crazykai

Don't forget, EI premiums are taxed again for employers at 1.4 times the employee rate. Of course, these payroll taxes are often indirectly passed onto employees. When you take that into account, the mariginal tax rate between the lower-middle and upper middle class isn't much different. And tax increase only on income earned belowed $42,300... how regressive. Almost unheard of, oh wait, Harper raised the lowest mariginal tax rate when he come into office. Talk about an unbalanced tax policy, tax cuts for the rich, tax hikes for the poor. And it's not like we have a massive braindrain or capital outflow problems, on the contrary.

The extent, effects, costs and nessecarly adaptions to man-made climate change will always be debatable, but the basic science isn't. It's as clear cut as smoking causes cancer, liquor makes you drunk, and you can't breathe water. Ever notice the people who don't believe in climate change also don't believe other basic common scientific consciouses, like sex ed reduces abortions, poverty, crime, welfare use, population thus cost of living and so on; the theory of evolution and so on. And it's always because some corporation or church spreads lies to protect their own interests. As a side note, one of the good things, and the biggests economic effect of the HST is shift taxes on fossil fuels that will reduce climate change. Now we have something to bargain back with at on the international stage, all thnaks to the Liberals and no thanks to the Conservative. Of course, they can always admit it was their idea all along.

Do I want the NDP, who will endlessly pork barrel government money into unionized fields, whether or not it will benefit the public. Or the Tories, who are stubbornily ignorant to the nessecary role of government, either for church, out of paranoia or one's own self-centredness. Let's just say I wouldn't vote, unless one party got really out of control and distructive.

The Tories, Liberals and NDP will never merge. They are three seperate ideologies, representing different interests. I can't think of any examples of any large political parties merging. In other countries, often parties with 5-10% of the vote merge together but often have a short history, weak base, or inconsistent platform. Given the public reaction to the coalition experiment, I doubt that will ever happen again federally. I am predicting minority governments as far as the eye can see.

Doesn't anyone release if Harper called an election today after polling the narrowest of majorities he would lose the election to Ignatieff. Why? There is a reason why the Liberals are polling so low all of sudden. I still think Iggy is planning for the long-term, drainning the Tories of attack ad spending, making the NDP and Tories alienate their hardliner through bipartisanship, and looking tough and principaled, not a weak flip flopper. I think everyone knew Iggy would lose support in the short-term for being all election gun hoe, but I believe he will come out stronger come 2010/2011, when people will actually want an election.

Good luck finding a tax free country... unless you want to work for an oil shiek or pay off your local warlord. Even those "taxhavens" are not all what they are cracked up to be, they make up taxes elsewhere to attack a certain residents or industries.

If you are so against taxes, then get out of my country because you obiviously don't want to be part of it. Good luck finding a tax free country... unless you want to work for an oil shiek or pay off your local warlord.

I think Ignatieff started the rumour himself. Harper routinely sends out two messages, one to the grassroots and one to Tory-Grit swing voters. The "no new taxes" appeals to the large segement of Tory-Grit swing voters he desperately needs but the "adult conversation" appeals to grassroots and Greens. I say Greens because they statistically have much in common with Liberals when polled, they are younger, more educated, economically centrist and socially liberal. Contray to popular belief, polling has show Green supporter are for the most part actually not strident environmentalists but people upset with immature, dialetic and sloganistic nature of Canadian politics, hence Ignatieff presents a "mature conversation". It is just as essential Ignatieff gets them onboard as taking votes from the Tories, a lesson learnt the hard way by the Green Shift, though to be fair, carbon taxes were so 2007... now it's as popular as disco. How will this "mature conversation" go. I for one don't want healthcare or education cuts. So what is left? Ending the unpopular war in Afghanistan, there is a few billion, then you have the Harper "childcare" plan, $100 a month to familes regardless of income. When it comes to family policy, it's a catch-22. Money for parents smooth out lifetime earnings while increasing family sizes reducing our children's burden of caring for the elderly by splitting it with more children. At the same time, more children will have to split the same limited resources in the future, particually land for housing. Here is the catch-22, this supposedly redistributive policy just drives up prices, creating new inequality and a society based more on inheritance than merit. So, cutting that is a couple extra billion dollars. You can privatize some of the auto sector, there is a couple billion and "cut" programs that were going to expire anyways. As for tax increases, I am all for them. Why? Federal government debt burdens the public with heavy interest payments to the wealthly debt holders meanwhile I want universial healthcare, a modern education system, the social supports to provide opportunities for people to escape poverty and modern 21st century infrastructure. Higher taxes now means lower taxes and higher standard of living in the future for all in the future. Politicans claim our debt-to-GDP ratio is the lowest in the G8, but ignore the fact Canada is unique because of our massive provincial debts. Then, compare ourselves to economies more like our own. Australia had been public sector debt free for over a decade until the recession. All of the Scandinavian countires have very little debt and were running massive government budget surpluses until recently. Obiviously, Canadians need a mature conversation on fiscal policy.

