August1991 Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) No doubt about it, this is going to move some key voters to check the Tory box in October 2015.This is money for kids under 12, more money for kids under 6 and money for any family with kids and a wife who earns less than the husband.How many families meet this standard? How many of these families (two votes) have yet to give thought to an election in 2015? (IOW, how many are swing voters?) How many are immigrants in critical ridings around Toronto?Meanwhile, the urban/gay/young/no kids/CBC crowd get no tax benefits - but they never would have voted for Harper anyway.And the retired, kids-gone, "get off my lawn" types would vote Harper anyway.Along with enlarging Parliament, this is a key element in Harper's re-election strategy. (I suspect that Harper even knows how much this policy will shift voter results in critical southern Ontario ridings.)Toronto Star======Harper's last trick, I reckon, is something to split the NDP/Trudeau Jnr vote. To win this difficult contract, as in bridge, Harper needs a good split. Edited October 31, 2014 by August1991 Quote
jacee Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) And the retired, kids-gone, "get off my lawn" types would vote Harper anyway.Not so much anymore.We're the boomers now, dug up our lawns & planted sustainable natural grasses and shrubs. /seniors-rejecting-harper-and-tories-for-liberals-carp-poll/ . Edited October 31, 2014 by jacee Quote
Topaz Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 I thought the Tories were against prostitution. Serious though,this is going to cost big time, and if oil prices keep dipping and there no manufacturing jobs , what going to support the Canadian economy? Since it is a small portion of the population, more people could vote against the Tories and recently, I read were Harper had 53% support in Alberta, its now 43%, I guess they don't believe his "I didn't know" excuse for Duffy scam. Quote
Argus Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 I thought the Tories were against prostitution. Serious though,this is going to cost big time, and if oil prices keep dipping and there no manufacturing jobs , what going to support the Canadian economy? What does that matter? That's in the future. By then he'll either be re-elected, which will make these tax breaks well worthwhile (to Tories) or he won't, in which case they don't matter. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) And the retired, kids-gone, "get off my lawn" types would vote Harper anyway. Well, if they fullfil their promise of increasing the yearly contribution rates to TFSAs to $10k I'll be happy. Edited October 31, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
hitops Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 This is classic vote buying. Everything announced yesterday benefits my family, but it's all a bad idea. It's not fair that people without kids should have to help pay for my kids. It's not fair that single people should get less benefit than married. Also $2000 is really not much. Quote
Moonbox Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 Honestly, I don't think this is really going to help the Tories much. The right-of-centre voters who this will mostly benefit (SITK's) are likely (outside of downtown Toronto/Montreal) already voting Tory and the ones who aren't weren't going to anyways. This is just a bone to their base. Personally, I'm strongly against income-splitting, as the wealthy already have innumerable ways to reduce their tax burdens. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
The_Squid Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 Honestly, I don't think this is really going to help the Tories much. The right-of-centre voters who this will mostly benefit (SITK's) are likely (outside of downtown Toronto/Montreal) already voting Tory and the ones who aren't weren't going to anyways. This is just a bone to their base. Personally, I'm strongly against income-splitting, as the wealthy already have innumerable ways to reduce their tax burdens. Also, the wealthy do not need to reduce their tax burdens... they're wealthy! Helping the lower tax brackets reduce their tax burden would benefit the most Canadians who actually need the help. But it would buy the least amount of votes. Quote
Argus Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 Also, the wealthy do not need to reduce their tax burdens... they're wealthy! Helping the lower tax brackets reduce their tax burden would benefit the most Canadians who actually need the help. But it would buy the least amount of votes. This is not going to benefit the wealthy. The $2k cap is meaningless to them. Hell, it wouldn't mean a lot to me and I'm not even wealthy. It will, on the other hand, benefit the family I know which has one person employed earning $70k, and one stay at home with two kids and a disabled relative. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
cybercoma Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 This is classic vote buying. Everything announced yesterday benefits my family, but it's all a bad idea. It's not fair that people without kids should have to help pay for my kids. It's not fair that single people should get less benefit than married. Also $2000 is really not much. It must be snowing in hell because I agree with hitops on something. Somebody check The Weather Network. Quote
