How big should government be, how low the taxes?

[Barts]

Government is too big! Taxes are too high! So goes the conservative dogma. If you are a conservative and know that the government is too big or that taxes are too high, you must know also know how big government should be and how low taxes should be. You can't know something is too big unless you know what size it should be. This is obvious. Don't you agree? (If not why not?)

So, conservatives all, how big should the government be and how much tax should Canadians pay? Once you've told the "commies" and "lefties" that, maybe we can take a look at what kind of Canada would be the result if the government was just the right size and taxes were just the right amount according to conservatives.

[Alta4ever]

The Fraiser Instatute did a study on this a found what the optimal size of the Canadian Government and the size of the civil service should be it also compaired it to a few other countries and studies on whatr the optimal size of their govenrment. It was quite an interesting report. It showed that we should have an above average sized government but much smaller then the one we have now. I suggesty many here go look it up.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Government is too big! Taxes are too high! So goes the conservative dogma. If you are a conservative and know that the government is too big or that taxes are too high, you must know also know how big government should be and how low taxes should be. You can't know something is too big unless you know what size it should be. This is obvious. Don't you agree? (If not why not?)

So, conservatives all, how big should the government be and how much tax should Canadians pay? Once you've told the "commies" and "lefties" that, maybe we can take a look at what kind of Canada would be the result if the government was just the right size and taxes were just the right amount according to conservatives.

Government is too big, I agree. To be more precise, the number of the employees on the government payroll is too high. With respect to the number of elected representatives, as in "government" I do not believe that the number is too high, I believe it is to low. The Senate needs to be elected, but the number of Senators should be reduced, there should be no more than 65 people in that chamber.

As to the number of employees on the government payroll, I believe that much of the public service should be rolled over into crown corporations, with all attending wages, benefits and pensions transferred to the new employer. Each elected representative in the House of Commons should be responsible for a specific crown corporation and sit as a CEO for that corporation being responsible and accountable for the actions and delivery systems for the programs operated by that crown corporation. In addition, there should be a form of electoral recall available to citizens to remove individuals from these positions.

On this issue of "income" taxes, I believe they should eliminated for both persons and business, replaced with a new form of consumption taxes with base levels to include exemptions for the basic necessities, unprepared food stuffs, personal hygiene items, childrens clothing, utilities, and shelter. Create a tax haven for citizens and companies to provide massive incentive for relocation to this country.

[punked]

The Fraiser Instatute did a study on this a found what the optimal size of the Canadian Government and the size of the civil service should be it also compaired it to a few other countries and studies on whatr the optimal size of their govenrment. It was quite an interesting report. It showed that we should have an above average sized government but much smaller then the one we have now. I suggesty many here go look it up.

Wow a conservative think tank said the government is too big?

[eyeball]

Government is too big, I agree. To be more precise, the number of the employees on the government payroll is too high. With respect to the number of elected representatives, as in "government" I do not believe that the number is too high, I believe it is to low. The Senate needs to be elected, but the number of Senators should be reduced, there should be no more than 65 people in that chamber.

I'd downsize our centralized representation i.e. scrap the senate. I wouldn't make Parliament any bigger.

As to the number of employees on the government payroll, I believe that much of the public service should be rolled over into crown corporations, with all attending wages, benefits and pensions transferred to the new employer. Each elected representative in the House of Commons should be responsible for a specific crown corporation and sit as a CEO for that corporation being responsible and accountable for the actions and delivery systems for the programs operated by that crown corporation. In addition, there should be a form of electoral recall available to citizens to remove individuals from these positions.

I'd also want elected representatives to sit as directors on the boards of directors of these corporations. Crown corporations should be more accountable to stakeholders that rely on or are affected by the programs they deliver. This would ensure that voices representating regional environmental and labour or social issues would be heard. We cannot rely on these critical issues being addressed by by top down representation from Ottawa alone.

On this issue of "income" taxes, I believe they should eliminated for both persons and business, replaced with a new form of consumption taxes with base levels to include exemptions for the basic necessities, unprepared food stuffs, personal hygiene items, childrens clothing, utilities, and shelter. Create a tax haven for citizens and companies to provide massive incentive for relocation to this country.

I'd shift income taxes towards an environmental tax to ensure economic growth and our incomes did not come at the cost of the environment or without accounting for the drawdown of natural capital. Our ecosystems can no longer afford the deficits i.e. fewer resources and environmental degradation, that our economic growth impose on them. This is not a debt that can be passed on to future generations.

