Article: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/recession/4228661/story.html
Summary:
Statistics Canada has confirmed that Canada's employment marked has regained its pre-recession peak of 17.2 million in the fall of 2008. All it took was an unexpectedly large gain of 69,200 jobs in January, compared to December 2010. Compared to our last recession (in the early 1990s) it's taken only half as long to regain the lost jobs. However, there is still plenty of economic damage to be repaired. During the recession, the country's population kept growing, which means currently, there are nearly 375,000 additional job seekers in the workforce. As a result, the national unemployment rate as of January is 7.8 percent compared to 6.1 percent at the start of the recession. As of now, many parts of the country are still hurting. For instance, 17 of the largest 33 urban areas had yet to regain previous employment levels. Peterborough, Guelph, and Kingston weren't even close. Other cities such as Kelowna, British Columbia, and Quebec City has performed well beyond pre-recession levels. It all depends on the city.
Connection:
This article ties in with one of the topics in chapter 5--Employment and unemployment. According to our textbook, the definition of an unemployed person is "any person who, during the reference week, was without work, had actively looked for work in the last four weeks, and was available for work. An unemployed person has an immediate interest in finding work, and would be available if suitable work were found." An employed person is "any person who did any work for pay or profit during the reference week. Others that are considered employed are "unpaid family workers in a family farm or business." This category also includes individuals who were on vacation, on strike or on sick leave during the reference week. As well, there are many types of unemployment and I think the one that is connected to the article is Structual unemployment. Structual unemployment is the result from a mismatch between demand in the labour market and the skills and locations of the workers seeking employment. Even though the number of vacancies may be equal to, or greater than the number of unemployed, the unemployed workers many lack the skills needed for the jobs; or they may not live in the part of the country or world where jobs are available. This is true to the article because areas such as Guelph and Kingston, they are still "hurting" from the recession and not many jobs are available. As a result, many individuals living there are unemployed because of where they live. Not many opportunities are present at this time.
Reflection:
Unemployment has always been a concern for us individuals. This is because when a worker's income has been reduced due to unemployment, it will be more difficult for them to support him/herself or their family. It is also a concern for Canada, because if people are not working, then it means that Canada is not using its resources efficiently enough. From this article, it is interesting to see that although we have officially stepped out of recession, and many jobs have been added to the economy, our unemployment rate has still increased to 7.8 percent compared to 6.1 percent at the start of the recession. This is because our population has grown during the recession and many people have decided to step into the workforce. I suppose even if we have successfully stepped out of recession, it is true that it will still take a long time for us to fully recover.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Friday, January 21, 2011
Corporate Taxes: Flaherty gets it right
Article: http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Corporate+taxes/4095206/story.html
Summary:
Since four years ago, federal Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty had suggested to lower the corporate income tax rates in Canada. His intention and idea was to increase investment, create jobs and ensure that Canadian companies could remain competitive. And right now, it seems as if this strategy is working very effectively. Originally, the tax rate was at 21 percent. It then decreased to 18 percent, and on January 1, 2010 it went down to 16.5 percent. By next year, it will go down to as low as 15 percent. "If we want more jobs, higher wages and an improved standard of living, Canada needs to be the most attractive place for job creators to do business and invest," Flaherty says. Lowering the corporate tax is not only improving our standard of living, but it is also benefiting our reputation. Just last week, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial which pointed out that the U.S. should be looking closely at the competitive advantage that Canada has slowly shaped with corporate tax cuts. Currently, the U.S. federal rate is at 35 per cent, which is more than double Canada's. All in all, Canada's image has also received a boost in Washington Times where business author, James A. Bacon has stated that "Canada is quietly surpassing the U.S. as the land of opportunity."
Connection:
This article connects to Chapter 4 because this chapter mainly talks about the involvement of taxation in the government of Canada. This relates to one of the topics discussed in the textbook; Sources of Government Revenue. One of the main taxes that generate income for the government is the corporation income tax, which is a tax that is imposed on the net profits of companies. These tax rates vary depending on the type of business and the ownership. In this article, the main focus is on the corporation income taxes. They think that lowering these tax rates will in return allow us to receive benefits such as higher wages, more job opportunities, and higher standard of living. This seems quite true in some degree because if we were to lower the income taxes, we would have to pay less tax and it is less of a burden for us; therefore it allows us to enjoy a higher standard of living.
Reflection:
In my opinion, this seems to be good news because it seems to be a benefit to all companies and people who have lost their jobs from the recession. For myself, I do hope for and encourage the government to decrease this corporate income tax because from what I have read in the article, there seems to be more pros than cons in imposing this act. However, I feel that this seems to be almost too good to be true. It appears to me that the benefits that Flaherty has mentioned in the article can be achieved a little too easily. Lowering the tax rate might have an effect on our economy and creating a better image for us, but will it really create more jobs and give us higher wages in return is still unknown. I do not believe that solely lowering taxes will generate that many benefits for us. I feel that to achieve everything stated in the article, more things have to be done.
Summary:
Since four years ago, federal Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty had suggested to lower the corporate income tax rates in Canada. His intention and idea was to increase investment, create jobs and ensure that Canadian companies could remain competitive. And right now, it seems as if this strategy is working very effectively. Originally, the tax rate was at 21 percent. It then decreased to 18 percent, and on January 1, 2010 it went down to 16.5 percent. By next year, it will go down to as low as 15 percent. "If we want more jobs, higher wages and an improved standard of living, Canada needs to be the most attractive place for job creators to do business and invest," Flaherty says. Lowering the corporate tax is not only improving our standard of living, but it is also benefiting our reputation. Just last week, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial which pointed out that the U.S. should be looking closely at the competitive advantage that Canada has slowly shaped with corporate tax cuts. Currently, the U.S. federal rate is at 35 per cent, which is more than double Canada's. All in all, Canada's image has also received a boost in Washington Times where business author, James A. Bacon has stated that "Canada is quietly surpassing the U.S. as the land of opportunity."
Connection:
This article connects to Chapter 4 because this chapter mainly talks about the involvement of taxation in the government of Canada. This relates to one of the topics discussed in the textbook; Sources of Government Revenue. One of the main taxes that generate income for the government is the corporation income tax, which is a tax that is imposed on the net profits of companies. These tax rates vary depending on the type of business and the ownership. In this article, the main focus is on the corporation income taxes. They think that lowering these tax rates will in return allow us to receive benefits such as higher wages, more job opportunities, and higher standard of living. This seems quite true in some degree because if we were to lower the income taxes, we would have to pay less tax and it is less of a burden for us; therefore it allows us to enjoy a higher standard of living.
Reflection:
In my opinion, this seems to be good news because it seems to be a benefit to all companies and people who have lost their jobs from the recession. For myself, I do hope for and encourage the government to decrease this corporate income tax because from what I have read in the article, there seems to be more pros than cons in imposing this act. However, I feel that this seems to be almost too good to be true. It appears to me that the benefits that Flaherty has mentioned in the article can be achieved a little too easily. Lowering the tax rate might have an effect on our economy and creating a better image for us, but will it really create more jobs and give us higher wages in return is still unknown. I do not believe that solely lowering taxes will generate that many benefits for us. I feel that to achieve everything stated in the article, more things have to be done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)