overthere Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 I thought the Tories were against prostitution. Serious though,this is going to cost big time, and if oil prices keep dipping and there no manufacturing jobs , what going to support the Canadian economy? Since it is a small portion of the population, more people could vote against the Tories and recently, I read were Harper had 53% support in Alberta, its now 43%, I guess they don't believe his "I didn't know" excuse for Duffy scam. since it will defeat Harper, you support this legislation? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
overthere Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 This is classic vote buying. Everything announced yesterday benefits my family, but it's all a bad idea. It's not fair that people without kids should have to help pay for my kids. It's not fair that single people should get less benefit than married. Also $2000 is really not much. That is a little confusing. I guess you also are against public edcuation, where complete strangers with no children pay for the bulk of your childrens education right now. And health care too? Yet a $2000 cap is not enough money for you? Could everybody please note that poor people/people in low income households don't really pay much or any taxes now and won't under this new legislation either? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Topaz Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 I think Duffy scam, Harper not knowing what is going on in PMO, changes to social programs and people just being tired of their faces will take him out. Quote
Topaz Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 We 've heard the "pro-side" from the Tories but its the "con" side that going to hurt. Apparently, correct me if I'm wrong but I heard someone say that the child tax credit will be gone if this goes through. I think that money will be an income therefore, taxable and the income-splitting, those couples who have wages nearly the same, they be lucky to get back $ 60.00. It's been said that Harper wants the women to stay home with their kids, but they are going to have to have some form of income or they can't split. just remember the saying, "if its too good to be true, it usually is". Quote
Moonbox Posted October 31, 2014 Report Posted October 31, 2014 Helping the lower tax brackets reduce their tax burden would benefit the most Canadians who actually need the help. But it would buy the least amount of votes. Statistically, it SHOULD give them the most amount of votes. Unfortunately, the lower tax brackets tend to be the least educated and the least motivated to vote, so that clearly ends up not being the case! Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
hitops Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 It must be snowing in hell because I agree with hitops on something. Somebody check The Weather Network. Funny hey? Probably because I don't agree with subsidies, not just those that don't help me. I also don't agrer that anyone should be forced to help pay for my kids or anyone else's. Would scrap the UCCB if I could. Quote
Bryan Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 (edited) This is classic vote buying. Everything announced yesterday benefits my family, but it's all a bad idea. It's not fair that people without kids should have to help pay for my kids. It's not fair that single people should get less benefit than married. Also $2000 is really not much. It's called fulfilling an election promise. Last campaign, they said they'd do it before the next election (once the deficit was gone), they won the election, and they did what they promised to do. We should only be so lucky if other parties (national and regional) actually considered their election platforms as actual promises. All of it is a good idea. It's never a bad idea to give people their own money back, especially those who are stretched the thinnest -- working families. Our entire country is set up on the idea that that those who can help out those who cannot. That's what happens with health care, school taxes, welfare, disability, etc, etc. They are all good ideas as long as they are managed well. Gradually extending things like tax credits and income splitting certainly complicate the tax code, but they also allow for managing the costs and benefits to the overall budget and economy. Especially with respect to the child care benefit, this is the way it absolutely should be done -- gradually increase it as the budget allows, as opposed to the plans that both the NDP and the LIberals have proposed where they want to build out a national day care program that would be a tremendous expense. If $2000 isn't very much to you, feel free to give yours to a young family in your area that could really use it. Edited November 1, 2014 by Bryan Quote
Keepitsimple Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 Statistically, it SHOULD give them the most amount of votes. Unfortunately, the lower tax brackets tend to be the least educated and the least motivated to vote, so that clearly ends up not being the case! You're missing a big point - people who make $30K pay hardly any Provincial/Federal tax at all.....so there is nothing for them to gain. Quote Back to Basics
Keepitsimple Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 Instituting a one-size-fits-all "National Day Care" program is a disaster-in-waiting - no where near the cost that the NDP would have people believe - or the Liberals before them. That's why provinces - other than Quebec - have been loathe to start it. It would quickly become a bloated, unionized monstrosity that would suck money from the Feds and Provinces at the expense of Healthcare, Education and God knows what else. Unions = Big Dollars. Quote Back to Basics
