hitops

But you're just so easy to poke. Given the amount of time you spend on here judging by your post totals (a bit tricky given how many times you have been banned and made new accounts), and your comments here, it's not even slightly possible you successfully run a business. A guy who does and has friends who does tries explaining it to you, but you just don't listen. No assumptions needs to be made. On the CPP issue, you are just wrong. http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/isp/cpp/cppinfo.shtml 3. Who pays into the Canada Pension Plan? With very few exceptions, every person in Canada over the age of 18 who earns a salary must pay into the Canada Pension Plan. You and your employer each pay half of the contributions. If you are self-employed, you pay both portions.

We will let you do puzzles soon, just calm down. You don't want the hockey helmet again do you?

You are right, and he's tried to improve us from the pure socialist state. Medicare expansion now has a realistic, responsible goal of increasing with GDP. And corporate taxes are near all-time lows. And our nation has had the best economic performance over the last 5-6 years in the G7.

I honestly haven't noticed Trudeau mania. Maybe its different where you live?

Not so fast, we don't want you to starve. Anorexia is not a laughing matter.

Oh I have no doubt you know the system very well. Ideas refuted, gets trounced. Nobody wants to listen. Reacts with swearing and such. Now playing the victim......right on schedule. If your past accounts are an indication...at least you're consistent.

I'm new here, thanks for the history lesson. I guess there's only so much you can do in the age of IP hiding software. I don't get why he keeps coming back though. At least his current forum name shows a little bit more insight into the likely results of this behavior. What's the best name to remember him by so as to reduce confusion? It was certainly free. Education might be a very generous word for it. Since he can't seem to decide himself whether he's a student or not, or whether his system is free or not, I strongly doubt he'll be able to explain it to others.

That hasn't been working great so far maybe we could take it in shifts?

Just moving them around doesn't count.

I would suggest you take a break, walk outside and take a few deep breaths. Do something active maybe?

Trust me we are doing our best.

Anybody else know what 'you buddy suck plain and simple' means?

No his points are factually accurate, you didn't really think about them.

I think there's nothing horribly wrong with him but nothing all that interesting either. He's basically cruising along on being handsome and the son of former PM. Liberals don't have a lot of depth in the figurehead department, so he's it. I seriously doubt he will win. Even though I'd take him over Mulcair as a PM, at least Mulcair stands for something. IMHO his key to victory will be people fed up with the various clownish antics of CPC members and associates, not Trudeau-mania. For the folks talking about uniting with the NDP to defeat Harper, I think maybe they don't realize the LIberals don't necessarily want to be a leftist party. They also like balancing the budget and are fairly conservative in many ways. If you put a gun to most liberals heads and forced them to choose, I would wager most would leave for the CPC rather than the NDP. They are the centrist party and there's lots of room for them in Canadians minds. They got kicked out because of the perception of scandals and mismanagement near the end. The conservatives will probably run into that problem next time as well.

Yep. Actually payroll taxes are the absolute most senseless tax according to the general consensus of economists. They generally prefer consumption and energy taxes (or taxes on anything you pull from the ground).

And here is the depth of your responses. I think we've heard everything we need to. Every single person here has tried to explain you the problems with your system. You seem to think it will operate magically, nobody needs to run it and therefore it doesn't require any staffing or bureaucracy. You repeatedly claim in one breath that the system is funded off the wages of working taxpayers, and at the same time that it does not force any money out of anyone. You say its funded by alumni of the system if they accepted the system, in other words mandatory. We then try to explain to you that it's mandatory, and you deny it. It's not really possible to converse with a person like that. Tell you what.....never mind. You are so smart that absolutely nobody gets you. The reason not a single soul agrees with you is not because we are rational adults who recognize when a plan is brain-dead and unworkable. It's because....we all got together and decided in secret to conspire against you simply because we are part of a secret centuries-old society who's sole purpose in life is to recognize when anybody presents this one brilliant education idea and shut it down. Our wizard task-masters told us to do it. You've exposed us! How could we not see the brilliance of this system! And now you're swearing at forum members. The funny part is you actually took time to edit your post.....and left the swears in. Thinking twice doesn't work for you. Your behavior shows you to be a troll and you should leave, you should also issue an apology.

