Canadians now spend more on taxes than on food, clothing and
Newsbot @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:01 am
Title: Canadians now spend more on taxes than on food, clothing and shelter combined, study finds | Financial Post
Category: Economics
Posted By: shockedcanadian
Date: 2016-08-23 06:52:59
Canadian
uwish @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:01 am
I actually think it is slightly higher, but it's within one standard deviation of my own estimation.
DrCaleb @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:07 am
And that's why the Fraiser Institute is ridiculed regularally. StatsCan has similar median incomes per family, and but the Fraiser institute includes things like CPP and EI payments that the family doesn't make into it's 'tax paid' calculations. 
DrCaleb @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:09 am
http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/the-f ... an-family/
Not the first time either.
DrCaleb @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:10 am
http://www.lop.parl.gc.ca/content/lop/r ... i-21-e.htm
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:18 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/the-fraser-institute-and-average-canadian-family/
Not the first time either.
Not the first time either.
Fraser institute logic:
"A millionaire paid $300,000 in taxes. A minimum wage worker paid zero taxes. That's an average $150,000 in taxes per person! How are minimum wage workers going to afford that?"
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:37 am
Also, even thought this study is bullshit, the fact that the basic necessities of survival now cost so little that we spend more on public services like education and healthcare?
Also, as this author puts it:
$1:
The Fraser Institute's annual Consumer Tax Index report generated some media buzz with its outlandish claims about just how much taxes have risen since 1961. Before you get worked up about this, consider that 1961 was over half a century ago, before the time of universal health care that we all benefit from, before the Canada Pension Plan and the Guaranteed Income Supplement that hugely reduced poverty for seniors, before the Canada Child Tax Benefit which is helping lower child poverty (though not enough!).There are big problems with the Fraser Institute report’s methodology which lead them to grossly overestimate the tax bill of the average Canadian family.
The Fraser Institute misleadingly includes all business taxes, import duties and resource royalties in the tax bill of the average family....
The Fraser Institute misleadingly includes all business taxes, import duties and resource royalties in the tax bill of the average family....
http://www.progressive-economics.ca/201 ... es-latest/
shockedcanadian @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:45 am
Tax me I'm Canadian.
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:47 am
I thought you said you're long-term unemployed. What taxes do you even pay?
Robair @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:47 am
shockedcanadian shockedcanadian:
Tax me I'm Canadian.
Way WAY back in 2003 I moved from Alberta to Kentucky and my tax rate went up.
andyt @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:49 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/the-fraser-institute-and-average-canadian-family/
Not the first time either.
Not the first time either.
In BC the govt likes to brag how it keeps taxes low. Instead it charges user fees for anything and everything, and squeezes billions out of the public insurance and hydro companies, so that they have to raise rates. Puts more of the burden on lower income earners, since these fees are regressive.
People love to bitch about taxes, but ask them to give up the things that the taxes buy, and all of a sudden it's different story.
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:56 am
For the opposing viewpoint:
$1:
Tax-funded services a 'bargain:' study
COLIN PERKEL
TORONTO — Canadian Press
Published Wednesday, Apr. 15, 2009 8:44AM EDT
Last updated Friday, May 15, 2009 2:13PM EDT
Canada's average middle-income family would have to spend more than half its pay cheque to buy health care, education and the other "free" public services now paid for with tax dollars, a new analysis finds.
The study by the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives concludes the services are a terrific bargain yet their value is often glossed over when it comes to discussions around tax cuts.
"For the vast majority of Canada's population, public services are, to put it bluntly, the best deal they are ever going to get," the analysis finds. "The taxes Canadians pay contribute substantially to their standard of living by providing them with some of the best public services in the world."
The report, called Canada's Quiet Bargain: The Benefits of Public Spending, comes as a response to those who argue tax levels are too high. For example, 80 per cent of Canadians would have been better off if the federal government had not cut the GST, according to the research.
"Tax cuts are always made to sound like they're free money to middle-income Canadians," co-author Hugh Mackenzie writes. "They are anything but - we're far better off with the public services our taxes fund than we are with tax cuts."
According to the study, Canadians get an average of $17,000 worth of benefits from their tax-funded public services, which also include such items as pensions, child-care benefits, roads and police services.
That translates to about $41,000 for a middle-income family - or 63 per cent of its yearly income.
For households earning $80,000 to $90,000, public-service benefits are equivalent to about half their total income, according to the study. In other words, an upper-middle income Canadian household would have to devote half a year's wages to pay for the public services their taxes provide.
