Mimas

Ok, there has been a lot of speculation on this one. But the big bag of election presents is out to the election call must follow it shortly. We got BIG presents for people who don't want to work. Really bad policy but great politics. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/11/21/i...esplitting.html

I think that is a bad excuse for being blind to government waste. We should demand better and we can. I'm going to a rediculously expensive X-mas party in two weeks. The company is paying but I can hardly see any shareholder value in it. If you own shares, you'll be paying for my expensive dinner. Are you going to complain about that? I don't see anyone complaining about waste in private industries even though they are owned by the general population. The fact is, that as long as there are people involved there will be waste. Perfectly efficient enterprises don't exist.

It's not that they didn't do anything, they didn't do nearly enough. The Cons just came in and wiped out everything the Libs had done, even though it wasn't nearly enough. Now the Cons are accusing the Libs for their own inaction and the Libs are accusing the Cons for their own procrastination on the issue. Just lovely. On the other hand, I'd like to see them argue even more and louder over this. This should force the Libs to do something serious when they get into office. It will be difficult to back out of doing work on it after accusing the other guys of doing nothing.

You mean this part? If they're such big believers in mutual respect, maybe they should show some. -k They are. If they were not, they would come out telling Harper to remove the muzzles on his MPs before he lectures them on democracy.

George Galloway, whoever he is is not all that interesting here. What's interesting here is that Canada is making a great name for itself not only at the APEC meeting (everyone thought that Harper blundered there but were too diplomatic to say it, except George and his big mouth) but in Kenya too with Rona being the big hit there. Harper may have mastered politics at home and may have the media on his side but overseas people aren't being so convinced by his performance and the media is not so nice. I hope he stays at home more because things are starting to become embarrassing.

All it will mean is that Stephen Harper is incompetent..... really. The different regions of the country are doing just fine. There are a few voices that won't shut up slamming Canada cause they are afraid if they do the ROC will realize that their numbers are almost nonexistent. Anyone hoping for Alberta to separate should watch how many votes Snortin' Morton gets against Jim Dinning. THAT is how much support there is for separatists in Alberta. And is is a very, very small number. That may change as Albertans become more and more convinced that it is their brilliance that put the oil in the ground and that the rest of us lazy Canadians are trying to live off their hard work and sharp brains. Ok, that's a gross overstatement but in a few years time it may end up being pretty close to the truth.

The Statcan data shows 'Investment Income' at about 8% of all revenues. If Hydro-Quebec turns a profit, is that a tax? If it makes a loss, is that a subsidy? God knows. Ok, you are starting to lose it there. If you make a profit are you taxing your customers? If you have a loss, are you subsidizing your customers? Profit is profit. A loss is a loss. Simple. The confused philosopher. You should get some sleep. Well, that's how we always feel. That we are paying too much to the lawyer, too much to the garbage collector, too much for tuition, etc. It sucks to part with your money when you work hard for it and everything looks expensive. Especially, when you have to pay for things that you never realized you are using. But just because they are not right in your face, doesn't mean that they don't exist and that you don't need them.

Are 'employers' not Canadians? And are the owners of 'corporations' not Canadians too (many with families)? And who pays taxes on capital gains? Martians?The government can only tax people. If the government imposed a tax on vacuum cleaners, would you believe that vacuum cleaners paid the tax? So why do you believe that corporations pay taxes on corporate earnings? Dude, I told you that if you want to add corporate taxes to my taxes, you have to add the corresponding corporate income to my income. You can't claim that I pay my taxes + corporate taxes but I receive only my income and no corporate income. That's nonsense. But that's what the FI does. No matter how much you dig and try to spin things, you can't find the $200+ billion in taxes that never existed. The Fraser Institute is a bunch of conmen whose purpose is to defend and promote a certain ideology by whatever means will achieve that (including misrepresentation), not to inform you of the truth. It's a PR firm. Don't expect to find reality there.

This topic made me laugh so hard...... Sometimes it's embarrassing to think that humans are the smartest animals on the planet. Many of us prove this statement wrong. I'd say god was very, very drunk and high when he created us.

My problem is when the religious right assumes that religious freedom means the right to impose their beliefs on others. While I disagree with forcing ideas on children, I can't tell parents not to teach their children their beliefs (as long as they aren't harmful). But to force your beliefs on adults of other faiths or force other people's children to learn nonsense in school is far beyond what I would consider acceptable. The religious can live their lives any way they want but they have no business in other people's bedrooms or telling my kids in school that god made people out of clay.

Milton Friedman tried to convince us that letting our companies dump us for cheaper overseas labour (like China) was the greatest idea of all. It was a great idea for the companies but Western economies have stagnated as a result. IMO, a lot of his ideas had nothing to do with economic reality, most of them were born purely by ideological reasons. I am not impressed by his work. Sorry, Milton, won't miss ya. RIP.

In Ontario, accident payouts amount to only 1/5 of premiums. That's overcharging! The remaining 80% go cover the investment losses of the industry and to the shareholders. In Ontario, you'd be paying $2,000 not $1,000 for your Toyota SUV.

Calm down, breath deep, use your head, don't recite what you read in the Calgary Sun. Oil is a newly discovered commodity in NFLD. Second, there isn't that much of it out there at all. Third, it's in the ocean and it's much more expensive to get. Fourth, the federal government is not letting NFLD have the same deal as Alberta - in Alberta if you find oil, you develop it within 5 years or you lose it. In NFLD, you can sit on it forever. The reason being that Harper is an Albertan and not a NFLDer. So what's going to happen is that the oil companies will dig up all the oil in Alberta and then move to NFLD. Which is good because the oil rigs in Alb are ran by NFLDers anyway, so they are fully qualified to do the job. What may be inconvenient for you is that you'll have to move to St.Johns.

You've got to be kidding. Your solid economic values generated rich deposits of oil under your feet? That's rather funny. Your heads are spinning. Don't overestimate yourselves. That's what's going to cause tensions, nothing else.

Annual GDP for 2005 was $1,371 million. Consolidated (local, provincial, federal) government revenues in 2005-06 was $532 million. That's about 39%.Statcan I think Statistics Canada data on taxes/revenues exclude EI and CPP and other "public sector" costs and benefits. This probably accounts for the discrepancy between Statcan and the Fraser Institute. Only about 80% of government revenue is from taxes. Governments earn money from investments get the profits of crown corporations (which have been quite profitable lately). Government revenue does not equal tax revenue. ======== From the table you provided Sales of goods and services 34,913 37,653 39,055 41,274 42,592 Investment income 31,258 33,406 36,284 39,712 44,954 Other revenue from own sources 5,443 9,574 9,460 7,968 9,997 In 2006, the non-tax revenue was roughly $100 Billion (last column). Subtract if from your $532 M and you end up where I said you end up.

I'm not complaining about what I paid in but the way the benefits are paid out and that it is used for other purposes than a retirement pension. I agree, the premiums were unrealistically low. If it was a real pension plan, benefits would be proportional to what was paid in. It was supposed to be a pension plan, not a disability plan. If you are on disability, not contributing and not retired you should not be collecting from a fund set up and paid for by others for their retirement. I'm not saying that people who are disabled shouldn't be looked after but it shouldn't come out of the CPP fund until they are over 60. Well, it's a naming problem. It's called a pension plan but it's really a pension plan and disability insurance combined. The big chunk of your premium goes to the pension plan and a small chunk goes to disability insurance. Disability payouts amount to only 1-2% of total payouts, so it's not a big deal. Besides those payments also depend on how much you contribute to the plan. I don't mind it a bit and I pray that I'll never need the disability payments.

Wilber, you shouldn't be complaining about the CPP because you paid less than half of what we are now paying so that you can get your CPP. Up until 1997, CPP premiums were so unrealistically low that the plan would have gone bankrupt within a decade if CPP premiums had not been more than doubled.

I have friends who have had to purchase healthcare insurance in the US and the cost is in the $1200-$1500/month range for a family. I have also heard that the cost of to US employers is in a similar range. One half of the property taxes I pay goes to pay the RCMP and the Fire Department the other half goes to paying for roads and community buildings/parks. Private schools start at $1000/month (after deducting the gov't private school subsidy). Many seniors collect $500-1000/month in retirement benefits. That is a short list of benefits that already add up to at $2000/month which exceeds the direct tax bill of the majority of families in the country.I agree that the gov't could save some money eliminating wasteful pork barrel projects but I seriously doubt the savings would be much more that 10%. IOW: taxes are not dumped into a pit an burned - a large percentage of the taxes we pay does come back in the form of essential services which we have to pay for no matter what. It is important to keep those facts in mind when asking whether we pay too much tax. I grant you that there are many essential services. I also agree that some services like healthcare are provided more efficiently by the government. However, I may be single and don't need to purchase schooling or healthcare for an entire family. I may not be a senior and thus do not collect $1000/month in retirement benefits. In short I'm skeptical how many "essential" services would truly been replaced if taxpayers had the option. You may not be using the schooling right now, but you did at one point (I hope). Also, education is extremely important for the quality of life in a country and you benefit indirectly from it. If 90% of Canadians were illiterate, life in Canada would be quite different. Also, keeping kids in school instead of running around shooting at each other (and possibly you) is a huge benefit too. Finally, those who are now in school are going to provide services for you later and will care for you when you retire and the more capable and educated they are, the better off you will be.

For CPP it has some similarity to both a tax and to a savings plan, so I can go either way on it. It is like a savings plan in that I contribute to it and expect my contributions to be held "in trust" for me, and paid out with investment gains upon retirements. It is also like a tax in that the government unilaterally sets payment rates and payout rates and there doesn't necessarily need to be a relationship between the two. For example the government could decide, that by the time I retire, it doesn't have enough to pay out all retirees, and can unilaterally cut payment rates, or hike contributions as they did in the 90s. I am not convinced that by the time the babyboomers are done with it, there will be something left for me either but all retirement savings (aside from GICs and T-bills) come with some risks - the stock market may crash, your income trust investments may tank. I guess you can only wait and see. Because that's a feature of all insurance. If you have a car accident, you get benefits from your car insurance and if you don't have an accident, you get nothing. What you really pay for when you get insurance is 1) certainty and 2) spreading the payments over time. Whether it's car, home, medical or life insurance, it's not a tax. Health care is the odd one out but that's because it's of such vital importance. That's the employee portion only.

I am one of those people. My Vancouver riding some years ago had an excellent PC MP who consistently won the riding. But once Reform appeared on the scene and split the fiscal conservative vote, the riding went Liberal. It has remained Liberal ever since as local voters see a Harper-lead CPC as another version of Reform/Alliance. Almost the entire PC vote went to the Liberals. CPC can probably recapture that former PC vote by selecting a leader who is not perceived to be a so-con. Harper's well-established position on marijuana, lesbians and other issues will make it impossible for him to shake the so-con image even if he tried. But if he goes so-lib, next thing you know Preston will be starting his new Reform Party in Alberta and we'll be back to 1993.

geoffrey, total taxes=$400 M, GDP=$1,300 M. You ought to agree that taxes would be roughly 30%, not 47%. Even without looking into the detailed calculation and realizing that they divide apples by the orange tree to get the tax rate, it's pretty obvious that "average Canadians pay half their income in taxes" is a case of misrepresentation and distorting reality. Besides, wait till the baby boomers retire. That's when taxes will have to go up to 47%. Do we get less in return than the taxes we pay? Of course. Between 15% and 20% of our tax dollars go to pay the interest on the debt our parents and grandparents piled up for us. But instead of doing the right thing and paying it down, the boomers want tax breaks (at least until they retire) so that we really are stuck with all of their debt.

I'm not sure what you mean. Why would I return CPP or EI beneifts? You don't factor in the benefits for any of the other services my taxes pay for, so why shoudl CPP or EI be any different. I'll grant you that my figures are not accurate, I just did it from the top of my head. However, even if you look at Riverwind's figures CPP + EI is $2928 on an income of $60,000. That works out to 5% of income Actually, EI = $729 and CPP=$1911 for total=$2640. That's 4.4%. The thing here is that these are not really taxes. Paying CPP means that you will get a pension (so it's saving for retirement, like RRSPs) and EI is insurance on employment and you will get EI benefits if you lose your job. Of course, there are certain similarities to taxes but that's a whole other debate. The main difference between CPP and EI and taxes is that you pay the same amount of taxes whether you get services or not. You may never go to the doctor or you can spend all your free time at his office, but you still pay the same. With CPP and EI, the benefits you get are directly related to how much you CPP and EI premiums you pay. It's like life insurance - you get the benefit only if and depending on the premium you pay. But you wouldn't say that life insurance is a tax, would you?

Where do you think corporate taxes come from, out of thin air. We are taxed to death in this country. It wasn't always that way. Socialist leaning governments that think they know how to spend your money better than you do put an end to that little by little. It shouldn't be called taxes, it should be theft. Corporate income taxes apply to corporate income. Corporate income=Dividends paid out to shareholders + Retained earnings. If you distribute corporate taxes among families, then you have to distribute the retained earnings (which FI doesn't do). Dividends are already included in family income. I haven't seen anyone dying due to taxes. Besides taxes come back to the taxpayers in the form of services. If you really want to not pay taxes, try moving to Rwanda or Niger or one of those wonderful places. Or at least visit for a week or two. There may be sewage running down the street but you won't be paying taxes.

Actually, the "subsidies" received from the government are a very valid point by my point was different. My point was that the FI go through the trouble of distributing all income that is not received by families and all taxes that are not paid by families to families and then divide total taxes by a portion of total income to derive the tax rate. It goes like: Total Income = Family Income + Income of other entities per family Total Taxes = Family Taxes + Taxes paid by other entities per family Tax Rate = Total Taxes / Family Income. This doesn't make any sense! You either do Total Taxes/Total Income OR Family Taxes/Family Income. Total Taxes/Family Income is like comparing apples to fruit salad.

What evidence is there that he's a socialist? And if he's a socialist, why did the Ontario unions abandon him and why did he abandon the NDP? Bob Rae was never a real NDPer, nor was he a socialist. His comes from a Liberal family. Also, his brother is a lifelong Liberal well known in Liberal circles. Bob just found it easier to make it to the top in the NDP than in the Liberal party. He denounced the NDP as soon as he left office and wrote many articles against NDP policies in subsequent years.