Should the Conservatives Raise the GST

[ToadBrother]

The one thing I find ironic is the people here who are attacking the government for bringing forward populist measures that are meant to please the populace, yet they also argue that our taxes should go to fund political parties that our essentially populist in nature. Can anybody name a party which doesn't appeal to populist sentiments?

Just because something is populist doesn't mean that it's right. Economists much favor consumption taxes to income and corporate taxes, and economists from all over the map stated very clearly that dropping the GST as opposed to more sweeping corporate and income tax cuts was a mistake. We're about to find out just how big a mistake it was.

Maybe politics just hurts the country. After all I'm certain that most Members of Parliament would have made fine whores, snake oil salesmen, thieves, bandits, and con artists, in another life. Actually I'd prefer to be ruled by that group [not MP's, the whores, thieves, con artists, etc.] more or less because they fully realize what they are doing and might have half a conscience. Our politicians have no luxury because all of the harm they do is done in the name of unity, compassion, generosity, and national security.

Well, as long as you're being rational.

Just for the record, I'd rather be ruled by a [classical] liberal Monarch over a democracy any day of the week.

There's a reason that monarchies have not survived, or at least haven't survived in any "classical" sense, and that's because for every good monarch there were two alright ones, two mediocre ones and one outright delusional and/or mentally retarded one.

[Visionseeker]

"Should the Conservatives raise the GST?"

Naw, let the Liberals do it after they win the next election.

[Progressive Tory]

There can be nothing more democratic than allowing people to choose which political party to support - or to support none. If people want to give money to a political party, they are free to do so. Your method FORCES people to contribute whether they want to or not, and gives them no choice about who the money goes to.

Oh contraire. Not everyone has money to donate to a political party and they do choose who to give a mere $1.95 to, by casting their ballot.

That way even the poorest Canadians have a voice, by not allowing a Party to take unfair advantage simply because they cater to the wealthiest in our society Chretien got this right.

[Progressive Tory]

What an insane idea. The government is running up a multi-billion dollar deficit because everyone and his old grannie thinks they need to encourage spending - and you want us to increase taxes on consumption so people spend less?

It has already been proven that lowering the GST did nothing to encourage spending, so it's time to rethink the strategy.

Lowering income tax for all but the rich, produces more spending power. 2% savings on a single purchase, is nothing; however a 2% increase in consumption tax, will help lower the deficit and put the country back on track sooner than constantly scrambling for funds.

We're going to pay for it sooner or later, so why not sooner?

[Progressive Tory]

Liberal Apologist said:

Remind me how paying a political party $1.95 makes my vote 'count'? Would it count 150% more if we raised it to $5?

I actually don't really care if they raise it or not, but definitely believe we need to keep it. Many people will use the excuse that there's no point voting because their local candidate can't win. However, if they can be encouraged to at least vote, they will be helping their chosen Party stay competive, and even a stronger opposition will be to their benefit.

As it is, only those who can afford it, fund politicians, giving the wealthy a stronger voice.

[Progressive Tory]

And then as soon as your party gets in it's PARTY ON!

Just use it. Nine months later the Liberals were back in power and it was no holds barred on furnishing their offices. Every Liberal administration since Trudeau has been one of champaign and limos, enormous cabinets of non-entities and huge outlays for party favorites. Nor has anything changed.

And yet the Liberals managed to pay down the debt and create a thirteen billion dollar surplus that the Cons spent through in less than three years. Brilliant.

It was the Cosnervatives who claimed we had to tighten our belts, but instead they just kept adding more holes to theirs.

[Progressive Tory]

Rather than ask people to donate personally you want to FORCE them to pay taxes to subsidize parties that can't get the average joe to open their wallets and donate $50 to???

We are not forcing anyone to do anything and despite what you think many Canadians cannot afford $ 50.00 to donate to a political party.

What if we simply added it to the ballot? At the bottom ask the question, do you wish to allow your vote to include $ 1.95 of your tax dollars going to your party of choice? Check yes or no. I'll bet even the Conservatives would check yes and be encouraged to do so.

