Equalization payments

[Smallc]

And one biggie- Ontario- has gone the other way......

Ontario is getting $347M. They're paying $21B more in taxes than they get back in services. Too say they have gone the other way is to not really understand the situation.

I object to the terminology used, I'd say the 'have' provinces are those that are eternally on the teat of equalization- Maritimes, Quebec and the very worst example, Manitoba.

I really don't care what you'd say, since you wouldn't be using the correct terminology.

There are lots of jobless in Alberta, a large operating deficit, and we will still send far more money to Ottawa/Winnipeg than we get back.

And? Every province has a deficit. I don't know if you heard, but there was this thing called a recession.

[Alta4ever]

Uhm, given Alberta's lavish spending these last some years, I don't think you guys should really talk about the incompetence of fiscal managers elsewhere. And I grant you, they ARE incompetent, at least in Ontario and Quebec.

But you guys having a budget deficit given all that oil is just - pitiful. Get your spending under control and then you can complain about Quebec and its social services. Quebec, btw, does not pay its doctors, nurses, teachers or public servants nearly as much as Alberta does (nor does anyone else). Maybe, even given the same funding, that leaves them some free room to provide more services...

We are in the works of replacing a government. So yes we are again getting our house in order.

[Smallc]

We are in the works of replacing a government. So yes we are again getting our house in order.

We'll see if that actually happens. There is a long way between then and now.

[fellowtraveller]

I really don't care what you'd say, since you wouldn't be using the correct terminology.

In the meantime, send back the cash, K?

[Moonbox]

In the meantime, send back the cash, K?

Are you talking about Ontario or Manitoba or both? If Ontario, then I'm not sure how we could arrange to send back money we already sent out...Actually I like that idea. It's like a double negative.

Ontario's budget - (- net equalization payments) =

Ontario's budget + equalizations payments.

WHERE DO WE SIGN UP FOR THIS!?!?!?

[Smallc]

In the meantime, send back the cash, K?

Can't do that....the cash was paid to the federal government, and they have an obligation to bring the provinces up to an average minimum.

[BubberMiley]

Manitoba is a modern juridiction full of intelligent well trained workforce, cheap energy and plenty of resources. Get off your asses and get to work, or move.

I'm surprised by how little you know about the issue. Manitoba's current unemployment rate is 5.4%, well below Alberta's current rate of 6.9%.

It's not like we need the money. We just accept it to irritate you.

[wyly]

We'll see if that actually happens. There is a long way between then and now.

I would be surprised if it happened, the new party will frighten many people once they take a closer look at it...

[wyly]

And Ontario grew by far more...yet they did it with far less money.

it also has nearly 4 times Albertas population...it's difficult to make a straight analogy...

[wyly]

They already make less than in Alberta (well, not nurses). If we paid everyone less, that again would create huge disparity.

no it's always been that way...if you live in a have not province like did (Sask) wages are less but so is housing...so going the other way for me would not be an issue, I'd make less per hour but my costs are less too...the desparity only comes into play when you move to a more expensive area, the mortgage difference is a real wake up...

[Smallc]

When you are competing for medical professionals, wages are important.

[wyly]

When you are competing for medical professionals, wages are important.

not as much as you would think...they're not stupid they understand the cost of living in different regions and expect to be paid accordingly...they'll also negotiate for perks like research funds or a job for their spouse...

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I think a better question is whether or not equalization does the job it was designed to do......

[Smallc]

not as much as you would think

Obviously much more than you would think. We've started to retain them because we pay them enough.

[Smallc]

I think a better question is whether or not equalization does the job it was designed to do......

Then the answer is yes.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Then the answer is yes.

In your opinion you mean......

In my opinion, it is a bad system that does not function to the benefit of all citizens. It is a leftist solution that has resulted in higher taxation levels and a larger bureaucracy. It punishes the citizens of successful provinces and rewards the citizens of provinces with less productive effort. It is ingrained within the constitution, so there is little chance of eliminating the program. However, the government can change it as it sees fit without opening the constitutional can of worms just long as the program remains "alive" in political terms.

