according to the canadian union of public employees (CUPE), top marginal tax rates of 53% in canada are actually too low and should be over 80%. 

they also argue that we should rely on public sector job growth since 1/4 canadians are currently employed by the gov (which they argue is a good thing).

according to the canadian union of public employees (CUPE), top marginal tax rates of 53% in canada are actually too low and should be over 80%. 

they also argue that we should rely on public sector job growth since 1/4 canadians are currently employed by the gov (which they argue is a good thing).

https://cupe.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/action-plan-adopted-2025-EN.pdf

writing about products & protocols on Farcaster | prev. Juicebox, Nouns, RAW DAO | casting about coffee, hi-fi, and other rabbit holes

a hearty “fuck you” to anyone that believes we should have 80% tax rates lmao

don't worry, this rate wouldn't apply to you 😉

models that propose 80%+ tax are aimed at extreme top earners, CEOs, hedge-fund gains, earning well into the high seven figures.

XX C

artist-researcher-developer-member-worker: hypha.coop

vncnt ? vncnt.xyz : vincent.charlebois.info

pfp: vncnt.xyz/horloge/1

countries had 80–90% top tax rates.
growth didn't die.
middle classes thrived.
inequality dropped.
public goods expanded.
and only once we cut those rates did wealth concentration and corporate hoarding explode.

personally I don’t want to live like the EU where everyone earns 30-50k and will never afford anything nice

it’s a great deal if you earn 0-20k and want strong safety nets, bad deal for anyone that wants to earn over 100k and buy property etc.

we can definitely disagree, but I'll call out your arguments as flimsy, some just flat-out wrong.

again, proposals for 80%+ top marginal tax rates aren't aimed at $300k-$1M earners. they target ultra-high incomes, top 0.01%. by definition, there aren't many of them, but they somehow keep getting richer

pretending they're coming for the "professional class" is fearbait, not analysis.

growth strategy isn’t about income tax rates anyway. it’s about ecosystems: capital access, talent networks, institutional support. that’s why people leave, not because they’re taxed at 40%++.

btw, the tsx has outperformed the s&p 500 so far this year.

all that to say, if you want lower taxes, you're definitely living in the wrong province

quebec already defines their highest marginal tax rate bracket at a very low amount, threats like CUPE is making would likely be targeting individuals far lower than 10M annual income. almost nobody in canada earns that much, maybe Galen Weston. imo it would be aimed at squeezing more out of the professional class that covers the bill for everyone else at present, $300k-1M.

if you think that’s a good growth strategy for canada that has produced almost no companies of value vs. the U.S. over the last 20yr, a country in which nearly every Waterloo eng grad immediately moves south to start their companies instead of doing so in Canada… then that’s okay, I just disagree.

you're missing the point. we are talking about taxing the richest 0.1%. this is not about you.

the threshold for such rates wouldn't be at 100k but 10M.

do you know who taxed the rich at 90%+?

the USA, during the Golden Age of Capitalism