msj Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Just because we can afford to do it doesn't mean we should do it msj, that's just silly. I prefer less taxation whereas you seem to prefer higher taxes for some reason. I prefer less taxation too. It's just that if I had to choose between higher consumption taxes and higher income taxes - well, I vote higher consumptions taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 I prefer less taxation too. It's just that if I had to choose between higher consumption taxes and higher income taxes - well, I vote higher consumptions taxes. How about neither and cut some social spending? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How about neither and cut some social spending? I live in the real world. You know, where the "Conservative" Party of Canada increases spending, year after year after year, by more than inflation plus population growth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 I live in the real world. You know, where the "Conservative" Party of Canada increases spending, year after year after year, by more than inflation plus population growth. The Tories hand is being forced by the opposition. This is a minority situation. Believe it after the next election when they have a majority I want to see some real plans on an exit strategy for this stimulus spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 The Tories hand is being forced by the opposition. This is a minority situation. Believe it after the next election when they have a majority I want to see some real plans on an exit strategy for this stimulus spending. Yes, the excuses keep coming. All that spending, one weak Liberal leader and potentially another one, and still no majority. Yet, you still fawn over His photo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Yes, the excuses keep coming. All that spending, one weak Liberal leader and potentially another one, and still no majority. Yet, you still fawn over His photo... 1.Tories wanted to end Political Party welfare by ending the $1.95 subsidy, which is supported by the majority of Canadians I might add. 2.Liberals, NDP and Bloc agree on a coalition government because of this, signing ceremony on TV etc. Tories back of this and remove it from the budget. 3.The coalition threatens to vote no confidence because there is no stimulus spending in the budget 4.The GG prorogues Parliament. 5.The opposition demand that stimulus spending be included in any budget tabled or they'll bring down the government. This is what happened just a few short months ago. If this isn't being forced by the opposition I don't know what is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How about neither and cut some social spending? Because it appears Canadians want social spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Because it appears Canadians want social spending. Canadians outside of Toronto? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Canadians outside of Toronto? Canadians everywhere, apparently. Look at the widespread support for public health care. You have this problem of confusing your own positions with those of the general public. The general public are not homophobic ethnophobic uber-conservatives, which is why Harper has dragged his party to the center. Heck, even at its most right wing, Reform still marginalized guys like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Canadians outside of Toronto? Yep! Farmers and corporations are some of the largest welfare recipients we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 (edited) I've given it more thought and the idea of charging GST/HST on interest is more complicated than first thought.What you are also missing is the interest charged by banks is not all profit. They only make money on the difference between the BOC rates and the interest charges. This means everyone putting money into a GIC would have to charge GST and send it to the government and the bank would get a GST input credit for that GIC interest paid. I suspect most people would rather give the banks an exemption on interest charges if it also means their saving accounts are exempt. Edited October 6, 2009 by Riverwind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Well said, RW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 1.Tories wanted to end Political Party welfare by ending the $1.95 subsidy, which is supported by the majority of Canadians I might add.2.Liberals, NDP and Bloc agree on a coalition government because of this, signing ceremony on TV etc. Tories back of this and remove it from the budget. 3.The coalition threatens to vote no confidence because there is no stimulus spending in the budget 4.The GG prorogues Parliament. 5.The opposition demand that stimulus spending be included in any budget tabled or they'll bring down the government. This is what happened just a few short months ago. If this isn't being forced by the opposition I don't know what is. huh... in another thread you were claiming Flaherty was some sort of financial genius for creating the the stimulus mr canada-I thought they idea was is to do what is best for Canada and if the Minister is winning awards and accolades on his handling of the stimulus isn't that good for Canada?and now you say the evil opposition forced it upon your personal savior Harper... :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 huh... in another thread you were claiming Flaherty was some sort of financial genius for creating the the stimulusand now you say the evil opposition forced it upon your personal savior Harper... :lol: I claimed that Flaherty was receiving awards and accolades for his handling of the economy, this is a fact which I posted in another thread. The opposition formed the coalition due to the Tories wanting to scrap the $1.95 per vote money and because the budget had lack of stimulus spending. Ignatieff and Layton both railed the government and stated that every other modern nation was providing stimulus. This lays out everything I said in this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nat Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'll be glad to see the PST gone forever. I have suppliers that charge me PST even with my PST number, then try to get the money back from the government. This week a lone it is either costing me $200.00 or a pile of paperwork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck U. Farlie Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'll be glad to see the PST gone forever. I have suppliers that charge me PST even with my PST number, then try to get the money back from the government. This week a lone it is either costing me $200.00 or a pile of paperwork. I take no issue with canning the PST, but I do take issue with being charged significantly more for things that weren't charged for before, some of the things being necessities. If things like heating fuel, automotive fuel, and used cars were exempt, for example, then I wouldn't bitch. Alternatively if