Lol, the fact that you want to differentiate between 'paper pushing' and 'actual labor' as some kind of value statement, shows you have no concept of how labor is valued. It's not valuable because you personally feel it does something. The value of the work is whatever it commands in the market. Guess what.....now this may shock you.....some people do even less than pushing paper, they use computers all day! What a useless job! If you don't like making $400 a week as an employee, then start a business where you make $400 a week like this guy. Far preferable to the option of just complaining that other people do it. If you don't want that enormous hassle and stress, than don't complain what about you have because you're not willing to pursue more.

Somewhat true, but the real problem is the CMHC, not 40 year mortgages, although both are bad. Get rid of the CMHC (which existed for many decades before this government or the last one), and you will find banks will lend appropriate to the risk. It's when they know their lending is backed by the taxpayer that they take stupid chances, which is exactly what happened in the US.

Exactly. And almost as bad. To be fair they turn a profit, but that's probably because our bubble hasn't burst. If it does, it will of course be the taxpayers who has to back them.

The stupid reasons.....are all the ones you've given. At least you admit you are a moderate and not a libertarian. By 'lending money', you of course mean being forced to lend the money. This is not what a libertarian believes in. It is no people's choice in your plan, you explicitly said they are forced to pay from their future income. Against their will. I know its simple. It's very simply forcing them to pay from their salary. Not libertarian. You don't have a hot clue what the terms mean that you are using. Consult a political science textbook or wikipedia. The reason people get better at personal life is because they grow up. Not because they go to university. All the non-grads get better with experience as well. Your argument is like brushing your teeth, watching the sun rise an then concluding that brushing your teeth made the sun rise. Stop deluding yourself. If somebody gets free education, then has to pay a $ of their salary to fund the same system, that's a tax. I'd love if you started using even a bit of honesty in your arguments. Yes you are. Free education? Forced to pay from your salary later. There's no choice, you MUST pay, assuming your working. Of course a far larger share wouldn't be working under your system.....so is this how they get out of it? That's still the same as a tax. It's still forcing people to pay if they accepted the service. The fact that you can't explain why that is untrue, tells me you haven't really thought about it. OBVIOUSLY somebody has to administer this system. It won't function by having magic pixies debit people's account. Somebody has to evaluate applications, even if that just means proving citizenship. They have to enroll them in the program. They have to document completion, or hours/classes claimed. Did they switch majors?, drop classes? switch universities? They have to track them for life, verifying anytime they start working. Not all work involves getting a T4 even, complicating matters because sefl-employment is much harder for gov or uni to keep track of. They have to register them into the payment system, and confirm the right percentage is deducted from their paycheck. They have to be aware anytime they switch jobs, or get a raise, or get fired. They have to prosecute people who don't pay. This is an entire new system requiring and entire new bureaucracy. This fact could not possibly be more obvious, but you are missing it. And a million other things I probably haven't thought of. You obviously have never worked in government, nor been involved with many government systems. And yes, it will be government run. Income data, tracking, prosecution and forcing payments which your system requires, cannot be done by a university. You do not realize that to successfully execute this system, you need access to information and prosecution services extending far beyond any kind of new 'citizens' bank. We are not talking about whether they are worthwhile students in the program. We are talking about whether the program is worthwhile. You are a university. You realize that student enrollment means cash for you. You realize that suddenly a leviathan-sized government program has popped up providing for education funding for all. What is your incentive? To add more....of anything. It doesn't matter, just convince students to come take it and you get their dollars. This will lead to an EXPLOSION of pointless courses. I'm not sure how you don't see this. Net results: More graduates, with a much higher percentage of graduates that have no marketable skills. They will never pay into this system, too poor. The projections suddenly don't work for lack of funding, and it runs in the red. Of course.....the taxpayers is expected to pick up the pieces. Everybody else here seems to get this. I think you don't realize that plenty of politicians have come up with 'dream' systems just like you think you have. They all think it will work great, just like you. Then they find out it doesn't work that way in real life. The primary benefit of your system, will be in funding the salaries and benefits of those administering the system. We already have lots of those, no thanks.

Flaherty is a smart guy and almost all of his ideas have been good ones. It was a good move to tighten the mortgage restrictions last year, and this was probably good as well. The root of the problem is the existence of the CMHC. It was founded to help war veterans get homes. Now it just serves to insure $300,000 mortgage to kids just out of high school. This drives up the cost of homes for everyone, and there will be massive defaults in the interest rates go up. Get rid of it, and banks will naturally be more restrictive in lending. Are you kidding? This is a move to protect consumers, from themselves if nobody else.

