|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 658
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:29 pm
Scape Scape: Reform personal income tax to a flat rate more on par with the GST. Lower both the GST and corp tax.
Anarchist
Sounds good to me.
|
Wally_Sconce
CKA Elite
Posts: 3469
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:04 am
Benoit Benoit: Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck: Benoit Benoit: Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck: I would eliminate which ever tax would torment those cheap bastard Liberals the most. Wrong answer. then don't ask Try again.
but its your turn
|
WBenson
Active Member
Posts: 476
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:16 am
Goldenboy Goldenboy: Taxes are a robbery, a fraud, a wrong presentation...
Yeah, damn roads, hospitals, schools, and fire departments. We don't need those. Let me go get my blubber lamp and die of the flu.
|
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:06 am
I say keep the taxes, don't eliminate any of them. Instead, I'd rather see my tax dollars spent more responsibly. Perhaps designate GST as a tax for military expenditures. Get them some much needed equipment and staffing. Lets face it, its an important issue at the moment.
|
Benoit
CKA Elite
Posts: 4661
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:07 am
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck: Benoit Benoit: Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck: Benoit Benoit: Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck: I would eliminate which ever tax would torment those cheap bastard Liberals the most. Wrong answer. then don't ask Try again. but its your turn
The Nobel of economics Laureate, Herbert Simon argues that an income tax of up to 70 percent would tax only the portion of a person’s income that comes from productivity advances that they had nothing to do with and would leave their individual incentive to work largely, if not fully, in place.
(Rogers, Joel and Joshua Cohen (editors), 2001. What’s Wrong with a Free Lunch? Boston: Beacon
Press.)
http://www.usbig.net/pdf/Perspectives2.pdf
|
Posts: 7580
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 6:54 am
I would like to see individualized income tax..that means that each person is taxed and files on their own income.. if both partners are working there shouldnt be a family income .. it should be individual..
the joint tax is a cash cow and you lose benefits as well.. I also think they should scrap the gst rebate program
|
Posts: 1804
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:04 am
I'm back. I would like to seriously promote my idea to abolish income tax. Seriously. I already posted how.
I'm pissed-off that the Conservatives keep trying to claim they believe in reducing government, reducing debt, and reducing taxes. I said it before: on March 17, 2011, Kevin Page, then Parliamentary Budget Officer, published a report stating the debt equalled its previous all time high. The number of civil servants hired by the federal government had risen 14% from the time of the 2006 election. The May 2006 budget stated the "status quo surplus" for 2005/2006 was $17.4 billion, but Jim Flaherty stated his intent to reduce the surplus to $8.0 billion. That wouldn't be through tax cuts, that would be through spending increases. The federal government's year end is March 31, so the 2005/2006 fiscal year is April 1, 2005, through March 31, 2006. The election was January 23, 2006, and ministers sworn in on February 6, 2006. That means they were only in power the last two months of that fiscal year. Yet Jim Flaherty intended to increase spending by $9.4 billion in the first two months alone! When the auditor general published her report in the summer of 2006, she said total income for 2005/2006 was greater than anyone had expected, so the surplus ended up as $13.2 billion. That wasn't do to Conservatives being responsible with spending, it was because Canadian taxpayers worked harder and paid more.
The 2005 budget was the last Liberal budget. It projected spending through 2009. Liberal projected spending for 2006/2007 was $169.5 billion, but actual spending under Conservatives was $188.3 billion. I could give every year, but the last was 2009. Liberal projected spending for 2009/2010 was $194.5 billion, actual spending under Conservatives was $244.8 billion. These figures are from federal budgets, so you can't dispute them. That means Conservative spending was $50.3 billion more for fiscal year 2009/2010 alone!
The November 2005 fiscal update included a 0.5% cut to personal income tax. That was a minority government, and both Conservatives and NDP voted against it. Liberals included a national day care program, intended to appease the NDP, but the NDP voted against it anyway. Voting against the fiscal update is what caused the election. But that means the last Liberal cut to income tax was cancelled. Conservatives didn't bring that cut back in their 2006 budget. They cut GST by 1% effective July 1, 2006, from 7% down to 6%. That means they effectively raised income tax by 0.5% for the whole year, and cut GST by 1% for half the year. That's a wash. And they claim they cut taxes! Canadians demanded tax cuts when they saw the large surplus. Conservatives cut income tax from 15.5% for the lowest income bracket to 15.0% effective January 1, 2007. But wait! That's the tax cut they cancelled from the Liberal's November 2005 fiscal update! So they cancelled a tax cut, then brought it back. Then claimed they cut taxes. Uh, huh! During the campaign for the 2006 election they promised to cut GST to 5%; the final 1% cut was didn't happen until January 1, 2008.
Meanwhile they cut corporate taxes. Liberals had cut corporate income tax from 28% when they took over from Mulroney in 1993, to 21% on election day 2006. Liberals had already passed a bill to abolish corporate capital tax before the January 23, 2006, election, but the effective date hadn't kicked-in yet. Conservatives have tried to claim credit for that, but they didn't do it, Liberals did. Liberals also stated their intention to abolish corporate surtax. But at the time of the 2006 election they were in the process of getting rid of corporate capital tax; that had to wait. You can only get rid of one at a time, or risk plunging the country back into deficit. If you want to be cruel, you could point out they failed to do so, Conservatives did. But Conservatives tried to take credit for abolishing both. My argument is that's enough. Reduce corporate tax from 28% to 21%, and abolish both corporate capital tax and corporate surtax? Enough. The rest of us need a break. But Conservatives didn't stop there. They cut corporate tax to 15%.