"The vast majority of Canadians are getting a quiet bargain by investing in taxes that produce enormous public benefits," the analysis states.
While utilization of the benefits tends to vary with age and household composition, their value tends to remain relatively stable. So while families with older children might get more from the education system and less from health care, a senior might get more from the public-pension and health-care systems.
In an interview, Mr. Mackenzie said talk about tax burdens in recent years has missed an important element. "We've had lots of debates about taxes without reference at all to the implications of reducing taxes on our ability to pay for public services," he said.
While cutting taxes might appear to leave an individual with more money in their pockets, they are in fact losing out when it comes the whole equation, he said. "When we change the GST by a point or two, or when we make a change in the way capital gains are taxed, and corresponding to that is a reduction in our ability to pay for public services, a significant majority of Canadians actually lose.
"Tax cuts don't give you money for free. They introduce a trade off between a private benefit in the form of lower taxes and a reduced public benefit.
"For most Canadians . . . that trade-off is not very favourable."
COLIN PERKEL
TORONTO — Canadian Press
Published Wednesday, Apr. 15, 2009 8:44AM EDT
Last updated Friday, May 15, 2009 2:13PM EDT
Canada's average middle-income family would have to spend more than half its pay cheque to buy health care, education and the other "free" public services now paid for with tax dollars, a new analysis finds.
The study by the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives concludes the services are a terrific bargain yet their value is often glossed over when it comes to discussions around tax cuts.
"For the vast majority of Canada's population, public services are, to put it bluntly, the best deal they are ever going to get," the analysis finds. "The taxes Canadians pay contribute substantially to their standard of living by providing them with some of the best public services in the world."
The report, called Canada's Quiet Bargain: The Benefits of Public Spending, comes as a response to those who argue tax levels are too high. For example, 80 per cent of Canadians would have been better off if the federal government had not cut the GST, according to the research.
"Tax cuts are always made to sound like they're free money to middle-income Canadians," co-author Hugh Mackenzie writes. "They are anything but - we're far better off with the public services our taxes fund than we are with tax cuts."
According to the study, Canadians get an average of $17,000 worth of benefits from their tax-funded public services, which also include such items as pensions, child-care benefits, roads and police services.
That translates to about $41,000 for a middle-income family - or 63 per cent of its yearly income.
For households earning $80,000 to $90,000, public-service benefits are equivalent to about half their total income, according to the study. In other words, an upper-middle income Canadian household would have to devote half a year's wages to pay for the public services their taxes provide.
"The vast majority of Canadians are getting a quiet bargain by investing in taxes that produce enormous public benefits," the analysis states.
While utilization of the benefits tends to vary with age and household composition, their value tends to remain relatively stable. So while families with older children might get more from the education system and less from health care, a senior might get more from the public-pension and health-care systems.
In an interview, Mr. Mackenzie said talk about tax burdens in recent years has missed an important element. "We've had lots of debates about taxes without reference at all to the implications of reducing taxes on our ability to pay for public services," he said.
While cutting taxes might appear to leave an individual with more money in their pockets, they are in fact losing out when it comes the whole equation, he said. "When we change the GST by a point or two, or when we make a change in the way capital gains are taxed, and corresponding to that is a reduction in our ability to pay for public services, a significant majority of Canadians actually lose.
"Tax cuts don't give you money for free. They introduce a trade off between a private benefit in the form of lower taxes and a reduced public benefit.
"For most Canadians . . . that trade-off is not very favourable."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le4193279/
Full report here (PDF): https://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites ... ending.pdf
stratos @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:23 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever:
I thought you said you're long-term unemployed. What taxes do you even pay?
Wont let me +5 you for saying exactly what I was thinking when I read the comment.
stratos @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:32 am
$1:
, child-care benefits
This is from the article that BeaverFever posted above. When they say this are they meaning some sort of TAX return you get or is child care paid for by the state? Basically do they reimburse you x amount per child like here in the US or do you get a place to drop your (pre school age) child off as you go to work that is substantially funded by the state?
shockedcanadian @ Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:32 am
stratos stratos:
BeaverFever BeaverFever:
I thought you said you're long-term unemployed. What taxes do you even pay?
Wont let me +5 you for saying exactly what I was thinking when I read the comment.
And why are you able to post at this hour? Work is flexible eh? Or let me guess, you run your own business, right?