welfare

[wufwugy]

please name one example in which somebody should be on welfare instead of either executed or exiled to canadia or mehico

[Pythonic]

disabled

[jyms]

because we don't want your societal rejects.

[wufwugy]

all right thats one

name two

[Deanglow]

future NBA stars

[Hawk]

I think there is a difference that would need to be considered, and thats whether this person is on welfare for the short term, maybe unable to find work etc, or if they are using welfare to avoid work.

I don't have any problem with the system helping people through tough times. I do have a problem with supporting leeches.

[pankfish]

Because they are poor imo.

[Sykedupp]

throretically, I could play poekr for a living, and since its non-taxable by the gov't, I could go on welfare cause I dont make anything. But I wont..

-Chris

[swiggidy]

Veterans, except they should be helped more in other ways and not need it

[Galapogos]

throretically, I could play poekr for a living, and since its non-taxable by the gov't, I could go on welfare cause I dont make anything. But I wont..

Somebody needs to brush up on his Canadian tax laws...

[BennyLaRue]

throretically, I could play poekr for a living, and since its non-taxable by the gov't, I could go on welfare cause I dont make anything. But I wont..

-Chris

Nah, dude. In Canada, if poker is your primary source of income and you spend a regular and significant amount of time doing it, it's taxable. Only if it stays as what amounts to a leisure activity is it not taxable.

[jyms]

throretically, I could play poekr for a living, and since its non-taxable by the gov't, I could go on welfare cause I dont make anything. But I wont..

-Chris

Nah, dude. In Canada, if poker is your primary source of income and you spend a regular and significant amount of time doing it, it's taxable. Only if it stays as what amounts to a leisure activity is it not taxable.

Yep. Just get a part time job so you can withdraw a little less and get some benefits and the govt. wont really notice since you will file a T4 every year. At least until the money becomes significant.

[wufwugy]

Veterans, except they should be helped more in other ways and not need it

isn't that still classified as disabled?

[a500lbgorilla]

isn't that still classified as disabled?

What? being Canadian?

SICKBURN FREEDOMHI5 LETS ROLL

[bigred]

AMERICA! FUCK YEAH!

[Knytestorme]

throretically, I could play poekr for a living, and since its non-taxable by the gov't, I could go on welfare cause I dont make anything. But I wont..

-Chris

Nah, dude. In Canada, if poker is your primary source of income and you spend a regular and significant amount of time doing it, it's taxable. Only if it stays as what amounts to a leisure activity is it not taxable.

Which is why I LOVE being Australian.....the first quote is true, the second not for us

[Sykedupp]

I got H&R Block to guarantee that any income I make from poker is counted as gambling winnings, and with their guarantee they have liability coverage of 1 million dollars. So if they (and Canada Revenue Agency, cause I called them too) are BOTH wrong, and I end up getting audited, H&R Block will cover for me. I am almost positive it's non-taxable no matter what, unless the Canada Revenue Agency actually lied to me.

And btw, at the Canada Revenue Agency, I spoke to the boss' boss' boss, cause none of the lower people knew. So yeah, I really hope they are right, otherwise I'll be pissed.

If you could show proof that poker is taxable, that'd be great, thx.

-Chris

[KoRnholio]

I got H&R Block to guarantee that any income I make from poker is counted as gambling winnings, and with their guarantee they have liability coverage of 1 million dollars.

Interesting stuff. Is poker your primary source of income?

[Sykedupp]

yes sir. So this is kinda important lol.

[phantom_lord]

I remember reading a post in one of the monthly threads this year in msnl where a guy had paid an account to look into it thoroughly and the report came back that it wasn't taxable.

I didn't really follow it, but i think he offered the report to anyone that was interested. probably worth looking up.

[BennyLaRue]

I got H&R Block

That's your first problem right there. It's great that you have your guarantee (and the gov't has to want to go after you too) but H&R Block is the Wal-Mart of tax preparation.

