cgarrett

the fact of the matter is simple... hard statistics show that over the past thirty years the following has been happening: - the average north americans spending power is dropping - wealth disparity is increasing with the middle class absolutely disappearing - organized labor is decreasing (public and private) and currently at a record low. this is in direct conflict with the first half of the 20th century where the opposite was true. now, i suggest the union bashing cease but only because statistically it doesn't hold water that they are destroying our economy. could be some other liberal policies... but this one is not it.

sir springer well laid out arguments... aside from the usual hate accusations at the end of each point. but there are some points where these ideas expose cracks, or at least we need more facts regarding them. 1) the tax plan another post asked the most important question... what is the resulting change in government income under the tax plan that you outlined? also, what about corporate tax structure? is that going to drop to 6% as well? surely we cannot allow corporation to pay 17%? having worked as a consultant with government and private industry for two decades now i find most people quite uneducated regarding the vast responsibilities that government, as a collective tool of a society, performs. in a huge fabric of federal, provincial and municipal levels we expect government to take care of roads, rail, airports, power generation, sewage and water, protective regulation and monitoring, economic planning, resource management, fire, police, national defense, health care, international trade and the list goes on and on... and its a great idea to centralize these mass services. and none of us propose to say pay no tax at all do we? none of these services would exist without taxation right? so i put to you that this is an extremely important question. people are definitely going to have more money in there pockets (which they will probably spend on commodities not produced in canada). but does this mean that government will have absolutely no money? because let me tell you what happens when government has no money (and i am seeing this in b.c.). governments must resort to regressive taxation schemes and borrowing. everything you do will have a fee associated. and these fees will not be a percentage of your income, they will be set fees. here is a blatant example from the u.s.... i had to call the washington state government last year. it was $9.95 a minute to listen to mostly recorded messages. now $9.95 a minute is nothing for a millionaire but to someone who is not making great money it could easily put government services out of reach. so now government services (which everyone apparently pays for) are the domain of those who can afford them. 2) health care actually, as in another post i said that i saw harper on tv and he was asked about tiered health care... and he simply repeated that the national health care system must be retained. he avoided answering the question directly. lets get something more definitive from him so we can all sleep at night. the argument you provide supporting privatization of health care services, or any government services makes perfect common sense. but they would have to be associated with regulation of these private corporations that currently we do no have and would probably be hard pressed to implement given the current protective corporate climate. what i am talking about is exposing the books of private corporations to public inspection. this i propose will be like pulling teeth but unless it happens i propose that we cannot go ahead. as i have indicated in previous posts my contracting to a private firm that was performing privatized services for government was indeed frightening. when given a choice whether canadians be paid say $30 per hour to perform these services or give a private firm $25 an hour ($10 of that going to a canadian employee and $15 going out of the country) then i think most people should wisely choose the first option. again, if government cannot audit a private companies books and ask "how do you justify 300% profit on toilet paper" then things are not going to go well. and again, if these were canadian corporations with money going to canada then that might be fine. but... thats not the case. here in b.c. every major contract has gone to a foreign entity. washington state now has state regulation baring foreign entities from competing for the states tax dollars. a good idea! 3) foreign investment i don't see alot of knowledge regarding national economics here. countries all over the world use tactics to build and support industry in their own backyards including support of canadian sales in canadian markets, tariffs on foreign competing producers and tax relief for markets that are emerging or floundering (provided that they provide a plan for innovation that will allow them to emerge from the situation). i can come up with a huge list of these situations in the u.s., the auto industry, the motorcycle industry etc,,, and again, i will bring up japan because i go there twice a year and i am continuously amazed at the quality of their capitalism and democracy (with huge socialized benefits). don't believe the hype about how they are all in the poor house now, they are still one of the top two most powerful economies in the world. the japanese have loads of cash. and all because of extremely stringent controls on what they import (strictly what they do not have, raw materials) and what they export (everything!). imagine a country where low mortgage rates have been a 2% for thirty years! i will leave it to the reader to explore more on this matter. sorry for the long post!

