[andyt]

Very nice GST analysis, Boots. I've never seen it laid out like that before. Now I don't feel I compromise my anti-poverty cred by supporting consumption taxes.

BTW, on the west side of Vancouver there isn't one house available below $500,000, and you pay a million for a pretty basic house.

[peck420]

The reduction in GST had zero to do with the wealthy and had zero to do with the low incomes.

It had everything to do with easing lives of middle class families and more importantly, garnering their votes.

To that end, it seems to have worked well.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I notice you appear to be for tax credits, like the GST credit, but you have an issue with credits that specifically apply to the middle class.

What's your problem with the middle class? Should we not be entitled to a little tax break now and again too?

The GST credit is to protect low income people. Middle class people don't need that protection. What they need is to have tax rates set at a fair level in the first place, not a bunch of little bribes given back to them. As I said, I would envision a median income earner to come out even under my scheme, or even a bit ahead. (Don't pretend to have the figures to know what's required).

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

But I guess that's part of what's playing out here - people want these little bonuses, not because it makes a hill of beans diff to their finances, but because they feel they're being stroked, the govt is telling them they're good people.

Yet you're the guy that wants to raise wages by mere cents because it will make a difference. Right?

In BCm the min wage was raised 28% because it had been allowed to languish for so long - that's not mere cents. What I want is to tie the min wage to the LICO, so it never languishes anymore, but gets raised with inflation.

[quote="OnTheIce"]Apparently the only people who matter to you are those who live at or below poverty. The others should be lucky they're alive and working and should pay for those who have less.[quote="OnTheIce"] Well yes, the people to worry about are at the bottom. By definition. The rest of us are lucky to be working at decent jobs and enjoying a decent standard of living. Very lucky. And those who have more are going to have to pay for those who have little or nothing, how else could it work. Which is why those who have the most should pay the most. As I've pointed out in other posts, it's really a form of enlightened self-interest, because it makes for a more harmonious society with greater productivity and far lower healthcare and legal system costs. It's a win win deal.

[OnTheIce]

bootlegga bootlegga:

See how the GST really affects people? That why cutting the GST helped the rich FAR more than it ever did the poor. And don't think for a minute that Harper and the Conservatives weren't aware of this when they cut it.

The affect on people is all relative to their income. $20 is a lot to someone who can only afford a $1000 car, while the other is a lot to those in a higher income bracket.

That person who can only afford the $1000 car probably doesn't make enough to pay any income tax at all....so where do we give them a break?

bootlegga bootlegga:

There are lots of ways to cut spending without laying people off. Get rid of bonuses, institute salary deductions, cut department operational expenses by 5%, postpone/scale back future purchases, etc.

That would be nice, but let's talk about the real world. You're dealing with unions & contracts....look at what's happened in Toronto with Mayor Ford....10% cut in all departments and you'd think WWIII hit Toronto the way people are crying and looking to get Ford ousted.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

That person who can only afford the $1000 car probably doesn't make enough to pay any income tax at all....so where do we give them a break?

Refundable tax credits. This has been proposed by Khar for one to replace the minimum wage. Business has also proposed the idea - I guess the figure it will work like a subsidy for them. For a single person, the basic exemption and working credit is what, 12k before they pay tax? Doubt someone earning 12k a year will buy even a $1000 car.

Sweden has one of the lowest income inequality, and very low levels of of poverty - they have a VAT of 25%. The trick it to roll the tax into prices, then people won't bitch so much every time they see something for 99.99 and have to pay 111.98. It would probably force retailers to lower prices a bit to get the total back down to that magic 99.99 level.

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

See how the GST really affects people? That why cutting the GST helped the rich FAR more than it ever did the poor. And don't think for a minute that Harper and the Conservatives weren't aware of this when they cut it.

The affect on people is all relative to their income. $20 is a lot to someone who can only afford a $1000 car, while the other is a lot to those in a higher income bracket.

That person who can only afford the $1000 car probably doesn't make enough to pay any income tax at all....so where do we give them a break?