There is nothing one-sided about this. I think all political parties deserve to be subsidized to ensure they can run a campaign in a democratic election. It sure wasn't democratic to use taxpayer money to print election pamphlets, but the Conservatives did it anyway. We were FORCED to subsidize them against our will.

[Progressive Tory]

I generally prefer excise and consumption taxes over income taxes, more or less because I find the income tax to be immoral.

Here is what I'd do:

I like some of those, but here's what I'd do.

1. Slash all unecessary government departments, the feds can handle defence, national security, coinage, Healthcare and foreign affairs, leave everything else to the provinces.

2. Keep EI and CPP, because Canadians have been paying into those for years, and many have yet to use them. Otherwise, all funds collected have to be returned to the provinces, including CPP and EI payments made by non-recipients.

3. liberalize drug and prostitution laws at the federal level. [thus allowing the provinces and local governments to decide how they want to deal with such issues] Yes, yes and yes. Did I mention yes.

4. Cut the cabinet down to 20 members.

5. Get rid of equalization, only if the provinces get to keep more of the tax revenue.

6. Replace the income tax with consumption and excise taxes, as well as putting in a carbon tax about 1/4 the size of Dion's. We can't drop income tax completely. I never begrudge paying in return for policing and other essential services. We need the RCMP.

7. If Harper wants to pay $ 400.00 every time he gets a haircut, he should pay it, not us.

As to Elizabeth May, I like her a lot; but do find many politicians from all parties insufferable. However, it's the price we pay to live in a democracy. I don't begrudge $ 1.95 every election, to ensure that we can continuing living in a democracy. Chretien got this right. I almost feel guilty that I never voted for him.

[Progressive Tory]

I would like to see te iberal campaign on raising the GST....maybe to 15%?

Nobody is going to campaign on it. However, I don't see it being a big issue if any gov't decided to raise it back to 6 or even 7%, whether it's the Conservatives, Liberals or a Coalition.

The Globe and Mail have started a poll about a 1% increase in GST as a means of easing the recession.

You can take that poll here if you're interested.

"The GST reductions were proposed and implemented in an entirely different economic climate. The reductions in fact could be seen to have been helpful because the 1% reversal can now be earmarked for a special purpose. Funding the stimulus package this way would be similar to taking out a mortgage, which Canadians don't have a problem with. They do have a problem with running big deficits, which feel more like credit card debt, and which they are going to leave to their children."

It's quite interesting that even the Right wing Fraser Institute agrees:

"The study found that the costs associated with taxes extend far beyond the direct amount of taxes collected. One of the most important costs associated with taxes is how they affect behaviour and incentives. The study concluded that different taxes imposed greatly varying costs on society depending on how and to what extent they changed incentives. For example, taxes on capital such as corporate income taxes impose much higher costs on society than consumption taxes such as the GST.

“Canada has a great opportunity to improve our economic performance by simply rebalancing our tax system to rely less on capital-based taxes and more on consumption-based taxes,” Clemens said."

Never thought I'd ever be agreeing with the Fraser Institute, but they sure got this one right.

Edited March 5, 2009 by Progressive Tory

[Progressive Tory]

Sure why not ... i did not notice a thing when it was reduced a percent .... raising it a couple more percent is not an issue to me.

Exactly. It wouldn't change my spending habits either way.

[Progressive Tory]

Interesting that fiscal conservative Herb Grubel was cited. Both Preston Manning and Herb Grubel strongly believed that cutting personal income taxes was an effective way to stimulate the economy. Apparently Harper has yet to figure this out. No wonder Manning fired the inept Harper as Reform's Finance critic and replaced him with Herb Grubel, an economist. Unlike Harper, Grubel was actually employed as an economist and has trained other economists.

It's like Harper is determined to go against every single principle that the party was founded on, especially the big one: Common sense.

