Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

Gutting the military the EI fund equals "excellent"?

Yep. Especially EI reform. It was necessary. Sometime you have to cut government spending. Not just so-called waste. Everbody agree with cutting waste. That's not the hard part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 590
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm a conservative so my answer to everything is slash tax rates and burn wasteful government programs.

Conservatives don't lower taxes. They shift them from the wealthy to regular people.

Didn't you get the memo?

HST was being pushed by the federal Conservatives...

lol.

Who brought the GST in????

lol.

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to post
Share on other sites

$14B actually (it was less than originally predicted) and it will probably be eliminated ahead of the scheduled date of 2018.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ontario-deficit-27-billion-less-than-projected/article2138863/

Why am I suspicious of a sudden improvement just before an election? Hmmm.

As for eliminated, I find the very idea anyone would buy the crap that McGuinty is putting out as fiscal forecasts to be incredible. They have no viable plan on eliminating the deficit. Read what their own auditor had to say. As an example, they say oh, well, we're going to keep increases in health care spending to 1% annually. HUH!? How? "Oh, well, we're just going to do it. don't worry. We'll figure it out." Health care spending has been rising by more than 7% a year and suddenly they're just going to flick a switch and keep it to 1%?? Suuuuuuuuuuuure they will. Not only is that less than inflation but it doesn't even take into effect that the population of Ontario keeps rising. And health care spending is 42% of the budget.

It's the same sort of BS that you get when you look at their 'green power' predictions. He's suggested Ontario will have 5% of its vehicles using electric power within ten years, which is why he's going to start up those recharging stations. But as Maragaret Wente pointed out in yesterday's Globe, in order to reach that figure 100,000 electric cars would have to be sold in Ontario every year starting this year. Only about 10,000 electric cars are sold annually in the United States...

The guy is nothing more than a compulsive liar, and so far this election he's doing nothing more than promising more toys and goodies, and damn the expense. Want more doctors to visit you at home? No problem! We've got oodles of cash ready at hand! Want free service if it takes too long at the counter? Suuuure! Want a refund if your train is late? No problem! As for his vaunted multi billion dollar initiative to create 'green jobs' that hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried. The jobs only last as long as massive subsidies do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honestly, though he's spent too much, it isn't McGunity's fault. It has to do with the US, and there's really nothing and Ontario premier can do.

He's been spending too much since before the recession. He's increased spending over 60% so far, and most of it has nothing to do with the US or a recession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's been spending too much since before the recession. He's increased spending over 60% so far, and most of it has nothing to do with the US or a recession.

Most provinces and the federal government have done the same after all the cutting that was done during the 90s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Conservatives don't lower taxes. They shift them from the wealthy to regular people.

Didn't you get the memo?

No, I didn't. Suppose you show it to me. I'd like something to support your statement, some evidence, some cite. Something.

Go ahead. I wait with bated breath.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most provinces and the federal government have done the same after all the cutting that was done during the 90s.

No, most provinces haven't done the same.

As far as spending goes the Financial Post graded him the worst premier in Canada for spending.

Chart

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most provinces and the federal government have done the same after all the cutting that was done during the 90s.

McGuinty has increased spending by over 7% every year since he took office. That's completely irresponsible. And even using their rosey budget scenario. He won't have the budget closed to being balanced until 2018. That's 7 more years of deficit spending! He's going to add another 100 billion to the debt before it's balanced. If one believes that he acutally will. Adding that much more debt is again, completely irresponsible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone see that ad where Dalton admits he's not popular then lists off some ballwashing facts about Ontario. Anyone do any fact checking on what he's saying? Cuz I don't believe any of it.

Ontario has produced more jobs since the recession than all of Canada combined?

Maybe jobs at Tim Hortons. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
He won't have the budget closed to being balanced until 2018. That's 7 more years of deficit spending!

Hudak isn't promising any earlier, unfortunately. And what's worse is that tax cuts will make it even longer.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-mathematically-challenged-tim-hudak/article2069593/

"Mr. Hudak, who visits Ottawa on Thursday, promises to spend more on health and education, which together take about three-quarters of all government program spending. He can do nothing about rising payments on the debt. So he's left with the threadbare promise to cut spending on what remains by 2 per cent yearly, saying this can be done by not filling public-sector vacancies as they arise.

This is bad math, cleverly disguised. Even if possible – and the reductions aren't possible without cutting or scaling back whole programs – the reductions would be smaller than Mr. Hudak would need to balance a budget to whose deficit he'll add by a series of tax cuts and new spending commitments.

As in, $35-billion for new infrastructure, mostly on roads. As in, $6-billion for health care. As in, $2-billion for education. As in, income splitting and a tax cut of 5 per cent on the first $75,000 of taxable income. As in, handing over some provincial tax revenue to the municipalities."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hudak isn't promising any earlier, unfortunately. And what's worse is that tax cuts will make it even longer.

