Hjalmar

I believe the 22% rate kicks in at the $32,183 income level and this is the rate he is eliminating. In other words the bottom 16% rate would stay up to an approximate $50,000 income level. The 3rd level is to remain the same. Middle income earners will be the largest benefactors. I always thought you were illiterate MS but now I'm wondering.. are you innumerate as well? Do the calculation again.. I'll lend you my abacus if you need it. This tax cut benefits middle income [$32,183 - $50,000] earners

This part is true .. but don't forget that the Conservative party inherited a debt of $200 billion from the Trudeau Liberals when they came to power in 1984. The Trudeau Liberals were the ones that STARTED our debt and deficit. No Canadian should forget that. When Trudeau started with no deficit and turned over a $200 billion debt to the Conservatives he left them with a huge handicap. A handicap that will take at least two generations to eliminate. I give Paul Martin credit for his accomplishment but the Liberals aren't exactly squeeky clean when it comes to handling taxpayers money. I don't want to get going on the damages Trudeau did to our country.. it would waste the rest of my day.

Jack is being noticed An apt title for this thread .. I notice him because he reminds me so much of Hitler. Have you noticed that? Watch his gait next time you see him.

Cheer up MS http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~blagger/the_duel.html

Back in the 60's, 70's and early 80's, socialism was running rampant in Western Europe and Canadians tended to follow suit. A lot of people are still fixated on this mindset of yesterday even though socialism and the welfare state today are virtually dead. Countries like Sweden, for example, started to recognize about 10 years ago that the welfare state and protection from cradle to grave would no longer be sustainable in a global economy where every nation has to compete in order to survive. The law of supply and demand will always prevail and governments that recognize that they must compete with one another from a tax standpoint will be the ones that fare the best. Yesterdays mindset must be put to rest because it no longer fits the mold of todays world. We need forward thinkers in government if we want to survive. Perhaps Paul Martin and Jack Layton need a "wake-up call!!

Reagan's goal was to reinvigorate the American people and reduce their reliance upon government. The Reagan years saw a restoration of prosperity and the goal of "peace through strength". Which leader in Canada is the most likely to take us in this direction? Which leader in Canada is the most likely to take us in the opposite direction?

Reagan was either 69 or 70 years of age when he became president. Harper is slightly better than half his age. I believe the gist of this thread is whether Harper could become Canada's Reagan. Harper hasn't even become prime minister yet .. Give the man a chance!!

Reagan along with Eisenhower and Kennedy were likely the best presidents the USA ever had during my lifetime. Reagan accomplished a lot during his two terms as president. He raised the American profile tremendously and he deserves more credit than anyone else for bringing an end to the Cold War. If Harper turns out to be another Reagan then we will be in good hands. In many ways he reminds me of John Kennedy.

Jack Layton could be the best thing that happened to Canada. Socialism and the welfare state, dating back to the 50's and 60's, is dead and most forward thinkers know this. Throughout Western Europe, countries are abandoning socialism for more progressive policies that enhance their countries ability to compete in a global economy.. This includes a move towards more fiscal responsibility, freer trade policies as well as measures to enhance a countries ability to compete on a global scale. Jack Layton is yesterdays man and he could very well destroy the NDP in Canada forever and that would be Canada's gain. Protection from cradle to grave is passe, over, finis, done, dead, gone the way of the dodo bird.

You are both correct and incorrect. Workers do get paid more in states without RTW laws... and you quote as much as 8% more and as high as 19% more in some instances. But you are incorrect when you say that states with RTW laws keep more people employed when in fact the reverse is true. The state of Georgia, for example, which has "right to work" laws, has an unemployment rate of under 3% which is considered full employment. There is not a state in the USA without RTW laws that comes close to those unemployment numbers. Furthermore, everything is relevant. The cost of living in states with "right to work" laws can run as high as 25% lower than states without these laws. The average spread in income is in the range of $5,000.00 per annum less in states with RTW laws v/s states without them. You do the math!! You say better paid workers buy more things!!! Do you see that as a positive when only 25% of the workforce is in a position to buy more things? Where is your sense of fairness for the underdog non-union workers? We need to get away from "two tiers" of workers in order to level out the playing field for all workers. "Right to work" laws is the answer, you know it is the answer, but you are unwilling to admit it. As to your comment about better paid workers keep more corporations in business.. that is absolutely false. So, I ask you how do you respond to the fact that over 50% of corporations wishing to relocate or expand will not consider a state that does not have "right to work" laws?

Union membership in the USA By State Overall............. 13.5% Alabama.......... 9.5% Alaska............. 22.0% Arizona............ 5.9% Arkansas......... 6.3% California.......... 16.4% Colorado.......... 8.7% Connecticut...... 15.8% Delaware......... 12.2% D.C. ................. 16.8% Florida.............. 6.5% Georgia............. 7.2% Hawaii............... 23.9% Idaho................ 7.6% Illinois............... 18.3% Indiana............. 14.3% Iowa................. 12.8% Kansas.............. 9.3% Kentucky........... 11.4% Louisiana.......... 7.7% Maine................ 12.9% Maryland........... 14.1% Massachusetts.. 14.8% Michigan............ 21.8% Minnesota......... 17.6% Mississippi......... 5.6% Missouri............. 14.2% Montana............ 13.2% Nebraska........... 7.6% Nevada.............. 17.0% New Hampshire. 10.1% New Jersey....... 19.6% New Mexico...... 8.0% New York.......... 26.7% North Carolina.. 3.7% North Dakota... 7.5% Ohio................. 17.7% Oklahoma........ 8.5% Oregon............ 15.8% Pennsylvania... 17.0% Rhode Island... 17.9% South Carolina. 4.5% South Dakota.. 5.9% Tennessee...... 7.6% Texas.............. 5.6% Utah................ 6.8% Vermont.......... 10.8% Virginia........... 5.0% Washington... 18.6% West Virginia. 14.6% Wisconsin...... 16.2% Wyoming....... 9.0%

Here's my score: Harper -- 100 Martin -- 52 Duceppe -- 26 Layton -- 22

Do you enjoy talking to yourself MS?

