountants charging hundreds/hour under the guise of being disinterested champions of justice. It's an outrage racket like any other.

* a mostly empty signifier meant to capture as many people as possible under a vague umbrella of imagined belonging

[Transplanted Caper]

50+ dead in a shooting in Las Vegas. Fuck US gun laws, or lack thereof.

Always dug up after a mass shooting, but still as true as ever.

[Curry Rage]

A friend's response:

Trump checklist for latest US shooting:
- "one of the biggest massacres OF ALL TIME"
- "blame on both sides"
- "claim shooter is local white man - FAKE NEWS!"
- "shooter respected the American flag"

[akiberg]

Wow, a firm that specialises in avoiding tax thinks a tax scheme is crooked. Shocked.

claw asked for info. I found some.
cool your jets, serpico

[tbm]

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/kelly-mcparland-why-do-fair-tax-crusaders-trudeau-and-morneau-suddenly-look-so-nervous


https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/20170256

Apparently Morneau has also set himself up to profit from the tax changes as well, not just to be sheltered from it.

[Curry Rage]

Lawl

[paulster]

Enough of this Trudeau nonsense. I trust we’re all voting for Jagmeet in a couple years?

[akiberg]

Enough of this Trudeau nonsense. I trust we’re all voting for Jagmeet in a couple years?

obviously.

[Curry Rage]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opin ... trump.html

[vf]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/deficit-tax-cuts-trump.html

So budgets really do balance themselves?

[Curry Rage]

On tax rates vs. competitiveness: https://francisweyzig.com/2017/10/06/th ... itiveness/

[akiberg]

On tax rates vs. competitiveness: https://francisweyzig.com/2017/10/06/th ... itiveness/

I always think it’s cute when the people who pay the least amount of tax support higher taxes. great interwebing on your part to find someone equally altruistic.
your extraordinary largess knows no bounds, courage.

[Curry Rage]

I always find it amusing when cucki thinks he can guess how much tax someone else pays over the internet. Your extra-sensory perception knows no bounds.

Even more amusing that aki thinks there's a "someone" who pays corporate tax, like corporations really are people and not just a legal fiction of one. You'd think someone so engrossed with taxation would understand details.

Even more amusing when the akibot comments without addressing a single thing said by its intended target. As always, the crosshairs need adjusting.

Maybe it should go back to posting bullshit PR from that ambulance chasing tax firm it's such a fan of and let adults discuss the data.

Here's the issue:

Ambulance chasers and some Canadian conservatives shrieking like chimps and proclaiming the government's attitude offensive, and claiming that tax rates will effect growth and competitiveness. Which taxes? How much effect? These are questions adults might ask. Of course, someone has provided an answer regarding corporate rates: i.e. there is no clear correlation.

Aki clucks on...

Gobble! Gobble!

[akiberg]

I always find it amusing when cucki thinks he can guess how much tax someone else pays over the internet. Your extra-sensory perception knows no bounds.

Even more amusing that aki thinks there's a "someone" who pays corporate tax, like corporations really are people and not just a legal fiction of one. You'd think someone so engrossed with taxation would understand details.

Even more amusing when the akibot comments without addressing a single thing said by its intended target. As always, the crosshairs need adjusting.

Maybe it should go back to posting bullshit PR from that ambulance chasing tax firm it's such a fan of and let adults discuss the data.

Here's the issue:

Ambulance chasers and some Canadian conservatives shrieking like chimps and proclaiming the government's attitude offensive, and claiming that tax rates will effect growth and competitiveness. Which taxes? How much effect? These are questions adults might ask. Of course, someone has provided an answer regarding corporate rates: i.e. there is no clear correlation.

Aki clucks on...

Gobble! Gobble!

lol. blah blah. only me make point. what me find on interweb to support me point is *so* much differenter than what aki finds to make his point. me point therefore better.
your sure do take yourself seriously, don’t you?

happy thanks giving, little guy.

