Tax and Spend
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
Yes Sask is doing well - But - yup the but I have a point - Growth year over year for 5 years in Sask can be for discussion purposes be 1 % higher than AB. The fine Captain was posting GDP- completely different sets of numbers.
Then he offered to discuss tax rates.
And yes the West is doing well.
But - Yep- But again- Resource prices have dropped - those high numbers we had a while ago will not be seen in the next few years to decade or longer.
I figured someone would come along and make my point for me.
We now pay 43% of earned income on average to the government and the above poster thinks it is just fine to increase that amount .
Assuming a person is not a public servant and has no or a minimal pension which is very common in the private sector these days.
How would that person support their family and then save up enough excess cash to retire on.
AFTER paying more than 43% taxes on income.
It's impossible for the average Joe.
Now lets take a look at the public sector.
Every time more funding is directed to health and education the vast majority of the funding is quickly scooped up by the union members through strike threats.
Every time.
Teachers make around $100,000 a year.
Work around 9 months a year.
6 1/2 or 7 hours a day.
Retire around 53 with a pension of around 70% of earnings.
That COLA pention can be worth over 2 million and is primarily funded by the taxpayer not the teacher.
And the teachers want more.
The NDP and the above poster think they deserve more.
Its completely unsustainable
It would be funny if it were not so sad.
On another thread we are discussing clawing back seniors pensions, CPP and OAS.
Seniors are not the problem.
Workers trying to save up enough money to retire in some kind of dignity however is a huge problem.
And out of control extortionist public service combined with weak or unionist governments is also a huge problem.
We need to criminalize collective bargaining in the public sector.
In the private sector, who cares.
If a few private companies are run into the ground by strikes and the unionists it does not usually seriously damage the nation.
But the unionist public sector is rapidly succeeding in bankrupting an entire country.
We need to ban unions in the public sector.
The days of small children being sent down the mines are long over.
Dix, the Dips and the unions stand a pretty good chance of chopping the legs right out from under BC in the near future.
Time will tell
Holy crap, you're right! We need to get rid of this lefty government that's taxing us at such an abysmal rate.
You have no idea what the policy of said future government might look like, other than it will be 'lefty'.
Yet, we DO know what the policy of this government is, and it's apparently high taxes.
You do not want a discussion - everything is a red from you. What a useless ffn wanker. Yes I expect you will now go thru a thread or to and tag a bunch as Red.
Which lefty government are you referring to?
The Manitoba Dip's, the BC or Ontario Lib's?
The pending BC Dip's.
Surely not the Federal Conservatives and Harper who have significantly reduced taxes on Canadians?
Several times.
What do you mean I have no idea about what said future government will look like?
I was talking about Adrian Dix and the Dips in BC.
And it's pretty much a sure thing in BC.
I previously stated what Dix has publicly released as his platform.
Stop all or most resource companies in BC.
Increase taxes across the board.
Increase funding to the unionist public sector
You said 'federally or provincially'. You weren't confining it to BC in what I quoted. but no worries. I have no serious desire to debate tax policy, it just struck me as funny.
Hey Goobs... Looks like your stalker is expanding his/her horizons... Just got this:
Post #1738265 - Re: Tax and Spend Bad Cannuck
You can see by the comment I posted that it must have been extraordinarily offensive.
Regardless, I take great comfort in the knowledge that I hold absolutely nothing in common with the poster-in-question... This is indeed a badge of honor.
Post #1738265 - Re: Tax and Spend Bad Cannuck
You can see by the comment I posted that it must have been extraordinarily offensive.
Regardless, I take great comfort in the knowledge that I hold absolutely nothing in common with the poster-in-question... This is indeed a badge of honor.
It's good to see you finally admit that you are not a fiscal conservative. I always took you for a wannabe.
So, you think deregulation, cutting personal and corporate income tax rates, and reducing social spending are left wing policies? :lol: You're daft.
And put the government back into deficit! What a smart move that was...so in a few years when all you old farts are retired, and the demographics are unfavourable, my taxes will have to go up some more to pay for your tax cuts now, that we can't afford.
But you're still being intellectually lazy. The tax rate, what would be enough? What should we fund? What do we fund more, or less? You haven't even bothered to comment on the services we receive, which is pretty important isn't it?
Those policies are designed to get more money transacting through the economy. They are enacted at points wherein the gvt deosn't want to see a contraction.
In the midst of a global recession there is merit in gvt expending monies on a controlled basis. All of the G20 did this (not to mention ASEAN, etc). Some nations did it successfully and others weren't as successful.
BTW - your generation is already in the sh*t in terms of financing society. Your money won't be going to fund today's tax cuts as much as it will be used to fund healthcare for the aging boomers, pharmacare, infrastructure, etc - all of this in an environment where the tax base is shrinking as the Boomers are no longer generating strong taxable incomes
There will be a re-examination of what programs are priorities and the scope that are targeted for funding. That should be the impetus for establishing the tax rates.
They were enacted in BC as austerity measures. But that doesn't have any meaning whatsoever on the fact that they are right wing policies. Walter just has a hard time with things like that.
Right, I'm not disagreeing with the decision to stimulate the economy. But facts are that the government isn't taking in enough through tax receipts to pay for it. That means generations like my own will be paying for it, through higher taxes or by getting ripped off in the services we receive for what we pay. That's the appropriate discussion to have in this thread. Running a deficit now means one of two things if the government actually addresses it. Taxes will go up to cover the deficit, or services will decline. We're already seeing the services decline. So getting back to my point, the question really is, are we getting good value or not? A naked number like that presented in the OP doesn't answer that question at all.
That's exactly what I was going to say. That's what happens when you don't think before you post.
No, you didn't make that point at all.
Take off your partisn blinders. Crispy Clarke has increased the deficit at a rate greater than any other BC gov't in history.