babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » More Tax Cuts: How Much Are The Rich Going To Receive This Time?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: More Tax Cuts: How Much Are The Rich Going To Receive This Time?
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 21 October 2005 03:09 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
/ Link
quote:
The federal Liberals plan to introduce broad-based income tax cuts and run on them in the upcoming federal election, The Canadian Press reports.

The government will provide details of the plan over the coming weeks and introduce it as part of the economic program around which they will build their campaign platform.

“There are several different tax brackets covered by this. It's broad-based,” one government official said of the plan.

The cuts, which will not be as large as the five-year, $100-billion tax-relief program announced in 2000, will be one element of the Liberals' so-called Prosperity Agenda.



From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Redflag
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7633

posted 21 October 2005 05:52 AM      Profile for Redflag     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well like usual they will recieve as much as they can get away with.
From: Prescott | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tory Spelling
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10528

posted 21 October 2005 10:45 AM      Profile for Tory Spelling   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
The Liberals are only offering tax cuts now to run on in the next election because they believe it will help them win votes. Not because they are committed to tax cuts. Especially not to the middle class, or even lower income Canadians.

They will do whatever they have to to stay in power. They prove that time and again.

Let's assusme their scheme to stay in power works. At some point the people will see through the mirage, but let's assume they can convince the voters not only will they keep the promises to lower taxes, ( this from the party that promised to 'kill scrap and abolish the GST' and just kept on milking that cow) and that they will keep all the spending promises made to get the support of the NDP to keep their corrupt asses in power.

So they get the votes they need to win another majority. What happens to the promises of tax cuts and the NDP budget? What about sponsorship, Dingwall, government waste, democratic deficit, etc. etc. etc.

It will be clear at that point to everyone including Layton that he was snookered. Bottom line, the Liberals cannot be trusted, they need to be kicked while they are down.


From: Beverly Hills | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 21 October 2005 10:57 AM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The NDP can now differentiate itself from the other parties by promising to spend the surpluses on the things Canadians need and want. But not increasing taxes, which is a vote loser as Dalton McGuinty found out after his first budget.
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 21 October 2005 10:59 AM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So let me get this straight TS:

Paul Martin's pissing away of the surplus in the face of a 500 Billion dollar plus debt is unprincipled.

Jack Layton's pissing away of the surplus is hopelessly naive.

Stephen Harper's surpissing, however is the result of soul searching and pragmatism and not the following of the Campbell - Harris view of the one-eyed taxpayer.

Okay then.

I guess I'm in that fateful 2% of Canadians who oppose tax cuts, but would like tax reform in the methods of assessment and enforcement.

Sometime we've gotta pay off the mortgage and a ten billion dollar surplus seems like a good time to start.


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 21 October 2005 01:19 PM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sean, we are paying the mortgage, rather nicely I might add. But at some point you have to pay attention to the structure of the house. Since we have the money, I would like to see some spending on the bricks and mortar.
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Suaros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10562

posted 21 October 2005 01:46 PM      Profile for Suaros     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So basically, we have two centre-right parties (Liberals and Conservatives) offering tax cuts, with the combined support of close to 70% of the population. I guess I really dont care who wins the next election, but that other Canadians agree with me when we wont allow the NDP to have a chance to mess up this country with their stupid taxation ideas, which would turn Canada into Cuba Jr. Either way, tax-cuts are a good thing, no matter who gives them (Harper or Martin).
From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 21 October 2005 01:49 PM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes the people of Walkerton would agree that tax cuts are the most important thing a government can offer.
From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Suaros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10562

posted 21 October 2005 01:54 PM      Profile for Suaros     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
Yes the people of Walkerton would agree that tax cuts are the most important thing a government can offer.

I like how people always try and belittle Harris' government. You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment. People like right-wing politicians who come clean about everything they plan to do, and they recieve it accordingly.


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 21 October 2005 01:56 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment.

That would have to be an exremely long moment.


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 21 October 2005 02:00 PM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Suaros:

I like how people always try and belittle Harris' government. You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment. People like right-wing politicians who come clean about everything they plan to do, and they recieve it accordingly.


