http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2009/02/06/januaryjobs.html
Summary:
As most of us know, we are currently in a recession. When a recession occurs, there is usually a high rate of unemployment. Current statistics have shown that there are many job losses. As a matter of fact, the job losses exceed the numbers of the 1980s and the 1990s. In just January alone, the unemployment rate went up by 0.6% to a current 7.2% unemployment rate in Canada. This unemployment rate is partly because of the 213,000 jobs that were lost ever since October 2008. To make matters worse, economic experts expect that this drop will continue for another six months or so. Although the unemployment rate is expected to increase, companies such as the Bank of Canada declared that they will cut interest rates to help solve the problem of this recession and the unemployment rate.
Chapter 5 Connections:
This is related to chapter 5 because it does talk about unemployment rates and the labour force. A survey known as the Labour Force Survey is complied monthly based on 50,000 households across Canada. This is used to determine the employed and unemployment rate. We can say that the survey in the present ended up with a high unemployment rate due to this recession. In fact, there is a formula for unemployment rate and that is: unemployment rate= unemployed / labour force. Out of all the types of unemployment, I believe we are going through a demand-deficient unemployment because many people are now purchasing fewer goods (not to mention, inflation), because of this recession; thus, the employers will have to lay off workers due to the fact that they are having difficulties selling their product. As a result, there is currently such a high unemployment rate in Canada.
Personal Reflection:
Being in the current labour force, I have witnessed many people that have been laid off. I also believe that the unemployment rate will increase for another six months or even longer. Canada usually has a higher unemployment rate compared to the United States, but right now, the unemployment rate for Canada is actually lower than the United States. Although there have been job loses in Canada, when we compare to our neighbours, the United States, they are doing worse than us. However, if we compare the unemployment rates of 1980s and the 1990s to the present, we actually have a lower rate right now. Overall, I believe that this is currently an economic drawback and not a crisis; therefore, I think jobs will be available to the unemployed within a year.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Chapter 4 Blog
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123180759988175649.html
Summary:
In this article, it talks about the “death tax” which is a tax that family members have to pay due to the death of an owner. Mr. Obama wants to bring this estate tax back which was supposed to expire in the year 2010. He states that this “death tax” will create new jobs, but the author thinks otherwise. Although this tax is targeted towards the wealthy people such as Bill Gates, these rich people have ways to avoid the taxes which ultimately means that the lower and middle income people pay it. This is a problem because those two groups of people (lower and middle class) are responsible for creating new jobs, but if those people can’t pay the taxes, then there will be no new jobs created. Also, studies have shown that countries are better off without a “death tax” because many countries remove this tax so there would be more jobs. Although the government thinks that they are creating more jobs for the people in the United States, the results show otherwise.
Connections:
Since chapter four talks all about taxes created by the government, this article is related to this chapter. Since revenue is made as a result of taxes, the estate tax also creates revenue. Also, there the ability to pay concept can be applied to this article. Since the wealthy have the ability to avoid much of the estate tax, some argue that taxes should be paid according to their incomes and all their personal wealth (e.g. real estate, stocks, bank accounts, etc.) This is also somewhat related to a regressive tax because the poorer people end up carrying the burden of this “death tax” while the wealthy people find ways to evade it which makes the poor people pay a higher percentage of it.
Reflection
After reading this article, I have to agree with what the author says. If studies shown that eliminating this “death tax” do indeed help create new jobs, I think Mr. Obama should consider getting rid of this estate tax. Also, Countries such as China and other poor countries eliminated the “death tax” and as a result, new jobs were created. The only countries to pay the “death tax” are the United States, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In my opinion, there is no point continuing this tax because most of the people the country is taxing are the poor people. If the lower and middle class people are the ones that are looking for the jobs, giving them more taxes to pay isn’t going to help them one bit. Overall, studies as well as results are displayed that the “death tax” is better off excluded.
Summary:
In this article, it talks about the “death tax” which is a tax that family members have to pay due to the death of an owner. Mr. Obama wants to bring this estate tax back which was supposed to expire in the year 2010. He states that this “death tax” will create new jobs, but the author thinks otherwise. Although this tax is targeted towards the wealthy people such as Bill Gates, these rich people have ways to avoid the taxes which ultimately means that the lower and middle income people pay it. This is a problem because those two groups of people (lower and middle class) are responsible for creating new jobs, but if those people can’t pay the taxes, then there will be no new jobs created. Also, studies have shown that countries are better off without a “death tax” because many countries remove this tax so there would be more jobs. Although the government thinks that they are creating more jobs for the people in the United States, the results show otherwise.
Connections:
Since chapter four talks all about taxes created by the government, this article is related to this chapter. Since revenue is made as a result of taxes, the estate tax also creates revenue. Also, there the ability to pay concept can be applied to this article. Since the wealthy have the ability to avoid much of the estate tax, some argue that taxes should be paid according to their incomes and all their personal wealth (e.g. real estate, stocks, bank accounts, etc.) This is also somewhat related to a regressive tax because the poorer people end up carrying the burden of this “death tax” while the wealthy people find ways to evade it which makes the poor people pay a higher percentage of it.
Reflection
After reading this article, I have to agree with what the author says. If studies shown that eliminating this “death tax” do indeed help create new jobs, I think Mr. Obama should consider getting rid of this estate tax. Also, Countries such as China and other poor countries eliminated the “death tax” and as a result, new jobs were created. The only countries to pay the “death tax” are the United States, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In my opinion, there is no point continuing this tax because most of the people the country is taxing are the poor people. If the lower and middle class people are the ones that are looking for the jobs, giving them more taxes to pay isn’t going to help them one bit. Overall, studies as well as results are displayed that the “death tax” is better off excluded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)