Thursday, April 13, 2006

The Face of a Tax Hiker!?!?


The federal government is giving strong signals it will cancel the tax cuts of the previous government to pay for their reduction to the GST.

In layman's terms, this is giving with one hand while taking with the other.

Note for the PM: This will be a giant misstep and will earn you the tax-hiker label and the wrath of middle-income Canadians.

11 comments:

Richard_Cranium said...

For the life of me I do not understand how people can expect more and more and more for less and less and less. Evey person in every city in every province seems to want more benefits and serices and a decrease in taxes. That is about as possible as spotting a unicorn. The unfortunate part is that if any government came out with a policy that, yes, you can have ALL that you want, but taxes will rise 10 percent. Governments seem to avoid doing what is right, and doing what acquires or retains the most number of votes. And that seems to be a non-partisan nasty fact of government.

Josef said...

He won't do that...

This is the beefcake running your country.

Greg P said...

And, keep in mind that this is exactly what he promised to do during the election.

Personally, I'd like to see both tax cuts in place - but, don't try to suggest that this is unexpected - he's doing exactly what he promised to do during the campaign.

Adam Taylor said...

What I am suggesting is that to cut the GST and pay for it by raising income taxes is counter-productive.

Greg P said...

Exactly, and I agree with you on that principle, but you try to bill it like this is something that you were not expecting during the election campaign. Give credit where credit is due - it may be a less-than-optimal economic policy, but it's a policy that was clearly enunciated and promised during the election campaign.

Mike Stefaniuk said...

To all at the CTF, thanks for taking the time to chat, I've learned quite a bit from our discussions.

David, I'm sure the CEO told you to put a halt to the comments after a number of right-wing trolls started trying to turn the discussions into flamewars (and after your most recent hilarious post). When the marxist/socialist/communist shouldn't you be working comments abound, you know people are essentially conceding defeat (for the record, I'm on vacation).

I do appreciate you guys being up front about how you are funded and who comprises your membership. I find it disappointing that there are still many unanswered questions about your policy positions.

In any case, this will be my last post as I don't have time for flamewars. Keep up the good the fight in your quest to create Rightwingistan. To borrow a line from Scott Brison "I don't want to join a right-wing debate club that discusses how to privatize sidewalks".

P.S. Related to this post is a very good question in the comments a couple of posts below.

Adam Taylor said...

Mike:

Thanks for dropping by. You added a lot to the debate and that is exactly why we started this blog.

As for your questions, etc. it is difficult to answer them all in this forum due to time constraints, etc.

If you have further questions, etc. please email me at: ataylor@taxpayer.com

I will do my best to answer all your questions.

Again, thanks for your solid and civil input on our blog. All the best.

Sincerely,

-Adam

Robert McClelland said...

Hi Adam. I was wondering if you could point me to the CTF's position on debt reduction and their justification for cutting taxes while ignoring the single largest waste of taxpayer dollars.

sask.taxpayers federation said...

Cutting the GST is cheaper than an income tax cut. That is the only reason they did it. It's like putting the carrot in front of the donkey. I little tidbit to entice the voters. The gov't is not a buisness and should not be run as such. They are a service industry.

Robert McClelland said...

Since there's been no response to my question, can I assume this means the CTF doesn't have a policy regarding debt repayment?

Right to work said...

Robert:
As a member of the CTF I know their policy has always been to get a legislated debt reduction schedule set up in each province and federally as well. As Jack layton said, it is a mortgage.
However Jack said don't pay the mortgage spend the money on social programs like subsidized housing and foreign aid. Well, the good socialist he is Jack took advantage of subsidized housing and a private clinic.
In Sask we balance our books by using the kids {Crowns) resourses [dividends} and then the Kids [Crowns} take out loans to operate. Sask Power has a 1.91 billion dollar debt. I don't know of a crown that doaen't have a huge debt.

I paid off my mortgage as fast as I could and the bank helped by setting up a debt retirement schedule.
Can the gov. not do the same.
Are you going to leave your mortgqge for your children and granchildren while you sit on your ass an do nothing! I don't think so.
The CTF opposed The meadow lake pulp mill when Grant started getting involved with cash. Alberta has legilation to prohibit handouts in the mid 90's and are not subject to Spudcos and Meadow Lakes. In the previous 10 years they had been bilked out of over 3 billion dollars in bad investments. Grant didn't listen and the NDP will never learn to let the private sector create the wealth to pay the bills. The only gov. busines that makes profits is a monopoly beacause socialists can't run a business {it is against their Philosophy}
The Sask Debt is over double now than when Grant left. Grant created a lot of debt by funding the goverment employees pension plans that the previous administration had neglectrd to do.
A lot of information is in Mark Milke's book "Tax Me I am Canadian"
Available through the CTF. I think David should read it!

CTF You Tube Channel

Canadian Taxpayers Federation's Fan Box