willy, good post! i agree entirely... i hope other "conservatives" are listening...

no willy, you cannot predict the future... but a country does know what industries it is lacking in for self-sufficiency. and you must agree that self-sufficiency is a key ingredient to a strong economy. it creates trade surpluses etc. etc... and yes, capital does not sit around long... but wealth created in canada should be forced to stay in canada for reinvestment. business people don't like this idea of forced reinvestment. it involves innovation. its just easier to find a cheap investment with larger returns in developing economies. but our tax system supports this idea and globalization/free trade look to destroy it. canadians cannot move capital outside the country without a significant tax hit currently. foreign investment are the only guys who get away scott free. they pay corporate tax then move the money out without penalty.

well, if you think that health care is expensive now in a regulated environment i believe it will be a shock to see how much it costs when delivered by entities that seek to maximize a profit from it. look to the united states for an example. i have done much work as an independent consultant to private companies that perform privatized services for government. the entire process has soured my whole concept of privatization. the focus of a company that performs this work is to make a profit. this desire for ever increasing profit is like a wedge that is slowly driven between the services delivered and the client. you would not believe how much money this company spent on consultants flown in from all over the world... just to study how to increase this wedge and increase profits. the business model was simple, pay as little as possible to deliver the services. when the service suffers and the client complains then show what ever cooked materials were required to prove to the client that not enough money was being paid by government to the contracted company to supply the services requested. in the end i preferred to work with unionized public service employees. the vast majority were hard working individuals. the money they made was not sent south over the border. it was spent on goods and services in their own home towns.

willy you're points are well taken... and i agree with you on some specific points. we need industry to have a stronger economy. but why should we provide tax relief for profitable industries that we possess? tax relief should be provided in areas of industry that we require to become a self sufficient and strong economic force. tax relief to promote investment and offset risk in these specific areas. but most conservative governments advertise broad based tax relief to all industry. even the profitable ones...

august1991 thanks for the intelligent post... if the "flat tax" as advertised by the conservative party is as you say then it is still a progressive tax. it would be nice to see some details... have they published any? a recent study at ubc determined that our health care system is far from "in trouble". either way, if japan, norway, france, germany, spain etc etc can have national health care systems that aren't "in trouble" then maybe we should be looking there instead of deciding to abandon it altogether. who owns our industry makes all the difference! i can't stress this enough. as in other posts i have indicated that britain and the united states entertain 2-3% foreign ownership. japan is barely above 0%. canada is foreign owned to the tune of 30%! and mostly in the critical industries that our economy support like natural resources. the profits made are shipped across the border like huge vacuum cleaners of wealth out of the country. do some research on this important subject. an extreme example is say... honduras. home to some of the most productive agricultural land on the planet, the honduran people live in absolute poverty. three u.s. companies own just about every square inch of the place. the indigenous people see very little of this wealth.

august1991 conservative and right wing policies are all geared towards concentrating wealth. the conservative party has already indicated that it is ready to further slash the corporate tax structure! i've never called myself a liberal or a socialist in any of these posts. its others who do when i question how conservative policies are advantageous to the working canadian. so anyone is welcome to explain to me: - how does a tax system that takes a higher percentage of ones wages the less someone makes (flat tax) better for the average canadian? - how is a two tiered or private system of health care better for the average canadian? - how do laws that allow foreign companys the ability to buy up canadian industry better for the average canadian? i have more questions... another post maybe.

well willy, of course i've seen the 171 points (available from their website) and they have not implemented as many items as the have implemented. and again, no mention of the items i outlined in the previous post. i hope you like high hydro costs... i hope you have a big savings account for your childrens future education costs etc, etc...

mapleleafmerc thanks for the document link from the world bank. .. actually, there are four european countries ahead of the united states under the atlas methodology list and two ahead in the ppp list. in fact, socialist capitalist democracies jam the tops of both columns! what you should be thinking about is the fact that the citizens of these european countries and japan enjoy this per capita income without the overhead of private medical insurance. and enjoy free post secondary education, subsidized mass transit etc.... paid for by the wealth of their nation!