So now they have a budget that's almost balanced. They claim they'll have a small surplus next year. I say not enough! If my plan had been started when I proposed it in January 2006, then we would be several years in to a 16 debt repayment plan. Yes, I argued to repay the debt in 16 years starting January 2006. That would mean no debt effective January 1, 2022. But Conservatives ran up the debt so much that March 17, 2011, it equalled its previous all time high. And it's been growing ever since.
The reason for posting all this is frustration, and a question. Should I try once again to run for MP? Before the 2008 federal election I was president of the riding association. They made me president to I could prepare for my own nomination. I was uncontested, and had full support of the riding association. But someone stomped on me hard. I could give details, but someone pulled dirty tricks to ensure I couldn't run. The party disallowed my nomination; not surprising considering what was done to me. They replaced me as the candidate a week and a half into the writ period (election campaign period). My replacement did badly, only got 6.6% of the vote. He was the first Liberal candidate in my riding to ever get less than 10%. I checked election results all the way back to Confederation, checking every riding that covered even a portion of what my riding is today. But it didn't stop there. I suspected someone outside the party. But certain individuals in the Manitoba provincial office manipulated the nomination process prior to the 2011 election. In 2009, fully 2 years before the election, they got some beautiful woman who no one had seen before. Turned out she doesn't even live in our riding. During the 2011 election I tried to help her, even though I wanted to be the candidate. She our party's candidate, so I helped her anyway. Until her campaign manager told me my face that she didn't trust me. So I just walked away. Didn't do anything to undermine her campaign, just walked away. She got 5.0% of the vote. I didn't think it was possible for anyone to do worse than Wes, but she did. Now she has stated her intent to run again!
So, here's the question. Should I? Many members of the riding association support me. They're the individuals who made me president of the riding association in 2007, and supported my nomination for 2008. They are very disappointed by the candidate that was forced upon us; they don't want a candidate that can only get 5.0% of the vote. But certain individuals in the provincial office still don't like me. The reason is I believe in fiscal responsibility. They want to go extreme left-wing. We had someone new appear at "Wonderful Wednesday" last summer, and I told her there are people here who don't like me. She asked why, so I told her I'm a "Paul Martin Liberal" and told her my plan to reduce debt and reduce taxes. Right after talking to her, Justin Trudeau went on national TV to announce he wouldn't tolerate a split between Liberals. Ok, so that woman was someone from his office.
Justin has not stated any specific fiscal plan. I would like to promote my plan. After all, my plan builds upon the work of Paul Martin, just taking it to the next level. Yea, cliché, but I think that describes it. Pushing my fiscal plan would be a fight within the Liberal Party. But Conservatives have no intention to help average Canadians, just Corporations. And NDP don't want to cut spending or taxes at all, they want to increase taxes so they can spend our money. Getting Liberals to return to fiscal responsibility would be an up-hill battle, but I don't see any other party has any hope at all.
So again, should I run? Would you guys vote Liberal if I got the Liberal party to support my plan?
|
Posts: 1804
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:05 am
Ps. I already have the "Typewriter" medal.
|
Regina
Site Admin
Posts: 32460
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:06 am
No.......
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:11 am
Yes. No. I will be voting for whoever has the best chance to defeat the Conservative candidate in my riding. At one time I would have voted to try for a Conservative minority, but with Harper's attempt to subvert democracy, no way.
|
Posts: 18770
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:15 am
Ah the true haters vote. You wont be voting on policies or even for a politician that has a platform you agree with. You just hate the right so much you don't care who is elected as long as it's not a conservative.
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:17 am
Yes. Strategic voting. What platform - the Conservatives are all trained seals, it's Harper's platform. One that seems to rest on subverting the vote. Shouldn't be allowed to stand. In the past I've voted for conservatives when I respected the candidate and the party wasn't out of control, it was 6 of one half a dozen of the other between cons and libs. That's not true this time.
Would you vote for Hilary Clinton?
|
Posts: 23058
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:09 am
I vote in every election - but Liberal is a toxic brand here in Alberta, dating back the PET.
The only way a Liberal has a realistic chance here is if Harper institutes a new GST or something like Mulroney did - and let's face it, Harper is much smarter than that.
Otherwise, most, if not all, ridings will stay Conservative in the next election - although the re-drawing of ridings here in Edmonton might allow better overall representation of actual votes. Still, with FPTP, it's doubtful.
|
Posts: 39
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 2:00 pm
Back to Winnipeger's post. Don't confuse the amount of money the government spends and thus the amount of revenue they sooner or later need with the methods of raising it. Myself I have become a real fan of Fairtax. Getting rid of all other taxes and raising the GST to some value needed for the government to function. Some pretty good analysis of this has been done for the US and they include giving every person a "prebate" to keep carrying the needy. For the fine details as applies to the US situation check out http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer.
|
|
Page 6 of 6
|
[ 90 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests |
|
|