TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- The Belinda Bounce
Pages (4): [1] 2 3 4 »

The Belinda Bounce

Ive noticed mostly Lois Brown Conservative signs on the lawns of my riding.

Could Aurora-Newmarket be doing the Belinda bounce (out of office)? Or will we win the Toronto Sun Butthead award for re-electing her?

Remember the toronto sun's first butthead award went to Hamilton voters after they re-elected sheila copps when she resigned over the GST.

Re: The Belinda Bounce

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Ive noticed mostly Lois Brown Conservative signs on the lawns of my riding. Could Aurora-Newmarket be doing the Belinda bounce (out of office)? Or will we win the Toronto Sun Butthead award for re-electing her? Remember the toronto sun's first butthead award went to Hamilton voters after they re-elected sheila copps when she resigned over the GST.

And now the PC's want to cut the GST by 2%???
Then they will probably reduce or cut-out the GST rebates that those lower income indivuduals would normally get!!!

Re: Re: The Belinda Bounce

quote:

Originally posted by TrickDaddE And now the PC's want to cut the GST by 2%??? Then they will probably reduce or cut-out the GST rebates that those lower income indivuduals would normally get!!!

Harper said in the debate that although the GST would get reduced, the rebates would REMAIN THE SAME.

Re: Re: Re: The Belinda Bounce

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Harper said in the debate that although the GST would get reduced, the rebates would REMAIN THE SAME.

Well thats good but you of all should know what the left-hand gives the right-hand taketh away!!! Or is it the Right-hand giveth and the Left-hand Taketh??? LOL!!!!

if thats true then i worry about paul martin's income tax cut (which wont help the poorest canadians at all)

http://torontotory.blogspot.com/200...elebration.html

Re: Re: Re: The Belinda Bounce

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Harper said in the debate that although the GST would get reduced, the rebates would REMAIN THE SAME.

Typical conservative tactics. Citing a position without fact or evidence. Just because Harper said that the GST reduction would be equivalent to the proposed liberal reduction in income taxes, does not make it so. Furthermore, if the two policies are in fact the same, why would Harper then propose the GST tax cut at all? IN actuality, a GST reduction would be highly regressive. People who make more spend more, and thus they will save more from the GST cut. However, an reduction in the income tax of lower and middle class Canadians will provide money to the families who actually need it. Finally, in addition to the direct benefits generated from these proposed tax cuts, different spill-over effects will also occur. However, suffice to say that they are not similiar in any way, except the total fiscal impact on the government budget (which is what Harper probably means when he says that the tax cuts are the same; a tactic that is HIGHLY misleading to the average citizen and voter!).

Want a good example?

The disabled and welfare recipients DONT PAY INCOME TAX BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE INCOME. And i would classify them as the most disadvantaged in society. Also people who earn under $8000 a year dont pay income tax so they will not see a tax cut either. A GST cut will help everyone including those without an income. An income tax cut will not.


To say that a GST cut is a bad idea is ludicris.

In fact less than 12 months ago Paul Martin was on record saying that ANY tax cut is a bad idea.

I guess things change around election time eh?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 The disabled and welfare recipients DONT PAY INCOME TAX BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE INCOME. And i would classify them as the most disadvantaged in society. Also people who earn under $8000 a year dont pay income tax so they will not see a tax cut either. A GST cut will help everyone including those without an income. An income tax cut will not.

If they HAVE NO INCOME, they WONT BE BUYING MANY THINGS, and hence the disabled will not benefit from a GST reduction. As for your example of a person with $8000 income: yes they don't pay taxes, and yes they will not recieve a direct benefit from an income tax reduction. However, considering their low income and hence meager means of consumption, a reduction in a CONSUMPTION tax will only be marginally beneficial to such people. People who consume more, will benefit more (it's not a hard connection to make).

Stop pretending that the conservative party actually cares about the welfare of the average Canadian citizen; if you really cared about income disparity, you would not vote conservative, considering the Conservative policies which seek to further repress poor and lower income families (such as the proposed childcare rebate, restrictive welfare policy, etc.). Poor people and their children need affordable education and employment, not a reduction in the tax they pay on their meagre consumption. The conservative solution is to blind the electorate by promoting equal distribution of benefits (such as the GST reduction), despite the fact that the need for monetary aid is overwhelmingly concentrated at the bottom end of the income spectrum by it's very nature.

You go by beer and popcorn, I'll give my rebate to charity and someone who actually needs it.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict If they HAVE NO INCOME, they WONT BE BUYING MANY THINGS, and hence the disabled will not benefit from a GST reduction. ...

people seem to forget that...7% on nothing is nothing.

If you want to benefit the poor, remove GST from essentials, like food. Remove it from books to benefit students and promote literacy.

