I am amazed by the left on this board.

Freethinker · Jan 19, 2006

nomore said:
very easily, way back in the day, when I was in school, making roughly that amount (a little less actually), I spent more than $6400/year on GST items...hell my tuition almost came to that amount, not to mention the books, bus pass, supplies, even friggin toilet paper. Plus my heat/hydro. I went out with friends to restaurants and bars (gst taxable). Internet connection, laundry, clothes....god the list goes on and on.

You know I get the impression I am talking to Bill OReilly, who will make up anything on the spot to back their point up. Previously you harped on buying a house, then I pointed out, used residential properties are GST exempt, new residential homes have GST tax rebate. Now you are on about tuition. Well any accredited degree program in Canada has GST exemption on the tution. So again more misinformation.

Someone making $12000 for university would pay $10000 easily in Food/Lodging/Tuition. All GST exempt. That doesn't leave much GST spending room.

Freethinker said:
I haven't seen the spin of either party. I don't watch TV, so I don't get pummelled with the ads. I simply downloaded the PDFs of the platforms for each party.

ah I think we found the problem, misinformed.[/quote]

Oh I see, by your logic, informed is listening to party spin, uninformed is downloading the platforms and examining the numbers for myself.

Mike if someone provides a link to a credible source, that actually includes a breakdown of the numbers I will be very happy to have a look. By breakdown, I expect to see expected number for Food,lodging, other gst exempts like prescription drugs taken into account.

But CD Howe said: ... or CBC said: ... is meaningless.

nomore · Jan 19, 2006

Freethinker, you misread what I said, perhaps that was my fault for writing that the way I did. It was meant to read that if I could spend that amount on "disposable" items, which may not be required to survive. Those could just as easily be transfered to taxable items. It was ment to point out, that it is possible to live on 12500 a year, and still have $6400 to spend on other items than rent/food....because I did it. It was not ment as a taxable/non-taxable list.

I never disputed the used housing issue, but you are forgetting, I never mentioned a used home. I was refering to families in general buying a house, and many families that don't make a lot of money DO buy new homes, especially where I live, since many new homes actually cost less than "used"

Oh I see, by your logic, informed is listening to party spin, uninformed is downloading the platforms and examining the numbers for myself.

informed is newspapers/websites/TV news/independant research/government sources/party platforms, plus many others

You need to look at many different sources to get a full picture of the issues. "downloading the policies" alone, is just breaking the ice of being "informed"

Freethinker · Jan 19, 2006

RE: I am amazed by the le

Thanks for explaining that last post on the tuition. One last post. You don't have to be an economist to know there is something wrong with numbers in the article you mentioned. You just have to work them backwards.
$64 in savings for someone making less than $12500. Well I think we can agree, the higher, the easier to make that number.

Can we agree on 11500 after tax income after Fed/Prov income tax?

$64 in savings from a 1% gst cut = $6400 in GST spending.

11500-6400 = 5100 left for food/rent.

So if you can find rent for $425 you have just enough to pay your rent and starve to death.

I just don't see how it is realistic to use as a realistic case for the numbers, let alone any kind of representative average.

This is not a question about being informed this is question of the numbers just not being in any way realistic. Crunching numbers yourself is important since I can easily find sources claiming the opposite, even the same sources.

I searched on CD Howe and GST. Pretty much ever link that came up said it was not a good choice.

Varying reactions almost universally negative including CD Howe reaction. I clipped the bottom section with a bunch of Economist reactions:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...k_051202/20051202?s_name=election2006&no_ads=
What other economists have to say:

* "Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid," McGill University economist Christopher Ragan told CP. People may like it, he said, because "it's the tax people love to hate."
* "I believe it's a poor idea," said economist Mike Veal of Hamilton's McMaster University. He said most economists would choose an income tax cut.
* Robin Boadway, a Queen's University economist, suggests another way to help low-income earners: increasing the refundable GST tax credit. He also told CP that Conservatives are actually looking for way to cut government revenue and thus spending, with an eye to reducing the overall size of the federal government and bolster the provinces.
* "Canada's problem is a productivity problem -- that's been identified," John Johnston, chief strategist with Harbour Group at RBC Dominion Securities Inc, told The Globe and Mail. "Cutting GST doesn't help productivity."
* Other criticisms levelled at the GST cut include the disproportionate 'savings' it would afford people who spend more. Lower-income Canadians, because they're not spending as much, would not realize as much savings.

Here is CD Howe instititue VP, saying GST cut not so hot:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/01/gst-reac051201.html

From an economic point of view, it wouldn't be my first choice," Bill Robson, senior vice-president of the CD Howe Institute, told CBC Newsworld on Thursday.

"If you want tax cuts that are going to promote work, going to promote saving, help us invest more and raise living standards in the future, the GST is not the tax you would go after."

Robson said it would be better to cut personal income taxes.

To see what else the CBC had to say, I went to the reality check site:

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/realitycheck/taxing_inquiries.html

"The GST advantage realistically really doesn’t kick in until you hit the $100,000 bracket. Because then you would only have to spend a little over 40 per cent of your total earnings to get a larger return from the GST break."

Aside from out of context quotes previously provided, I believe the above paragraph best condenses the gist of the CBC piece.
Realistically, because if you make below $10k you will save about $10, and between 10K and 100K the liberal plan is better, beyond 100k is where the GST cut really gains traction.
People trying to score points will quote the the low end out of context to claim even the CBC is supporting the GST as best for low income Canadians.

While theoretically correct that is like me saying the ocean level rises if I wade in up to my knees. Theoretically correct, but of no pragmatic realistic value. The real truth is.

Very Low income Canadians . Neither program beneifits. $10/year is a token benefit that is only useful to make PR with.
Middle-low Income ranges: The liberal income program benefits most.
Upper (>100K) income ranges: The Conservative program benefits most.

And that is ignoring the Capital gains tax break from the conservatives that also primarily benefits upper income Canadians.

nomore · Jan 19, 2006

Re: RE: I am amazed by the le

Freethinker said:
Very Low income Canadians . Neither program beneifits. $10/year is a token benefit that is only useful to make PR with.

^^^I think at least this much we can both agree on.

As for the rent issue, I did a quick scan of the local paper (Ottawa Citizen) and found several places for rent for under $425. But besides that, there is a lot of subsidised housing out there as well, which many low income people live in.

And also remember that families, say 2 parents, might each be making 12500, wich brings the houshold income to 25000, which allows for greater combined spending. Or it could even be something as simple as a roommate to share the cost of rent with.

On top of all this, Debt is another issue. Many people/households, spend more than their income on goods, that is why many people/families (even higher income ones) have a significant amount of debt.

Either way, I'm not even sure why we have gone so deep into this, since this issue alone would not change my view of either party, and wouldn't exactly entice me to switch sides, whether I was Liberal, Conservative, or NDP.

I would much rather see government spending, and burocracy reduced so that there is no longer a need to tax us so high in the first place.
These tax breaks are more directed to the lowest income earners, of which I am no longer a part anyway.

The issue for these parties is who can claim the "crown" of being able to say they help the poor most. Even if they both hardly end up helping them out at all. The unfortunate part is that Canadians are partly to blame, because we fuel the fire by everyone being sooo happy about their $20 a year tax break. where as If we didn't have all this waste, and spending in the first place, we might be able to save way more, like a few thousand a year.

It's all a moot point in my mind.

jimmoyer · Jan 19, 2006

As a conservative I generally support income tax cuts
over sales tax cuts (the GST goods and services tax).

Freethinker said you have to cut your spending
to realize a greater tax cut.

Often it is the consumers that prop up the economy,
so this flip flop of the Canadian conservative party
is sort of bizarre.

Cutting income taxes could increase some disposal
income to consume more product in the economy
and thus help the governmental budget and the economy.

As an American conservative I would support the Canadian
Liberal Party's income tax cut over the GST (goods and
services tax) cut.

Jay · Jan 19, 2006

I think the GST cut is a play on the broken promise of the Liberals to eliminate the GST altogether.

jimmoyer · Jan 19, 2006

Even if it's a conservative party's way of reminding
voters of a broken liberal party's promise, it is less
sound policy than an income tax cut.

Freethinker · Jan 19, 2006

Re: RE: I am amazed by the left on this board.

I find it odd that I supported the government that brought in this tax, Brian Mulroneys Progressive Conservatives and today I am opposing the party that wants to cut it. The Stephen Harper conservatives.

It is a tax I have always favoured as one of the fairest in the land. I would actually like to see it go up a few points and drop income tax more.

For those interested in GST minutia, the Liberals promised to replace the GST with something that would generate the same revenue(campaign rhetoric at times dropped the replace part, but that was the official platform. That they offered no clue what that would be was a sign they were blowing smoke. Some GST criticisms were from small business complexity and the administration costs. Eventually I think they decided to aim for an HST, merger with the provincial sales tax to make it easier to administer and cheaper to collect. I think there was some talk of making it semi hidden. But significant push back from provinces shut this down.

I would have supported if they just came out and said we will harmonize the GST with PST, and hide it. Because as much as I think it is the fairest tax I still hate the effect when I buy something and get the cash and experience tax shock.

I voted against Chretien everytime in every election.

Anyway, there is some info here on GST replacement pledge:
http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/202/300/onbalance/publications/onbalance/1996/9-6/

S-Ranger · Jan 20, 2006