From: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/it...it334r2-e.html

Gambling Profits

10. Profits derived from bookmaking or from the operation of any gambling establishment (carried on legally or otherwise) constitute income from a business. In addition, an individual may be subject to tax on income derived from gambling itself, if the gambling activities constitute carrying on the business of gambling; see the decision of MNR v. Morden, (1961) CTC 484, 61 DTC 1266 (Ex. Ct.). The issue of whether or not an individual's activities are such that he or she can be considered to be carrying on a gambling business is a question of fact that can be determined only by an examination of all of the circumstances and the taxpayer's entire course of conduct. Although no one factor may be conclusive, the following criteria should be considered in making the determination:

(a) the degree of organization that is present in the pursuit of this activity by the taxpayer,

(b) the existence of special knowledge or inside information that enables the taxpayer to reduce the element of chance,

(c) the taxpayer's intention to gamble for pleasure as compared with any intention to gamble for profit as a means of gaining a livelihood, and

(d) the extent of the taxpayer's gambling activities, including the number and frequency of bets.

It is clear from various decisions of the courts that earnings from illegal operations or illicit businesses, such as illegal gambling and fraudulent business schemes, are not exempt from tax. (See for example, the decisions in The Queen v. Poynton, (1972) CTC 411, 72 DTC 6329 (Ont. C.A.) and MNR v. Eldridge, (1964) CTC 545, 64 DTC 5338 (Ex. Ct.).) Hobbies

11. In order for any activity or pursuit to be regarded as a source of income, there must be a reasonable expectation of profit. Where such an expectation does not exist (as is the case with most hobbies), neither amounts received nor expenses incurred are included in the income computation for tax purposes and any excess of expenses over receipts is a personal or living expense, the deduction of which is denied by paragraph 18(1)(h). On the other hand, if the hobby or pastime results in receipts of revenue in excess of expenses, that fact is a strong indication that the hobby is a venture with an expectation of profit; if so, the net income may be taxable as income from a business. The current version of IT-504, Visual Artists and Writers, discusses the concept of "a reasonable expectation of profit" in greater detail. Where a hobby consists of collecting personal-use property or listed personal property, dispositions should be accounted for as described in the current version of IT-332, Personal-Use Property.

Again, this does not mean you'll get nailed. But the CCRA has used this "reasonable expectation of profit" line tax a lot of horse racing winnings in the past and, more and more I'm reading about poker players as well.

You might want to read this thread as well: http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/show...5&o=14&fpart=1

Basically the tone of that thread is "yeah, it's taxable if its obv. that's how you make a living, but shut up about it and you'll be ok".

Of course, I'm not a tax lawyer.

[Warpe]

I got H&R Block to guarantee that any income I make from poker is counted as gambling winnings, and with their guarantee they have liability coverage of 1 million dollars. So if they (and Canada Revenue Agency, cause I called them too) are BOTH wrong, and I end up getting audited, H&R Block will cover for me. I am almost positive it's non-taxable no matter what, unless the Canada Revenue Agency actually lied to me.

And btw, at the Canada Revenue Agency, I spoke to the boss' boss' boss, cause none of the lower people knew. So yeah, I really hope they are right, otherwise I'll be pissed.

If you could show proof that poker is taxable, that'd be great, thx.

-Chris

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...36.html#269481

[bigred]

haha. the only thing chris could brag about being in canada doesn't even apply

canada sux

[Galapogos]

We make better hockey players.

BOOM

[Sykedupp]

My chances of getting caught must be super-super-low if Revenue Canada doesnt even know that gambling is taxable, amirite?

-Chris

[BennyLaRue]

My chances of getting caught must be super-super-low if Revenue Canada doesnt even know that gambling is taxable, amirite?

-Chris

Not necessarily. It depends who you talked to and what specific information you provided. Oddly enough, the CRA isn't actually responsible to give you tax advice if you call them up and even if they do give you an unofficial interpretation, it's the Courts that have the final say.

That said, if you want an official interpretation from the CRA, you need to pay for an Advance Income Tax Ruling. Did you do that?

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tax/taxprof...gs/menu-e.html

Remember that it's possible the boss' boss' boss got his job because he was good at managing people, not because he knows his tax laws.

Will you get caught? No idea. Is it taxable though? Yeah, it some cases, it is.

[Lukie]

veteran injured in war would be a great example.

for the most part, it's just a waste of taxpayer money (i.e. a burden on society).

[yourfather]

Is it bad that I kind of hope my company goes under so I can collect unemployment for 6 months while chilling and it will cover my bills and shit and allow me to pwn life?

Its not leechy as it comes out of my paycheck every month. Right?