Canada was part of the British Empire, thus colonialism. Canadian soverignity from colonial powers was slow to be achieved. For example, we didn't have a foreign affairs department until 1931 and a constitution until 1981. We were forced to fight in the British Empirial wars, ranging from putting down Indian rebellions, War of 1812, the Boer War and World War I. Our early involvement in World War II compared to the United States was out of colonial obligation as well. Canada's policy on undermining aboriginals, the invasion of their lands, their mariginalization, abuse and attempted assilimation, that's colonialism. Aboriginals are still suffering from that legacy and will for many generations, despite even the best intensions. If Harper comments came from Vladmir Putin, and you substitute Canada with Russia, nobody would dispute the hypocracy. I can't believe we are even havign this debate. It's like debating whether or not the Holocaust happened. To quote Barney Frank "Arguing with you is like arguing with dining room table".

"We also have no history of colonialism..." – Prime Minister Stephen Harper http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun...olonialism.aspx Are you kidding me!? Do I even need to mention basic history that Harper has obiviously forgot or doesn't know. How can he be that dumb and ignorant!? Harper's comments reminds me of the comments that cost Gerald Ford the presidency in 1976. "there is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be under a Ford administration." Sadly, I see his popularity steady and most shocking of now, me, an avid political follower and quick to find anything wrong with the Tories, have only found about this a number of days after the fact from my wife on the Wedding Bells message board. The fact this seems burried in the back of media just reinforced my belief of Conservative media bias in Canada, along with the factors like Lukidnik Aspers running Canwest and the Tories holding the pursestring of ad revenue, tax credits and the CBC budget.

As policy is partisan, thus government policy adveritising can always be argued as partisan. Yet, much of it is harmless. No probleming the Conservative government saying "hey, you can file for the new Universial Child Care Tax Credit" or the provincial Liberals saying "hey, you can retrain if you have been laid off, call this number.. etc". But these Economic Action Plan ads are blantant party propaganda without any mention the party or leader name for legal reasons. Full of the typical vague mainstay conversative policy pitches, rhetroical slogans and fearmonger we have all heard a million times from the Harper Tories. Only "the fundamentals of the economy is strong" line from John McCain was missing, probably because when unemployment is near double digits and at a 15 year high and 19% of those between 18-25 are unemployed (18-25 most likely to vote Liberal over Tory too), it's now a much harder arguement to win. These remind me the Harris government paid ads in the 90s with the wires everywhere shorting and Harris turning the swtich on a more simple circuit, promoting the merits of his new efficient smaller government. Such ads using government money are illegal, and should be, in many democracies, like the UK, or just unheard of because of the public outroar of it's similarities to propaganda from brutual dictatorships. Then you have actionplan.gc.ca and conservative.ca, notice the similar page layouts. GC.ca websites have government mandated layouts. This one doesn't.

Somebody has to say, I am sick of all this "support the troops" and "red fridays" propaganda, because that is what it is, military and grassroots conservative propaganda that wants endless sums of money to fight an endless list of wars. Much of our tax dollars even pays for it. These slogans also distract the public from the real issues. As we can see with the US Healthcare debate, if you don't have a good position, screaming simple slogans that may or may not makes sense is always an effective strategy. I think it works as people with neutral or somewhat anti-war views are quickly silenced by questions of "patroitism", being targed by pro-war hardliners or avoid the issue because of social awkwardness. It sickens me. Not to mention the attitude of the military that they always know what to do and our opinion does matter. Well, frankly it does because it is my tax dollars. The other myth I want to debunk is Canada's military is underfunded. That is because we always compare ourselves to the US. Other middle global powers like Japan, Ireland and Austria have roughly half the share of GDP in military expenditure that we do. Many economists say this was a factor in the Japanese and Irish economic miracles and why Austria remains one of the wealthier countries in mainland Europe. All of these countries are seen as safe, soverign, and internationally respected. Interestingly enough, all three of these countries have a 20th century history of war that I think majority of the public want to keep in the past.

