Happy Tax Freedom Day!

[August1991]

But all we have little control over backroom decisions about where our money goes. We do have some control over taxes.

Geoff, I'm surprised you make this distinction. Do you really believe that you have more control over government taxes than you do over government spending? (Do you have any control over government borrowing?)

[As a single voter, I think you have control over absolutely nothing but I'll let that radical idea slide.]

Politicians view a tax as a negative announcement. They view spending as a positive. Robert Bourassa famously said that he didn't know how Hydro-Quebec decided its tariffs but he made sure that it announced any increases in the summer. The federal Liberal Party (and US incumbent congressmen) have largely based their success on being there for unveiling the plans, cutting the ribbon or delivering the cheque.

I think voters have more control over spending.

If you want to compare Canadian taxes to US taxes then you must compare apples to apples. That means the cost that Americans pay for healthcare must be added to the tax calculation.

Except that the Canadian health premium/tax is decided by a single monopoly. In the US, employers or self-employed can shop around.

And Riverwind, did you include in your "tax" calculation the time lost waiting in queues? In Quebec right now, there is a story of three people who died after waiting in emergency room queues. One guy had a heart attack in the hospital parking lot after being told he would have to wait several hours before seeing a physician.

Notre-Dame hospital is looking into why 3 patients died in the hospital parking lot last April. Two patients died just after being released. A third man suffered a massive heart attack after leaving the ER when he saw there were no nurses in the triage area. The nurses say they're exhausted and are short staffed. The hospital has disciplined the staff on duty the night the man died - the union is contesting the action.

Link

[geoffrey]

Most people would find that every cent of that tax brake is spent purchasing medical insurance.

Ah, but they would have more choice than they have today. I'll take choice and quality over lines and restrictions for the same price, wouldn't you? Again, this isn't an us vs. USA issue either. There are much better ways of doing health care everywhere else in the world other than Canada and the US.

Geoff, I'm surprised you make this distinction. Do you really believe that you have more control over government taxes than you do over government spending?

Tax revolts have happened.

(Do you have any control over government borrowing?)

I can refuse to buy government bonds. Won't do much, but like you said in the carbon tax thread, every change starts with individual action (or taxes).

I think voters have more control over spending.

We can stop paying taxes. We can never stop the government from spending (unless we didn't pay taxes and refused to borrow I suppose).

And Riverwind, did you include in your "tax" calculation the time lost waiting in queues?

Or how about the time lost traveling elsewhere to receive proper care?

August makes a good point. The wait to see rehab people after an accident is long for example, not to mention the millions of hours sitting in a hospital waiting room (the average ER wait in Calgary is well over 7 hours... at average Calgary pay thats $170). There is a huge cost to society in that. The other cost is long-term. The government has no interest in having Canadians live healthy, private insurers do (less costs for them).

[Riverwind]

And Riverwind, did you include in your "tax" calculation the time lost waiting in queues?

A bit of a red herring considering people die all of the time in the US because of lack of access to healthcare. And a lot more are stuck in infinitely long queues waiting for care that they will never receive because they can't afford and/or their company benefit plan does not cover it.

My point is healthcare is a shared cost that every modern society must bear. The total cost of providing this care in Canada is roughly the same if not less than the US. The mechanisms use to pay the cost are the only differences between the two and these different mechanisms produce different winners and losers. Unfortunately that is the nature of all shared risk insurance programs - some people will always benefit more than others.

[gc1765]

Why wait? I'd rather stand up for taxpayers now before I get screwed.

It's one thing to want to ensure that you continue to get a good deal for your tax money, and another to say that you are not getting your money's worth when up until now you have been getting a pretty sweet deal and are way ahead in terms of money spent vs. services received.

[geoffrey]

Why wait? I'd rather stand up for taxpayers now before I get screwed.

It's one thing to want to ensure that you continue to get a good deal for your tax money, and another to say that you are not getting your money's worth when up until now you have been getting a pretty sweet deal and are way ahead in terms of money spent vs. services received.

