CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 355
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:04 pm
 


In this National Post column, Jim Flaherty offers us a precious little quote...

Quote:
I must be clear. We did not do this on the backs of ordinary Canadians or Canadians in need, or at the expense of our provinces and territories. We did not cut the programs Canadians rely on. We did not cut transfers to our provinces and territories – money they use for things like education and health care.


...Except that the budget is being balanced on the backs of:

-Canadian veterans;

-Millions of Canadians who now have to wait two more years before they can claim their pensions;

-Oh, and anybody who tries to collect EI.

I realize that I probably come across on these forums as constantly bashing the Tories, and I wish I didn't. There are a number of things the Harper government has done that I really do like, such as tax-free savings accounts, legislating the Gas Tax fund for infrastructure, making the Canadian Wheat Board optional, ending the long gun registry, reforming the Criminal Code, and so forth.

However, despite that good work-and it is good work-I'm deeply disgusted at how our money has been managed by the Harper government. And this didn't even have too much to do with the stimulus, either-back in 2008, the Finance Department's own analysis suggested that Ottawa could end up suffering four years of deficits even before it spent any money at all on stimulus. Sure, Jim Flaherty says that we'll have a surplus next year, but he has so far failed to meet even one of his fiscal targets.

Who's to say he won't miss this one, too?

/end rant


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22465
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:00 pm
 


Your second point is bs. The old age supplement is welfare, not a pension, nobody paid into it. It's welfare for people earning up to 100k a year. Also, it the change doesn't kick in for some time yet.

The budget is being balanced on the backs of federal workers, whom the govt hopes to be able to screw in the next round of bargaining - if they don't manage that, no balanced budget.

It's also being balanced on the backs of canadians who are affected by cutbacks in what have you - scientists, inspectors, etc etc leading to a degradation of various services that a well functioning country depends on. The Cons like to pass tough laws, but cut back on the people to enforce them, which makes is a bit of a farce. So basically all Canadians.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 355
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:26 pm
 


andyt wrote:
Your second point is bs. The old age supplement is welfare, not a pension, nobody paid into it. It's welfare for people earning up to 100k a year. Also, it the change doesn't kick in for some time yet.


So what? Here's the word on OAS, directly from Service Canada:

Quote:

The Old Age Security program is the Government of Canada's largest pension program. It is funded out of the general revenues of the Government of Canada, which means that you do not pay into it directly.


In other words, it's one of those programs that our general taxes pay for, and one of the programs that you quite rightly decry is being cut. It doesn't look like the Veterans' Charter is much different-the IPolitics article I cite notes that it's separate from the veterans' pension plan.

andyt wrote:

It's also being balanced on the backs of canadians who are affected by cutbacks in what have you - scientists, inspectors, etc etc leading to a degradation of various services that a well functioning country depends on. The Cons like to pass tough laws, but cut back on the people to enforce them, which makes is a bit of a farce. So basically all Canadians.


You forget-according to the likes of Stephen Harper and Rob Ford, we can have as many services as we want, no matter how much we cut taxes.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22465
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:32 pm
 


OAS should be cut back so it stops at 50k income. Those savings would be more than changing the eligibility age, and be what it should be, as supplement for lower income people. Anyway, the change in eligibility age doesn't affect this budget, since it's so far down the road.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7711
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:59 pm
 


Flaherty's comment was a direct reminder to the public that the Liberal Party t balanced their 95 budget by taking 28 billion out of the Military, RCMP and UNDE Union's pension fund, cutting transfer payments to the provinces for things like health care and cutting social programs.

It worked but, hurt a lot of Canadian because in balancing the federal budget they put a large burden on the Provincial budgets who had to raise taxes and or implement user fees for things that had been funded by Federal Taxes before.

Mr. Flaherty's budget may not screw all Canadians, just the select few but by doing it to Veterans and Military he is proving once again that when it comes to saving a buck both the Liberals and the Conservatives have no qualms about going after people who can't defend themselves.

BTW the Conservatives successfully defended the lawsuit against the Federal Gov't by the UNDE with regards to them putting the 28 billion the Liberals stole back in the pension fund, which means that everybody in the Military, RCMP and UNDE will now face larger pension payments to cover the shortfalls of those pension funds.

Well done Mr. Fhaherty. [cheer] You've now become my fiscal hero.

(sarcasm off)


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.