"...Going to vote for Harper..."
Two weeks to go and we are still undecided. However, our votes will go to "anybody but Harper".
In fact Mary wanted to put a sign on our front lawn "Vote for anybody but Harper". 
"Trudeau's boy "
I guess you meant to write "Trudeau's son".
At 43 (44 in December) Justin is a bit old to be considered a "boy".
"Are your children Pierre in that class? "
No.
Both my son and daughter in law earn substantial salaries and splitting is not relevant to them.
My daughter and son-in-law also earn substantial salaries and they already split their income through their corporation.
Either way, whether I personally benefit or members of my family personally benefit does not affect my vote: Harper must go.
He is bad for Canada and Canadians, today and for future generations.
There is more than money in life. Sharing our good fortunes with those less advantaged is being Canadian. That means taxing those high income earners ($200,000+ a year) and giving a bit more benefits to those with lower income.
That is something Harper and his Reform group do not and will never understand. Time for Harper to go.
Who benefits from income splitting?
At first glance, many will cheer this policy. After all, who would not want an extra $2,000 a year in tax savings? But don’t applaud yet. So what’s wrong? Well … lots.
First, a few studies now have estimated that up to 85 per cent of Canadians will not benefit one penny from this new policy. It excludes all single working parents and childless couples. At a price tag of $27 billion over the next six years, one would have hoped that it would benefit more Canadians!
Second, why insist on couples having children? What is the relationship between income splitting and children? Well, absolutely nothing. It makes no sense. Zero. Zilch. Nada. So why is Harper insisting on announcing a policy that targets presumably straight couples with children? This raises bizarre questions about his motives.
The answer, of course, is rather obvious. This is just a ploy to satisfy all those Harper base voters who see a man and a woman with children as the perfect image of the Canadian nuclear family. And if the woman is barefoot and pregnant, and is a stay-at-home mom, even better.
But what about hard-working, single adults? Nope, no benefits for you. Childless couples where one has lost his or her job? Move on, nothing to see. Loving gay and lesbian couples? Well, maybe if you have children, but otherwise nope. And since most gay and lesbian couples have no children, is this policy specifically designed to be discriminatory? Oh, and of course, the breadwinner must make an income sufficiently high to be able to transfer $50,000 to his spouse. So you gotta be rich too!
- Louis-Philippe Rochon professor of economics (at least he has a job in economics which Harper never did)
"and they have very bad track record of managing money"
???
When they took over from Mulroney there was a huge annual deficit. It took them a few years to balance the budget and keep it balanced until Harper came in and started running deficits,
Check the facts. Check the real history, not the nonsense we hear during a campaign.