[bigred]

Get the alcohol boys, we got a leech!

[wufwugy]

all right heres what i dont get.

i assume two things: 1) the majority of posters on this forum (posters on most forums on internet works too) are democrats (often libertarian but still vote dem often), and 2) 'welfare state' is a big if not the biggest part of the liberal establishment.

if those are correct, they dont jive with each other. explain. if those are not correct explain.

[d0zer]

Corporate welfare is a far bigger taxpayer drain than personal welfare. Re-aim your libertarian crosshair on a better target...

[wufwugy]

i have no crosshairs anywhere. i do not understand liberals or democratic viewpoints by any decent margin, and i am only now beginning to.

and whats the diff between those two welfares?

[d0zer]

i have no crosshairs anywhere. i do not understand liberals or democratic viewpoints by any decent margin, and i am only now beginning to.

and whats the diff between those two welfares?

Corporate welfare is done in the form of government subsidies, tax breaks etc... for struggling industries, and violates the Darwinist principles of competition that free market capitalism was based on.

"Personal" welfare is what you started this thread about. I think there are maybe a few valid circumstances for personal welfare, but I'm not confident on that...I've been on the fence with that issue for a while. I'm not a huge fan of the current implementation at any rate.

[Lukie]

all right heres what i dont get.

i assume two things: 1) the majority of posters on this forum (posters on most forums on internet works too) are democrats (often libertarian but still vote dem often), and 2) 'welfare state' is a big if not the biggest part of the liberal establishment.

if those are correct, they dont jive with each other. explain. if those are not correct explain.

I guess there are a couple ways to look at it...

One way might be that both sides (i.e. liberal and conservative) historically/traditionally have held views that are just terrible. Welfare, Affirmative action, Patriot act, bible thumping [fill-in-the-blank] rhetoric, etc. are a couple from both sides. I could think of many more. So maybe people like the dems as a whole, but when they see a crock of shit they immediately recognize it.

Another way to look at it might be that everyone they know is a democrat, and let's be honest-- their polices seem much nicer, more friendly, and you come off as a *MUCH* nicer guy arguing that the poor guy living on the street needs a free check and a free house than it is to say that he fucked his life up, is lazy, and doesn't deserve a dime of my tax money, but i digress...

[Lukie]

Also, just the fact that you're on the internet posting about welfare makes it likely, you know, that you don't need it.

[Ragnar4]

how about. I have 3 kids, but my super rich wife left me, and I only had a part time job at McDonalds, I'm unqualified to do any real work, and I have to work a 2nd job at arby's just to feed my kids.

that count?

[pankfish]

Another way to look at it might be that everyone they know is a democrat, and let's be honest-- their polices seem much nicer, more friendly, and you come off as a *MUCH* nicer guy arguing that the poor guy living on the street needs a free check and a free house than it is to say that he fucked his life up, is lazy, and doesn't deserve a dime of my tax money, but i digress...

I don't think that lazy able minded/bodied men make up very high of a percentage of welfare cases. Pretty sure the only way you can actually get welfare is if you are mentally or physically handicapped.
There are state sponsored child support programs of sorts, like wic and food stamps, of course child care tax credits.

It's not like you can just go to a welfare office and say "gimme some money I don't wanna work". Sure there are people who are frauds and manage to get some undeserved support from the government, but these aren't the people the programs are designed for and they are receiving support illegally.

[bigred]

how about. I have 3 kids, but my super rich wife left me, and I only had a part time job at McDonalds, I'm unqualified to do any real work, and I have to work a 2nd job at arby's just to feed my kids.

that count?

ewww arbys

[BankItDrew]

Here in Canada, I had a friend (let the jokes begin).

He worked at Shoppers Drug Mart through summers during high school for two or three years. One day his boss said: "Go and clean up this mess and use this disinfectant while you're at it." My friend refused to and was then fired.

One month later he was accepting welfare checks in the mail. He was <19.

[d0zer]

Here in Canada, I had a friend (let the jokes begin).

He worked at Shoppers Drug Mart through summers during high school for two or three years. One day his boss said: "Go and clean up this mess and use this disinfectant while you're at it." My friend refused to and was then fired.

One month later he was accepting welfare checks in the mail. He was <19.

EI or welfare?