Complete nonsense. McGuinty's already taxed the hell out of this economy, and all it's done is choke growth. And we don't need to lock in his yearly 7% spending increases as the baseline of future budgets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I didn't. Suppose you show it to me. I'd like something to support your statement, some evidence, some cite. Something.

Go ahead. I wait with bated breath.

GST :) Tax the consumer!

HST :) "Never been about about job creation or cost savings. It's always been about transferring the burden of tax from business to consumer" -Ernie Eves, former Ontario PC Party Leader (paraphrased) Was listening to him on the radio when HST was legislated.

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to post
Share on other sites

GST :) Tax the consumer!

The GST taxes everyone at all levels, and yes, that includes business.

HST :) "Never been about about job creation or cost savings. It's always been about transferring the burden of tax from business to consumer" -Ernie Eves, former Ontario PC Party Leader (paraphrased) Was listening to him on the radio when HST was legislated.

Paraphrased, eh? Now why do I suspect that's quite a leap?

The HST makes sense, and what you don't seem to understand is that retail outlets in competition will try to charge less than their competitors. Every expense they have goes into the prices. The more expense they have in government paper work, as in two seperate taxes to record and submit, the higher the cost of goods and services. You lower that cost to them, and that will inevitably effect the cost to consumers. You raise the cost, as in increasing taxes to them, and they simply raise their prices and pass that along to the consumer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paraphrased, eh? Now why do I suspect that's quite a leap?

The HST makes sense, and what you don't seem to understand is that retail outlets in competition will try to charge less than their competitors. Every expense they have goes into the prices. The more expense they have in government paper work, as in two seperate taxes to record and submit, the higher the cost of goods and services. You lower that cost to them, and that will inevitably effect the cost to consumers. You raise the cost, as in increasing taxes to them, and they simply raise their prices and pass that along to the consumer.

Well, let's be 100% efficient! We all sign our entire paycheques over to the government and they just kick us back an allowance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let's be 100% efficient! We all sign our entire paycheques over to the government and they just kick us back an allowance.

Bill, the HST was not designed to be a new tax. It was designed to allow retailers to simply collect a single tax rather than the two they were presently collecting, each with its own separate forms and requirements. And while I'm not a fan of high taxes, given I'm in the highest tax bracket, I am also not a fan of borrowing to pay for social services, or of not HAVING social services.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GST taxes everyone at all levels, and yes, that includes business.

No. Businesses can deduct their expenses... ... or do you not know how that works? :lol:

Paraphrased, eh? Now why do I suspect that's quite a leap?

The HST makes sense, and what you don't seem to understand is that retail outlets in competition will try to charge less than their competitors. Every expense they have goes into the prices. The more expense they have in government paper work, as in two separate taxes to record and submit, the higher the cost of goods and services. You lower that cost to them, and that will inevitably effect the cost to consumers. You raise the cost, as in increasing taxes to them, and they simply raise their prices and pass that along to the consumer.

You can suspect it is a leap all you want. I just meant that it isn't a verbatim quote. And he's right about the HST. It helps corporations at the expense of the consumer.

What you fail to realize is that our economy is becoming a small group of corporations that own most things. Why should they compete?

You could be in a city with two taxi companies... yet they are both owned by the same entity. Where do you want to eat? Swiss Chalet? Milestones? Kelsey's? Montana's? same company.

Do you want to shop for electronics and Bestbuy or Futureshop? Same company... Corporations have grown wise to keep different names to appear fictitiously competitive.

Why would companies compete with themselves? Why would the few remaining companies fight to lower prices in a market, when that only hurts profits?

This is what is being increasingly seen as corporations own more and more corporations and there are actually very few players in the market.

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Businesses can deduct their expenses... ... or do you not know how that works? :lol:

So you're saying it doesn't matter what the tax rate is on business then? So we might as well eliminate all taxes on business?

You can suspect it is a leap all you want. I just meant that it isn't a verbatim quote. And he's right about the HST. It helps corporations at the expense of the consumer.

No, it doesn't. It helps business. If applied correctly, it doesn't harm the consumer.

What you fail to realize is that our economy is becoming a small group of corporations that own most things. Why should they compete?

There is always competition, even within one organization. If you think the corporate exec who runs Future Shop isn't in fierce competition with the guy who runs Best Buy, even though they have the same corporate owner, you really don't understand how business works. Besides, you can get the same electronic goods at scores of other stores, so there IS competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill, the HST was not designed to be a new tax. It was designed to allow retailers to simply collect a single tax rather than the two they were presently collecting, each with its own separate forms and requirements. And while I'm not a fan of high taxes, given I'm in the highest tax bracket, I am also not a fan of borrowing to pay for social services, or of not HAVING social services.

