kr!~~_7.JPG "pigdog47"){kind=avatar}
sE9swm,vh4BQ,)Qfn2Y!~~60_7.JPG "paisley_daze"){kind=avatar}
"Martha Hall Findlay's suggestion to raise the GST back up to 7%,"
I most definitely agree. It does not matter if the idea comes from a Conservative, a NDPer or a Liberal. If it right, it is right, regardless of the source.
Cutting the GST from 7% to 6% then 5% was a bad idea that did not really benefit Canadians on the long run.
Fairness to Canadians would be better served by increasing taxes on spending (GST) and lowering taxes on earning (income tax, payroll taxes).
The recent increase in Employment Insurance is a typical example that hurts most working Canadians. In the meantime, the rich and very rich save thousands of dollars a year buying fancy cars, etc... paying the lower GST.
The only ‘greed’ that needs discussing is the greed of corporations and their owners. Who cares if there is a multi-millionaire enjoying life….. as long as the people who made him a millionaire are treated fairly and equitably.
It is notable that the people who laugh at, or condemn those who are looking for fairer treatment are those who have their own businesses (and so do the wife), or someone who haves a good pension coming in from a past workplace as well as a government pension. Free money dropped in their mail box every month for as long as they live.
So to them ….they don’t care one iota if an individual or a couple are trying to make it in a world of increasing prices from food to gasoline and rent….as they are making minimum wage, while their bosses have a wealthy home and all the other toys of the rich.....provided by their work.
Then increasingly in N. America when the workers ask for better wages or unions stand up for fair treatment…..the corporate owners take their manufacturing or purchasing to other countries and use the desperate people in those countries as the new millennium slaves who they could pay even lower wages to as many of them worked in dangerous and intimidating conditions.
Without the workers……..the rich would have …….nothing!
My part time hourly wage was cut recently from $20 to $15.50
Lets lay it all on the table..... you have two pensions coming in, one from Bell and the other from the government...plus investments (all of which you have talked about). And your wife has a pension as well….and maybe more. And you’re at an age now that you’re settled.
Now think of a younger person trying to get a foothold in life and all they have is a 15.00 an hour job and nothing else coming in.
It’s really easy to play with money…..when one has money. Reminds me of the line from Poolhall Junkies……’I'm a millionaire! That's the difference. I lose 80 grand I can get another 80 grand. That’s the difference, between you and me.’
Employees and unions got the big money in the 60's, 70's and 80's and it still got better and better until the mid 90's. Everyone was in the middle class. Now, however, teachers, government employees, nurses, auto makers add infinitum - get anywhere from 60K to 100K per year plus another 35 in additional perks.
You are correct and life was good, especially after WW2. However as people made more money, manufacturers realized they could get more money. Why sell a toaster to someone for 50 bucks and make x amount, when you know people can afford 125 dollars and you can make far more. And government knew people were flush so to raise taxes didn’t hurt them that much. And why sell a house for 100 grand when you know people on average can afford to spend 150 grand. And the list goes on and on of things that started to cost…..more. Then the regular workers and the union workers then seen their standard of living drop so to keep up they wanted more. And the rest of the story is in the history books.
But suddenly…..corporations found they could get manufacturing done cheaper in other countries and there was something else called ‘free trade’ which took away the protection for N. American workers. The unemployment rose as items were manufactured in other countries and N. American corporations moved their manufacturing off shore or some corporations just closed down because they could not compete with the off shore lower prices.
The middle class started ….dying. Then the banks said “here have these pieces of plastic called credit cards and you can buy now…..pay later”!!! So the people fell for it in order to keep to the lifestyle they had been accustomed to. Now……they’re in debt up to their ears!
But in all of this who didn’t lose (generally speaking)?………..the big corporations and the wealthy. Oh they made mistakes and the banks pushed the envelope too far especially in the US ….but the government was forced to bail them out or have even a worse economy than already existed.
In the end the banks are making more…the corporations are making more….and the people making less.
Like I said before; when our resources run out it is game over and we will be a third nation. I doubt it is too far down the road.
You’re correct but our resource loss is a long way away and people aren’t worried about that. Who is worried about it are the First Nations people and Bill C-45 which leaves the government open to use any Native land they see fit and the government has also drastically cut the care and preservation for a lot of the lakes and streams because they know that as more corporations go to our hidden resources these lakes and streams will be ruined.....so that rich corporations can make ....more money.
"So you are suggesting that those on welfare (who pay no taxes at all) will be better off increasing their taxes by 2% on just about everything they buy?"
No.
Think about it.
Someone earning $25,000 a year or less pays little GST or HST since the bulk of that money goes to pay the rent (no tax) and basic food (also no tax). The relatively low amount of GST/HST paid is largely covered by the GST/HST credit available to all low income earners. It was instituted by the Conservative government of Brian Mulroney and that credit makes sense. It helps those who need it the most.
Someone earning $100,000 a year will spend a lot more money and, as such, was subject to much more GST/HST until Harper lowered that tax.
Someone making $1,000,000 or more spends a huge amount of money on high ticket items. For example, a $100,000 car would cost $2,000 more if the GST had remained at 7%.
It is not a question of taxing the rich or the high income earners. It is a principle to taxing expenses instead of income.
Tax the folks a little bit more on the money they spend and a little bit less on the money they earn through their labour.
Welfare recipients have nothing to do with the concept.except that the government have less money available to spend on those who really need it when they reduce consumption taxes on those who spend the most.