You're right I absolutely don't know this. I guess you're going to tell me next I just don't know that Elvis is still alive and living in Ajax.


From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 21 October 2005 02:18 PM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I like how people always try and belittle Harris' government. You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment.

Is that what the polls were telling him when he fled politics?


From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 21 October 2005 02:34 PM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Suaros:

I like how people always try and belittle Harris' government. You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment. People like right-wing politicians who come clean about everything they plan to do, and they recieve it accordingly.


If you believe that I've got a gross of Mulroney in '93 buttons to sell you


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 21 October 2005 02:39 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yes the people of Walkerton would agree that tax cuts are the most important thing a government can offer.

Perhaps they're intelligent enough to realize that with a few BILLION dollars surplus, you don't have to choose between tax hikes and buying a few water filters.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 21 October 2005 02:42 PM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If you believe that I've got a gross of Mulroney in '93 buttons to sell you

Nice one!!


From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 21 October 2005 02:53 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Suaros:
but that other Canadians agree with me when we wont allow the NDP to have a chance to mess up this country with their stupid taxation ideas, which would turn Canada into Cuba Jr. Either way, tax-cuts are a good thing, no matter who gives them (Harper or Martin).

We know. The two old line parties are tripping over each other trying to sell-off what bits of Canada there are left to rich foreigners for a song. And at least Cuban's aren't short of doctors like this northern Puerto Rico is. I don't know about you, but I think 100 years of Liberal and Conservative autocracy in this country has turned out for the worst. We still don't compete with socialist Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark or Singapore when it comes to economic competitive growth index. Singapore was a fourth world nation only as far back as 1965. I think it's time we cleaned the buggers out of Ottawa and Queen's Park.

But conservatives knew how to run us up the first $40 billion dollars of Ontario debt during some of the cold war threat years - when corporations actually paid their taxes - and when full-time job creation and a few crumbs in Canada were carrots dangled infront of workers to take our minds off of "change."

It's time for some new blood in Canada. The time is now because the two old line parties still don't know any other tune than the one the old cow died on - preaching tax cuts and socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the working class.

[ 21 October 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tory Spelling
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10528

posted 21 October 2005 03:18 PM      Profile for Tory Spelling   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Olly says:
The NDP can now differentiate itself from the other parties by promising to spend the surpluses on the things Canadians need and want. But not increasing taxes, which is a vote loser as Dalton McGuinty found out after his first budget.

The Liberals introduced the 'NDP budget' and got it through with the help of the NDP and to some extent the Bloc. So how does the NDP distinguish itself from the Liberals on that one. They are on the same page. But the Liberals are going to position themselves, apparently, as tax cutters to win more votes. If they can convince the voters they can deliver 'NDP budgets' and tax cuts too, are the voters going to go for NDP budgets from the NDP with no tax cuts? Don't think so. So the NDP is differntiated by not promising tax cuts. That's a seller?

I really don't think it is realistic to do both, but reality does not matter it is what the voters think. They've been hoodwinked by the Liberals before, 'kill scrap abolish' the GST.


I'm saying you'll have Harper pushing Martin to be a tax cutter, and Martin trying to convince people he can also deliver the kind of spending Jack wants. Martin is trying to have it both ways and Jack is paving the way to allow Martin to lie and possibly get away with it one more time. How does that get 'results' for the people? There is no way Layton can form a government so why would voters vote for him if Martin is promissing them they can have the cake and eat it too. Not to mention all his friends in the media who will be trying to lather up a positive profile for Martin in their columns and broadcasts.


Just to be clear Dalton promised unequivically not to raise taxes which got him a lot of votes and then proceeded to break that promise with one of the largest tax increases in the history of Ontario. He tricked the people into giving him a majority. And it is not clear Johnnie boy can capitalize on that, we'll see. Martin is trying to lie to get a majority and Layton is working in lockstep to help Martin accomplish that. Where is his common sense?


From: Beverly Hills | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 21 October 2005 03:48 PM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So the NDP is differntiated by not promising tax cuts. That's a seller?

