We need to pay more taxes

whitedog

It''s our duty, vote.
Mar 13, 2006
128
0
16
Yeah I know, sounds silly. But lets have a look at the other options. First off, and lets be clear, we are a little over 1 trillion in debt. Yeah, sure, 610 billion net debt. My butt. Lets say you own a home worth 400k, you owe the bank, a 350k mortgage. So whats your net debt? Well, I'm sure the bank will tell you its 350k. Have a look at the financial statement issued by Fin Can, year ended Mar 2014. Its one trillion. Because of that, 28.5 billion is a govt expense, for interest. Not health care, not defence, not transfer payments, CPP or old age securrity, no, its a 28.5 billion off the top expense, and it can only get bigger. Presently, it has an average effective interest rate of 2.8%, now imagine interest rates climbing by 1.0%, then we will pay, another 10 billion on top of the 28.8.

Ok so what are our choices. Pay more taxes to write down the debt. Reduce spending. Maybe both. But I think it should be increase taxes. Why, because out government got voted in on the promise to lower takes, they were voted in several times, in fact. And we climbed up from 705 billion, So we sow what we reap. And lets start with corporations. And if we are going to cut spending, well, although I don't receive mail delivery to my home, I take exception to a government that tells us we can't afford the service. Really? Can we afford to send F18's around the world? Can we afford to give donations to other Countries, such as Ukraine? Can we afford to build access roads for oil and mining companies? Like why can we afford those things, but a direct service to Canadians, nope, can't afford that. Honestly.

The most recent tax change announcement by the Govt, amounted to this, your paycheque finally exceeded your expenses, although you owe on your MC, 3.7 times what you earn in a year, your interest payments on the card equate to 10.4% of your annual earnings. So what do you do, go to the bar, yell a round for the house, just so everyone will like you. Priceless.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
Yeah I know, sounds silly

silly wasn't the term that crossed my mind


welcome back...seems you've been gone a while...
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
LMAO. Paying more taxes isn't really the issue, the issue is government spending those tax dollars wisely. And no government does that.So that pretty much screws that idea.
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
hmmm, a second necro account...looks like fun times ahead.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I had a backdoor (Shush SLM) account along time ago. It's still alive. I just forgot the password, lol.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
LMAO. Paying more taxes isn't really the issue, the issue is government spending those tax dollars wisely. And no government does that.So that pretty much screws that idea.

Maybe it's time to revisit exactly how 'involved' we want gvt in our lives in addition to the benefits that people have conveniently confused with rights.

Increasing taxes simply goes to feeding the idea that everything gets solved with money as evidenced by the myriad of special taxes that end up paying for someone's hobby horse in exchange for votes.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I had a backdoor (Shush SLM) account along time ago. It's still alive. I just forgot the password, lol.

Well damn Bear, you might as well ask me not to breathe! Lol.

Maybe it's time to revisit exactly how 'involved' we want gvt in our lives in addition to the benefits that people have conveniently confused with rights.

Oh yes, lets. I do love this part....at least before all the idiots get involved anyway.

Increasing taxes simply goes to feeding the idea that everything gets solved with money as evidenced by the myriad of special taxes that end up paying for someone's hobby horse in exchange for votes.
Ultimately what we want to do, ideally, is obtain the maximum benefit for the minimum cost. But as you well know, that doesn't mean you don't spend money on things.

There really is no current political or governmental system that is forward thinking enough to do this. It's essentially a catch 22, if we democratically elect our representation we expect certain things from them and thus you end up with paying for someone's hobby horse in exchange for votes. If it somehow works by some time of appointment, you still can end up with the same thing because who's appointing them? The PM? Yep, no partisanship there. Perhaps by some type of consensus? I don't know, I can't envision a method by which the decision makers are not beholden to someone, somewhere and thus, our money gets spent accordingly.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Ultimately what we want to do, ideally, is obtain the maximum benefit for the minimum cost. But as you well know, that doesn't mean you don't spend money on things.

There really is no current political or governmental system that is forward thinking enough to do this. It's essentially a catch 22, if we democratically elect our representation we expect certain things from them and thus you end up with paying for someone's hobby horse in exchange for votes. If it somehow works by some time of appointment, you still can end up with the same thing because who's appointing them? The PM? Yep, no partisanship there. Perhaps by some type of consensus? I don't know, I can't envision a method by which the decision makers are not beholden to someone, somewhere and thus, our money gets spent accordingly.

How about legislation that requires that the funds collected from 'X' tax is exclusively ear-marked for that purpose?

Had this approach been taken (and diligently followed), we would see a far different circumstance with CPP and EI... Instead, into the general account that goes towards oiling squeaky wheels
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
How about legislation that requires that the funds collected from 'X' tax is exclusively ear-marked for that purpose?

Had this approach been taken (and diligently followed), we would see a far different circumstance with CPP and EI... Instead, into the general account that goes towards oiling squeaky wheels

it would be an awesome start

the pension plan sure would be in better shape

if money is needed in another area perhaps the expectation should be, borrowed and must be paid back

also, expenditures should be published
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
How about legislation that requires that the funds collected from 'X' tax is exclusively ear-marked for that purpose?

Had this approach been taken (and diligently followed), we would see a far different circumstance with CPP and EI... Instead, into the general account that goes towards oiling squeaky wheels

For certain things, yes, that would work.

But some things still need to be funded through general revenue and deficits and surpluses are a natural ebb and flow for pretty much everything. And making 'cuts' in the wrong places doesn't do anyone any favours.