From: sharx335@hotmail.com   
      
   "John Fleming"  wrote in message   
   news:7hk0l71jp1v1h2g3o5ck0i6a7qu1n9jhak@4ax.com...   
   > [Default] On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 13:43:09 +0000 (UTC), while chained   
   > to a   
   > desk in the scriptorium Andrew Chaplin   
   >  wrote:   
   >> $John Fleming  wrote in   
   >> $news:tvsuk7logmqvdu02u1hr039qfrr8nsqvs5@4ax.com:   
   >> $   
   >> $> [Default] On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:57:29 -0800 (PST), while   
   >> chained to a   
   >> $> desk in the scriptorium simplicity    
   >> wrote:   
   >> $>   
   >> $>> $On Feb 28, 6:53 pm, Sir eel  wrote:   
   >> $>> $> On Feb 28, 10:15 am, Alan Baggett   
   >>    
   >> $>> wrote: $>   
   >> $>> $> > Economists say Ottawa should tax food   
   >> $>> $>   
   >> $>> $> > 02/25/2012 | Julian Beltrame, The Canadian Press   
   >> $>> $>   
   >> $>> $> > Two of Canada's leading economists   
   >> $>> $>   
   >> $>> $> ====================================================   
   >> $>> $>   
   >> $>> $> ????/  leading economists!   
   >> $>> $> two buffons who equate the percentage of  of disposable   
   >> income   
   >> $>> spent $> on food is the same for the $600,000.00 income   
   >> person as it   
   >> $>> is for the $> $30,000.00 wage earner.   
   >> $>> $> You got two choices these two are idiots or they're paid   
   >> stooges   
   >> $>> $   
   >> $>> $To be willing to make oneself look like an idiot for money,   
   >> one must   
   >> $>> $be an idiot. Period.   
   >> $>   
   >> $> The problem with taxing food is the people who bear the brunt   
   >> of the   
   >> $> tax increase are lower income earners.   
   >> $>   
   >> $> While someone in a higher income bracket might spend a bit   
   >> more per   
   >> $> family member than a lower income earner--more expensive cuts   
   >> of meat,   
   >> $> for example--they don't eat significantly more food.   
   >> $   
   >> $Whether or not one gets "progressive" results from taxing food   
   >> all lies   
   >> $in the tax credits that one devises. The only people whom tax   
   >> on food and   
   >> $rent could hit unduly are low income earners who do not file   
   >> tax returns.   
   >> $   
   >> $Tax *everything*--especially legal fees--at a low rate and use   
   >> tax   
   >> $credits to shield the poor.   
   >   
   > I think, if you really want to help the low income earners,   
   > increase   
   > the personal exemption for income taxes at a rate faster than   
   > inflation.   
   >   
   > With the personal exemption, essentially the first $11,000 or so   
   > income is tax free.  Say, over the next five years, you bumped   
   > this up   
   > to $15,000, and you put more money in the pockets of people who   
   > will   
   > spend the money on goods and services.   
   >   
   > While people with high incomes benefit too, they won't benefit to   
   > anywhere near the same extent as someone who is trying to make   
   > ends   
   > meet on less than $24,000 per year.   
      
   Most poorer people I know DON'T have to pay any income tax AS IT   
   IS. So, John, raising the personal exemption simply lowers the   
   taxes on those ALREADY well off enough to STILL pay some taxes. No,   
   in my opinion, the best way to get the money to the poorer people   
   WITHOUT the better off skimming off through higher person   
   exemptions, is to plump up quarterly GST credit system.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
   > --   
   >   
   >   
   > John Fleming   
   > Edmonton, Canada   
   >   
   >   
   >     Old MacDonald had a farm E-I-E-I-O   
   >     And on that farm he had a genome E-I-E-I-O   
   >     With a SNP SNP here and a SNP SNP there,   
   >     Here a SNP, there a SNP, everywhere a SNP SNP   
   >     Old MacDonald had a farm E-I-E-I-O   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)