[Curry Rage]

One doesn't need to be Freud to see your inferiority complex for "just a drummer" that shows you up time after time, but you really seem to be taking this personally.

As usual, you don't have a point. I called attention to the fact that the link you posted is not disinterested information about the effects of the tax proposals. It's plain to see that it's not. It's from a firm that makes money off of this stuff. That really doesn't have anything to do with the data contained in the post I linked to, but you've conflated them somewhere in your rather average head.

If you'd bothered to read what I'd posted, it specifically refutes the claim being made in several articles linked to this thread that the proposed tax changes will, of necessity, effect competitiveness and growth. It's hard data pertaining to corporate taxes. You could argue that, but you don't. You make personal attacks and put words in my mouth about wanting folks to pay more taxes.

Rather telling that virtually in the same breathe as (once again) calling me "small" you not only display your own inferiority complex but effectively admit you're ideologically onside with those at a firm you linked to who's concern is small sector of society. Rich that the guy questioning others' altruism is admittedly unconcerned with the bulk of taxpayers -- i.e. those that pay less than the well-heeled clients of said firm. It's almost as though all that talk of the "middle class" is just as I said: cover for pursuing the interests of someone else entirely.

Keep coming back for more. Perhaps one day it'll -- seriously -- stop bothering you knowing that a drummer has your number.

[akiberg]

One doesn't need to be Freud to see your inferiority complex for "just a drummer" that shows you up time after time, but you really seem to be taking this personally.

As usual, you don't have a point. I called attention to the fact that the link you posted is not disinterested information about the effects of the tax proposals. It's plain to see that it's not. It's from a firm that makes money off of this stuff. That really doesn't have anything to do with the data contained in the post I linked to, but you've conflated them somewhere in your rather average head.

If you'd bothered to read what I'd posted, it specifically refutes the claim being made in several articles linked to this thread that the proposed tax changes will, of necessity, effect competitiveness and growth. It's hard data pertaining to corporate taxes. You could argue that, but you don't. You make personal attacks and put words in my mouth about wanting folks to pay more taxes.

Rather telling that virtually in the same breathe as (once again) calling me "small" you not only display your own inferiority complex but effectively admit you're ideologically onside with those at a firm you linked to who's concern is small sector of society. Rich that the guy questioning others' altruism is admittedly unconcerned with the bulk of taxpayers -- i.e. those that pay less than the well-heeled clients of said firm. It's almost as though all that talk of the "middle class" is just as I said: cover for pursuing the interests of someone else entirely.

Keep coming back for more. Perhaps one day it'll -- seriously -- stop bothering you knowing that a drummer has your number.

more lol’s.
like I’ve said, bully for you for first of all finding data on the interweb that supports your bullshit and secondly (and most importantly) sharing it in your ever so endearing bombastic blow hard way. your ability to ‘interpret data’ was brought to light in the whole Frankie corrada improving his stride and gap control from the press box laughable fiasco. interpret away, I’m still able to laugh at you little guy.
former liberal finance minister John Manley has spoken out against the proposed changes. several liberal back benchers have as well. more chimps screeching? nothing to see here?
hey world, I found this graph on the interweb... you sound like AZ and Malthus ‘talking hockey’, only smaller.

[Curry Rage]

Oh, look. It's back. Look at the chest puff!

Frankie...something...something...some Liberal agrees with me...something... I hope this isn't how you make a point when negotiating at work because it's a bit pathetic. Perhaps you should try arguing on point now and again. I'm sure your colleagues would be more than impressed. I ain't.


There's something to be said for plain old IQ. I'd invite you down to MENSA to discuss, but they're a bit exclusive.

[akiberg]

Oh, look. It's back. Look at the chest puff!

Frankie...something...something...some Liberal agrees with me...something... I hope this isn't how you make a point when negotiating at work because it's a bit pathetic. Perhaps you should try arguing on point now and again. I'm sure your colleagues would be more than impressed. I ain't.

