Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

That's the good part. You can pick whichever carrier you want. Is Air Canada flying out of Windsor with their big planes or is it Jazz or whatever they've rebranded the planes? I should know this because I also have a few shares of what was Jazz and is now renamed Chorus Aviation. This stuff was on sale back in 2009 and I picked up some. Problem is I forgot to sell.

Porter is fairly new to Windsor and flies into Toronto Island. Air Canada flies to Toronto Pearson with fairly small turboprop planes as far as I recall. I think that they list Jazz and Tango as other cheaper options which you can purchase on the Air Canada website.

If I am driving by myself the cost of a flight is the same driving from Windsor to Toronto or flying via Porter with the seat sale. The drawback is that I would have to stay in a more expensive hotel than the one that I usually stay in if I was trying to do it without a car. The latter is not a big deal in the case of a weekend event but is a big deal in the case of a nine day event like the Canadian Open.

[Erik Malmsten]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

If the business of filming is not profitable without tax credits, then the people involved in the business should either work for less or figure out a way to get the private sector to fund their projects. Should chess teachers demand a tax credit because without it there would be less chess teaching and therefore the government would get less income tax revenue? Most (99.9999%) people would say that's ridiculous and rightfully so. What makes film and TV programming so special?

There is no government funding of the film business, we're talking about corporate tax write-offs. (There is Telefilm Canada funding of low-budget Canadian films, but that's another issue.)

The film and television business is a very risky business, they spend $40 million and it could be a hit or flop. If they're sure it will be a hit, they'll film it in Hollywood. If they have concerns, they'll go to a cheaper location like Vancouver or Montreal. We film alot of crap but a good film I worked on, Frequency, was on TV tonight.

On a theoritical basis, I agree that it seems absurd to give special tax credits to capitalist investors. But the reality is that Canadian cities are competing with other filming centres in other countries that are offering incentives. Us labourers in the industry have no say in where they will film, and in fact have lowered many pay rates (except for the uppidity actors). Grandstanding to maintain your rigid political stance of no government incentives and our country loses 50,000 jobs and billions of dollars being spent. It's the economic benefits of those jobs and purchases that make the film industry worth getting a tax credit. And all those employees and services are paying taxes, buying consumer goods, etc. By foregoing $1 in taxes from the producers the government takes in $20.

I don't think chess teachers spend $1 million a week. But the government does offer tax credit programs for other large industries like medical research, automobiles and the oil sands. And there are many large companies -- even banks whose profit greatly from government debt -- that haven't been paying corporate income tax. It's messy.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

If you ever took an economics degree, at some point you would be asked to solve a problem involving the subsidization of industries with pricing power which extend beyond your immediate area. Ultimately, you would find that it is possible, under some conditions, for this subsidy to be profitable on a net basis to you, the industry, and your taxpayers. So, in answer to your question, why you would do so - because it is in your best interest. Now as to wether a particular industry meets those conditions, that's a different question.

As to your suggestion that somehow people directly in the industry coordinate (all get together to offer special deals to the film industry or some other new industry etc.) to create the necessary profitable conditions, probably you underestimate the cost of coordination - something that the government can do.

An extremely well written and thought out reply, and it's not even inflammatory. Kudos.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

. If they're sure it will be a hit, they'll film it in Hollywood. If they have concerns, they'll go to a cheaper location like Vancouver or Montreal. We film alot of crap but a good film I worked on, Frequency, was on TV tonight.

I'm watching it as the late movie now. Denis Quaid and Jim Cavaziel. Great cast.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

Where did I write that we shouldn't have any of these things? Without health regulations, for example people *do* die. But stuff like chess and music and football (and the Olympics, for example), no: absolutely no public money should go into these activities. Let those who wish to participate in them pony up the cash.



Then people in Canada who wish to be employed will have to make it more attractive to film here, but without government intervention/incentives.



You could take a pay cut or find other employment or move elsewhere. Where is it written that you are entitled to the job you want at the pay you want in the place you want to work?

Why should anyone be ordered subsidize your career in film?

Tom, I am in synch with your arguments if it were a fact that people who have no interest in chess, music, football are paying taxes that explicitly go to fund those activities. But here Erik is talking about a tax credit to companies that bring in film production activities, and he is trying to show you that the credit is a net plus to the government: it generates new tax revenues not from you personally, but from the people employed in producing this activity, who as he suggests might otherwise be on welfare because the things they are good at don't exist in your area and they want to live in your area. Perhaps they have family in your locality. Are you demanding they pack up and move, even if it is economically viable and in fact profitable, and non-harmful, to bring in the activities that they excel in?

The government is the only entity that can tax. Therefore it is the only entity that can bring in economic activity by the method of tax breaks. If it is shown that a specific activity, in this case film production, is a net plus for tax revenues, and that you as a plumber or bus driver or lumberjack (cue Monty Python lumberjack song) are not directly paying some new "film production tax" to finance this activity, then as long as no one is being hurt in the activity, there is no harm, no foul in the government awarding the tax break.

As with all things, there is a limit to this line of thought. Morality and ethics have to be considered, but not one person's or one minority group's morality or ethics. Rather, the morality and ethics of the (majority of) the locality itself. So if the locality is a nice quiet senior citizens community, and they don't want pornographic films filmed in their locality (Debbie Does Dullsville), then profit or not, it should not be government supported for that locality. It could still be supported for another community where it is wanted.

But even with that provision, there is still a potential problem. The majority of Dullsville might want the government to give tax breaks to lumberjacks to come in and clear the local forest. But the local forest might be the last refuge of the endangered species, the "Beckwith Screaming Alarmist Bird" which lets out a distinctive call ("Gore! Gore!) whenever temperatures rise above the local average. Despite its nerve-wracking calls, it does do the local area a big service: it eats the nefarious Drkulec mosquito, which is known to spread Right Wing Fever among the human population. The Fever causes 95% of infected humans to have the urge to buy houses with only 5% down irregardless of their income. The other 5% of infected humans work at the bank that mortgages the houses.

So sometimes government should ignore both profit and local majority opinion in the interest of some overriding common sense. Whose common sense? That's the 64 thousand looney question.

Tom, I assume that you are not against chess, music, or football if they are self-financing. The government tax breaks for film are something that help towards self-financing, without directly imposing a film production tax on you. If there were no government at all, many things would not happen, and activities financed by tax breaks would be one of them. At least in this singular sense, government can be a good thing. It's when majority wishes and / or common sense are violated by government that things cross the line.


BTW, I'm surprised no one else has brought this up in this thread: "Searching For Bobby Fischer" was filmed at least partially in Toronto. And it was a movie about a chess teacher.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Fans determined to save Endgame (TV show)

If there were no government at all, many things would not happen, and activities financed by tax breaks would be one of them. At least in this singular sense, government can be a good thing.

if there were no government at all then every activity would be receiving a 100% tax break (duhhhh)