actually, if you haven't read my other posts... i am an incorporated individual. i just send my receipts to my accountant and pay my 12% effective tax! yes, thats 5% lower than the lowest tax bracket! so i'm getting pretty tired of screaming at you guys who are taxed at source... yes, slavery means being taxed at source. but you guys don't appear interested in the fact that incorporated individuals like myself pay little in any tax at all. blanket tax relief is fine with you guys. when the conservatives get into power i get another tax break and everybody else's taxes go up. thats been the right wing model forever... take the b.c. liberals for example. progressive tax relief accross the board. most of that money going to the wealthiest of british columbians. and then come the regressive taxes to make up for the loss of provincial income... a rise in sales tax, a rise in gas tax, a rise in medical premiums. and this year, progressive tax increases... but just for the middle classes.

i have not seen such a load of brain washed crap in a post in some time! blah blah blah... what a bunch of empty sound bites! first problem, the idea that globalization is an evolution to a higher form... and that we have no choice but to accept it! please tell me why globalization is good for you. be specific. i'll tell you why it is being rammed down our throats. lets say you got into the widget market early and cornered the market. you have a widget factory, supply chains, the money is rolling in and things are great. theres just one problem though, the demand for widgets is fixed. people just don't seem to need more than one widget each and are only willing to pay so much for one. so how are you going to grow your profits? you need to cut costs! and labor is usually the most expensive cost. so if you could just set up your factory in china... then boom, more profits! except for those damn pesky national borders! with those silly rules that tax imports to protect the natiions widget industry! thats where globalization comes in... get rid of those pesky national borders. democracies are too difficult to control anyways... people keep voting to share the wealth of a nation! its bothersome! of course, this is the short sited economics of business. after you've moved all those widget manufacturing jobs offshore then you find that your market has no money. all those people who have no jobs can no longer afford widgets! and please, don't go on about sweden without stating some statistics. the fact is that most european countries and japan are very protective of their industries and its workers and are continuously rated as having a higher standard of living than the united states... the only globalization flag waver! more homeless/welfare bashing... its tiresome seeing as how the amount of money spent on welfare is such a minute portion of the nations budget.

black dog you must be coming across the same frustration as i... i have only started to post to this forum recently but learned much! there appears to be alot of 'lifer' conservatives, reformers or whatever who think that politics is simply a hockey game in which they have picked their team. i've been quite disappointed at the lack of discussion on any of my posts that critically examine policies and the results of those policies (see 'left vs right' as a prime example). i had one person who constantly supports the conservative party at least admit that they did not know the difference between progressive and regressive taxation (an extremely important aspect of our economy). these people are the most dangerous of the electorate. they don't think, they simply act on their base emotions... and they like it that way! i don't consider myself a socialist, conservative, left/right wing... any of these labels of control. i simply vote for the canada i want based on the policies a politician wants to implement!

harper is now in for the greatest challenge of his career. the challenge: "to appear moderate"! yes, its a big challenge but he is already rising to the test! yes, after years of lip service to his wealthy financial backers and those canadians who are not wealthy but love the sport of union bashing, government bashing, homeless bashing, gay bashing , non-militarism bashing (to name only a few here) its time to appeal to the average canadian... a few sound bites (nothing longer for him please) last night on the cbc was showing him polishing his new form: cbc: health care? harper: we must retain our national health care system. cbc: multi-tiered health car? harper: (long pause)...we must retain our national health care system. cbc: taxes? harper: less taxes for everyone! (big smile) lets examine this huge wealth of information that harper provides us here on his policies a little more closely. yes, its best he avoid the issue of multi-tiered health care right now. it is the beginning of the end of our national health care system. as soon as it is implemented it opens the doors for lawsuits by foreign health care industries due to our various free trade (nice name) agreements. its time for harper to sweep under the rug or simply try and make people forget his statements made earlier this year stating that he supports u.s. style health care. every canadian loves to hear the words "less tax for everybody"! what joy! of course, what harper means here is... less "progressive tax"! i watch the conservative party website. for ages (with harpers face) it indicated that the conservative party supported the abandoning of progressive taxation and the institution of regressive taxation (flat tax, poll tax... maybe they should call it free tax!). so, you won't be hearing harper say that they will be abandoning sales, gst and gas tax anytime soon... so the big challenge is on... i'm sure he has some trainers and has hired a big public relations company. we saw the same thing here in b.c. when the campbell government simply had to slander the ndp and not indicate what their own policies would be at all! yes, campbell never indicated that his agenda would include the selling of bc hydro to an american company operating out of the caymen islands or selling bc rail to americans, or giving a 3 billion dollar tax deduction to the rich or 60 year administrative contract of bc ferries to a private firm or the privitization of post-secondary education. we now have the worst performing economy in canada! but the campbell government will have no problem finding party contributors...

