Tired Of Broken Promises ? I Am

"Said in another way if your RRSP was worth 300,000 the next day it was likely worth only 240,000."

And two weeks later it was back to almost $300K again. Almost all of the stock of the affected companies and the $20 Billion in "lost" funds bounced back the following weeks. If you were one of the short term investors that sold in those first 2 days, then yes, you lost.

Cry me a river.

When Bell and Telus started talking about moving their companies into an income trust, it would have resulted in more than 1.5 billion in tax revenues gone from the Federal government alone each year just from these two companies alone. You guys bitch about how the government only serves big business... well here is an example of it standing up to business in a huge way and making sure we don't continue to lose billions in tax revenue. Where would we make up the difference? Virtually every large company was beginning to look at becoming an income trust. Government would have to start taxing individuals more heavily if they couldn't get the funds from corporations.

The paper loss (only a real loss if you sold) lasted a few weeks... short term in the cases of RSP's. And if you are investing hundreds of thousands on short term gain, you should make sure you can sustain loss. If not, you shouldn't be investing at all.

Find a real issue to bitch about the Conservatives. This is in the interests of almost every Canadian.

News Flash: Politicians are Lying Scumbags! Film at 11.

News Flash: TSX Rises to record levels Thursday. Investor confidence rises!


---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

Seeing as how I don't expect to ever be able to retire before I shuffle off this mortal coil, this doesn't affect me directly as far as I am currently aware.

However, that being said, should I ever find myself in the position of actually having sufficient funds to be able to retire earlier than age 65 (or more likely 70-75), the last thing I would do is trust anyone other than myself to manage my money.

My stake in it is far higher than any managers, especially when I would be one of many accounts he would steward of.

The thing that really perplexes me are those of you who VOTED for the Conservatives and were actually gullible enough to believe them.

Were you suffering some form of diminished capacity at the time?

They're CONSERVATIVES for pete's sake, soul children and predogies of Brian Mulroney.

That alone should have alerted you that something was seriously wrong.



---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

"The thing that really perplexes me are those of you who VOTED for the Conservatives and were actually gullible enough to believe them."

Yes, and that's why I have to laugh at the fools who are crying about yet another broken "promise" as if they were too stupid not to notice that every "new" government we've ever had throughout history has always lied and broken their promises.

Now keep in mind that the people who are yelling the loudest are the tiny minority with big bucks behind them who *paid* the Conservatives to keep this particular "promise".

"If you were one of the short term investors that sold in those first 2 days, then yes, you lost. "

Yes it would be most interesting to see who made their fortunes from buying up all that "cheap" stock. I'm certain this was just another scam intended to pay off Harpers backroom buddies.

<blockquote> Seeing as how I don't expect to ever be able to retire before I shuffle off this mortal coil, this doesn't affect me directly as far as I am currently aware. </blockquote> Ditto, Deacon!<p>---<br>"Son, if you wanna get ahead in this world, never work for another man as long as you live."

"You guys bitch about how the government only serves big business... well here is an example of it standing up to business in a huge way"

This statement seems to be a bit of a contradiction. How can a Government which caters to corporate facism first and foremost, "stand up" to their corporate masters? Sorry, but I don't see Harper breaking his promises to the big boys, since he is nothing more than a robotic pre-programmed patsy for their selfish interests.

Very good points Michael. If anyone thinks that corporations are turning to income trusts for anyone elses benefit, then maybe they can "donate" to them. Unpresidented profits are not enough. Now it's avoiding tax's on those profits. This same government is also looking at laws to prevent "off-shore" companies from avoiding tax's on money made in Canada. I don't like the "New Government" but can't see Martin having done the same thing. I'm certain Martin would have led the pack of complainers if he was the Liberal leader today.

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

My stake in it is far higher than any managers, especially when I would be one of many accounts he would steward of.<<

Isn't that the point? The Income trust "allows" the investor to use the various loopholes to avoid paying tax's. The Income trust pays no tax. Using a broker or investing directly makes no differance. The government is saying that no matter who profits, they WILL be paying the tax. Corporations making vast profits have merely passed the tax bill to the investors by becoming an income trust.

I don't know about you, but I'm getting tired of seeing huge corporations getting away with not paying tax's. "Income trusts" was just another way they were going to do it. Shareholders voted for them and now are being told "Ha, Ha it didn't work this time."


---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

This statement seems to be a bit of a contradiction. How can a Government which caters to corporate facism first and foremost, "stand up" to their corporate masters?<<

To much is at stake. Not every corporation is an "income trust". Someone is going to have to pay the bills and Harper can't afford to allow the biggest payers of the hook. Besides, he has a war to run, in company with his buddy Bush. The "war" is like an investment and soon to see profit. Haliburton is doing wonderfully well in Iraq. Perhaps Afghanistan will have a new medium with Telus/Bell.

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

Methinks this issue of taxation, or foregone taxation by the federal government, was independantly studied around the time of the last liberal budget, when they decided not to change the tax rules on income trusts.

I seem to recall that the opinion was that the tax effect on income trusts was revenue neutral, ie. RevCan would get its pound of flesh, albeit somewhat delayed.

Since the federal goverment is running surplusses these days I cannot see why a delayed income stream would cause the feds to stick their political neck out on this issue.

To any business, tax is a cost which gets passed onto the ultimate customer you and me. Am I wrong here?

H.F. Wolff

Profits are also a form of taxation, in a totally different category from wages and real earnings. Especially, when policies permit them to rise to the sky, while prices are going up every day and wages down.

Yes, as an independent businessman for almost 50 years, I agree that businesses have to make profits, but how much and shouldn't be there some limits ? Taxation and anti cartel and anti trust laws usd to take care of this.

Corporatina have been making profits 40-50 years ago, but living standards were also going up. The forced introduction
of the neocon ideology and neoclassical economics have changed business into a crime wave.

Ed Deak.

Some of you guys must be looking at a different set of numbers somewhere.

The income trusts are still down by 20 % and more , there has been no recovery. There is not likely to ever be a recovery as a result of this change. (unless it does not pass)

There are stocks rising on the TSX like the banks and Bell canada etc. The big buisness that are rising are the ones that have benefited for the changes of taxes to income trusts.

Income trust investors were not the rich guys, not the big business tycoons, they were the ordinary moms and pops that worked their whole lives running convienance stores, mechanics, construction workers etc. They saved and invested in their RRSPs, maybe sold the convienance store they ran for thirty years and put their money into income trusts.

Why because they had no or little other pension coming in , or were getting ready for their retirement. They just wanted something that paid them about 8 to 10 % yearly on their savings.

This did not affect the big wigs and big business ? as a matter of fact if you read the newspaper you will see that the beneficarys of this change are families like the bombardier family (worth about 1.4 billion $) and own 60 % of the voting rights in that huge company, which is now about to be given a loan again by the canadian tax payers of 350 million $.

SO what did the government need the supposed 500 million in missing taxes for ? To loan it to bombardier ??

Also I suggest that you read Diane Francis coloum today In the national post. The government is not likely to recover any of additional taxes as a result of this move. As these taxes were being paid by the investors and now they won't be as they are taxed at the corporate level.

This was a take from the common investor and saver in Canada and a give to the rich. Like the owners of Bell Canada , the banks, and companies like Bombardier.

"and companies like Bombardier."

Bombardier is not a real company. Real companies don't require or get government hand outs.

No, that's because under Harper, companies ARE the government, ergo no need for handouts.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush