Equalization is unfair to Ontario

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Using equalization to fix so-called fiscal gap unfair to Ontario: McGuinty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TORONTO (CP) - Equalization is forcing federal taxpayers in Ontario to help finance lower taxes and higher health and education spending in other provinces, where they don't get to enjoy the benefits, Premier Dalton McGuinty charged Wednesday.

McGuinty was responding to a recent report prepared for the premiers that recommends increasing equalization payments received by Canada's so-called have-not provinces as a way of fixing the fiscal imbalance.

That, however, would only worsen the injustice as far as Ontario is concerned, he said.

"We are now subsidizing lower levels of taxation in some equalization-receiving provinces than we have here in the province of Ontario," McGuinty said before a cabinet meeting.

"If we in the so-called have province have the lowest levels of funding for our colleges and universities, the second-lowest levels of funding for our hospitals, we have the lowest overall per capita program spending, and we're being asked to send more money elsewhere, that strikes me as patently unfair."

Alberta and Ontario are the only two have provinces that do not receive equalization payments, which are part of a system designed to more evenly distribute Canada's wealth among all of its residents.

Ontario calculates that its transfers to have-not provinces would increase by 28 per cent under the plan recommended by the other premiers, climbing to $6.3 billion from $4.9 billion. McGuinty said he intends to fight the plan.

"I have yet to see any evidence that would indicate that it's time for us right now to enrich equalization," he said. "That might happen in the future."

McGuinty said the gap between Ontario and the have-not provinces appears to be narrowing, which should mean they need less money under equalization, not more.

"The have-nots are in fact becoming wealthier, which is a good thing for all Canadians," McGuinty said.

"There really shouldn't be a reason for us to now put more into equalization if the gap is closing. It would make an argument, I would think, for moving in the other direction."

Deficit-plagued Ontario wants the federal government, which has been posting annual surpluses in the billions of dollars, to provide more money to the provinces for health and social transfers instead of using the equalization plan to address the fiscal imbalance.

The province calculates that federal taxes paid by Ontario residents account for 43 per cent of Ottawa's equalization payments, even though the province has only 39 per cent of the country's population and receives only 32 per cent of federal program spending.

Senior Ontario government officials said the province would get an additional $1.1 billion a year if it received the same per capita funding for health and social spending as do other provinces.

McGuinty also complained about a 3.5 per cent annual increase in equalization payments, which he described two years ago as a "reasonable accommodation," but now says was imposed against his will by Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Ontario's opposition parties pounced on his apparent about-face on the equalization agreement reached two years ago.

"It's rather galling," said New Democrat critic Gilles Bisson. "There he was singing the praises of the deal he signed. . . now he's trying to deny it."

Conservative finance critic Tim Hudak accused McGuinty of weak leadership.

"Dalton McGuinty's picking fights with the federal government and all the other provinces, and has isolated himself in the equalization discussions," said Hudak.

©The Canadian Press, 2006
http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/NationalNewsArticle.htm?&src=n051029A.xml
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
This is one area where I disagree with both the federal Tories and the Liberals. The Liberals created the mess and the Tories are going to continue it. Mr Harper being an economist should cut back on equalization especially when it comes to Ontario. Think of it like an investment, why would you take money from a strong investment and pour it into provinces that will just become more dependent on welfare. Instead of pouring money into Quebec (the biggest welfare recipient), he should be scaling back the increases in equalization from Ontario, which would/could mean a lot more seats in the next election.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
However, Hank C, would decreases in the "extractions", so to speak, from the Province of Ontario, while perhaps strengthening the economy in Ontario and delivering more seats from Ontario to the Conservative Party of Canada, not simultaneously cause economic hardships in other Provinces of Canada and a decrease in seats for the same party in those other Provinces?

I am not sure what the numbers are, but I would hope that the Province of British Columbia could continue in a strong manner, notwithstanding whatever decreases in equalization payments may be incurred in the future.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
It's great McGuinty is taking some stand on this issue, much to his credit and he needs it.
 
RE: Equalization is unfai

Sadly, I have to side with Hank on this one. Instead of taking money/resources from the other provinces, the "have-not" provinces should try to audit the laws and taxes associated around businesses. Also, they should consider their own immigration standards as well.

On that note, wouldn't it be funny to see a Nunavut Territorial Nomination Program?
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Re: RE: Equalization is unfai

Kyle Korleski said:
Sadly, I have to side with Hank on this one. Instead of taking money/resources from the other provinces, the "have-not" provinces should try to audit the laws and taxes associated around businesses. Also, they should consider their own immigration standards as well.

On that note, wouldn't it be funny to see a Nunavut Territorial Nomination Program?

Immigration need to be looked over, possibly a program that discourages the entire third world from packing into the GTA. Immigrants are needed in other parts where the population is in decline
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

Jay said:
It's great McGuinty is taking some stand on this issue, much to his credit and he needs it.

Funny how this became an issue when Ontario has a problem, but for years when Alberta complained about the exact same thing in the exact same way, we were told to quit whining, we had to help the rest of Canada.

Just so we are clear, too, until Ontario pays the same amount PER CAPITA that Alberta does, their problem is not as bad as Albertas when it comes to this. Albertans pay almost $3000 per person into this program, and Ontario residents pay around $1900, per the last report I saw.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Both Alberta and B.C.

were at one time "have not" provinces and collected equalization payments. The provinces helping each other out is the Canadian way. My only beef is that the maritime provinces, PEI particularly, waste money by having thirty odd MLAs with a population of a hundred and thirty five thousand people in a province you can drive around in an hour. As long as they are getting money from the rest of Canada they should conserve a bit. In B.C. we have two MLAs in an area twice the size of PEI with more people.
 

S-Ranger

Nominee Member
Mar 12, 2005
96
0
6
South Ontario, Toronto District
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

Hank C said:
This is one area where I disagree with both the federal Tories and the Liberals. The Liberals created the mess...

Actually Alberta created the mess of equalization, much to the government of Ontario's (which means less than the government of Nunavat in this mess) objections. We already had an equalization system and we still do, around all that matters or should be "equalized" -- and held, to put it in Harper terms, "transparent and accountable."

The Canada Health Transfer (CHT) claims to equalize healthcare across the Canadas. It doesn't, it leaves Ontario in last place, below all 10 provinces; but it "claims" to equalize and that's good enough coming out of the mouths of <shudders> politicians for most "Canadians." Particularly the ones who don't live in Ontario.

The Canada Social Transfer (CST) claims to equalize social services, whatever (as with healthcare, the provinces come up with it and it could cover haircuts and pedicures in BC anyday, but no eyecare, chiropractic or physiotherapy in "Ontario") the jurisdiction happens to call and cover under "social services" with no standards, no measurement systems so no possible way to know if anything is being "equalized" ... and post-secondary educations, and early childhood development/educations.

What more does anything need other than real accountability and transparency around those transfers alone to ensure that they truly are equal, which is not the case?

Ontario is at the bottom again and it makes no difference what excuses anyone tries to throw out about it -- our revenues are our revenues and if we allow our elected governments to blow 100% of them, then we do and too bad for anything else. But we won't and at least have some control over that.

We have zero control over other jurisdictions blowing 100% of our revenues year after decade. They elect their own governments, not us.

Hank C said:
... and the Tories are going to continue it. Mr Harper being an economist should cut back on equalization especially when it comes to Ontario.

Harper is not an economist. It holds an economics degree from the "school" of Stampede Town that would not qualify it to manage a McDonald's franchise in Toronto. Harper has never worked for anything, has zero business experience in the real world and has no clue or care in the world about anything but (as if it needs more of them) more firewalls around Alberta to "protect" its revenues.

The McGuinty Liberals are not exactly liked in most of the Ontarios, Harper knows it, is hitching its wagon to John Tory's Progressive Conservative Party, the only party that can run Ontario; if any single government can manage some singular "Ontario thing", which is quite debatable if it's going to remain in the Canadas as is.

But the provincial election is a ways off, we're stuck with McGuinty & Clan, and it's the office of the premier of the Ontarios that Harper needs to pay attention to (it represents us whether we like it or not, as with all ridiculous "elected" parliamentary dictatorships without recall legislation entrenched in a provincial constitution in a section that cannot be changed without a referendum; among other things that should have been done decades ago).

The next confederate election is likely to take place before I either move out of the Canadas or the McGuinty Swine are flushed down the toilet, so Harper is not winning anything around here now but malice; which is actually making the McGuinty Freaks look good.

Harper was in the alleged "capital" city of the Ontarios, with no evidence of it, but they park their sorry arses on prime real estate in downtown Toronto and somehow manage not to get blown up every hour (not that I'd ever suggest or even imply that such a thing should be done; it's just what a few thousand or so others have said and marvel at; at least move to North Bay or something).

It spent all of 15 minutes with, like it or not, the elected nutcase of Ontario's leader, who is not wrong, has every party in the Ontarios and everything else that matters behind the ridiculous "fiscal imbalance" which is truly one of the biggest SCAMS going on the entire planet. Then Harper off to a PC convention to helpJohn Tory raise funds to (better happen) flush the McGuimpy Freaks down the toilet in the next "provincial" election; without addressing the concerns of (south) Ontario voters, where 93% of the population of the Ontarios lived in 2001 (according to the 2001 Census).

The "equalization" transfer should not even exist. The CHT and CST and other transfers and backroom deals have been plundering "Ontario" of its revenues since the almighty "confederation" we'd be a lot better without.

The 2004 "equalization" renewal and Atlantic Accord blew the lid off "equalization" in Ontario. RAISING it even more is totally out of the question.

It should be scrapped. Or scrap all other transfers and create a simple, proper, easy system that taxpayers (who actually pay taxes) can understand; not mathemeticians as Harper (its real people in the back rooms/departments who claim to have brains but clearly do not) is proposing, with over 2,000 MORE variables when the current mess is almost beyond comprension by real economists who actually have jos, have real experience, unlike Harper with its worthless piece of paper and no business experience or real political experice even being a mayor.

It doesn't amount to more accountability, as promised (and rejected by most Ontarians; and every other city in the Canadas that matters); it amounts to less

It doesn't amount to more transparency, it amounts to having to take a freaking courses to try to figure the mess out when it's already quite bad enough.

Those are the only hopes in hell Harper has in the Onarios and it's already blown it totally and may even end up getting the ridiculous McGuinty Liberals re-elected to spite him/it. [Um, as PM, the PMO, it is an entity, not a person: not that many policians are persons regardless of anything because just the "political family" systems don't allow it, let alone the insults to the words (political) "systems" and "structures".]

It's sucking Quebec's arse, which we don't tend to take as much offense to as the rest of the Canadas does (as noted by the Harperites) and is using a separtist party to do it with.

But any idiot could have told any Canadian that it's the position the "western" reformers would be in if they ever won anything; and they won a smaller minority government than the confederate Liberals did last time -- mainly due to the McGimpy government.

It's in Harper's interests to make the McGimpy dictatorship look bad but it's doing the opposite; which is no big surprise out of the "western" reformers against whatever they think Ontario is, given that it's so popular to hate "Ontario" in the Canadas and is even more popular to hate South Ontario and Toronto; which is where all of the revenues come from and is where all of the corporations are that can and will string any conferderates up by the balls if they don't smarten up and make it quick: which, of course, as expected, the Harperites are doing the exact opposite of.

Hank C said:
Think of it like an investment, why would you take money from a strong investment and pour it into provinces that will just become more dependent on welfare. Instead of pouring money into Quebec (the biggest welfare recipient), he should be scaling back the increases in equalization from Ontario, which would/could mean a lot more seats in the next election.

Equalization Program

Equalization Entitlements in 2005-06 $ per person

(Per person is also called per capita; same thing, the total divided by the population of each province in this case, but the confederate Dept. of Finance (a.k.a. "Finance Canada") doesn't bother to list the population estimate(s) they're using, so either can I to make sure that they're not playing any more games than usual.)
Code:
_______________________________________
                         2005-06   % of
Province                 $ each   Total
_______________________________________
Prince Edward Island     1,996    21.93
New Brunswick            1,793    19.70
Newfoundland & Labrador  1,668    18.33
Nova Scotia              1,432    15.73
Manitoba                 1,359    14.93

Québec                     632     6.94
British Columbia           139     1.53
Saskatchewan                83     0.91

Ontario                      0     0.00
Alberta                      0     0.00
_______________________________________
TOTAL                    9,102   100.00
_______________________________________
                         2005-06   % of
SUMMARY                  $ each   Total
_______________________________________
Atlantic Total           6,889    75.69
Prairie-B.C. Total       1,581    17.37
Québec Total               632     6.94
_______________________________________
TOTAL                    9,102   100.00
_______________________________________
Figures reflect increases resulting from the new framework on Equalization announced by the Prime Minister following the October 2004 First Ministers' Meeting). These figures incorporate the protection provided to provinces against declines in Equalization. These figures do not include the additional $150 million in Equalization announced in Budget 2004. [Or the 'Atlantic Accord' or 2.5% annual accelerator or plenty of other BS to buy votes at the expense of the Ontarios, as usual.]

Source: Department of Finance Canada - Equalization Program
Date modified (by source): 2005-04-04
Last modified/checked (by me): 2006-01-25
_____

Equalization Entitlements – (2004-05, 2005-06) per person
Sorted by 2005-06 per person

Code:
____________________________________________
JURISDICTION              2004   2005  $ +/-
____________________________________________
Prince Edward Island     1,776  1,996  +220
New Brunswick            1,537  1,793  +256
Newfoundland & Labrador  1,398  1,668  +270
Nova Scotia              1,223  1,432  +209
Manitoba                 1,147  1,359  +212
____________________________________________
Quebec                     500    632  +132
British Columbia           197    139  - 58
Saskatchewan               464     83  -381
____________________________________________
Ontario                      0      0     0
Alberta                      0      0     0
____________________________________________
Figures reflect increases resulting from the new framework on Equalization announced by the Prime Minister following the October 2004 First Ministers' Meeting). These figures incorporate the protection provided to provinces against declines in Equalization. These figures do not include the additional $150 million in Equalization announced in Budget 2004. [Or the 'Atlantic Accord' or 2.5% annual accelerator or plenty of other BS to buy votes at the expense of the Ontarios, as usual.]

Source: Not Long For This World Finance "Canada" - Equalization Program
Date modified (by source): 2005-04-04
Last updated/checked (by me): 2005-01-25

Quebec is not the biggest recipient. It's a myth invented by the have-nots, which Alberta used to be not long ago. Per person/per capita is just that. And Quebec opted out of the CHT and CST (one transfer then, CHST, split in two for more "transparency" by the Liberals) and was totally screwed by the confederates for it and is slowly being paid back via the only transfer around that has no strings attached: the "equalization" transfer.

Slap the CHT and CST on:

CAD dollars ($) per person (per capita, same thing) in confederate transfers to each province and territory for fiscal years 2004-05 and 2005-06, the percentage (%) the amount of the transfers are of total jurisdiction's revenues (pittances of confederate tax returns for Ontario, Québec, BC and Alberta; confederate handouts for everything else; on top of getting 100% of all federal receipts collected from them back) -- but for the previous fiscal year. Confused? Welcome to the Canadas.[/b]

Code:
______________________________________________________________
JURISDICTION             2004-05    %  2005-06    %   Change
______________________________________________________________
Nunavat Territory        $25,975   88% $28,061   91%  UP  3%
Northwest Territories    $16,633   78% $17,951   80%  UP  2%
Yukon Territory          $15,727   76% $16,818   78%  UP  2%

Prince Edward Island     $ 2,930   39%  $3,291   42%  UP  3%
New Brunswick            $ 2,739   36%  $3,111   39%  UP  3%
Newfoundland & Labrador  $ 2,449   32%  $2,966   34%  UP  2%*
Nova Scotia              $ 2,455   39%  $2,793   42%  UP  3%
Manitoba                 $ 2,428   38%  $2,717   40%  UP  2%

Quebec                   $ 1,757   25%  $2,052   26%  UP  1%
British Columbia         $ 1,383   18%  $1,570   19%  UP  1%
Saskatchewan             $ 1,332   20%  $1,487   28%  UP  8%**
Ontario                  $ 1,322   21%  $1,487   21%  UP  0%
Alberta                  $ 1,321   16%  $1,486   16%  UP  0%
______________________________________________________________
TOTAL                    $78,451   40% $85,790   43%  UP  2%
______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________
                                   AVG           AVG   AVG 
SUMMARY                  2004-05    %  2005-06    %   Change
______________________________________________________________
Territories Total        $58,335   81% $62,830   83%  UP  2%
Atlantic Canadas Total   $10,573   37% $12,161   39%  UP  3%
Prairies Total           $ 5,081   63% $ 5,690   73%  UP 10%

Ontario and Québec Total $ 3,079   36% $ 3,539   37%  UP  1%

Rest - (ON+QC) Total     $75,372   44% $82,251   46%  UP  3%
______________________________________________________________
* NL moves up one position over NS from 2004-05.
**SK up the highest of every jurisdiction in percentage of provincial revenues in handouts from 2004-05 to 2005-06.

Territories = Nunavat Territory + Northwest Territories + Yukon Territory.
Atlantic Canadas = Prince Edward Island + New Brunswick + Newfoundland & Labrador + Nova Scotia.
Prairies = Manitoba + Saskatchewan + Alberta.
ON = Ontario
QC = Québec

% and Change in SUMMARY is not the sum of the percent changes from fiscal 2004-05 to 2005-06 but are the average changes (total divided by the number of jurisdictions; e.g. (3 + 2 + 2 = 7) / 3 = 2.3 percent change for the territories).