Much of Harper's creepy and robotic nature is more because he hates people. You put him around his family or some kittens, he suddenly seems normal.

The whole War on Terror is a reaction to many Americans conscious, and subconscious, need for armed vengance and deep seeded racism. Conservatives used fear and negativity to stoke these reactions, ending millions of lives and costing billions and probably trillions of dollars. Nothing has been accomplished in the last 8 years, it's time to end it.

Gilles Duceppe looks cool. Jack Layton's mustache still wierds me out a little. On one hand, I shoudn't judge people with mustaches and I can't see him looking better without it. But still, it's creepy. Iggy has that dimple between his eyebrows that makes it look like he has a unibrow. He can't help it. Steven Colbert said it best. "The world doesn't need another lesbian president. Canada already has Steven Harper".

Gee.... was it any different when the Calgary Stampede got 8 times more government funding than Toronto Pride only to have a big stink and a Montreal Gay festival cut? I smell hyprocracy, racism's ugly friend.

I think it will it be vague as to make it easier to spin later on and it will it be set up to stump the Tories in a debate. Given the close nature of the Liberals and Tories in places like the 401 corridor and Edmonton and their closeless in the national polls, I am sure the Tories will hand some easy seats to the Bloc and the Liberals to the NDP in western Canada. These are the changes from Harper I am hoping for, but not expecting... an earned income tax credit and larger maternal and parental leave benefits. Even with Iggy having to operate as a red tory with razor thin Liberal minority, I will be so happy to no longer having a Prime Minister's Republican style paranoid fearmongering and negative tactics that insult my intelligence. Not to mention, his "stiffness" I see as more euphaism to his inability to sucessfully protray that he actually cares about people beause he doesn't. He is anti-social self centred nerd. Iggy might be come across as being a little pretenious, but he is likeable. I see Harper as more some with the brains to use other people to get his way to the top. I find Harper personnally as being on the most repulsive politicans in recent memory.

CPP is doing whatever any smart investor does... not put all of it's eggs in on basket. They should be in both the bond and equity market. They are a good market of scale to give Canadians a good return, though they shouldn't expect to put all of their eggs in that baskets for retirement, and help stabilize both the market and retirees with investments and savings.

Well... Ontario has Ontario Northland, a provincial crown corporation that provides some of the rail and bus service in Northern Ontario could easily send a few buses to run routes out in Northwestern Ontario. Saskatchewan has STC, a crown bus service servicing small towns. Maybe it's time Manitoba starts up a new crown to operate interprovincial bus service rather give into blackmail from Texas. Interresting too on how Greyhound just finished a $6 million new terminal in Winnipeg and you'd think in a recession, more people would be taking the bus.

Selling the LCBO is a foolish move, both economically and socially. Firstly, the LCBO has a nice place that generates huge revenues for the province and because it is the largest alcohol retailer in the world, it has the markets of scale to buy cheap and carry more brands they any other liquor retailer. I also find the customer service there amazing, the staff are extremely knowledgable, the stores are clean and nicely decorated and they have amazing selection. You can even go online and check inventory and call ahead to make sure they have what you want. I would never expect this from the private sector. If you were to asked me to list public institutions I have pride in, the LCBO would come second after medicare. Public transit in Ottawa would come last, by the way because they are the bain of my existence. The problems I see with private liquor stores are what I see out west. In BC, the private liquor stores essentially don't compete during regular hours by having higher prices and only carry a few brands. The business picks up at 10pm, when you have people how are irresponsible coming in either because they forgot to buy booze earilier in the day or have already drank too much. That also comes to the other bigger problem. Alcohol is a huge social problem. I do drink but from my experience, I should have drank less in the past and less in the future and I am cutting back to only a few drinks spread out over the month. Prohibition failed miserably so liquor control was founded to control liquor in the sense, take it our of organized crime but not promote it and tax it just enough to avoid widespread black market and homemade liquor. In Alberta, there seems to be a liquor store on every corner and the population seem more drunken than elsewhere in Canada. With that, comes the fights, abuse, property damage, healthcare costs, lost property values, death but worst of all, the drugs. Every person I know from Alberta or has worked there says substaince abuse (drugs and alcohol) and the crime that goes with it is the biggest problem in Alberta. Why am I not surprised "tough-on-crime" politicans are pushing a policy that will likely significantly increase crime? The LCBO might be nice, but it is pushing higher end products rather than volume. They also adveritise social responsiblity and I have seen them take people out of the store that shouldn't be buying liquor. I don't see the private sector doing that.