cybercoma Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 Instituting a one-size-fits-all "National Day Care" program is a disaster-in-waiting - no where near the cost that the NDP would have people believe - or the Liberals before them. That's why provinces - other than Quebec - have been loathe to start it. It would quickly become a bloated, unionized monstrosity that would suck money from the Feds and Provinces at the expense of Healthcare, Education and God knows what else. Unions = Big Dollars.The national program proposed by the NDP would be privately delivered and publicly subsidized. Quote
Moonbox Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 You're missing a big point - people who make $30K pay hardly any Provincial/Federal tax at all.....so there is nothing for them to gain. I'm not missing any point. They have plenty to gain. While their marginal tax rate might be low, they also have extremely low disposable income so any tax breaks are a relatively big deal for them. There's also a HUGE number of people that this would benefit. Income-splitting, on the other hand, is just an ill-conceived bone the Conservatives are throwing to the relatively wealthy. It really doesn't make sense to me because those are votes they generally already have. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Bonam Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 I'm not missing any point. They have plenty to gain. While their marginal tax rate might be low The point is that they're taxes aren't "might be low" but are in a great many cases already precisely zero. Unless you want the government just giving them money directly ("negative tax"), these people aren't gonna benefit from any kind of tax break, period. Quote
carepov Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 No doubt about it, this is going to move some key voters to check the Tory box in October 2015. This is money for kids under 12, more money for kids under 6 and money for any family with kids and a wife who earns less than the husband. How many families meet this standard? How many of these families (two votes) have yet to give thought to an election in 2015? (IOW, how many are swing voters?) How many are immigrants in critical ridings around Toronto? Meanwhile, the urban/gay/young/no kids/CBC crowd get no tax benefits - but they never would have voted for Harper anyway. And the retired, kids-gone, "get off my lawn" types would vote Harper anyway. Along with enlarging Parliament, this is a key element in Harper's re-election strategy. (I suspect that Harper even knows how much this policy will shift voter results in critical southern Ontario ridings.) Toronto Star ====== Harper's last trick, I reckon, is something to split the NDP/Trudeau Jnr vote. To win this difficult contract, as in bridge, Harper needs a good split. Harper has successfully bought my vote. Why should my family, with gross revenue of ~$80,000 pay ~$25,000 in income tax when my neighbor's family also makes ~$80,000 and pays ~$20,000? The only difference is that my family's income is from one person, while the other family has two earners. I will gladly vote Liberal if they promise to keep this "income splitting" policy. Quote
scribblet Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 PM Harper is trying to help out families by giving them money but people don't like helping out familes - why - because it's Harper doing it? If the gov`t has the funds to spend then I can't think of a better place to spend it than on helping Canadian families prosper. Canada is stronger if families are together and prosperous. Limiting the possible credit to $2K limits the super-rich so I don't see a problem. Maybe what he really needs to do is increase the basic personal exemption to about $15K from the current $11,138 which would make a big difference to the working poor and part time workers. Mulcair had a difficult time during question period the other day trying to come up with a well reasoned attack. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Big Guy Posted November 1, 2014 Report Posted November 1, 2014 (edited) I am surprised that people are surprised. There is no attempt at being "fair" in politics because what is fair and what is not is a matter of vision of society. Some people feel that it is fair to force those who make a lot of money to share it with those who do not. They are considered left leaning individuals and will probably support federal NDP causes. Some people feel that those who make lots of money deserve to keep most of it and when they spend it, they generate jobs for the middle class. They are considered right leaning individuals and will probably support Conservative causes. During the last election, the plurality of the voters ended up giving the right a majority government under our system of democracy so this government followed its philosophy. If the majority of voters in the next election disagree with this legislation then they will elect a different government and they can rescind that bill or pass other bills that favor their views. I do not agree with the far right on this one but ... that is what elections are for. Edited November 1, 2014 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
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.