[Lemmy]

sandorski sandorski:

Canada doesn't have "runaway Government".

Who said it did?

[Lemmy]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Thats crap and you know it. Harper ran up a massive debt in order to win votes. Its yet another example of how he will say and do anything to stay in power. The debt is his as is its responsibility.

As for a small tax increase after the Liberals (and Harper once or twice) lowered it nearly every single year I think its only fair.

Surprisingly none of the cons on here who scream about a larger and better equiped military seem to ever support any increase in taxes.

There are two other considerations: 1. The Laffer Curve. As you increase tax rates, you get to a point where tax revenues begin to fall. WE ARE AT THE PEAK OF THE LAFFER CURVE. Further tax increases will result in falling tax revenues. 2. There would be LOTS of money for all sorts of funding (military included) if we could just get rid of the waste and inefficiency. We could fund programs to make both left and right happy, AND reduce peoples' taxes significantly if we'd just start cleaning house.

[sandorski]

Lemmy Lemmy:

sandorski sandorski:

Canada doesn't have "runaway Government".

Who said it did?

You did, first post.

edit: ok, you didn't exactly say that. Either way, there's nothing running away.

[DerbyX]

Lemmy Lemmy:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Thats crap and you know it. Harper ran up a massive debt in order to win votes. Its yet another example of how he will say and do anything to stay in power. The debt is his as is its responsibility.

As for a small tax increase after the Liberals (and Harper once or twice) lowered it nearly every single year I think its only fair.

Surprisingly none of the cons on here who scream about a larger and better equiped military seem to ever support any increase in taxes.

There are two other considerations: 1. The Laffer Curve. As you increase tax rates, you get to a point where tax revenues begin to fall. WE ARE AT THE PEAK OF THE LAFFER CURVE. Further tax increases will result in falling tax revenues. 2. There would be LOTS of money for all sorts of funding (military included) if we could just get rid of the waste and inefficiency. We could fund programs to make both left and right happy, AND reduce peoples' taxes significantly if we'd just start cleaning house.

I've argued that point as well. The law of diminishing returns. Too low tax and its boost to spending and business doesn't offset the loss in revenues. Too high and the gain in revenues doesn't offset the loss in spending and productivity. I know. I think you are incorrect in that we are already at the peak.

Its easy to state the obvious that by eliminating waste and inefficiency we would have more money. We all know that. Its the implementing it that is the problem and the fact that our democratic system is simply made for waste and inefficiency.

[Lemmy]

sandorski sandorski:

Lemmy Lemmy:

sandorski sandorski:

Canada doesn't have "runaway Government".

Who said it did?

You did, first post.

edit: ok, you didn't exactly say that. Either way, there's nothing running away.

I never said anything was running away either. I said our government is out of control. It's running amok all over our paycheques and civil rights. It's a Frankenstein monster.

[Lemmy]

DerbyX DerbyX:

I've argued that point as well. The law of diminishing returns. Too low tax and its boost to spending and business doesn't offset the loss in revenues. Too high and the gain in revenues doesn't offset the loss in spending and productivity. I know. I think you are incorrect in that we are already at the peak.

Its easy to state the obvious that by eliminating waste and inefficiency we would have more money. We all know that. Its the implementing it that is the problem and the fact that our democratic system is simply made for waste and inefficiency.

No argument at all. But eventually we MUST address this. That's why I suggested a line-item referendum.

[DerbyX]

A line item referendum?

Can you provide additional details?

[Lemmy]

DerbyX DerbyX:

A line item referendum?

Can you provide additional details?

Well, I haven't really thought it all out fully, but ask Canadians what government services they're willing to pay for. Anything the majority doesn't want to pay for gets cut from the government budget. If that service is still in demand, private entrepreneurs can take up the initiative, if there's any profit to be made.

[DerbyX]

Lemmy Lemmy:

DerbyX DerbyX:

A line item referendum?

Can you provide additional details?

Well, I haven't really thought it all out fully, but ask Canadians what government services they're willing to pay for. Anything the majority doesn't want to pay for gets cut from the government budget. If that service is still in demand, private entrepreneurs can take up the initiative, if there's any profit to be made.

Oh, a tax spending check list. I've thought about that as well although not with a referendum. I proposed that along with our tax return forms they include a checklist that tax-payers (that way only people who file a return get a vote) can use to indicate where they want their tax money spent. It can be as general or detailed as we like. We can even have people indicate how much money the government should have to the years budget.

Force the government to match its spending up to the results of such a check list. It would certainly let everybody see just how everybody feels about what is a priority and how much are we willing to spend towards it.

[uwish]

because we are too busy robbing the babies to pay for it. But then again, you like Canada paying people to be different, so it's language police and department of Indian Affairs for everyone to enjoy!

And that isn't crap, if their was no coalition their would not have been as massive a stimulus as you are seeing now. That rests on the coalitions back that baby.

Though, NO government has been up front about the military, for some reason they talk big but then run away crying when they see the bill. Shit or get off the pot!

[hurley_108]

uwish uwish:

And that isn't crap, if their was no coalition their would not have been as massive a stimulus as you are seeing now. That rests on the coalitions back that baby.

And there would have been no coalition if Harper hadn't gone for the jugular by proposing to axe the subsidies. This is just Harper digging himself out of his own mess.

[DerbyX]

uwish uwish:

because we are too busy robbing the babies to pay for it. But then again, you like Canada paying people to be different, so it's language police and department of Indian Affairs for everyone to enjoy!

And that isn't crap, if their was no coalition their would not have been as massive a stimulus as you are seeing now. That rests on the coalitions back that baby.

Though, NO government has been up front about the military, for some reason they talk big but then run away crying when they see the bill. Shit or get off the pot!

If that was meant for me then you are wrong on so many counts.

Harper wanted votes. He put forth a budget that he thinks will get him those votes ergo the budget and all its faults is his.

[uwish]

well Hurley I admit timing isn't Harpers strong point. While I agree in general with the removal of subsidies, his timing and method and implementation was a complete and utter cluster fuck.

Point said however, I do support removal of subsidies to all parties. But that is another forum debate.

[hurley_108]

I'd support the removal of subsidies, too. Just remove the donation cap at the same time.

[Lemmy]

DerbyX DerbyX:

[Oh, a tax spending check list. I've thought about that as well although not with a referendum. I proposed that along with our tax return forms they include a checklist that tax-payers (that way only people who file a return get a vote) can use to indicate where they want their tax money spent. It can be as general or detailed as we like. We can even have people indicate how much money the government should have to the years budget.

Force the government to match its spending up to the results of such a check list. It would certainly let everybody see just how everybody feels about what is a priority and how much are we willing to spend towards it.

My proposal would be more than a "spending check list" in that entire government agencies/ministries would be shut down if the majority didn't support those initiatives. The average Canadian has NO IDEA of the scope of government.