I look at the bigger picture. All odds are I'll pay in way more than I'll ever take out. That's unreasonable IMO.

[August1991]

Sorry for encouraging this thread drift.

And Riverwind, did you include in your "tax" calculation the time lost waiting in queues?

A bit of a red herring considering people die all of the time in the US because of lack of access to healthcare.

I'm appalled that you are so cavalier about other people's death.

In Canada, these people believed that their health insurance covered them. (Riverwind, you could be one of these people.) In the US, a person without health coverage knows they're without coverage. There's a big difference in the two countries.

My point is healthcare is a shared cost that every modern society must bear.

"Shared cost"? What do you mean?

Roads are a shared cost. Health services are personal and private. They are not shared. The logic of a State health insurance scheme is based on information, and fairness. Not "shared costs".

Information? If I'm planning to get pregnant, I'll look for a private insurer who covers pregnancy. A private insurer who accepted pregnant women gaming the system would be driven to bankruptcy - or be forced to refuse coverage for all pregnancies, even the accidental.

Fairness? If I am born with a known genetic disorder, no private insurer will accept me except if I pay a high premium. Is that fair?

Riverwind, the logic of State health insurance has nothing to do with "shared costs".

[hiti]

I don't follow your logic....a single employee often pays nothing for the insurance. Canadians flock to the USA for higher salaries and lower taxes. There is a tipping point when middle-wage Canadians really start to get screwed.

Canadians do not go to the US for lower taxes. Everyone I know realizes they are paying the same once they include the cost of heath insurance and school fees. The attraction of the US was always the higher pre-tax salaries and the greater opportunities for people in specialized fields. The salary differential has largely disappeared with the high Canadian dollar.

The Fraiser institute report is deceptive because it uses all taxes to determine when it's 'tax freedom day' occurs. Very few people pay anywhere close to 50% of their income in prersonal taxes. A single person making 50K/year in BC with no deductions would pay no more than 30% for Income Tax, CPP, EI, GST and PST. This would put their tax freedom day at April 19th - not June 18.

That is why it is meaningless to talk about the direct cost to an individual when you compare the US healthcare system to the Canadian system. Employers may pay the cost but it is the individual who pays in the end. That is the logic the Fraiser Instutute uses when it includes Corporate Taxes in its Tax Freedom Day calculations and that logic applies equally to the cost of supplying employees with healthcare benefits.

Plus the Fraser Institute does not include the corporate incomes, just their taxes which totally skews their claims. Our tax freedom day was sometime in April.

[geoffrey]

Plus the Fraser Institute does not include the corporate incomes, just their taxes which totally skews their claims. Our tax freedom day was sometime in April.

What? That doesn't even make sense.

[August1991]

What? That doesn't even make sense.

There are "corporations" who pay these taxes. There's even a movie showing that these "corporations" are people. They're rich so I'm encouraging my daughter to marry one.

[Riverwind]

In Canada, these people believed that their health insurance covered them. (Riverwind, you could be one of these people.) In the US, a person without health coverage knows they're without coverage.

Same thing happens to americans who discover that the fine print of their policies excludes treatments when they thought they were covered.

I don't want to get into a discussion of the relative merits of each system. I simply want to point out that:

1) Both systems cost people a significant amount of money

2) A system to share the cost of medical care is essential to modern economies.

Any insurance plan is a shared cost scheme. People who don't make claims subsidize the care of those who do. State funded medical plans are insurance plans. Government run hospitals is another issue that I don't want to get into...

Contrary to the opinion of some the US healthcare system is not really a pure free market system. The government pays for the healthcare for the elderly and the poor just like Canada. The US government also subsidizes the cost of health coverage for employers. The government also forces private insurers to take on clients that they would rather not take on - the private companies pass this cost onto other customers.

[hiti]

Plus the Fraser Institute does not include the corporate incomes, just their taxes which totally skews their claims. Our tax freedom day was sometime in April.

