[QBC]

The whole idea of tax cuts would be a great thing, but our governments do weird things when they cut taxes. They seem to spend money on dumber and dumber things and then cut programs that make a real difference. So lets cut education funding, but we'll spend lotsa money for a committee to review the study that looked at the problem of committees studying studies. You laugh, but these are the types of things that your hard earned tax dollars go to. Create jobs? They do a great job if you can get on one of those committees........

[QBC]

Godz46 Godz46:

The propsed tax-cut by the conservatives was not for those making 1 billion dollars. It was for families whose household income is between th 30000-80000 range. That's the average Canadian income.

You give people money, what are they gonna do with it? Burn it?

They spend it on things they want, that helps out business, which increases their revenue, businesses in turn invest more money in the market, creating more jobs!!! More investment=more jobs. Its simple human fact.

It's sad but thats not completely true, investment does not = jobs more times then not it just means more profits. Here in Quesnel BC West Fraser Timber is about to invest 20 million dollars into it's mill here, it means 100 less jobs. 100 good paying, family supporting, tax paying jobs gone. Nothing when it comes to the market or business is black or white, just infinite shades of grey.

[Rev_Blair]

But Reagan's policies largely failed. Workers saw their real wages decrease, more part-time and low-paying jobs were created than solid jobs, goverment debt sky-rocketed, consumer debt sky-rocketed and so on. Here's a simple little fact...when Reagan came to office there was no homeless problem and there were no foodbanks. After over a quarter of a century of following his insane voodoo economics we have an ever-expanding homeless problem and food banks are considered a normal part of the landscape.

Reagan was an idiot.

[QBC]

I remember Reaganomics. There was actually people here in Canada that considered copying that ideology. Oh wait, Mulrony did, didn't he? But him and Reagan sure looked good singing together on stage didn't they......

[Rev_Blair]

$1:

I agree with you for the most part but homelessness was a problem before Reagan, just not on the same scale.

Yeah, that's actually what I meant. Before Reagan it was a much smaller problem, now we have people with skills and/or jobs living in homeless shelters.

Mulroney followed the same policies here, and Maggie Thatcher did it to Britain. The same sorts of policies have been imposed on developing nations through the IMF and World Bank and the results have been even worse for them, magnified by the already existing poverty.

[Rev_Blair]

Reagan didn't end the Cold War, that's one of the biggest lies of the past fifty years. Any monkey could have been sitting in the White House when the USSR collapsed under its own weight. The writing had been on the wall for at least a decade.

Unemployment decreased, but so did high and medium paid jobs. The standard of living for the working class continued to sink and the gap between rich and poor increased exponentially. The middle class began to disappear. Real wages (income compared to what that income could buy) shrank, as they have continued to do. Homelessness skyrocketed. Poverty among children rose dramatically. Drug abuse and addiction went way up. Personal bankruptcies rose. Quality of education dropped. Access to education, especially post-secondary, dropped.

Those are the real effects of Reaganomics.

Mulroney did, in fact, copy Reaganomics, Avro...at least to the extent he could get away with it. Our system and our people are different enough from the US that it was modified, but it was still the same thing that neo-conservatives are selling today and it still hasn't worked. He shifted the tax burden from corporations onto working people. He cut social spending. He signed trade deals and legislation that enabled corporations to send our good jobs and money overseas.