Yes. It worked for Dalton McGuinty in Ontario. Remember the line "I won't cut your taxes, but I won't raise them either."

Of course he did raise them in the end, but that doesn't matter for the present argument.


From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 21 October 2005 05:06 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Our Liberals and conservatives have led the tax cut battle cry for decades. On that basis, how do the two old line parties in Canada diff from Herbert Hoover's tax cutting Republicans of the 1930's ?.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 21 October 2005 06:25 PM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
Our Liberals and conservatives have led the tax cut battle cry for decades. On that basis, how do the two old line parties in Canada diff from Herbert Hoover's tax cutting Republicans of the 1930's ?.

They believe for the most part that government is there to improve the welfare of the citizen through transfers and incentives. Harper for all his faults still believes in tax credits where Hoover would have believed in general minimisation of the tax load.

The similarity between these three, in fact the NDP as well, is that they are inherently anti-Keynesian, spending heavily in terms of transfers and/or tax cuts, whenever the economy gets strong enough to generate surpluses. Surpluses aren't a sign of over taxation, they are a sign of national savings being extended and a reduced potential for future taxation.


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
JPG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10478

posted 21 October 2005 10:41 PM      Profile for JPG     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment.

Not if those of us who actually went through the education system under Mike Harris have anything to say about it.


From: Toronto/Ottawa | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Transplant
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9960

posted 21 October 2005 10:45 PM      Profile for Transplant     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Suaros:

I like how people always try and belittle Harris' government. You probably dont even know that if he ran again, he would be elected in a moment.

No, I don't know that, and neither do you sport.


From: Free North America | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
-=+=-
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7072

posted 22 October 2005 02:41 AM      Profile for -=+=-   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
The Globe and Mail's daily poll shows 75% of readers against the tax cuts (with 27,000 votes).

A few weeks ago, when the question was: "Should Canada cancel Nafta?" -- the results were 50-50 Yes-No.

The great majority of average (Liberal-voting) Canadians don't want tax cuts.

[ 22 October 2005: Message edited by: -=+=- ]

[ 22 October 2005: Message edited by: -=+=- ]


From: Turtle Island | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 22 October 2005 04:20 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean Tisdall:
The similarity between these three, in fact the NDP as well, is that they are inherently anti-Keynesian, spending heavily in terms of transfers and/or tax cuts, whenever the economy gets strong enough to generate surpluses.

In fact, the NDP would spend money on public transit, recycling, alternative energy R&D and retro-fitting public buildings to conserve energy. The NDP are the only political party in Canada advocating this kind of direct spending to create jobs.

In Ontario, Dalton McGuinty has shown a propensity for anti-Keynesian taxation policies by refusing to tax those who can afford it most. The same policies south of the border have ensured that 48 states were in budget deficit mode for most of Bush's first term while unemployment soared and not one manufaturing job was created for several years across the U.S.

In fact, the conservatives would deal more corporate welfare handouts to big corporations. They would never come right out and say that during an election campaign, but all we have to is observe their conservative cousins in the States to know that taxpayer handouts is what conservatism has become in North America since Herbert Hoover's brand of tax the working class and poor in order to give to the rich policies contributed to the 1930's economic depression. Conservatives still believe in Keynesian stimulus, they tend to hand it over to the wrong
end of the economy and, technically, still fulfills Keynesianian policy for stimulating the economy and growth(the Republican's are still practicing Keynesian-militarism to a large degree). It just takes a lot longer for trickle-down to affect job growth and costs a helluva lot more than putting money in the hands of workers vis a vis labour-induced recoveries in bad times.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 22 October 2005 01:58 PM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fidel:

Economy booming, CUT spending!

How far have the dippers fallen when they can't distinguish the economic lever from the desired action?


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Joe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2905

posted 23 October 2005 01:37 AM      Profile for Joe        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Olly:
Sean, we are paying the mortgage, rather nicely I might add.

At the current rate it'll take about 100 years to pay off the debt that was accumulated in slightly over 20 years. We ran into debt at more than $40bn/year some years and have averaged less than 1/4 of that in repayments. I don't know how you could conclude that we're paying off the debt "rather nicely" particularly considering government spending increased by over 20% last year.

