Global economic downturn

 Canada is a federal state so we get taxed by two governments : the federal and the provincial.

The federal tax structure is as follows:

• 15% on the first $38,832 of taxable income
• + 22% on the portion of taxable income between $38,832 and $77,664
• + 26% on the portion of taxable income between $77,664 and $126,264
• + 29% of taxable income over $126,264

The provinces follows the same structure. However their rates are about half the federal rate.

(for more info, check out : http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html)

As you can see, the more money you make, the bigger the portion of tax that you're giving. 

Wow, you see that's how it should be done!

We still pay 21% and 41% which makes a mockery of our socialist state compared to yours!

well, speaking of socialist country, it would be fun to have a player from Iceland display their tax structure...i'm sure it would make all of us feel less "robed" by the government

However, if spent on sound programs, i don't consider imcome tax as a form of robery. On the contrary, i consider it the price to pay for a civilized society.

You are talking about a very particular instance there.  I remember a couple of yeras ago, the press was full of Icelandic entrepreneurs buying this that and the oither.  My main memory was though of, how?  The same applies in Ireland, the UK, America etc., we all had over blown economies, it was just a matter of scale!

Going back "on topic", Canada hasn't been hit that hard.

Our banks wern't as deregulated as the banks from other country, so we are scheletered on that front. None of them declared bankcrupcy yet.

However, i hear getting a loan is getting difficult. So companies that want to expand are kinda stalled due to the inability to get cash from the banks.

Also, we aren't protected from american and other foreign own branch plants closures. That has affected us a bit

 i agree

Yes, your two points are well understood!

About six months after moving home I was very uneasy about the apparent economic wealth of Ireland.  I had come from a truly wealthy country, Switzerland, and none of the basics seemed to apply to Ireland. 

Little was I to realise the true economic values of that little je ne sais quoi!

Wow I was looking forward to a post about global economic trends. Instead I found a thread about the Canadian health-care system. Interesting, but off-topic.

Your insights would be much appreciated, especially given your country's position as global economic leader!

This I think may have a limited reply source!

Well I don't follow politics and economics much, but the US is sitting in a very precarious position. We are definitely in the middle of a recession, and looking to get out of it hopefully in the next several months. That's what the experts say anyway. I'm skeptical =/

The United States doesn't have very much left to offer the world. We are entirely a service industry. We're "good" bosses but horrible workers. We lag behind in math and science, so we're not very smart compared to some other countries. No one buys our cars, televisions, etc. so we're not really selling anything productive. Everyone in the country is used to getting paid for "just showing up", and I'm a bit guilty as well.

As a nation, if we start working hard, valuing intelligence and social progress, I guess we'll improve. But the only thing that we pay attention to is media attention and the size of our bank accounts so I don't know.

I wonder what the rest of the world is going through? And I wonder what they think of us?

This topic is too large to explain in a single post, but I can give some good websites for further reading to all interested parties.

http://europac.net/

http://maxkeiser.com/

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

http://populus-vox.blogspot.com/

enjoy!

Oh! and a great series of videos for those interested in the US housing collapse can be found here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3Qefbt0n4&feature=PlayList&p=10E5668909719CBA&index=0&playnext=1

As Steevmartuns said, economic growth is basically how quickly money flows. This can be quite real and sound- if your company earns more profit, they can give you a raise, which you'll probably put toward a new car or whatever, and then that car company makes more and can pay its employees better etc.

This sort of growth is usually pretty slow and not like what we've seen, which resembles the bubbles of the 1700's and 1800's. Probably the most famous, among economists, is the South Seas Bubble of the 1720's. What "South Seas" refers to is not important- no one at the time was aware of what it meant or what they did, only that South Seas company stock was equivalent to a gold mine, until the illusion was shattered, that is.

Add to this the housing market, which was a very safe and profitable place to invest until supply outweighed demand as it inevitably does, and you've got a sticky wicket, as some might say.

These sorts of things happen when not enough people stop themselves from becoming potentially rich, and there is very little that wiser people can do about it- it is impossible to know when to abandon a ship that should have sunk already, and the sooner you jump the longer the swim to shore.

At this point we will probably be asking ourselves what the best solution is- to clean house with a good solid depression or to try to inject our way back onto the growth train. Herbert Hoover tried the former option and did not receive a second term. FDR tried the latter and had four terms, although it was arguably the added demand of goods in WWII that got things rolling again rather than any fiscal policy.

That is VERY debatable...considering FDR got into office campaigning against Hoover's interventionist policy.

Well in the U.S. politicians very often campaign against a policy and then follow it once in office. If you can show that Hoover spent more than Roosevelt (obviously, it would have to be his first term to be fair), I would be happy to learn something new.

No Roosevelt spent more than Hoover, just as Obama is spending more than Bush. But Hoover was by no means a non-interventionist president.

Here's a neat little vid you might like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXxNRNOjCM8

Glenn Beck is an idiot...but his guests are good.

and another nifty vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCaUA5l_bYc&eurl=http://www.campaignforliberty.com/index.php

 Hoover raised taxes and imposed tarrifs to protect U.S. business.  Did not work.  Exactly the wrong thing stratagy.  Throwing money at "make work" projects is merely providing income, not solving the problem.  I don't watch him, and he may be as you say, but what ideas are idiotic?  It does not advance the discussion/analysis to divert the debate to a personal attack, or say the debate on a subject is over because everyone agrees--when everyone does not.  I am interested in your Canadian healthcare information.  The proponents here of a universal system point to Canada, and others.  As one gets older health becomes more of a problem, but at what cost to the generation behind us. 

You started a very interesting topic.  My wife never reads these, and is devouring this one.

Doesn't the money circulate when the government spends it ? Or is it my English ?

But that assumes of course that Government is the most efficient spender of cash as opposed to businesses and the general public, which certainly is not the case here in Ireland.

On that basis, you could argue that tax cuts are better to drive us out of the economic turmoil as it will encourage efficient spending and investment.