There's something to be said for plain old IQ. I'd invite you down to MENSA to discuss, but they're a bit exclusive.

actually, MENSA sets a pretty low bar. good for you for reaching up to it though. unfortunately, we do live in a participation medal type society now.

frankie perfectly illustrates your ability (or lack thereof) to objectively interpret data. if you are so inclined there is a whole world wide web of data that refutes your pretty graph. along with a bunch of you know, people that actually own businesses. but what do they know?
lol

[Curry Rage]

Aww, the cucki believes that while he was getting his degree (my guess is at a mediocre school) no one else was doing any fancy book lernin'.

Why would I ask people who own businesses about data collected about thousands of businesses? It's like asking a bird flying in a flock to describe the flock from the outside.

I'm going to wager there actually isn't a WWW full of data that refutes the basic lack of correlation we see in the graph. I mean, even a simple example like the U.S. - with it's relatively high corporate rates and high levels of investment - blows your weaksauce case out of the water.

[akiberg]

Aww, the cucki believes that while he was getting his degree (my guess is at a mediocre school) no one else was doing any fancy book lernin'.

Why would I ask people who own businesses about data collected about thousands of businesses? It's like asking a bird flying in a flock to describe the flock from the outside.

I'm going to wager there actually isn't a WWW full of data that refutes the basic lack of correlation we see in the graph. I mean, even a simple example like the U.S. - with it's relatively high corporate rates and high levels of investment - blows your weaksauce case out of the water.

listen little buddy, you go ahead and enjoy your graphs and the irrefutable conclusions you have drawn from them. just because I don’t pay them/you any credence doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy the lols.

[Curry Rage]

Gives no credence. Comes out of the woodwork to take every morsel of cucki snacks personally while pretending to lol.

That's what we dummies call cognative disownints.

[akiberg]

Gives no credence. Comes out of the woodwork to take every morsel of cucki snacks personally while pretending to lol.

That's what we dummies call cognative disownints.

says mr. sucks every liberal cock he can.
the outcry from the business community and the former liberal finance minister isn’t even about your moron graph. I’m not pretending to laugh.

[tbm]

[paulster]

The question was entertaining and full of flair, but the answer - albeit boring as fuck - was acceptable.

[Curry Rage]

Gives no credence. Comes out of the woodwork to take every morsel of cucki snacks personally while pretending to lol.

That's what we dummies call cognative disownints.

says mr. sucks every liberal cock he can.
the outcry from the business community and the former liberal finance minister isn’t even about your moron graph. I’m not pretending to laugh.

It was in response to a general claim made in an article earlier in the thread about tax rates affecting growth. Corporate taxes are just one piece of the puzzle. Here's the claim:

But history has clearly demonstrated that when tax rates become excessive, tax revenues go down, not up. And so does economic growth because high taxes discourage startup entrepreneurs and the risk-taking investors needed to finance them, while over-taxed skilled workers take their badly needed expertise to countries where they get to keep more of their earnings.

Corporate taxes v. competitiveness is directly on point. Starting with weasel words (excessive) the article continues on to make the oft-made but seldom proved claim that people move to avoid taxes. Nary a net migration figure in sight, let alone one specific to flight due to taxes. The fact is that these *problems* affect a very tiny proportion of the population. Which, of course, brings us back to the trickle-down orthodoxy at the heart of the whole bullshit line.

"Sucks liberal cock".

Really got all your rhetorical cylinders firing. I guess that's sort of counterfactual a guy is supposed to give credence to.

Don't look now, but hockewiz...err Capt. Canuck is here to ride to your rescue.

[akiberg]

read Manley’s take on it. he has an example of billions leaving the country when rumours started swirling about the trust fund boy’s ‘plan’ in July. or, keep bleeting about your graph.
would you agree that hockey stats/graphs don’t tell the ‘whole’ story, courage? you are smarter than thIs.