There are good things and bad about any tax, Argus. With all the electronics involved, the savings from a combined HST are trivial compared to what they would have been a few decades ago. Still, that leaves the argument of consumption vs. production taxes and as I said, there is good and bad.

However, from a political perspective it doesn't really matter. The fact remains that the GST was the most hated tax in our history and the hatred has not really ebbed by today. Combining it with provincial taxes only makes the resentment worse, not better.

It's a gut thing and not a head thing. Frankly, I don't know if there's anything any government can do to change people's feelings. Logic certainly won't!

Perhaps one of the reasons may be that the GST was a watershed moment in our culture. A lot of things came to a head when Mulroney introduced his tax. We had been looking for something different after the Trudeau years and had given Mulroney the two biggest majorities ever. Then after the feeling that he favoured Quebec to buy support and that with Meech Lake and Charletown different promises were made in English than in French we began to feel like suckers. People talked about how Paul Martin registered his ships in foreign countries, to dodge taxes, along with island tax evading bank accounts for the rich, which included many politicians.

Priests were revealed as sex offenders. There went our faith in churches. PetroCan, which had been tooted as a tool to save us from being gouged by "evil oil companies" had had enough price history to show us that they were always the first to raise prices and the last to lower them at the pumps.

There were a lot of other examples which I'm sure you're just as familiar with as anybody else. The cumulative effect is that as a nation we lost our virginity! We no longer had much faith left for anything!

What's more, with the GST coming about on top of all this, we no longer felt the need to be honest with our government! The level of black market deals escalated to levels far beyond what we had ever seen before.

We always knew that governments were inefficient and a little bit corrupt but by the time the GST was introduced we were far more cynical. If the government and our institutions were so hypocritical and dishonest with us why should we be honest with them? We no longer took pride in being obedient citizens of good character. Rather, we felt like chumps who were being used.

So you can justify the GST and the HST all you want. As I said, it doesn't matter. There's an old saying that once you have lost respect it is FAR more difficult to get it back. ADSCAM was perhaps just the last straw, branding the Liberals just as bad as the PCs.

Now Harper has deliberately pursued a policy of making the CPC look as much like Mulroney's party as possible! Is it any wonder that people like me vote for him only by default, ready to drop him on a dime if something better comes along?

Is it any wonder we see anomalies arise out of the blue, like the incredible NDP result in Quebec and the spectacular fall of the incumbent BQ party? Or the poor support for Charest's Liberals without any real new warmth for the PQ?

Canadians everywhere are at the point where they'd vote for a dog if he was any different, as another old saying goes.

Keep on defending the GST/HST if it makes you feel better, Argus. Perhaps you'll find someone somewhere who actually cares!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are good things and bad about any tax, Argus. With all the electronics involved, the savings from a combined HST are trivial compared to what they would have been a few decades ago. Still, that leaves the argument of consumption vs. production taxes and as I said, there is good and bad.

However, from a political perspective it doesn't really matter. The fact remains that the GST was the most hated tax in our history and the hatred has not really ebbed by today. Combining it with provincial taxes only makes the resentment worse, not better.

It's a gut thing and not a head thing. Frankly, I don't know if there's anything any government can do to change people's feelings. Logic certainly won't!

Got that off your chest now?

Telling me it's a gut thing and not logical isn't likely to convince me of an argument, especially when I'm not really sure what it is you're arguing.

The GST made sense. It wasn't 'new' taxation, either. It replaced another tax which was actually unfair to Canadian manufacturers, as opposed to importers. So, like the HST, I support it. Your complaint boils down to you have no trust in government or institutions of government, nor any other institutions, for that matter. Well, neither do I, really. But I'm just not sure how that applies to the Ontario election. McGuinty is a weasel. I bet we both agree on that, at least. Hudak is probably a weasel, but as yet unproven, and it's hard to believe he can be as inept, dishonest and cowardly as McGuinty.

Voting for the Tories, federally or provincially, because they're the least worse choice, doesn't exactly make you unique. Unfortunately, there just isn't anything else out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it doesn't. It helps business. If applied correctly, it doesn't harm the consumer.

This problem with have multiple diferent kinds of taxes is its very expensive to collect them. Consumption taxes are especially problematic because its so much work for businesses to retool POS around collecting and reporting. Accountants sure love em though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
About ETFO

Members at Annual MeetingThe Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario (ETFO) is the professional and protective organization representing over 76,000 teachers, occasional teachers, and education workers employed in the public elementary schools of Ontario. All public elementary teachers in Ontario are an active member of ETFO provincially, and also a member of one of its 68 locals across the province.

ETFO strives to develop programs and services that both protect and enhance the working lives of its members in these challenging times for education. It works continuously to provide an environment that celebrates the diversity of its members and the students in their care. In addition to its internal work in support of members, ETFO reaches out to the broader community to foster a climate of social justice in this province and beyond.

http://www.etfo.ca/Pages/default.aspx

ETFO is paying for some very expensive media advertising in advance of the elections. Here are a couple from a series of four ads.