I know many don't agree with me, and my friends laugh everytime I say it, but I really like Preston Manning. I might not agree with his ideology, but he never allowed it to cloud his judgement. He often just made so much sense. A father figure who you beleived could always find the right answer.

This is not a time for foolish pride. You don't even have to admit you were worng, just say that desperate times call for desperate measures. We don't care. We need a return to common sense, and not just an automatic deficit that could run into a hundred billion dollars if left unchecked. Explore other options first, that could mean a smaller deficit and more stimulus. Why can't they wrap their heads around this? It's not rocket science.

[Progressive Tory]

Maybe so but we are buying a car in the next 90 days and that 2% cut will save us $500.

Personally I would like to see the GST and the PST harmonized to 0%

Yes and essential services harmonized to 0. Just imagine the savings. We may not have security but our pockets will jingle while the muggers pound it out of us.

[Progressive Tory]

Just for the record, I'd rather be ruled by a [classical] liberal Monarch over a democracy any day of the week.

Yikes.

[Progressive Tory]

"Should the Conservatives raise the GST?"

Naw, let the Liberals do it after they win the next election.

Somebody needs to do it.

[M.Dancer]

Yes and essential services harmonized to 0. Just imagine the savings. We may not have security but our pockets will jingle while the muggers pound it out of us.

I wasn't aware the GST paid for security against muggers...here I was thinking it was my property taxes.

[Canadian Blue]

There's a reason that monarchies have not survived, or at least haven't survived in any "classical" sense, and that's because for every good monarch there were two alright ones, two mediocre ones and one outright delusional and/or mentally retarded one.

Sounds alot like democracy, except democracy has only brought forward Nazism and Fascism. In the case of the French Revolution it brought foward hatred of religion, regicide, genocide, and tyranny.

Democracies eventually become oligarchies and are inherently unstable. I doubt western democracies will last past a generation or two.

Yikes.

Progressive Tory [which is ironic considering you're close to a Jacobin] democracy is inherently unstable. Ask Socrates. My preference is for a Republic where the rule of law is paramount or a Constitutional Monarchy with a limited democracy. Otherwise populism will destroy a society because it is more often based on expedients and tyranny based on the bigotry of the many.

This is not a time for foolish pride. You don't even have to admit you were worng, just say that desperate times call for desperate measures. We don't care. We need a return to common sense, and not just an automatic deficit that could run into a hundred billion dollars if left unchecked. Explore other options first, that could mean a smaller deficit and more stimulus. Why can't they wrap their heads around this? It's not rocket science.

Ask the other political parties. Weren't they the ones screaming for "action" like a large stimulus package.

With reference to the GST though, the United Kingdom recently cut a similar tax in the hopes of boosting the economic engine there. I'm weary of hearing self-proclaimed experts tell me what needs to be done, more or less because the advice is always dependent on the "experts" political leaning.

Edited March 5, 2009 by Canadian Blue

[Progressive Tory]

Progressive Tory [which is ironic considering you're close to a Jacobin] democracy is inherently unstable. Ask Socrates. My preference is for a Republic where the rule of law is paramount or a Constitutional Monarchy with a limited democracy.

I wouldn't consider myself very revolutionary, and do wonder about the future of democracy in an Imperialistic world. That doesn't mean I won't clutch onto it with both hands, especially if the alternative is leadership based on birthright.

I don't know what opinion of mine was counter-establishment. A meager democratic subsidy to at least pretend our government cared about the democratic rights of it's citizens, by ensuring there would always been an opposition; or the fact that I agree with most economists and even the Fraser Institute (egads) that the GST should be raised.

Hail to my revolutionaries! Let's storm the Bastille!

[Argus]

1. Slash all unecessary government departments, the feds can handle defence, national security, coinage, and foreign affairs, leave everything else to the provinces.

Nope. That's just silly. Either we're a nation or we're not. There are too many trans-provincial issues like international trade, ports and airports, fisheries, native affairs, the environment and justice and policing. Not to mention the tens of thousands of employees in agencies like Treasury Board, Canada Revenue, and Health Canada. Then there are national pensions... unemployment insurance...