[Smallc]

Actually that's not completely true. The program must meet the set goals in the Constitution. The system as of now gives all provincial governments an at least average fiscal capacity. More wealthy provinces have better than average, and thus they aren't being punished at all.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Actually that's not completely true. The program must meet the set goals in the Constitution. The system as of now gives all provincial governments an at least average fiscal capacity. More wealthy provinces have better than average, and thus they aren't being punished at all.

PART III EQUALIZATION AND REGIONAL DISPARITIES

Commitment to promote equal opportunities

36. (1) Without altering the legislative authority of Parliament or of the provincial legislatures, or the rights of any of them with respect to the exercise of their legislative authority, Parliament and the legislatures, together with the government of Canada and the provincial governments, are committed to

(a)promoting equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians;

(b)furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities; and

©providing essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians.

Commitment respecting public services

2)Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

Lets see now, where to start with this.....

Equalization actually fails to promote "equal opportunities" in "have" provinces by detracting from the provinces fiscal subsidies granted by the federal government to "have not" provinces.

Equalization actually fails to further economic development and actually creates disparity in opportunities by furthering the cause and efforts of bureaucracy instead of the cause and efforts of privately owned productive operations.

Equalization actually fails to provide essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians. Most public services are at the expense of the provinces, such as health care and education, roads and other infrastructure concerns. The feds actually merely provide EI and CPP, while paying lip service to the entire concept of a military defense.

With all due respect;

Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

those are rather vague parameters wouldn't you say?

Lets talk of things like the reality that the provinces pay no taxes to the federal government, just us pond scum citizens. It is not the provinces getting robbed, but instead us low life tax payers. It should make no difference where a citizen lives! ALL citizens should have equality in taxation treatment. Equalization does not do that, in fact it discriminates against people by virtue of where they live. Those tax dollars are the peoples money, not the feds and not the provinces.

[Smallc]

Lets see now, where to start with this.....

Equalization actually fails to promote "equal opportunities" in "have" provinces by detracting from the provinces fiscal subsidies granted by the federal government to "have not" provinces.

What? That's exactly how it's supposed to work. Those who need get, those who don't, don't.

Equalization actually fails to further economic development and actually creates disparity in opportunities by furthering the cause and efforts of bureaucracy instead of the cause and efforts of privately owned productive operations.

That's completely false. Equalization does nothing of the sort. Some provinces may do that through the way they decide to spend the money, but then, I don't think any of the provinces should be lectured by Alberta on bureaucracies.

Equalization actually fails to provide essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians. Most public services are at the expense of the provinces, such as health care and education, roads and other infrastructure concerns. The feds actually merely provide EI and CPP, while paying lip service to the entire concept of a military defense.

I'm not sure you're understanding this at all. Equalization brings all provinces up to at least an average. This has nothing to do with what the feds spend money on, this has to do with what the provinces have the ability to spend money on.

Lets talk of things like the reality that the provinces pay no taxes to the federal government, just us pond scum citizens. It is not the provinces getting robbed, but instead us low life tax payers. It should make no difference where a citizen lives! ALL citizens should have equality in taxation treatment. Equalization does not do that, in fact it discriminates against people by virtue of where they live. Those tax dollars are the peoples money, not the feds and not the provinces.

Actually equalization does do that. It gives us all similar taxation levels with similar service levels. Alberta already has the lowest tax rate in the country. Quit complaining.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Smallc

[Jerry J. Fortin]

What? That's exactly how it's supposed to work. Those who need get, those who don't, don't.