What? That doesn't even make sense.

In an attempt to convince working people that

Canadian taxes are unduly burdensome, right-

wing think tanks and conservative politicians

have been exaggerating the level of taxes paid by

Canadian families for years.Presumably,they see

this as their best strategy for convincing the gen-

eral public that they should go along with more

tax cuts for the wealthy and more cuts in govern-

ment spending programs.

http://tinyurl.com/2fwgre

That url explains it all.

[geoffrey]

I disagree. Corporate income is then sent off to individuals (a corporation doesn't make money, it's shareholders do). It would be foolish to count it twice. Corporate tax though, comes out of your pockets through lesser returns on your investments.

I know the left loves it's taxes and defends them to the end of the earth, but really, it's time Canadians saw more VALUE (as per August caring more about spending) and CHOICE (as per me thinking Canadians know how to spend money better than Ottawa does).

[hiti]

I disagree. Corporate income is then sent off to individuals (a corporation doesn't make money, it's shareholders do). It would be foolish to count it twice.

I know the left loves it's taxes and defends them to the end of the earth, but really, it's time Canadians saw more VALUE (as per August caring more about spending) and CHOICE (as per me thinking Canadians know how to spend money better than Ottawa does).

Why don't you try reading the material presented instead of instantly disagreeing? Knowledge is power and you just lost the argument with the above statements.

[geoffrey]

Contrary to the opinion of some the US healthcare system is not really a pure free market system. The government pays for the healthcare for the elderly and the poor just like Canada. The US government also subsidizes the cost of health coverage for employers. The government also forces private insurers to take on clients that they would rather not take on - the private companies pass this cost onto other customers.

Agreed completely. But who's to say that the US model is where everyone in Canada begging for options wants to go? I know few educated, intelligent people, that want to go to the American model. I know many that are very interested in the publically insured, private provision models of Europe.

--

I still don't like it as a general tax run thing though. It's hard to hold people accountable when they charge you x dollars a year to provide 'everything'. Essientially, I'm asking for a line by line invoice (within reason of course) of where my dollars have gone, and then I'll pay the bill. Health premiums should be encouraged, that way I see the *real* cost of my health care spending. As there should be road premiums, police premiums, ect. ect.. I want to know the costs, and whether it provides value to me. If enough things no longer provide value, I'll move elsewhere.

Friedman eventually hated the withholding tax nightmare that he created.

[geoffrey]

Why don't you try reading the material presented instead of instantly disagreeing? Knowledge is power and you just lost the argument with the above statements.

I didn't lose the argument, I provided a justification for the Fraser Institute's calculation of tax freedom day.

I rarely give much thought to unreferenced rubish, but I did read much of your link.

Here is a few parts I want to pick apart for you to prove I read it and to discredit such a piece of rubish:

This is still a substantial increase.Almost 70% of this increase, however, can be attributed to the significant real increase in the incomes of Canadians over this period. Only about 30% of the increase is because effective tax rates increased.

It ignores that the government expenditures (the reason for taxation) are growing and have been growing at faster than inflation for quite some time. 30% increase in the rate or proportion of taxation is massive. Do you not agree?

The Institute itself calculates in Tax Facts 3 that effective tax rates for the average family increased by 40.4% over this period. Is rational public discussion of the tax system likely to be furthered if Canadians are told that their taxes have increased by ,550% since 96, when in fact their taxes have increased by only 40.4%?

I agree that this is misleading. I still think that 40.4% is a ridiculous increase in the government's reach into my economic freedom.

For example, the Institute includes the royalty payments made by oil and gas and mining companies as taxes paid by Canadians even though these royalty payments are more properly regarded as non-tax revenues.

How are they not a tax? Royalties fund the government's expenditures and come out of my returns on my EnCana and Huskey holdings. Sounds like a tax to me.

--

I don't understand why anyone is to eager to defend our oppresive taxation system in Canada.

When opposition to a paper falls so flat on it's face, it's a good indication that the original presenter knew what was going on.