Source: Department of Finance Canada - Federal Transfers to Provinces and Territories (scroll down for all jurisdictions)
Date modified (by source): 2006-03-29
Last checked/modified (by me): 2006-05-09
_____

Try Nunavat along with the territorial version of "equalization" as being the biggest recpient by quite a lot.

Then, in the provinces, PEI is the biggest welfare case in the Canadas.

Albertans seem to like using per capitas to claim that their economy is worth something and all transfers are paid out on a per capita basis. it's not Quebec's fault that the rest of the Canadas has no population to speak of, or that it tried to opt out of the largest transfers around and pay for its own healthcare, social services, post-secondary everything, early childhood development/education and everything else the CST covers -- and that the confederates didn't like it, so screwed Quebec to "prove" that it couldn't exist without the Big Brother confederates, with its own revenues; which it can.

But Harper has to lick their butts to get anything passed, and is trying to win a majority with the rest of the Canadas and the Quebecs to the exclusion of Ontario -- which will be the end of the Canadas as you know it (finally) in less than 24 hours from whenever the hammer drops.
 

S-Ranger

Nominee Member
Mar 12, 2005
96
0
6
South Ontario, Toronto District
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

bluealberta said:
Jay said:
It's great McGuinty is taking some stand on this issue, much to his credit and he needs it.

Funny how this became an issue when Ontario has a problem, but for years when Alberta complained about the exact same thing in the exact same way, we were told to quit whining, we had to help the rest of Canada.

What are you blabbering about? It's been an issue for Upper Canada/Ontario since before Alberta even existed. "Y'all" just don't hear anything but what you want to way up and out there.

bluealberta said:
Just so we are clear, too, until Ontario pays the same amount PER CAPITA that Alberta does, their problem is not as bad as Albertas when it comes to this. Albertans pay almost $3000 per person into this program, and Ontario residents pay around $1900, per the last report I saw.

Screw your "per capita" with no people to speak of and 40% more revenues per capita than Ontario has.

You've got a puny 3,306,359 people in all of the Albertas compared to 12,599,364 in the Ontarios (Jan 1, 2006 pop estimates, Statistics Canada - The Daily, March 28, 2006).

Alberta has no debt. Ontario's debt was about half of your pathetic GDP last year. Alberta has no provincial income tax, Alberta has over $30 billion in "conservative surplus" sitting around in its various slush funds and could do just fine with no returns of its revenues.

As is, Alberta pays out less than the municipality of Toronto alone does, in the only revenues that matter: never to be seen again, here or there.

Alberta started this "equalization" mess.

Edit: S-Ranger, you are quite capable of making your points without insulting other members. Please refrain from such. Thank you - Kreskin.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Okay, hands up, who thinks they understand equalization? The feds are not robbing Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, or anybody else, to subsidize others. Federal tax rates are the same everywhere. Whatever your income, you pay exactly the same amount of federal tax on your taxable income (except for some minor differences like the isolated post allowance) and purchases no matter what province you live in. The principle of equalization is that the federal government will disburse funds to provincial governments from its general revenues to enable them to provide a roughly equal level of public services everywhere. That's all. Nobody's paying more or less than their share, everybody's paying the same. McGuinty's argument really (and Ralph Klein's, when he tried it) is that if the feds charged lower tax rates in his province then his province's taxes would be lower and every citizen of his province would thus be richer. It's a typically specious provincial bash the feds argument. It's selfish and ignorant, and it's crap. But it plays well, because so many voters are also selfish and ignorant.
 

S-Ranger

Nominee Member
Mar 12, 2005
96
0
6
South Ontario, Toronto District
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

FiveParadox said:
However, Hank C, would decreases in the "extractions", so to speak, from the Province of Ontario, while perhaps strengthening the economy in Ontario and delivering more seats from Ontario to the Conservative Party of Canada, not simultaneously cause economic hardships in other Provinces of Canada and a decrease in seats for the same party in those other Provinces?

Who cares? What "provinces?"

How many people it takes to get 1 federal seat in the "Commons"
2001, the more people per seat, the more people it takes just to get one "MP"
Code:
_____________________________________________________
JURISDICTION            POP (2001)  SEATS  PER CAPITA
Ontario*                11,897,647   106     112,242
British Columbia         3,907,738    36     108,548
Québec                   7,237,479    75      96,500

Alberta                  2,974,807    28     106,243

Nova Scotia                908,007    11      82,546
Manitoba                 1,119,583    14      79,970
Newfoundland & Labrador    512,930     7      73,276
New Brunswick              729,498    10      72,950
Saskatchewan               978,933    14      69,924
Northwest Territories       37,360     1      37,360
Prince Edward Island       135,294     4      33,824
Yukon Territory             28,674     1      28,674
Nunavat Territory           37,360     1      26,745
_____________________________________________________
TOTAL                   30,099,618   308      99,009
                                               (avg)
_____________________________________________________
SUMMARY                 POP (2001)  SEATS  PER CAPITA
_____________________________________________________
(ON+QC) Total           19,135,126   181     105,719
(ON+QC+BC) Total        23,042,864   217     106,188

Rest - (ON+QC) Total    11,359,569   127      89,445
Rest - (ON+QC+BC) Total  7,451,831    91      81,888

Prairie (AB+SK+MB) Total 5,073,323    56      90,595
(SK+MB) to ^ AB Total    2,098,516    24      74,947

Atlantic Canadas Total   2,285,729    32      71,429
Territories Total           92,779     3      30,926
_____________________________________________________
PER CAPITA is simply the population of the jurisdiction divided by the number of seats it has.

* Ontario Undercount correction from Statistics Canada in cooperation with the Assessment Office of the Ontario Ministry of Finance because ... "''Due to significant undercounts in southwest, southcentral, GTA, southeast Ontario CAs from the 1986 Census forward, the Assessment enumeration is now undertaken every three years by the local Assessment office of the Ontario Ministry of Finance in co-ordination with Statistics Canada''".

Source: Statistics Canada - Tables - Population and Dwelling Counts (2001 Census)
_____

Aside from getting ripped off in seats, the only "provinces" that matter are Ontario, Quebec and BC. 217 seats is a pretty good majority out of 308 seats.

FiveParadox said:
I am not sure what the numbers are, but I would hope that the Province of British Columbia could continue in a strong manner, notwithstanding whatever decreases in equalization payments may be incurred in the future.

You're right. You aren't sure, have no clue what the numbers are. But they're all over this forum.

BC is a joke for collecting equlization welfare handouts. The things don't exist so that you can pay your last NDP budget deficit down, then start paying your provincial debt down.

You call that "strong?" I call it sick.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
Caution: S-Ranger, I have edited out some inappropriate language in one of your above posts. Everyone has been discussing this calmly. No need for it as you are more than capable of handling yourself in a reasonable debate. Thank you.
 

S-Ranger

Nominee Member
Mar 12, 2005
96
0
6
South Ontario, Toronto District
Dexter Sinister said:
Okay, hands up, who thinks they understand equalization?

Hand up.

Do continue, guru.

Dexter Sinister said:
The feds are not robbing Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, or anybody else, to subsidize others. Federal tax rates are the same everywhere.

And you know absolutely nothing about unemployment insurance let alone the "transfer system", let alone equalization.

The stupid argument that everyone in every "province" is in the same tax bracket is a stupid argument. Nothing pays the same in taxes. I probably pay more in taxes a year than your house is worth.

And I probably know a lot more people than you do, or ever will, who don't even have to "prove it" because it's nonsensical.

If every province in the Canadas had 12,599,364 people, which is certainly nowhere close to being a joke of the case, and every business in every province with the same number of businesses and labor forces/employment rates all paid the same in taxes and every person in these non-existent 12,599,364-person provinces all paid the same in confederate taxes, etc., then you might have some point to begin what you don't even know about or care about; for starters, let alone when it comes to revenues per capita that go back to every "province" and territory.

And the point would be that no province needs equalization or any other federal transfers because they all make the same and have the same revenues. It's either that or the tax system is somehow unfair and penalizes those who make money than those who don't. And those who make more money than those who make less are also penalized by this "equal" tax system that doesn't exist anywhere but in Communist countries where there are no federal taxes. But not everyone has the same standard of living even in that mythical system either.

"The Canadian Way" is a total disaster that is going to be fixed up very soon.

Dexter Sinister said:
Whatever your income, you pay exactly the same amount of federal tax on your taxable income (except for some minor differences like the isolated post allowance) and purchases no matter what province you live in.

Particularly if you're unemployed. Then the "employment equalization" system kicks in, not employment insurance. Those who pay in the least get the most. Those who pay in the most get the least or usually nothing because they're never unemployed to the point that they'd bother filing for the employment unequalization system.

The kid with the paperroute (mostly adults in Toronto, as yet another job to try to get by, instead of sitting back sucking up welfare) makes the same as the CEO of the RBC Group and pays out taxes?

Sure s/he does: pay out any taxes at all: the unemployed welfare bum or the paperboy; unless it has, not a real job or s/he wouldn't have a paperroute, or deliver food, beer, wine, whatever.

