The GST and socialists

Some are complaining that the GST drop that's taking effect July 1st (tomorrow) won't make much difference. Oh really?

Sure, you probably won't save much on a cup of coffee, 1 or 2 cents. But if you had 365 of them, hey, that's about $6 - 7 bucks! Yeah, not much, but it's more of YOUR money. On a new car, that's $200-400 smackers. A new furniture set, that's $10-20.

Some say that most business won't change their prices, instead pocketing that 1% difference.

As much as I wish they didn't, okay, so what? That money is now going into the business and the economy, meaning, perhaps that some employees might get a 1% raise or more in their bonus. For a small business whose revenues are, let's say, $1 million--that's $10,000. Not a bad bonus for some of the employees, you think?

But leave it to socialists to think that your money is best served in the government. We all know too well how efficient and smart the government is in spending taxpayer dollars. ..lol.. Businesses and individuals can't be trusted to spend money wisely. Families can't be trusted to take care of their own kids.

So with this 1% GST cut, I'm just glad I get to save a few cents on beer and popcorn.

Update: Now I'm hearing rumours that certain provincial gov'ts might bump up their sales tax a point. Fiscal imbalance solved? Uh, no. Taxpayer still screwed.

More on Fiscal Balance

You see! Even finance minister Jim Flaherty sees that the whole fiscal imbalance is because the situation is all backwards. And Paul Wells talks about it. So does Andrew Coyne.

Thing is, the federal gov't simply taxes too much and ARE awash in cash. Being that tax freedom day was 5 days earlier this year, I'd say we're on the right track.

So now that ol' Jim, a former Ontario finance minister, recognizes that provinces can't come out with their baskets, the provinces are on their own--more independent I'd say!

So voila! It's balanced right? WRONG.

The question now is: does this leave more room in the future for the feds to lower income taxes? I think it does.

To me, that will be the real test of this new government. They've delivered on their election promises. What about the next budget? A couple points off the middle class rate would be nice.

THEN we can start talking about the real fiscal balance. Yet that will leave provinces room to raise taxes. But that's not really a good election platform though is it? So Flaherty has really painted the provs in a corner. If 8/10 provs have a surplus, then who's left to raise taxes?

The cities. That level of government which delivers the most direct services to the citizens.

But then the feds should forget about transferring gax tax revenue to the cities.

I'd say the backwards mentality has now reversed itself.

We'll see come the next budget. Stay tuned...

The Fiscal Balance

Yes, that's right, I said balance. The word imbalance that the media and politicians use recognizes that something's out-of-whack. I mean, they call it equalization don't they? It's a complicated formula to try and make all the provinces equal. Don't you find it amazing that while the premiers cry about the fiscal imbalance, none of them are pointing out the democratic imbalance that the Senate has. It's ridiculous.

Simply put, the federal budget was "balanced" about 10 years ago, and in some provinces. Some municipalities are also balanced, but continue to raise property taxes, fines, and fees to pay for it.

So if those levels are balanced, where's this imbalance?

What politicians, media, and the elite seem to forget is that the REAL fiscal imbalance is with Canadians themselves. You know, the ones who vote in the politicians. Yes, you. Okay, what do I mean?

For the amount of tax dollars we send to government, the municipal services are the most direct ones we benefit from.

Well, not to worry, the federal government will give the cities part of the gax tax revenue.

FOLKS, THIS IS ALL BACKWARDS!

Why is it the level of government that provides the least amount of direct services gets to tax you the most?

So here me out...

What if the federal government taxed you much less than they do (bet you wouldn't notice a change in service!), the provincial government a little bit less, but your municipal government got to tax more?

You see, by the time money is transferred to a province, which in turn transfers some of the money to the cities, what's left? Not much, so the cities then have to raise taxes to make up for the shortfall to build roads and infrastructure, hire more police, etc.

I'm thinking that's probably how it used to be. But you know socialism, it tries to include everybody on a large scale, even those that don't want any part of it, all in the name of balance.

Haught vs. Naught #5

Now that Prime Minister Harper has steamrolled over all his opponents, followed through on his promises, there's a sense of clarity with the government and much pride in Canada now, isn't there? Or maybe it's the Oilers. Anyway, here we go...

Haught - Prime Minister Harper. On the front of the blatantly bias Globe and Mail this past week, it read something to the effect that "Harper slow on Senate reform". Excuse me? Slow? I don't know about you, but 159 years compared to 159 days ain't slow, ya know. Oh I'm sure the media would love it if the gov't opened up the constitution again to "fast-track" headlines. Regardless, the prime minister's proposals have exposed the Liberal senators who threaten to block Conservative bills. And remember when he appointed Michel Fortier and everyone was in a huff? I said at that time Harper did it for many reasons, one of which to draw attention to the senate again, which is need of massive reform. There's that word again, "Reform". Hehe.

Now the Conservatives are raising the age of consent to 16 with a 5 year radius. My stars! Another promise kept. Oh, and fixed election dates are good too. See you in October 2009!

Naught - LibLead hopeful, Joe Volpe. Now that 11 year old twins can donate $10,000 to a campaign, the possibilities are endless. To be honest, I didn't even know he was running. Looks like we have another "Joe who?" Sure, he just returned the money, but I mean, come on.

Naught - Liberal senators. I happened to watch some of them ask Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay, "What the heck are we doing in Afghanistan?" If they can't figure that one out, it's too bad Harper's senate term limits don't apply to these cronies.

Haught - Ralph Klein. Briefly. Before he received a "Survivor" plaque from his provincial counterparts, outlasting, outwitting (!), and outplyaing 38 premiers and 4 prime ministers, King Ralph told them that Alberta's resource revenue should not be equated in the provincial transfer "formula". I'm glad that he's the only one who's been around long enough to remember the BNA act.

Naught - CBC reporter, Anna Maria Tremonti. Her use of "Conservative clan" in her show "The Current" has created some waves. Here's some of Dr. Roy's Thoughts, who wrote to the CBC and got a flippent reply.

That's all for now folks! Thanks for stopping by.