what is truly troubling are those who treat labels, such as conservatism, liberalism, right/left wing, socialism etc, as some sort of favorite hockey team! there are people posting here that admit to being lifer conservatives or liberals! there are issues and policies held by political parties. examine them, investigate their significance and vote for the ones that best describe the canada in which you want to life!

i believed this number to be posted in the globe and mail... if i am incorrect then please post the correct number of iraqi men, women and children killed because i cannot currently justify it... i guess you are implying that some number of iraqi non-combatant deaths is justified. while we are on the subject of facts... please state "facts" regarding why kyoto is a "bunch of garbage". i'm also interested in how it will transfer wealth out of our country. and if you are concerned about wealth transfer from our country, then you should be concerned about harpers policies on free trade, globalization and the continued selling of canadian industry to foreign entities... britain and the united states entertain 2-3% foreign ownership as do most european countries. japan almost 0%. canada has 30% foreign ownership. these figures i am sure of and will produce evidence to support it.

harper on kyoto: "It is a terrible deal for the country," he told reporters. "It's the worst international agreement this country has ever signed." bush is from texas.. harper from alberta! global warming isn't happening? alternative energy sources don't exist? the exon led... i mean u.s. led slaughter of 8 million iraqis was necessary (10 billion barrels of crude estimated in kurdish iraq alone)?

mapleleafmerc are you a producer? and if you are do you use canadian raw materials? do you do this work yourself or do you use other people to produce? in any case, you've missed my point entirely! the u.s. is a socialist regime just like ours. the only difference is the numbers in the tax system and how tax money is spent. canadians prefer to spend their tax money on the items i mentioned (national health care, education etc..). republicans prefer to spend it on the military! (u.s. military spending now dwarfs all discretionary spending in the federal budget, enough money has been allocated on the war in iraq to fund health care for all americans who do not have it for ten years).

great question! because the answer i believe is most interesting... yes canada is left wing! we are a socialist democracy that enjoys a capitalist economy! in fact, most functioning democracies in the world are socialist democracies with capitalist economies! who knew? well most western media are not telling you this... mostly because they are controlled by their billionaire owners! and yes, even the united states of america is a socialist country! the economic indicator for socialism is the progressive tax system which is in place in every major democracy in the world. sure, some of us have more... we have national health care, a social safety net, publicly funded transit and education. and conservative governments mess with the numbers of our tax system as much as they can. but even complete psycho right wing parties avoid abandoning it. thatcher tried to push through regressive taxation (the poll tax, flat tax, whatever new name they have for it) in the late eighties. do you remember the riots!? so, what is really news (if you have been relying on news papers and television for news) is that democracies are inherently socialist. the idea that a nations wealth should be enjoyed by the majority of its citizens instead of by a select minority is inherently appealing to an electorate.

is ralph klein tall? what klein and campbell have in common is driving while impaired charges! ha! should criminals be given employment equity?

