Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of taxation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of taxation
One of the most important topic in economics is taxes, a significant aspect that influences many decisions made by people, firms, and the government. Although it is agreed that action should be taken in order to reduce poverty, raising taxes may not be the most apt way to achieve this. First of all, despite the promise the that government makes about the 2 per cent HST increase being solely used to offset poverty in the province of Ontario, it is difficult to believe that it is completely true. On numerous occasions, the public has seen the government make promises and not abide by them afterwards . If the government has a tighter budget to work with, there is a reduced possibility of a “misuse of fund ”. Similarly, there is high possibility that the 2 per cent increase in taxes will not completely go towards offsetting …show more content…
The cost of living rises with rising taxes, which might push more people into poverty, defeating the original purpose of raising taxes. Then in addition to increased poverty, this can result in high unemployment rates as well . With higher taxes, the economy slows down as consumers spend less because they have less disposable income. This is particularly true in the case of so-called "luxury" goods, such as high-priced cars, jewelry, and other such goods. Furthermore, it seems pointless to raise the taxes even more, considering that Canada has higher taxes than many other countries. For instance, one of the many countries that has lower taxes that Canada is Germany . Yet, when we compare the child poverty rates between the two countries, Germany has a lower rate, despite the lower taxes . Finally, raising taxes to help reduce poverty might transform into a permanent method of relief. For some, increased support can become a source of dependency because essentially, it’s a form of “free money”, where someone does all the work, and someone else gets a portion of the profit for
Topic and Specific Case: The topic that I have chosen is the impact that the shift to neoliberal government policies has had on workers in Canada. I have chosen to explore this topic through looking at the restructuring of unemployment insurance in the 1990’s neoliberal era when it came to be called employment insurance (McBride, 2005, pg. 90).
...ther through income tax or GST, as they are all ultimate benefactors of socially optimal policy. Thus, the tax would be reinvested in benefiting Canadians.
In this section I will be discussing how inflation rates have increased over the past 40 years, and what effect this has had on monetary growth. Inflation rates are defined as the rate of change in price levels in our economy especially Canada. Surveys are conducted quarterly or monthly to determine and generate a Consumer Price Index. The CPI is conducted with a “basket of goods” to determine changes in consumer prices for Canadians. It is important to study and analyze the rate of inflation because it helps the government determine how the dollar value has changed over a period of time. Also to adjust pending contracts and initiate new pensions which have to take into account the effect of inflation. Less well-off people and elderly are more
Concerning the debate on our economy, republicans generally believe strongly in the power of a free market system, reduced income tax rate, more spending from the people, and less spending from the government. The Republican Party wants the tax rate to not be affected regardless of how much wealth a person has, and wants the tax rate to be reduced in order to create more private spending. According to the Republican National Convention web site, republicans “believe government should tax only to raise money for its essential functions,” such as keeping citizens safe from criminals and maintaining basic infrastructure and national security (Barton). With this being said, taxes should not be increased, but instead decreased, to lead to more spending on the free market and less spending from the federal government. The money the government uses to spend comes from the taxpayers, and republicans believe that those taxpayers have the right to use their money in other ways, such as spending on the free market, or saving it for the future. In turn, the republican idea is that when the taxes on things are lower, the people will spend more, which creates a steady, stable economy. The Republican Party would like to see a de-regulated economy with less taxing and more spending.
Poverty is a serious issue in Canada needs to be addressed promptly. Poverty is not simply about the lack of money an individual has; it is much more than that. The World Bank Organization defines poverty by stating that, “Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time”. In Canada, 14.9 percent of Canada’s population has low income as Statistics Canada reports, which is roughly about two million of Canadians in poverty or on the verge of poverty. In addition, according to an UNICEF survey, 13.3 percent of Canadian children live in poverty. If the government had started to provide efficient support to help decrease the rates of poverty, this would not have been such a significant issue in Canada. Even though the issue of poverty has always been affecting countries regardless of the efforts being made to fight against it, the government of Canada still needs to take charge and try to bring the percentage of poverty down to ensure that Canada is a suitable place to live. Therefore, due to the lack of support and social assistance from the government, poverty has drastically increased in Canada.
With the increase in funding, Canadian poverty within Aboriginal society would greatly decrease. The Government should be “proactive in giving aboriginal people in remote communities the support they need to move to areas where they can find jobs and education” (End First). That way, adults would be able to increase their income in order to have a much more fulfilling lifestyle. It is not only adults who need the financial aid, but also the community and children. In order to help, the Canadian Government should make sure more money is being made available for the First Nation education, social interactions such as community centres, and way of living including: housing, roads and availability of healthy food items. “...The poverty rate of status First Nations children living on reserves was triple that of non-indigenous children” (Hildebrandt). Aboriginal children across Canada need the help of Canadian Government in order to lose this poverty and be able to move ahead. “Persistent disadvantages faced by Canada’s aboriginal peoples in regard to education, employment, health and housing are well-documented/the staggering poverty faced by indigenous children is preventable” (Hildebrandt). With enough Government funding, Native children would be able to get better education, social skills and understanding of their traditions and culture. Schools, community centres
Canada as a country has a lot going for it. A high GNP, and high per capita income in international terms.... ... middle of paper ... ... With all the focus being on becoming a sovereign nation, the citizens are suffering.
Second serious issue follows from the first and implies the tax sphere. Lawmakers are likely to back tax cuts, but ...
however,the salaries would be less due to an increase in taxestaken out used to help pay for
The use of taxes is one of the government's favorite ways to make its presence known in the economy. While this method seems blatantly obvious, many of the ways the government uses the money collected by taxation is not. Some of the money it takes is used to fund other programs designed to "protect" consumers and to "create" jobs. Be...
The debate that took place in class on Friday, May 29th, focused strictly on the possible implementation of a negative income tax that would supplement the income of low-wage earners with the taxes paid by higher-wage earners. If put into effect this system would, in a sense, replace the welfare programs that are currently in place. The six debaters, three arguing for negative a income tax system and three arguing against, did a very good job bringing up some important evidence that defended their sides. One of the key points brought up by the affirmative side of the debate included the facts that our current welfare system is already extremely disorganized, and can even be considered unsustainable in the long run. Another affirmative topic was that this system would provide true income inequality to all Americans, not just those who have the ability to pay for tax loopholes. The negative side, on the other hand, argued that this system would often cause those earning beneath the fixed income tax line to have little incentive find work and that it such a program wouldn’t provide the same amount of benefits that many low-income individuals have
First off, let’s briefly talk about our current system. The tax rates for a single income starts as low as 10% for income below $9,325 and ends as high as 39.6% if you make over $418,400. It’s a little complex since there are seven different rates that a taxpayer could fall into. However, in the grand scheme of things it is simple—the more you make, the more you pay. With this tax system the “winners” are the lower income taxpayers, and the “losers” are the higher income taxpayers.
The famous literature on principles of taxation was embodied in Adams Smith “Canons of taxation”. Since then, economies have adopted (and adapted where necessary) these basic principles for what is regarded as the most important tool of fiscal policy.
Liam Flynn Mrs. Abban English 22 December 2014 Argument Essay I am a middle class person that believes that wealthy people shouldn’t have to pay more taxes than people with less money. I have heard both sides of the stories but I believe people with money have worked hard to earn that money and shouldn’t have to pay more. Taxes should be the same amount of money, even if you have a different amount of money. The government should try to lower taxes so this is not a discussion anymore.
The government would most likely do this by raising taxes for the rich to fund social programs or by forcefully increasing minimum wage. Due to the growth in distance between the rich and the poor in the world I mostly agree with the source however, if the government 's power is not limited they could make the economy worse.