I had a friend abuse the EI system, which isn't sooooo bad since you've gotta pay to play, but even so....bleahrg... EI's a whole lot easier to get than welfare IIRC.

[zook]

Clinton and the Republican Congress basically ended the kind of welfare op and others in this thread are bitching about.

[BankItDrew]

Here in Canada, I had a friend (let the jokes begin).

He worked at Shoppers Drug Mart through summers during high school for two or three years. One day his boss said: "Go and clean up this mess and use this disinfectant while you're at it." My friend refused to and was then fired.

One month later he was accepting welfare checks in the mail. He was <19.

EI or welfare?

I had a friend abuse the EI system, which isn't sooooo bad since you've gotta pay to play, but even so....bleahrg... EI's a whole lot easier to get than welfare IIRC.

maybe it was EI

[will641]

I don't think that lazy able minded/bodied men make up very high of a percentage of welfare cases. Pretty sure the only way you can actually get welfare is if you are mentally or physically handicapped.
There are state sponsored child support programs of sorts, like wic and food stamps, of course child care tax credits.

It's not like you can just go to a welfare office and say "gimme some money I don't wanna work". Sure there are people who are frauds and manage to get some undeserved support from the government, but these aren't the people the programs are designed for and they are receiving support illegally.

you do not need to be mentally/physically handicapped to get a welfare check. and you pretty much can go in and ask for money. i know a friend who just went in to get food stamps, lied about everything, and bam, $250 a month for groceries, or near that. also, there are fucking pan handlers on every block of the exit intersections on highways here, and >90% of them seem perfectly capable of getting a job.

[pankfish]

Sure there are people who are frauds and manage to get some undeserved support from the government, but these aren't the people the programs are designed for and they are receiving support illegally.

i know a friend who just went in to get food stamps, lied about everything, and bam, $250 a month for groceries, or near that.

[ensign_lee]

Back to the original post, the only thing that I consider "legitimate" is a veteran who was disabled in combat fighting for this country.

On another topic, honestly, that's the only disability that I think that the state should have to pay for...period. Everybody else is just a drain on resources with no corresponding benefit to society. Oftentimes, I do wish that we lived in more of a spartan society where babies with defects were immediately "taken care of" so that they didn't drain the resources of society throughout their entire lifetimes.

But...that's another topic. Back to the original post, there's a good example.

[wufwugy]

i completely agree that defected children should be taken care of. however, that is a very diff issue, and also very complicated. i would not be surprised if i changed my mind on the issue. at first glance, however, it is no doubt correct to allow parents complete autonomy over their unborn or newly born child. society has developed beyond this first glance, though, and the question is in how much.

[Lukie]

Clinton and the Republican Congress basically ended the kind of welfare op and others in this thread are bitching about.

You can apply what I said to the majority of "transfer payments" as well.

One good thing I can say about Clinton though was that he was a true fiscal conservative. That, coupled with the internet boom and voila.. big surplus. Unfortunately, he had so many other screwy ideas but that's another topic.

[Ltrain]

Back to the original post, the only thing that I consider "legitimate" is a veteran who was disabled in combat fighting for this country.

On another topic, honestly, that's the only disability that I think that the state should have to pay for...period. Everybody else is just a drain on resources with no corresponding benefit to society. Oftentimes, I do wish that we lived in more of a spartan society where babies with defects were immediately "taken care of" so that they didn't drain the resources of society throughout their entire lifetimes.

But...that's another topic. Back to the original post, there's a good example.

There was a society like this... It was Nazi Germany. In order to clear more money for the war they killed off the mentally ill or used them for experiments. Then they moved to the Gypsies, prisons, and eventually on to the Jewish Community. I think you need to be very careful what you wish for.

A society is judged on how it treats its unfortunate, sick and elderly. Using bankruptcy as an example, the largest demographics declaring bankrutpcy are the sick and the elderly, not people trying to scam credit cards.

[wufwugy]

There was a society like this... It was Nazi Germany. In order to clear more money for the war they killed off the mentally ill or used them for experiments. Then they moved to the Gypsies, prisons, and eventually on to the Jewish Community. I think you need to be very careful what you wish for.

fwiw, every society does this to some degree.

doing this in a small degree does not equal doing this to a great degree.

[d0zer]

be on welfare instead of either executed or exiled to canadia or mehico

I laugh at this post everytime I open this thread