more important for martin is how tied in with the current ruling class he is... chretien was a close personal friend of isreal asper (who recently died). the billionaire asper family own every major news paper in the country, southam papers (of note, the national post) and most television stations (canwest global). in b.c. they own every major newspaper! they are responsible for a huge rise in conservative support in this country over the last decade especially, by dictating what/how news is covered in every media outlet that they control. if you'd like more information on this corporate 'evil empire' do a search for canwest global at the canadian association of journalists: www.caj.ca here is a very informative article on how news events are manipulated by the media using language: http://zena.secureforum.com/Znet/zmag/zart...97herman.htm%20

as a comical addition to my last post on the ideal conservative climate.... the paradox is that conservative agenda never calls for NO taxes! they are not that stupid! the wealthiest of our society have learned very well how to use the efforts of the working classes to their own ends! they prefer that we pay for the public infrastructure that they need in order to run their business. infrastructure that would make their business completely unprofitable if they had to pay for it themselves! things like highways, water utilities, power utilities, police, national defense. one extreme example is in the united states where trillions of tax dollars are now being spent on the military industrial complex to wage war to oil rights. this in a country where 40 percent of voters have no health care!

yes, the NDP and the left in general have an uphill battle. i saw someone on the news recently stating that the conservative movement of the last two decades have spent two billion dollars (money easily acquired from the wealth of their supporters) in infrastructure to influence an increasingly uneducated electorate. this money was spent of think tanks (fraser institute, canadian tax payers alliance etc..) , media infrastructure support (canwest global etc...) and research. all of this money aimed towards one goal, getting the parties that they support elected! because people who work for a living don't have much money to donate for such things and they certainly don't have money to buy newspapers and television stations, their interests are now a low priority in todays political climate.

conservative policies support the following: an individual with enough capital for seeding a business starts a wood and lumber company. in the ideal conservative world, there is no government regulation... democracy has not power over him. so, he hires people to work for him, at the lowest wages possible for the cheapest conditions possible. he has his people clear cut. there is no point in re-forestation. important streams and other habitats are not protected. its straight profit. no stumpage fees are paid, no taxes are paid. now this individual has created a fortune for himself. the trees may be running out or there may be more to come. in any case, the country is still run by a democracy which may decide that any of these practices that he has employed may not be in the best public interests. no problem, we have free trade and globalization. so he either sells his business or folds it, packs his bags full of money he made from canadian wealth... and flys to the british virgin islands or some other secure tax haven. now what is the problem with this scenario? we live in a resource rich country. if we allowed this type of activity, which we already do but not to this extreme, then the wealth of our country would just be constantly pumped out of the country. and canadians would enjoy none of it!

i can't say that unions are always the right idea for every situation. they can be bloated bureaucracies just like large corporate entities. power structures at the top can cause all kinds of problems... but the idea that if unionized members aren't working hard enough then they are free riders is more hysteria aimed at the base emotion of jealousy. if people are working in a union (particularly in the private sector) and not working too hard and making lots of money then what is the problem? if they were not in a union then they would be making less money and working harder and who would be benefiting more? the owners would be benefiting. the owners who are already have a profitable business with unionized labor. i bet many of these owners aren't working too hard either and making extremely good money... this is simply the enjoyment of a nations wealth. for example, if you work in the forestry sector and you are a unionized worker then you are enjoying the wealth of a natural resource. of course, Slocan, Interfor and Warehouser (all foreign) would prefer that they make ever increasing profits but they wouldn't be there in the first place if they weren't making enough profit to make the venture worth while. the trees are there for the taking so should the workers enjoy this wealth? should everyone enjoy this wealth through taxation of the parties involved? or should the owners enjoy the wealth? i think that you would agree that its a mixture of all of these options... on this topic, people should think seriously when they hear conservative and right wing parties state that we must decrease taxes to the rich and corporations in a blanket manner. there is no reason to give tax breaks to profitable businesses. if we are lacking in an industry that we need to become more self-sufficient then we should give tax relief in that industry to encourage investment and offset risk. and then when that industry becomes profitable then that industry can fall back into the regular tax structure. but not a cut to the entire 10% of the population that own 55% of everything! just for being rich!