You don't even understand the tax system let alone equalization.

Have you ever even seen a tax form? Do you think that even one company pays out the same in provincial sales or the confederate goods and services tax when they don't sell anything, or sell less, and/or file a net loss (which pretty much covers the Canadas outside the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, Lower Mainlnd-south Vancouver island and all over the Albertas due to its, well, rather spread out economy) as when their sales (of ice cream cones or multi-million dollar mortages); same difference, are up?

Dexter Sinister said:
The principle of equalization is that the federal government will disburse funds to provincial governments from its general revenues to enable them to provide a roughly equal level of public services everywhere. That's all.

Ha, that's all -- to the propaganda. Reality is quite another story that I don't think you're up for. You might want to study the concept of income first.

Dexter Sinister said:
Nobody's paying more or less than their share, everybody's paying the same.

What planet are you from?


Dexter Sinister said:
McGuinty's argument really (and Ralph Klein's, when he tried it) is that if the feds charged lower tax rates in his province then his province's taxes would be lower and every citizen of his province would thus be richer.

Um, no. And it's certainly not McGuinty. The problem is the mess of "transfer systems" that claim to do what you claim above, but that the Atlantic [Canada] Institute of Market Research (AIMS) has quite handily proven, raises provincial taxes in every Atlantic province due entirely to the "equalization" transfer, which makes it unattractive to invest in so leaves it stuck on welfare forever.

It has been quite handily proven by everything that matters in the Canadas, that the entire "transfer system" has been totally corrupted and not only doesn't live up to any of its claims but harms evey jurisdiction it claims to help -- while also returning less in transfers in reenues per capita to Ontario and Alberta than to any other jurisdictions in the Canadas.

Taxes paid out mean nothing when 100% of them come back, with billions of more dollars out of Ontario's, Alberta's and BC's revenues.

You have a lot of learning to do. Don't spread your ignorance around in this forum.
 

S-Ranger

Nominee Member
Mar 12, 2005
96
0
6
South Ontario, Toronto District
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

Kreskin said:
Caution: S-Ranger, I have edited out some inappropriate language in one of your above posts. Everyone has been discussing this calmly. No need for it as you are more than capable of handling yourself in a reasonable debate. Thank you.

Of course I am, but there is no "debating" as to whether the sky is green with purple polka dots, or that this is the Ontario forum for "Local Ontario discussions" -- which is not what is taking place.

If anyone from Ontario wished to discuss anything with "Canadians" then they would go to the Canadian Politics forum. Is this forum to be renamed to "Anything Goes"? If so, I was not informed. And where are Ontarians supposed to go to discuss Ontario issues? As I stated to another poster in another thread; are there not enough forums on this phpBB2 end of the CCIC site to post in already?

I have no idea what "debate" there is around any of that. And what language? I have never even used the "s-word" in a post, uncensored.

Sorry if I offended you but if you're a moderator why aren't you removing posts from the Ontario forum that have nothing to do with the purpose of this forum and do not come from anyone who lives in Ontario, and have no clue what they're talking about?

I had to leave the Canadian Politics forum due to the unbelievable ignorance about the most basic everything and now what? Off to the Alberta forum to rant and rave about Ontario in it?

It's all I see going on in this forum for the most part; with locations from all over the Canadas.

If I used the word hick and you took offense, please look it up in a dictonary. And/or provide me with an alternative word that doesn't amount to the insults, the language used against the citizens of Ontario -- in this forum.

But above all, please moderate this forum so that posts that belong in the Canadian Politics and/or Canadian History and/or International Politics and/or Wreck Beach with the insults being hurled around, about Ontario by those with no clue, are moved to the appropriate forum.

It includes most threads in this forum. And had you the courtesy to PM me, I would have PM'd you back. But you decided to make a public post.

CCIC-forums said:
Forum Rules

General Overview

This document lays out the rules users of the discussion forums at www.canadiancontent.net are expected to abide by. References to “we,” “us,” and “our” in what follows refers to moderators and/or administrators of this site. The rules laid out on this page compliment our disclaimer of warranties and terms of service. Under no circumstances should these user guidelines void any clauses in the terms of service.