Edited January 7, 2009 by eyeball

[Progressive Tory]

The Fraiser Instatute did a study on this a found what the optimal size of the Canadian Government and the size of the civil service should be it also compaired it to a few other countries and studies on whatr the optimal size of their govenrment. It was quite an interesting report. It showed that we should have an above average sized government but much smaller then the one we have now. I suggesty many here go look it up.

The Fraser Institute? Give me a break. Their studies aren't worth the paper they're written on. The Conservatives say: "we need a paper on this and while it sounds absolutely ridiculous your your job is just to sell it." (Mike Harris writes for them.)

They do a paper suggesting that cigarette smoking does not cause cancer and like magic Phillip-Morris makes a huge donation to Harper's Reform Party. Peruse the elections Canada website and see it in their corporate contributions, before Chretien put an end to corporate contributions, replacing it with the more Democratic 1.95 per vote, so that no single industry can control government (Good theory anyway).

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:MeuKY...t=clnk&cd=4

End of that rant.

However, while I do support smaller government, the biggest problem right now is election reform. Our system is broken. We need proportional representation and then...hmmm. size won't matter?

[Alta4ever]

The Fraser Institute? Give me a break. Their studies aren't worth the paper they're written on. The Conservatives say: "we need a paper on this and while it sounds absolutely ridiculous your your job is just to sell it." (Mike Harris writes for them.)

They do a paper suggesting that cigarette smoking does not cause cancer and like magic Phillip-Morris makes a huge donation to Harper's Reform Party. Peruse the elections Canada website and see it in their corporate contributions, before Chretien put an end to corporate contributions, replacing it with the more Democratic 1.95 per vote, so that no single industry can control government (Good theory anyway).

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:MeuKY...t=clnk&cd=4

End of that rant.

However, while I do support smaller government, the biggest problem right now is election reform. Our system is broken. We need proportional representation and then...hmmm. size won't matter?

It was a very well written and researched report a found an optimal level for government size and spoending and it was a number higher then I thought considering the source. IU suggest you read it before you reject it outr of hand.

Its only small minded people that will not read info put infront of them before passing judgement.

Even tough i don't agree with much of the view points in the toroonto star I still read it.

[punked]

It was a very well written and researched report a found an optimal level for government size and spoending and it was a number higher then I thought considering the source. IU suggest you read it before you reject it outr of hand.

Its only small minded people that will not read info put infront of them before passing judgement.

Even tough i don't agree with much of the view points in the toroonto star I still read it.

No thank you, I don't read the national post either what is the point.

[OddSox]

It was a very well written and researched report a found an optimal level for government size and spoending and it was a number higher then I thought considering the source. IU suggest you read it before you reject it outr of hand.

Its only small minded people that will not read info put infront of them before passing judgement.

Even tough i don't agree with much of the view points in the toroonto star I still read it.

And the OP specifically asked for Conservative input...

[madmax]

However, while I do support smaller government, the biggest problem right now is election reform. Our system is broken. We need proportional representation and then...hmmm. size won't matter?

PR will not change the size of government.

[madmax]

I'd downsize our centralized representation i.e. scrap the senate. I wouldn't make Parliament any bigger.

I'd also want elected representatives to sit as directors on the boards of directors of these corporations. Crown corporations should be more accountable to stakeholders that rely on or are affected by the programs they deliver. This would ensure that voices representating regional environmental and labour or social issues would be heard. We cannot rely on these critical issues being addressed by by top down representation from Ottawa alone.

So far so good.....

I'd shift income taxes towards an environmental tax to ensure economic growth and our incomes did not come at the cost of the environment or without accounting for the drawdown of natural capital. Our ecosystems can no longer afford the deficits i.e. fewer resources and environmental degradation, that our economic growth impose on them. This is not a debt that can be passed on to future generations.

Environmental taxes don't work, and municipal governments and Provincial governments like to make rules that are supposed to economically punish end users but require the tax revenues from environmental abuse.

The tire tax in Ontario has been implemented in numerous ways for numerous good intentions and over 20 years, exactly NOTHING has been accomplished, short of the government now dropping the disposal tax and moving it over to the source, much like the FST was prior to the existence of the GST.

This is more tax shifting, that sounds great to certain people in the environmental lobby, and is great for governments to find another way to pick our pocket but this is nothing more then a SIN tax. It is not an environmental solution.