2. Get rid of EI and CPP, that's a responsibility that should be up to the provinces, local governments, or individuals.

I'm dubious about how pensions would be better or more efficiently handled by the provinces. Quebec handles theirs and just lost a ton of money. I think there's little doubt a national health care system would be much improved if we had one - instead of 10 individual systems and no way to agree on changes.

4. Cut the cabinet down to 10 members.

Cabinets are large because the media and the Left want them large. They want "representation" of women and minorities and various geographical and ethnic groups.

5. Get rid of equalization, brings more division to Canada and doesn't bring about prosperity.

Hmm, so the rich provinces would have fantastic roads and health care and pensions - under your scheme, and everyone else would just suffer?

[Argus]

Yikes.

I think Queen Elizabeth would make better decisions than any prime minister we've had during my lifetime. And unlike ANY of them, she, as a classical monarch, would make her decisions based strictly on the best interests of the country.

[Argus]

There's a reason that monarchies have not survived, or at least haven't survived in any "classical" sense, and that's because for every good monarch there were two alright ones, two mediocre ones and one outright delusional and/or mentally retarded one.

That's only because they kept marrying their cousins.

But you know, those numbers above still surpass what I've seen in prime ministers. The only way in which the democratic system surpasses the monarchy is that when a real idiot does get into office, his ability to damage people and the country is limited, and he can be more easily removed.

[Progressive Tory]

I think Queen Elizabeth would make better decisions than any prime minister we've had during my lifetime. And unlike ANY of them, she, as a classical monarch, would make her decisions based strictly on the best interests of the country.

Oh my God. That prune faced relic? You're just winding me up, right? She's an overpaid figure head. She makes no decisions and I wouldn't want to even guess what they might be. Keep her locked in the palace. She's a constant reminder why governments shouldn't be based on birthright. But when she's gone we get Charles and Camilla. Now there's an ugly pair.

[Canadian Blue]

Oh my God. That prune faced relic? You're just winding me up, right? She's an overpaid figure head. She makes no decisions and I wouldn't want to even guess what they might be. Keep her locked in the palace. She's a constant reminder why governments shouldn't be based on birthright. But when she's gone we get Charles and Camilla. Now there's an ugly pair.

How are you a Tory again?

[Alta4ever]

It's like Harper is determined to go against every single principle that the party was founded on,

So you helped found the Conservative party of Canada?

[Alta4ever]

Hail to my revolutionaries! Let's storm the Bastille!

But all the adscam liberals are already out of prision what's the point?

[ToadBrother]

Sounds alot like democracy, except democracy has only brought forward Nazism and Fascism. In the case of the French Revolution it brought foward hatred of religion, regicide, genocide, and tyranny.

So you really hate democracy that much?

And besides, the history of monarchies doesn't exactly fill one with faith in them either. Caligula, Ethelred and Richard I leap into one's mind. And WTF were Italy and Japan during the period when Fascism arose?

The chief advantage of a democracy is that you can boot a lunatic, an inept leader or a man dedicated to squandering his country's treasury in mad foreign adventures out. The only thing that ever stopped the three guys I mentioned above was getting dead. Thank goodness, for instance, the US didn't have to wait until Dubya croaked.

As to the French Revolution, well, yes that was a tidy bit of madness, the Glorious Revolution did much the same thing in ending the Absolute Monarchy without bloodshed. Still, the French Revolution didn't grow out of nothing, but out of a Court that had become utterly detached from reality, and a Treasury that had been emptied by Louis XIV and was forced to do drastic and self-destructive things to try to recover.

Democracies eventually become oligarchies and are inherently unstable. I doubt western democracies will last past a generation or two.

This is a rather grand claim, considering, for vast majority of human history, we haven't actually been run by democracies. You may be thinking of the Roman Republic, and to be sure it eventually became a monarchy, but I wouldn't say that's typical of democracies. The Athenian Republic certainly didn't go that route (instead, it was crushed by the Spartans, but that's a different story).