By using this service you agree:

1. Not to post any material that you know, or in our judgement ought to know, is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of personal privacy, or in violation of Canadian law;

[That pretty much describes every post in this forum other than from myself and a few others including MMMike.]
...
Conclusion

This site is intended to be a medium for public discussion. You are free to express your views forcefully but we require you to remain civil. Insults, hate speech, and deliberately inflammatory statements, commonly known as trolling, are not acceptable. Do not threaten anyone or any group or suggest they are deserving of harm

[Keep rule #1 in mind. And the above describes almost every post in this forum other than from those who should be posting: Ontarians. Or is it fine for me/everyone to head into the Prairies, Atlantic Canada, Quebec, BC forums to bring up what belongs in the Canadian Politics forum and/or insults the people who live in those jurisdictions?]

Terms of Service

iii. Discussion Boards / Forums

(a) Canadian Content offers it's users open forums. [It's is a contraction for "it is". The possessive form is "its".] These services are available free of charge, but may not be used in the following manners: Defame, abuse, harass or threaten others; Make any bigoted or hateful statements; Advocate illegal activity or discuss illegal activities with the intent to commit them; Post or distribute any material that infringes and/or violates any right of a third party or any law; Post or distribute any vulgar, obscene, discourteous, or indecent language or images; Advertise or sell to or solicit others; Post or distribute any software or other materials that contain a virus or other harmful component; or Post material or make statements that do not generally pertain to the designated topic or theme of any chat room or bulletin board.

Sorry for reading the rules and expecting them to be followed and not just hitting X-Report on every thread and post that has no business even being in this forum.

MOVED. Thank you.
 

Numure

Council Member
Apr 30, 2004
1,063
0
36
Montréal, Québec
Re: RE: Equalization is unfair to Ontario

bluealberta said:
Jay said:
It's great McGuinty is taking some stand on this issue, much to his credit and he needs it.

Funny how this became an issue when Ontario has a problem, but for years when Alberta complained about the exact same thing in the exact same way, we were told to quit whining, we had to help the rest of Canada.

Just so we are clear, too, until Ontario pays the same amount PER CAPITA that Alberta does, their problem is not as bad as Albertas when it comes to this. Albertans pay almost $3000 per person into this program, and Ontario residents pay around $1900, per the last report I saw.

And Québec doesnt get that much per capita...
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
S-Ranger, if it has no business being here don't write complete novels in rebuttal (while calling certain members of this forum mentally retarded) then tell everyone else to take it somewhere else.
 

Vicious

Electoral Member
May 12, 2006
293
4
18
Ontario, Sadly
Hank C - thanks for starting this topic. I love it.
S-Ranger - I've read all your posts and can't figure out who you support politically. You seem angry at every party both provincial and federal. You sound like a conservative but slam harper and the western reform movement. At other times you sound like an Liberal supporter but your fiscal/tax rants don't jive with that either.

So whatever your polical stripe I'd like to formally welcome you to Canada. Canada is the country that creates cradle to grave social programs to ensure that no matter how hard you work or not work you are taken care of. In this model of government it is important to take every cent you can from those people that create the wealth of the country - yes business people and conversely reward mediocrity. In Canada the general thought is that to accumulate wealth is evil and should be stopped at all costs.

Now since you live in Southern Ontario and I'll assume you have done so for the last number of years. You may be aware that the province of Ontario has single handedly chosen our federal governement for some time - say the last 13 years. So if you want to place blame for your fiscal/taxation woes - look in the mirror. Most of the fine folks from the west have been trying to rid the country of Liberals so don't blame them - head back to the mirror.

Ontario's fiscal imbalance - I'm less sure where you stand on this. You appear to be angry about Ontario recieving so little after paying so much but then you say you want to abolish the whole system. (I'm with you on that thought).

I'd suggest Ontario emulate the lesser provinces of Alberta and BC and get your own fiscal house in order. I don't think Ontario would be complaining about the fiscal imbalance at all if you weren't continually running a deficit. It's hard to blame the rest of the country for that.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Re: Ontario and Equalization

:arrow: Number of Seats for Ontario

I am unsure as to the opinion of the member above on our election system in terms of the distribution of seats in the House of Commons; néanmoins, je voudrais dire que la province de l'Ontario, à mon avis, comme province avec la pluralité de la population, cette province a la droite d'avoir la pluralité des députées et députés dans la Chambre. One person, one vote; to abandon our system of representing areas by population rather than region would result in some citizens of Canada having their votes "weighted", if you would, as more "valuable" than those of the citizens in other Provinces and Territories of Canada.

:arrow: Ontario's Role in Equalization

I would suggest it would be irresponsible, under the given circumstances today, to suggest that the payments charged from Ontario are responsible for the deficit, or for economic hardship in general therein. The Government of Ontario should have factored those payments into their budgets, and any failures in terms of economic provisions are on the Government of Ontario in terms of this issue, rather than the Government of Canada.