THe best source of environmental protection is enforcing environmental laws and standards and holding those standards up as a ticket to enter our markets.

None of this costs the tax payer a nickel in terms of a tax without a goal.

I do not believe in the bait and switch tax tactics that are supposed to help the environment.

[eyeball]

So far so good.....

Environmental taxes don't work, and municipal governments and Provincial governments like to make rules that are supposed to economically punish end users but require the tax revenues from environmental abuse.

I do not believe in the bait and switch tax tactics that are supposed to help the environment.

This probably has more to do with lousy unaccountable governments, the things we're trying to move away from. I'm not willing to give up on environmental taxes until it can be proven that good accountable government is just as incapable of delivering on these as the bad one's.

A lot of economists do think tax shifting is best way to go.

[Martin Chriton]

Government is too big! Taxes are too high! So goes the conservative dogma. If you are a conservative and know that the government is too big or that taxes are too high, you must know also know how big government should be and how low taxes should be. You can't know something is too big unless you know what size it should be. This is obvious. Don't you agree? (If not why not?)

So, conservatives all, how big should the government be and how much tax should Canadians pay? Once you've told the "commies" and "lefties" that, maybe we can take a look at what kind of Canada would be the result if the government was just the right size and taxes were just the right amount according to conservatives.

How can I spend more of your money! So goes the socialist dogma. If you are a socialist and know that the government doesn't have enough services, think day care, etc, you must know also know how big government should be and how high taxes should be. You can't know something is too small unless you know what size it should be. This is obvious. Don't you agree? (If not why not?)

So, socialists all, how big should the government be and how much more tax should Canadians pay? Once you've told the "righties" and "neo cons" that, maybe we can take a look at what kind of Canada would be the result if the government was just the right size and taxes were just the right amount according to socialists.

Edited January 8, 2009 by Martin Chriton

[eyeball]

So, socialists all, how big should the government be and how much more tax should Canadians pay? Once you've told the "righties" and "neo cons" that, maybe we can take a look at what kind of Canada would be the result if the government was just the right size and taxes were just the right amount according to socialists.

Why would you leave such important questions to just neocons and socialists? Or are you suggesting we use socialists to make policies and neocons to ratify them?

I doubt everyone else will be very thrilled with that.

[Topaz]

Can anyone here explain why Harper added to his government people like Peter Kent who is the "state of"? He works for Foreign affairs, who has a minister making what 250,000 yrly, a parl sec. making 110,000 yrly and now the "state of" making probably 110,000 yrly. Harper has created I think 7 state ofs adding to the pay roll and from what I can see, they are "media speakers" for the ministry they are with and nothing more.

[Pat Coghlan]

Government is too big! Taxes are too high! So goes the conservative dogma. If you are a conservative and know that the government is too big or that taxes are too high, you must know also know how big government should be and how low taxes should be. You can't know something is too big unless you know what size it should be. This is obvious. Don't you agree? (If not why not?)

Have a listen to the Dec 27th interview with G. Edward Griffen (end of Part 3 - Credit Crisis). He presents a credible story about how government will eventually be the ONLY game in town. http://www.financialsense.com/fsn/main.html

[Vancouver King]

"So, socialists all, how big should the government be ..."

Obiously big enough to summon sufficient resources to bailout future 'free market' losers. Ah yes, neo capitalism where profits remain private and only losses are socialized. Welcome to the new norm.

Edited January 7, 2009 by Vancouver King

[blueblood]

"So, socialists all, how big should the government be ..."

Obiously big enough to summon sufficient resources to bailout future 'free market' losers. Ah yes, neo capitalism where the profits remain private and the losses are socialized. Welcome to the new norm.

Yet not as big as the king socialist loser of all --- the USSR!!!

[KeyStone]

The Fraiser Instatute did a study on this a found what the optimal size of the Canadian Government and the size of the civil service should be it also compaired it to a few other countries and studies on whatr the optimal size of their govenrment. It was quite an interesting report. It showed that we should have an above average sized government but much smaller then the one we have now. I suggesty many here go look it up.

Well, the average size probably doesn't mean a whole lot given that 80% of the countries in the world don't have universal health care or education.

I think that most Canadians would agree that handing over control of our education system and health care system to the private sector wouldn't be such a great thing.

We've already seen what a smashing job the free-market poster-boys (banks) have done of managing things.