Yeah, I have to side with OTI here. It's my opinion that the GST cut was a good idea. Gasoline prices were sailing away and the GST cut gave families a break right when they needed it. Furthermore, it's my belief that cutting the GST did not result in lower tax revenues. I think the cut in GST helped pump some money into the economy when we could see the credit mess in the States and the global downturn coming. The GST cut came about the same time as the home improvement tax credit and the two worked very well together as stimulus.

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

That person who can only afford the $1000 car probably doesn't make enough to pay any income tax at all....so where do we give them a break?

Refundable tax credits. This has been proposed by Khar for one to replace the minimum wage. Business has also proposed the idea - I guess the figure it will work like a subsidy for them. For a single person, the basic exemption and working credit is what, 12k before they pay tax? Doubt someone earning 12k a year will buy even a $1000 car.

So rather than "bribe" the middle class, you want the government to "bribe" the low income people with the same money?

In the end, you want to take from one group and give to another because in your opinion, one group has more than they need.

[andyt]

Yes. They need it. Are you against income redistribution? And you've just ignored all my arguments to make your simplistic statements. Of course the 1% has more than they need. We have to fund the state somehow - how do you propose to do it? As I said, a median income earner would not see any tax increase, but people above that would.

[bootlegga]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The affect on people is all relative to their income. $20 is a lot to someone who can only afford a $1000 car, while the other is a lot to those in a higher income bracket.

I don't know about that - I lived for several years just above the poverty line and still paid federal income taxes. Maybe not much, but several hundred dollars nonetheless. About the only time in my life where I didn't pay any taxes was when I was a student earning $5000 a year.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

That person who can only afford the $1000 car probably doesn't make enough to pay any income tax at all....so where do we give them a break?

Wow, I can't believe you're justifying a huge tax break for a rich guy while the poor guy in the same instance gets nothing.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree...

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

There are lots of ways to cut spending without laying people off. Get rid of bonuses, institute salary deductions, cut department operational expenses by 5%, postpone/scale back future purchases, etc.

That would be nice, but let's talk about the real world. You're dealing with unions & contracts....look at what's happened in Toronto with Mayor Ford....10% cut in all departments and you'd think WWIII hit Toronto the way people are crying and looking to get Ford ousted.

Perhaps the federal Conservatives are incompetent then, because the provincial ones here in Alberta instituted a mandatory pay freeze in 2008, cancelled all bonus programs, cancelled discretionary spending, and froze hiring for three years. Some of those cuts are still in effect even now.

Klein also negotiated an across the board 5% pay cut for ALL provincial employees in the early 90s to help get spending under control, then when the budget was balanced and the economy turned around, returned that 5% to the unions.

It can be done - all it takes is leadership.

[andyt]

The big thing for govt employees is probably their rich pensions. Those need to be renegotiated. The Govt could set an example by submittig a bill to reduce the rich pensions that mp's get. That would be leadership. Taking a pay cut would help too.

[peck420]

Double the Canadian average.

You want a raise, raise the Canadian average.

[EyeBrock]

andyt andyt:

The big thing for govt employees is probably their rich pensions. Those need to be renegotiated. The Govt could set an example by submittig a bill to reduce the rich pensions that mp's get. That would be leadership. Taking a pay cut would help too.

I pay 12% of my pay into my 'rich' pension.

[ShepherdsDog]

Remember Eyebrock...Andy thinks anyone making more than minimum wage is 'rich'

[EyeBrock]

Silly me Shep. Fancy me thinking that having paid a shit load of cash into my pension, I should get it when I retire!

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Yes. They need it. Are you against income redistribution? And you've just ignored all my arguments to make your simplistic statements. Of course the 1% has more than they need. We have to fund the state somehow - how do you propose to do it? As I said, a median income earner would not see any tax increase, but people above that would.

Have I ever said I wasn't?

My comments are far from simplistic. You're the one making sweeping generalizations making the cure for poverty sound easy. It's not.

And I'm not for taking the benefits from one group of people and giving it to another. You think people barely living on the edge of middle class don't "need" anything...zero tax breaks. I don't agree. Regardless of how much you try to tell me your opinion.

I think we're doing a fine job at funding the state.