the HST were to be somewhat lowered - say 10% but all inclusive, I also wouldn't complain. The idea itself is fine... simplify things... good idea. The amount extra I will have to pay is not fine... I am poor enough as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'll be glad to see the PST gone forever. I have suppliers that charge me PST even with my PST number, then try to get the money back from the government. This week a lone it is either costing me $200.00 or a pile of paperwork. No reason why I should pay more or pay GST on something that is GST free now. I have been doing the rounds with many small business operators. I have yet to find one that complains and mentions as many difficulties as you. Infact, I am having difficulty finding one that is jumping up and down on the merger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) I'm all for dumping the PST but we'd also have to cut down services and I'm all for that as well. The province could save a lot of money if we privatized a lot of things and instead of making government bigger we could make it smaller. Start selling off things that government controls but doesn't really need to. Plus we could out source everything and have in contracted out instead of paying massive union contracts we could save money there...a lot of money. Plus if we used contracted services the companies could be held responsible whereas now no one is responsible...certaintly not the workers. Privatize Beer and Liquor stores. Sell of as much stuff as possible and make private as much as possible. Reducing the Provinces need for staff. That would be a good start. Edited October 7, 2009 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 .Contract out Garbage, recycling, compost collection. As well as snow removal and salting. None of which the province does right now. Wow, they are already ahead of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) Del Edited October 7, 2009 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I take no issue with canning the PST, but I do take issue with being charged significantly more for things that weren't charged for before, some of the things being necessities. If things like heating fuel, automotive fuel, and used cars were exempt, for example, then I wouldn't bitch. Alternatively if the HST were to be somewhat lowered - say 10% but all inclusive, I also wouldn't complain. The idea itself is fine... simplify things... good idea. The amount extra I will have to pay is not fine... I am poor enough as it is. I guess you're in Ontario then. Auto fuel and residential heating isn't going to be subject to the BC portion of the HST. As for used cars - in BC we already pay PST on them and under the HST it will be the same - so no change there anyway. As for people complaining about paying tax on things that you used to not pay tax on - well, too bloody bad. PST legislation comes from the 1940's (in BC) and at that time it may not have made sense for accountants or realtors to charge PST but it sure makes sense now. I still don't get why it's okay to charge income tax of 20% on income of $30,000 (or 43.7% on income above $126,000) but, hell no!, we can't pay 12% on a hair cut or a meal. Oh, sure, I don't mind paying 12% on a computer or a shovel because I've been doing that all my life.... Hmmm, sounds like people just don't like change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck U. Farlie Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I guess you're in Ontario then. Auto fuel and residential heating isn't going to be subject to the BC portion of the HST. As for used cars - in BC we already pay PST on them and under the HST it will be the same - so no change there anyway. As for people complaining about paying tax on things that you used to not pay tax on - well, too bloody bad. PST legislation comes from the 1940's (in BC) and at that time it may not have made sense for accountants or realtors to charge PST but it sure makes sense now. I still don't get why it's okay to charge income tax of 20% on income of $30,000 (or 43.7% on income above $126,000) but, hell no!, we can't pay 12% on a hair cut or a meal. Oh, sure, I don't mind paying 12% on a computer or a shovel because I've been doing that all my life.... Hmmm, sounds like people just don't like change. The income tax reduction we are getting in Ontario is a small amount... maximum of $300 or so. I also don't like how much I pay in income taxes, but I realize that our social services need to be paid for somehow. If income taxes were greatly reduced while gst and pst were increased, I wouldn't care - but that is not the case. I am not complaining about piddly increases - like hair cuts or mc d's meals... I am in Ontario and my condo fees are going to get hit drastically due to heating fuel and related services taking a hit. I will have no choice but to sell my condo before this tax comes in - unfortunately lots of other people will likely think the same way so the market will be flooded with condos for sale - so the valuation of my condo will likely take a hit too. It is not change I don't like - it is a significant increase in costs that I don't like. Every way I look at this HST indicates I am going to be paying significantly more for the same level of service I now receive, meanwhile my income won't be increasing... so that means a reduction in disposable income/lifestyle which I won't take without at least bitching about. I, like many others, will likely turn more towards the black/grey market which won't help cover the government's debt at all. If you don't like it, well too bloody bad for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 There wouldn't be an income tax cut at all (and probably a large increase) without the HST. As for the black market - as if it isn't incentive enough to not declare one's income to avoid 20% or 31% or 44% income tax rates. So, people are stupid enough to go to the black market now because of 12%? Nice math. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 No one would have to worry about the increase in taxes with the HST coming to Ontario, if they just stopped consuming so much. It is a very simple theory really...those who have ...pay... those who reduce their consumption of useless "New and Improved" future landfill goods won't be affected....simple really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 No one would have to worry about the increase in taxes with the HST coming to Ontario, if they just stopped consuming so much. It is a very simple theory really...those who have ...pay... those who reduce their consumption of useless "New and Improved" future landfill goods won't be affected....simple really. That's what I like about consumption taxes. Apart from anything else, they tend to encourage savings. The less you spend, the more you have. If you wanted to put a dent in the current credit culture, decreasing income taxes and increasing consumption taxes is the best way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.