After a decade of boom times Canada has barely made a dent in its massive debt load - a load that'll continue to suck $10's of billions in interest payments out of Canada for the foreseeable future. It's time for us to get serious about eradicating our debt - we owe it to future generations who may not enjoy similar boom times.


From: City | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 23 October 2005 01:44 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As a percentage of national production, the national debt has become far less important. It is similar to how a person with a $1000 debt making $15000 a year has problems, but change that to $150000 a year, and $1000 is no problem, even if she pays it off at the same rate as before.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Joe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2905

posted 23 October 2005 01:46 AM      Profile for Joe        Edit/Delete Post
Q. How Much Are The Rich Going To Receive This Time?

A. At least half of it, those who believe in fairness should hope.

quote:
The group comprising the 10% of taxfilers with the highest income (more than $64,500 in 2002) provided more than 50% of the federal personal income tax revenue in 2002. Between 1990 and 2002, the share of federal tax paid by this group went from 46.0% to 52.6%.
-
Among the three groups of taxfilers, only those with the highest incomes contributed a share of federal personal income tax greater than their share of total income.

In 2002, their share of federal personal income tax was 52.6%, well above their 35.7% share of income. In addition, this was the only group in which the gap between the share of income tax and share of income actually widened in the 12-year period.



Statistics Canada

From: City | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 23 October 2005 01:56 AM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Olly:
The NDP can now differentiate itself from the other parties by promising to spend the surpluses on the things Canadians need and want. But not increasing taxes, which is a vote loser as Dalton McGuinty found out after his first budget.

I think on social policy the Liberals have backed us into a corner. Promising more social spending is a big winner, and when you factor in tax breaks, Martin can then pass himself off as being a reasonable compromise between a radically right-wing Conservative party and a radically left-wing NDP.

quote:
Originally posted by Dormy:
At the current rate it'll take about 100 years to pay off the debt that was accumulated in slightly over 20 years. We ran into debt at more than $40bn/year some years and have averaged less than 1/4 of that in repayments. I don't know how you could conclude that we're paying off the debt "rather nicely" particularly considering government spending increased by over 20% last year.

Canada's debt standing in the G7 in terms of what we owe per capita is the best in the group.

As for the debt, that is simply a political game. "Oh, we can't cut your taxes or fix the health care system because we have to pay down our debt," our leaders will tell us. They use the debt as a pretext to ignore any demands we make of our government, and for that reason the government leaders have no intention of ever seeing it paid off.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Joe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2905

posted 23 October 2005 01:57 AM      Profile for Joe        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:
As a percentage of national production, the national debt has become far less important. It is similar to how a person with a $1000 debt making $15000 a year has problems, but change that to $150000 a year, and $1000 is no problem, even if she pays it off at the same rate as before.

The problem with leverage is that it increases the pain in a recession - if someone who used to earn $150,000 started making $50,000 their debt load and flexibility would be greatly limited.

Interest rates are rising and the US economy is tanking. Now is a good time for Canada to get its financial house in order.


From: City | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 23 October 2005 02:46 AM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dormy:
Interest rates are rising and the US economy is tanking. Now is a good time for Canada to get its financial house in order.

You're right! No more of this nonsense of having had surpluses for the past 8 years running or having the best debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. It's quite clear that our financial house is in shambles, and must be fixed.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
champagne socialist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10702

posted 23 October 2005 12:11 PM      Profile for champagne socialist   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Gah. As a student who doesn't earn enough money to even pay taxes, I'd like to see a lot more dedicated investment in post-secondary education, not a tax cut. I suspect that most middle-class boomer parents, a good part of the Liberal base, would like to see that as well. Most universities in this country are in really crap condition, and without a highly educated, highly skilled population, Canada doesn't have a chance of competing in the global economy. Unless Mr. Martin sees our economic future solely in the terms of continuing to cut down lumber, and pump out oil, instead of in social and technological innovation.
From: left coast | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca