Curiouscanuck

I disagree. You can have both. Decentralize the government, which is the direction the conservatives have been going. Problem solved.

I had enough of paying too much for wine. I am tired of paying a quarter of my grocery bill for dairy. I am sick of looking at my cell phone bill. Beyond cutting taxes there is a lot of work to do. Thoughts?

I beg to differ. The decentralizing of government allows for more money in provincial hands, where matters are negotiated closer to home. The majority of new spending was in this fiscal imbalance fix. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_canadian_budget This allows the provinces to have more money, and will allow for some very good provincial budgets if treated properly. In the future, my rational is that the federal government will lower taxes so the complications and inefficiency of only returning the money where it came from will be prevented. I have been hearing that this is a short sighted budget. Because of this important measure however, I believe otherwise.

How do you figure that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalization_payments I am referring to equalization. It creates an incentive for governments to overspend, overpay employees and encourages destructive economic policy. For more information - http://www.aims.ca/equalization.asp?cmPageID=159

Not good for the Ontario economy. The lost jobs are already there. We don't need these inflationary pressures. The economic disregard at this time of pain is dangerous.

In real terms Harper have done minimal to help Alberta. However, looking at this in relative terms, the plans the opposition has for Alberta would be very costly. And therefore when looking at the alternatives have actually done well.

He is only following the rules. The rules suck. Over time Quebec will continue to require more and more. The writers of the 1982 constitution should be ashamed of themselves. They created this situation. Quebeckers are merely rationally using this unsustainable law to their advantage, at the cost of the have provinces.

I agree. Don't get me wrong, there is a whole lot of other spending that is completely out of blue. I was pointing out the spending that took the majority of this budget. I wonder what new name the media will paint Harper now that neocon is out the window.

Equalization is in the constitution. Yeah, it sucks. It is like lagging around your whining lazy brother all day long. You want a change? Crack open the constitution. It is not a budget matter.

No...I still think its too cold outside.

Macleans Good read. We need provincial autonomy. Equalization is a welfare trap. This is especially true when it is used to finance a socialist agenda.

I'm with Canadian Blue. I can't say there is any serious opposition to stop this spending spree. I hear Dion responding to the budget and all the handouts and still stating there is not enough spending anywhere. Not to mention the NDP. The race is for the middle, and if this is the oppositions stance there is trouble. I must admit that it is good to see that the federal budget is giving more money to the provinces. I hope this is with the intention to hold them accountable for what they spend, with the idea to cut the federal tax in the future.

LOL! Figures you'd have "learned" that from the Fraser Institute. Thanks for almost contributing. I have shown you that capital tax is an effective tax for the economy to cut. Show me otherwise. This is a short briefing: http://www.heritage.org/Press/NewsReleases/NR050603.cfm

That's the claim. But it don't trickle down. I am going to argue that eliminating this tax and increasing taxes somewhere else aimed at the same demographic somewhere else is more Pareto efficient. Capital gains tax has got to go. If this is in the budget it will big a giant step to international recognitions.

I'm sure you won't. But is it the most effective tax cut out there? Capital gain tax is one of the most if not the most damaging to the economy. http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:8P69h8...clnk&cd=2&gl=ca