Jump to content

Read My Lips: NO NEW TAXES


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Harper has just committed that the next Tory government would pass legislation banning Federal tax hikes.

My only question here is really: Is there anybody that actually thinks this kind of populist pandering has any meaning?

Meanwhile, back at the turd factory, Mulcair promises no deficits while implementing some huge new social programs.

Yet he makes no mention of how to pay for it.

Does this kind of outright fibbing appeal to the riders of short buses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper has just committed that the next Tory government would pass legislation banning Federal tax hikes.

My only question here is really: Is there anybody that actually thinks this kind of populist pandering has any meaning?

Yes, as per the wording, it would require another party to repeal the legislation to raise revenue, likewise, during the election campaign, will warrant a response form the NDP and Liberals..........it is purely symbolic, well utilizing one tenant of mechanical advantage for politics:

wedge.gif

It doesn't cost anything to taxpayers and contrasts two types of political belief between the Tories and Liberals/NDP/Greens........its policy fluff, but brilliant, yet simple politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has meaning if there is a binding "or what" attached. The problem with these laws is the next guy just changes the law first, THEN does the thing that would have broke it. The NDP here in Manitoba have done it a bunch of times both for tax hikes and for running deficits. During the election, they adamantly promised not to do either, and by law they had to go to a referendum if they did want to. All they did was change the referendum law first, then raise the taxes and run "off-book" deficits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One tenant, which I haven't seen personally from this proposed legislation, but is reported in the Huffpost:

The Conservatives say the law would still allow them to close tax loopholes and address "tax avoidance schemes."

Rather vague, I'd like to see the meat and potatoes, but in spirit another form of populism........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, back at the turd factory, Mulcair promises no deficits while implementing some huge new social programs.

Yet he makes no mention of how to pay for it.

Actually he did:

Corporate tax increased to 17%, TFSA returned to $5500 per year limit, stock option loophole closed, income splitting eliminated. Some of those are good ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't cost anything to taxpayers and contrasts two types of political belief between the Tories and Liberals/NDP/Greens........its policy fluff, but brilliant, yet simple politics.

Yes, I would tend to agree. It's largely meaningless and symbolic, and doesn't cost us anything, as opposed to Trudeau's promise to expedite the entry into Canada of a lot more older immigrans who have no job skills and will almost immediately begin using our scarce health care resources. THAT will cost a ton of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I would tend to agree. It's largely meaningless and symbolic, and doesn't cost us anything, as opposed to Trudeau's promise to expedite the entry into Canada of a lot more older immigrans who have no job skills and will almost immediately begin using our scarce health care resources. THAT will cost a ton of money.

Well yes, it does cost us something. Since he's committing to creating legislating, that means three readings in the House of Commons, along with committee work, along with three readings in the Senate, along with committee work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it cost us over and above regular salaries - is there overtime involved or what? It sure beats the NDP taxing 100 per cent of stock-option benefits which will only serve to limit Canada's tech growth .

It costs something, and since at any time Parliament can reverse it completely, if it can ever really meaningfully be bound by it at all, even if it costs only a few tens of thousands of dollars, it's a waste, wouldn't you say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yes, it does cost us something. Since he's committing to creating legislating, that means three readings in the House of Commons, along with committee work, along with three readings in the Senate, along with committee work.

Are we not paying for MP's salaries regardless?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, so why waste that money on utterly pointless legislation?

Do you really think this proposed law means even the smallest little thing?

Well, if it helps keep the socialists and boy Trudeau out then it will save the country a fortune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if it helps keep the socialists and boy Trudeau out then it will save the country a fortune.

Well it worked for David Cameron earlier this year:

There will be no VAT, national insurance or income tax rises for the next five years under a Conservative government, David Cameron will announce today as he vows to enshrine the Tory pledge in law.

Mr Cameron will say that the choice facing voters is the "clearest for a generation" as he commits to a five year "tax lock" which will effectively bar a future Conservative government from raising the taxes.

;)

Edited by Derek 2.0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF Harper REALLY wanted to do this WHY didn't he DO IT? He has almost 10 years to do it and never did and just like Preston Manning said...words means nothing to Harper...its time for him to go....anywhere...join the army and go fight in the war he believes in., guess he can't they don't have closets on the battlefield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF Harper REALLY wanted to do this WHY didn't he DO IT? He has almost 10 years to do it and never did and just like Preston Manning said...words means nothing to Harper...its time for him to go....anywhere...join the army and go fight in the war he believes in., guess he can't they don't have closets on the battlefield.

Why didn't Paul Martin join the army and fight the war he believed in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the no new taxes law combined with the no deficits law is just great. Harper is essentially legislating that future governments have to govern like the Tories. It's completely moronic, considering the Tories can't even govern like the Tories.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now waste their time having to reverse something that's not constitutional anyway, since the courts have found that one parliament is not allowed to bind the hands of another in this way already.

I hope very much the NDP and Liberals campaign against a "no tax hike law".......maybe the can borrow New Labours' and the SNP's talking points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the no new taxes law combined with the no deficits law is just great. Harper is essentially legislating that future governments have to govern like the Tories. It's completely moronic, considering the Tories can't even govern like the Tories.

Good, then the Liberals and NDP shouldn't have a problem rallying public support against both CPC planks.......since deficits and tax increases are so popular of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope very much the NDP and Liberals campaign against a "no tax hike law".......maybe the can borrow New Labours' and the SNP's talking points.

They don't need to campaign against it. It's an act of parliament that can be undone at any time. It's also very likely to be illegal. It's nothing more than a waste of time and money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't need to campaign against it. It's an act of parliament that can be undone at any time. It's also very likely to be illegal. It's nothing more than a waste of time and money.

Well that's good too......the Tories will gladly keep repeating that they will lower taxes and the Liberals/NDP/Greens will raise taxes, so much so, that the Tories will make "tax hikes illegal" and the Opposition refuses to comment because they want to raise taxes...........

In electoral politics:

Tax cuts > " tax hikes for social democracy "

Simple, but true.......if it wasn't, the Liberals/NDP wouldn't be so remiss and cautious when speaking about their planned "revenue tools"......

Edited by Derek 2.0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,755
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Joe
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • CrazyCanuck89 went up a rank
      Contributor
    • CrazyCanuck89 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...