I don't think you have any idea who you are. Those things do not go together, and can by definition never go together. You are trying to hold every view at once. The de facto result is you are a socialist. Ummmm......huh? You principles are in complete contradiction to everything your education plan. Principle 1: You want to force working people to pay for it Principle 2: You want people who are already working to pay for the service, not those using it Principle 3: The subject of this discussion. No, you propose billing people who used the services in the past, to fund those using them now. Huge difference. In other words, you are not a libertarian. You really need to check the definitions of these terms. A libertarian believes that if you are not capable of making your own freedom, you don't get your own freedom. I think you are ignorant in assuming university is the only way to get exposed to the world, other ways of thinking and gain independence. Hang on a sec.....let me check........yep it's the year 2013. That's fine but I don't want to pay for that. A libertarian would understand this. Right now I pay tax dollars for massive university subsidies. Getting 'educated' and finding yourself is fine. What I don't see is why I should be footing the bill. I can appreciate footing the bill for something that might have some downstream economic impact. What's even more limiting freedom, is forcing everyone else to pay for education with no purpose other that for it's own sake. Libertarians absolutely believe that the individual should not be forced to pay for a service if they do not want it. You want all people who graduated, to pay for those going through. Those are opposite things. It will do nothing for income taxes. When gov taxes people, it rarely if ever weans itself off the addiction. It will not remove red tape, it will add it. Lots of it. A whole new bureaucracy will need to be created just to administer the system, evaluate who is eligible, make sure working people are getting taxed for it properly, prevent fraud etc. Removes government? lol Everything about this plan adds government into peoples lives. Who do you think will enforce the system? Who do you think will evaluate eligibility? There will be at least a dozen more official forms to fill out for anyone involved in such a boondoggle. No money will come back from this. All that will happen is an explosion of programs with little employability Those people won't be able to pay later. You will have to use all kinds of resources and department to chase them down. The useful side of university will diminish under your plan, and the useless side will balloon.

Whatever you are, you are absolutely not a libertarian. Free _____ for everyone is something a libertarian would never say. In fact your views are most consistent with socialism. But your arguments have been refuted appropriately. The reason free education makes no sense is that it sets up incentives to be in the educational system forever, with no set goal. It also incentivizes the creation of more and more pointless educational programs, because every department and dean knows if they add more programming, they add more government dollars. Therefore there is no incentive to add useful programming, just any programming. We already have hordes to students doing pointless degrees and wasting a lot of time, largely due to the massive access to capital for education through student loans. We 100% do not need to add more of this kind of thing. If student loans were either abolished or handed out strickly on the basis of a proven need i n the economy, we could eliminate 50% of more of useless wandering and far more students would get focused because when the money is real to you, all of a sudden its makes sense to get something for what you are paying. Regarding the value of arts etc, yes they have value. But.....and don't miss this part......that value is not for you, the state, or the university to determine. It is for the market to determine, if people want that stuff, then people will find jobs doing it. If there are jobs for it, then it makes sense to charge money to teach it. If there are not, then it does not. That is the best way to evaluate the need for those programs. The government, and by proxy the university, should never be in the business of determining what courses have value and which don't. Otherwise we would just get an explosion of nonsense being taught, simply because the government is paying.

That IS part of his job in fact. To independently report on the government's estimates is expressly listed on the PBO website. Fortunately for the sake of taxpayers, the job does not further include hiding those numbers once they have been obtained. The government gave estimates. Page independently said the numbers were wrong. The media was interested. This is not a startling series of events. I voted conservative and am happy with the general trajectory of the economy under them. However, they clearly have drawbacks when it comes to estimating various costs in their favor. It's good that Page was there, and nothing wrong with the rest of us knowing about it. It sucks for them now, but is good in the long run because if left to continue it would eventually be revealed anyway and probably blow up on them. Page might spare them that massive blowback like they suffered after Mulroney.

Equalization payments are a drag on the economy, and an incredibly inefficient way to distribute resources. Natural resources like tar sands oil profits should rightly go in part to national coffers and all Canadian should benefit. But they should be distributed according to population, not some arbitrary marker of 'need'. In a properly functioning market, when there is a have-not area, people move from that area to 'have' areas where there is more work or where they can get better access to whatever else they are after. That is the efficient way to allocate human capital. It is just a money sink to subsidize people to live where they live. Natural incentives that drive them to move to somewhere move viable for their needs, should be allowed to function. This ESPECIALLY applicable to people's living in the north. It makes no sense to force other people to pay for some people's desire to live a certain less viable place just because they want to. We all make choices, certain people's choices and their consequences should be treated in a special way compared to others. Get rid of these payments.