Governments are not businesses. They are totally different organizations. Those who think they are the same either have their own agenda and use people's ignorance or are ignorant themselves. Taken to the extreme, a government ruinning on a solely a profit motive would taken unproductive members of society and turn them into soap to be sold. There was one government that did that in the 30s and 40s and thank God our troops defeated them. I might as well add that I am for spending cuts if and when inflation and interest rates get out of control, like they did in the early 90s and resulting in both Mulroney and Chrietien making large spending cuts. Today, we have the exact opposite problem. I am also not dillusional or an anarchist, like say the Prime Minister, that all taxes are evil, unneseccary and the economy will be ruined by a one percent increase in the GST. There is good spending, there is bad spending, there are good taxes, there are bad taxes, there are people who base things on facts, others on wishful thinking, some are moderate, others extreme...

Recessions bring so many bad but nesseccary political decisions. The auto sector, around the world, is a key industry, employing a large percentage directly and indirectly and gets us around. Not bailing it out would be stupid, even though management and labour exploit the taxpayers with their sky high salaries only because they can and it is the same everywhere in the world, always has, always will be. Given we have bottomed out interest rates, continued recession in the US and headline deflation with slightly below target core inflation, I don't care how much the government goes in debt right now. I think there should be planning for the serious possiblity of a second stimulus package if core inflation starts falling. It will be absolutely nessecary to avoid a made in Canada financial crisis from deflation, a crisis I believe turned the recession of 1930 into the Great Depression. A forced currency devaluation by the central bank is another policy but it might scare away enough investment and hurt international confidence in Canada to create a crisis in itself. Ideas for a second stimulus package? - retroact one time tax cuts on the 15% mariginal income tax bracket from the 2008 year - stimulus checks, a couple hundred bucks to every man, woman and child like Alberta Tories do to bribe the public into voting for them before every election Keep out the sector lobbying handouts and from being delayed by planning commitees and in make it immediate.

Does anyone not agree with this was a political stunt. One could even think Harper and Iggy agreed to it behind close doors as it help with each other image. The fact of the matter is... the reforms the Liberals wanted would help almost nobody and cost almost nothing. Having that few insurable hours on EI, you'd be better off financial applying for social assistance. Social assistance though requires asset liquidation first. So, this helps the hundreds of households where the trophy wife loses her 7/hr a week job at.... some wierd place that hires for only 7 hours a week? Both Harper and Iggy know neither can make many waves as Iggy will take over in a slim minority once unemployment hits the double digits nationally. Iggy will govern just like Harper, but without the dickishness.

Canada has a publically administed insurance program that covers certain procedures based on certain circumstances, some of which are within certain amounts based on both federal and provincial regulations. Another name for it is "single payer". It is not a government owned system, it is not socialized medicine.

The NDP will never change. Their trade union foundations are too strong and controlling despite trade unionism declining as a movement. Union interests will always come before that of true public interest and a social democrat platform. Rae's Social Contract demanding labour concessions during an economic crisis, BC's Fast Ferries that built low-quality ferries with paritsan union labour and Layton's thinly vieled kickbacks to construction unions and the CAW with buzzwords like "green collar jobs" and "affordable housing" reaffirms this view. Even so called moderates and pragmatists like Dexter ran on major platform planks like tax breaks on electricity and construction, policies most benefical to the party's loyal private sector unions. Doer has a legion of increasingly relatively well paid public and crown union memebership in growing public sector thanks largely to hydro development and dealing with major social problems from aborginal poverty. It is why the NDP can't break out of their poll positions and the recession and high profile labour disputes will only make things worse for them.