Need is a bad choice of words my friend. I see and understand your point but there is a problem, with your understanding of the situation. In a perfect world, I agree that federalism is a highly idealistic and noble effort. Unfortunately in the real world politics has a way of perverting things. This nation does not have as many national institutions as you may think, there are far too many for me but that is just me. The provinces have much authority and control of a vast majority of social programs and services. The feds merely provide funding to a large degree, with administrative left to the provinces. That is how the system is setup. Because of that you have provinces doing this and that with their control of those programs and services. There are some programs not available from one province to the next, that is the reality of the situation. So when you venture into an equalization system the actions and the effects of programs and services vary from province to province. It therefore blurs the line between the federal government and the provinces. It boils down to a dollar number per capita in transfer payments that have no strings attached. The provinces can do what they want with the citizens tax dollars. That is why there is a great child care program in Quebec, but no other place in the land. Need doesn't really play into the equation at all. That is the problem.

That's completely false. Equalization does nothing of the sort. Some provinces may do that through the way they decide to spend the money, but then, I don't think any of the provinces should be lectured by Alberta on bureaucracies.

Alberta is not lecturing, where did you get that from? I, a citizen of Alberta, do not lecture either. I merely ask the questions of the representatives of the people. Bureaucracies in this nation are putrid fact of life. They exist because of the wants and desires of the public for programs and services and are a result of the administrative quagmire poorly designed for service delivery. I certainly did not design the system, although I can see many of the flaws within it as can most citizens. In such a system patronage and nepotism run rampant, at the expense of the tax paying citizen.

I'm not sure you're understanding this at all. Equalization brings all provinces up to at least an average. This has nothing to do with what the feds spend money on, this has to do with what the provinces have the ability to spend money on.

What you do not seem to understand is that average is brought to a lower configuration through this method. The question needs to be asked, why not aspire to higher and not lower standards? Why not just let the provinces collect taxes from their own people and do what they want with those funds being ultimately accountable to those people? Change the tax system to leave tax dollars in the provinces, instead of sending them to Ottawa? Let the feds have their cut, sure, but those dollars come from citizens of a province, and they should be spent on those citizens of that province.

Actually equalization does do that. It gives us all similar taxation levels with similar service levels. Alberta already has the lowest tax rate in the country. Quit complaining.

Provincial tax rates are the business of the provinces, not the feds or other provinces. MY issue is with the federal rates and levels of taxation with its accompanying problems. I have been paying taxes since 1970 and have seen vast amounts of my personal income withheld from me in the name of taxes. If all those dollars were returned to me I could retire in comfort without my company pension. Such is not the case.

I guess my real problem with equalization is the computational tables and parameters used to determine what goes where. For instance why is renewable energy production exempt from the calculation? Having said that, I can foresee the day when this all comes to a head because the levels of expenditures on the part of government entities are not functionally sustainable.

[Smallc]

What this all comes down to is that you don't like paying taxes, but, the reality is, taxation is necessary and important....especially in a federation.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

What this all comes down to is that you don't like paying taxes, but, the reality is, taxation is necessary and important....especially in a federation.

Sort of. I do dislike taxes, that is true but I don't advocate any plan or concept to eliminate them because the government requires a revenue stream to function. On the other hand this thread is not about merely taxation but instead the specifics of the equalization plan within the broader definition of taxation.

I like the way you said..."especially in a federation". It is very nearly an admission that this form of government is very ineffecient and very expensive. There is only one tax payer and there are only so many tax dollars to go around, Each citizen should be entitled to an equal share of those dollars spent, regardless of region or province lived in. I suggest that the paradigm of government and taxes needs serious redress, and that in as short of order as possible.

[Smallc]

Each citizen should be entitled to an equal share of those dollars spent, regardless of region or province lived in.

Welcome to equalization. Because of that program, each province can spend about the same per capita...and so does the federal government. The difference is, because some people make more, they pay more.

[Smallc]

Oh, and no, I think that Canada, the US, and Australia have all proven that federations are perhaps the best form of organization.

[blueblood]

The difference is, because some people make more, they pay more.

Welcome to the debate on opinion about equalization/taxation.