[Riverwind]

As there should be road premiums, police premiums, ect. ect.. I want to know the costs, and whether it provides value to me. If enough things no longer provide value, I'll move elsewhere.

The trouble is people hate getting nickled and dimed every time they do something. Many would rather pay a flat rate.

[geoffrey]

As there should be road premiums, police premiums, ect. ect.. I want to know the costs, and whether it provides value to me. If enough things no longer provide value, I'll move elsewhere.

The trouble is people hate getting nickled and dimed every time they do something. Many would rather pay a flat rate.

Agreed! No reason why we can't have a income taxation (or consumption taxation for the progressives).

I just want to know how much of my tax bill went to what, and then I can decide if the government prudentally spent my money. I know I can determine this, but most Canadians don't. If they received a bill from the government for services provided, they could see what they spent on various things and make a judgement on the value from that.

It's actually not that bold or idealistic... it's actually quite democratic to do such a thing. We should elect our leaders on the value they provide us... at least in my mind.

[August1991]

The trouble is people hate getting nickled and dimed every time they do something. Many would rather pay a flat rate.

Yes and no. People have no problem with itemized credit card bills, pay-per-second phone bills or comparing beef at 3.99 per pound or 4.99.

I think the problem is that marketing departments have long known that some people are bad at math, and many people have no patient for details in some circumstances. Lease agreements are not dishonest, they're just confusing.

No law will ever change this because no law can make people good at math, or make them patient.

[White Doors]

Bottom line... I don't feel like I receive value for the money I put into Canada. What I do like is how the Fraser Institute puts it tangibly, how does it feel to have worked 6 months for nearly nothing? Automatic tax deductions are the reason why the government can rob us blind, you don't miss the money you never had.

hahahaha.. You just went through taxpayer subsidized university, presumably, and you are still using the tax credits on the portion that you payed and YOU don't feel like you are getting a good deal? Well I partly supplied the funds for your university educaiton Geoffrey and it's time you started paying back in. Look at it this way, you have been a net drain on society this far. It will take years for you to pay that back. I'm all for lower and fairer taxes but you are hardly in a position to complain here my friend.

Then you claim you are looking at the bigger picture? You are quite self centred in your thoughts it appears to me. You say YOU want to pay lower taxes. I do too, but I have paid my dues over 15 years since I left University. How about fighting for lower taxes for All Canadians to improve productivity? I have not seen that enter your thoughts. You clearly don't give a road apple about your fellow citizen so tell me why I should care if you think you are paying too much tax especially when you are still using your university tax credits that was subsidized to begin with??

[M.Dancer]

As an ethnic Gael, it is part of my culture to hide as much as possible from the excise man.

If you deny me this, you oppress me.

[geoffrey]

hahahaha.. You just went through taxpayer subsidized university, presumably, and you are still using the tax credits on the portion that you payed and YOU don't feel like you are getting a good deal? Well I partly supplied the funds for your university educaiton Geoffrey and it's time you started paying back in. Look at it this way, you have been a net drain on society this far. It will take years for you to pay that back. I'm all for lower and fairer taxes but you are hardly in a position to complain here my friend.

WhiteDoors, I agree completely. If I could opt to pay the full cost of my school and have all the post secondary education portions of all tax I pay forevermore removed I would have. Unfortunately I can't pay the full cost even if I wanted to!

I thank you for your taxpayer support though.

How about fighting for lower taxes for All Canadians to improve productivity? I have not seen that enter your thoughts. You clearly don't give a road apple about your fellow citizen so tell me why I should care if you think you are paying too much tax especially when you are still using your university tax credits that was subsidized to begin with??

I do think everyone in Canada pays way too much taxes and thinks everything is free or cheap (like university, good example). Canada would be in better shape if university was closer to a realistic cost for students (wouldn't waste resources on undedicated students).

Your not going to find me justifying your support of my university education. I think that was unjust.

[White Doors]

I appreciate your consistency.