How and why does the ETFO think the October vote could be against kids?

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.etfo.ca/Pages/default.aspx

ETFO is paying for some very expensive media advertising in advance of the elections. Here are a couple from a series of four ads.

How and why does the ETFO think the October vote could be against kids?

The teachers federations don't give a shit about kids. Every time they lobby, every time they go on strike it's always about the kids. There's a strike by ontario college support staff right now and what's the first thing they said "We're doing this for the students." Bullshit! They're doing it for their own wallets. And their own wallets, their own benefits, their own work life is the only thing the teachers federation cares about. If the ETFO could arrange that children would have only half as much educational hours but their members would get a raise, they'd go for it in an instant. Their only interest in the election is to make sure McGuinty gets elected again. He hasn't done a thing for kids, but he's greatly enriched teachers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do not live in the 416 area code it is not in your or your families interest to vote Liberal in this election and here is why:

Environmental Policy:

The Liberals have pursued policies which are designed to make city people feel good about the environmnet, however many of those policies come directly at the expense of people in the country. A couple of examples are the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM)Policy, and a number of changes around water regulations.

The ORM Policy is long and drawn out and contains lots of statements about protecting various things like groundwater and other meaningless motherhood statements. However it actually protects the interest of a small group of people involved in the construction and sand and gravel industry. Even though people who live there have piles of restrictions that are generally designed to limit the number of people who live on the moraine so that eventually it will be significantly cheaper for the sand and gravel companies to acquire the land. The boundaries of the ORM line up perfectly (and I mean Perfectly) with the boundaries of the Aggregate resource maps produced by the MNR. Gravel extraction permits are exculded from the policies of the ORM and indeed do not require local municipal approval, gravel companies can remove trees, regrade the land create huge excavations and operate heavy diesel equipment within a meter of the water table with virtually no restrictions, yet a farmer may have reams of red tape just to add a barn or drive shed.

There are virtually no municipal water systems connected to the oak Ridge moraine aquifers except a few small towns which serve only locals. So the premise is BS and the execution similar.

Green Energy Policy:

Windmills and solar panels make excellent poster and pamphlet material and knowing they are out there makes lots of city people sleep better at night, but should they have to look at them they have so far been successful making sure that they don't have their own views spoiled. If the wind energy was in any way viable the rates would not have to be overblow ten fold or more to support them, and we would not have to make secret deals with foreign companies to get them built. There are no rural municipalities that support having these stupid behemoths built in their jursidictions but Dalton will force them down your throat, because Toronto wants them and you'll have no say. Thr e truth is Green energy (unless its hydro generation) is not economically viable and will only increase your already expensive hydro bill.

Immigrant hiring subsidy:

Toronto loves immigrants, Peterborough and small town Ontario not so much, maybe I have that wrong, Immigrant love Toronto. At any rate hard economic times have hit all of Ontario, probably small town Ontario worse that the big cities, but thats not news. But regular Ontario people should take second place when it come to finding work? I have a son who has a skilled trade, he's an eighth generation Ontarian he makes $12/hr after being out of work for about 6 months. He got his education right here in Ontario, has paid taxes here since he was able to work, and yet when it comes to finding a good job he should be at the back of the line? That is just plain offensive. I know he or I don't mind competing fairly but I don't think we deserve to be back of the bus.

Executive Powers for Police:

I'm not talking about all that G20 business, as offensive and sectretive as it was, but things like the .05% rule. When you have 0.05% alcohol in your system you blow a warning on a breathalyser, 0.08% is breaking the law. Although I'm not much of a drinker I take offense when the police are allowed to tow my car, take my license and cause my insurance to go up even though I have not broken a law, furthermore there is apparenty no way to fight it? This was enacted without any discussion just on Dalton's signature. I know some are going to say, hey this person is in favour of drunk driving, which of course is just a variation of the "so have you stopped beating your wife yet?" question.

Here is why I take offense to it, how it unduly hurts rural people and how it demonstrates how Dalton has no respect for due process.

In the city you have taxis and public transit, if I go visit my family or neighbour up the road and enjoy a glass of wine, I have no transportation choices available to me, I have to drive. A hundred pound woman might be subject to having her car taken away, license suspended and being treated like a criminal after having done what most people feel is a pretty normal activitiy. That's just not right, yet it appears that this is a more and more common way to deal with things in Ontario, give authorities extra judicial powers that take away your rights, Dalton feels this is OK, you should not.

There are more reasons, maybe I can get to them later. And I just am not going to buy the scare tactics about religion and other things circulated in smear campaigns by the Liberals, or their extra legal special interest groups like the working families coalition, cause it's BS.

Thanks

Link to post
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.

Guest
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.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...