Perhaps we could wait and let Jack Layton prove it for you!!!

An Incentive to be Poor A flat tax of perhaps 18% with a $12,000 basic exemption would be very fair in my view. A person earning an annual income of say $15,000 would pay $540 in income taxes while a person earning $500,000 would pay $87,840. Can anyone see that as being unfair? But Canada has a system in place that taxes the higher wage earner much more. This system has been in place as far back as I can remember. Along comes Jack Layton of the NDP and proposes tilting the scales further in favor of the poor. The "welfare state" is dying throughout the world. Governments today know that for the first time in history they will have to compete from a tax standpoint. Failing that, they will lose their hardest working, best educated and most productive citizens to more tax friendly jurisdictions.. The NDP have always reached out for their votes from the poorest in our society. We are fortunate here in Canada that they will never pose a threat of forming government, nor even official opposition. With them in power we would become a "Third World" country within 5 years. Jack Layton knows that if the "go getters" in this country were to flee he would be assured of power forever. This will leave no one left to fund the welfare state but the poor themselves. Do we really want to become another Cuba?

After today's announcement the NDP are dead in the water.. no one could possibly take them seriously any more. Jack Layton is yesterdays man and totally out of touch with reality. By the way, it is rumored that he is connected to the mafia - is there any truth to this? However he will certainly help the Conservatives because every additional vote he gets in this election is coming from the Liberals.

I think that was John Crow if memory serves me correctly.

How is this for a no - brainer? Jack Layton lands in Vancouver and at the first opportunity he gets, he praises the HEU [hospital employees union] for breaking the law and staging an illegal walkout after the government legislated an end to the strike and they were ordered back to work by the courts. This man is scary !!! How would we fare with such an imbicile vested with any powers? The NDP poses a danger if they get over 12 seats and have official party status.. This man is desperate for votes!!!

That's the scariest scenario of all... Liberals forming a coalition government with the NDP. If memory serves me correctly this is a replica of sorts what happened in the 70's with Pierre Trudeau when he relied on the NDP for support and our country changed to a welfare state that Canada has yet to recover from. Would be a real tragedy if this ever happened again.... good bye Canada!!!! Here was my prediction a month ago: Liberals - 162 Conservatives - 90 Bloc - 45 NDP - 11 I'm now predicting a minority government and it could be either Liberal or Conservative... The televised debate will be crucial.

Good topic .. one that I am surprised hasn't been raised sooner. The supplanting of Marxism by Islam as the main ideology of confrontation was predicted back in 1991 and that was an accurate prediction.the way I see it. I now think that racial profiling has to become part of our immigration policy. That's not going to be politically popular but I see it as a MUST because of events since 9/11... I wonder how many people agree with me. And new immigrants should be prepared to adapt to our customs and traditions here in Canada instead of them foisting theirs on us in our own country. Witness the RCMP today .. they, in effect, no longer have a uniform code.

It cost the taxpayers of Ontario $12 billion to educate Bob Rae. He was determined to spend his way out of the problems facing the province. Toward the end of his term the NDP started to recognize the errors of their ways and Bob Rae started to reverse course. The Conservatives under Mike Harris had a huge mess to clean up and now the Liberals are gullible enough to blame the latest Ontario budget on the Conservatives ... Go figure!!!!!!

Why would anyone vote NDP today when we all know that the cupboard is bare.

I would like to hear your definitions of both Socialism and Comminism.

maplesyrup Do you know the difference between a socialist and a communist? They are one and the same. The only difference is that the socialist is less mature. Are you advocating communism for our country? Why? So that we can align ourselves with Cuba? We have two parties now in Canada that could form the next government... Liberals and Conservatives. The leaders of both these parties know that and their election promises are well thought out because they have to follow through if they win. Along comes Jack Layton of the NDP who knows he hasn't a snowballs chance in Hell of forming government and he is free to make any promises he wants to buy votes knowing full well that he'll never have to see them through. What a cozy position to be in!!!!

I don't think globalization will bring about the dire consequences that you envisage. It's not a race to the bottom at all. First of all you are ignoring the fact that everything is relevant. Where wages are lower so also is the cost of living. What you will likely see is a downward adjustment in wages in countries such as Canada, the USA and Western Europe while at the same time wages in Third World countries will gravitate upward. Over time it will tend to equalize living standards throughout the world somewhat which is certainly a positive if you have any compassion for your fellow man. What you will likely witness is more people fending for themselves and creating their own source of income through small business ventures employing very few people other than the owners themselves. What you will most definately see is a widening of the income gap within jurisdictions between educated and productive people, the go-getters, so to speak, as compared to the mediocre performers. At the same time you will witness a narrowing of the income gap between people worldwide. I see that as a positive.