Removing/reducing the GST for people who actually *spend money* (ie. lower-middle class families) is more an issue, I would think, than it is to the poor.

income tax cuts benefit everyone and they can be tailored more to the people who need it most (ie. reduce it for lower income brackets). A broad cut to GST doesn't equalize anything...it doesn't bridge the wealth gap at all...why should some millionaire be targeted essentially "the same" as the lower class? This is some socialist agenda I'm pushing, but the bulk of the "savings" to citizens will be enjoyed by the people who consume the most, not the poor.

Income tax cuts put money back into an employee's pocket *right away*...it doesn't require them to spend in order to save. Further, for those who earn too little to benefit from an income tax cut...maybe we should put that 2% GST "savings" to better use by instead putting that money into resources that will result in them having a better paying job in the first place. Take that 2% and instead of cutting the GST, earmark it for education and job training.

A GST cut is buying votes...by the Conservatives giving back SOME of the tax that the Conservatives implemented in the first place.

Funny how the Liberals are the ones getting slammed for "giving back what they took in the first place" with their budget, yet the Conservative supporters are applauding a GST cut.

nice *double standard*

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Want a good example? The disabled and welfare recipients DONT PAY INCOME TAX BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE INCOME. And i would classify them as the most disadvantaged in society. Also people who earn under $8000 a year dont pay income tax so they will not see a tax cut either. A GST cut will help everyone including those without an income. An income tax cut will not. To say that a GST cut is a bad idea is ludicris. In fact less than 12 months ago Paul Martin was on record saying that ANY tax cut is a bad idea. I guess things change around election time eh?

it *is* a bad idea from a gov't standpoint...any cut = a reduction in revenue which has to be made up somewhere else...especially if people are crying for more spending.

give the disabled and welfare recipients some other incentive...a rebate, something...but why lose that 2% in tax off the upper middle class and the wealthy??? That's just dumb, IMHO...

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict If they HAVE NO INCOME, they WONT BE BUYING MANY THINGS, and hence the disabled will not benefit from a GST reduction. As for your example of a person with $8000 income: yes they don't pay taxes, and yes they will not recieve a direct benefit from an income tax reduction. However, considering their low income and hence meager means of consumption, a reduction in a CONSUMPTION tax will only be marginally beneficial to such people. People who consume more, will benefit more (it's not a hard connection to make). Stop pretending that the conservative party actually cares about the welfare of the average Canadian citizen; if you really cared about income disparity, you would not vote conservative, considering the Conservative policies which seek to further repress poor and lower income families (such as the proposed childcare rebate, restrictive welfare policy, etc.). Poor people and their children need affordable education and employment, not a reduction in the tax they pay on their meagre consumption. The conservative solution is to blind the electorate by promoting equal distribution of benefits (such as the GST reduction), despite the fact that the need for monetary aid is overwhelmingly concentrated at the bottom end of the income spectrum by it's very nature. You go by beer and popcorn, I'll give my rebate to charity and someone who actually needs it.

Of course people who earn less will spend less. So the idea in life is to earn more. They call it EARNING for a reason. This GST cut will allow everyone to save. Of course those who spend more will save more and rightly so. But a dollar here and there means a lot more to someone on a foxed income than it may to you. And to say that saving $100-200 a year for someone on a fixed income "is nothing" is severly underestimating just how much a dollar means to those people.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT it *is* a bad idea from a gov't standpoint...any cut = a reduction in revenue which has to be made up somewhere else...especially if people are crying for more spending. give the disabled and welfare recipients some other incentive...a rebate, something...but why lose that 2% in tax off the upper middle class and the wealthy??? That's just dumb, IMHO...

its not dumb. Everyone can spend more which means that tax income may actually go up due to the cut (although not likely).

In martins plan the rich get tax cuts too. And there is nothing wrong with that.

If you are really concerned about tax paying and the rich saving money you should ask Paul Martin why his billion dollar company is registered in barbados so he can avoid paying canadian taxes.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT A GST cut is buying votes...by the Conservatives giving back SOME of the tax that the Conservatives implemented in the first place. Funny how the Liberals are the ones getting slammed for "giving back what they took in the first place" with their budget, yet the Conservative supporters are applauding a GST cut. nice *double standard*

A GST cut allows the conservatives to appear as if they are promoting "equality", while in actuality they systemically conspire to remove any sense of equality from Canada.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT any cut = a reduction in revenue which has to be made up somewhere else...especially if people are crying for more spending.

Not when there's a $9 BILLION unaudited slush fund, plus a $45 BILLION EI surplus - all in addition to the "official" surplus.

It's time to fix the fiscal imbalance.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politic...1330536-cp.html

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT people seem to forget that...7% on nothing is nothing.

and a % tax deduction on zero income is nothing. Lower income people spend money as well and do pay GST.

quote:

If you want to benefit the poor, remove GST from essentials, like food. Remove it from books to benefit students and promote literacy.

agreed but thats also a GST cut. So you either want a GST cut or you dont. You cant tell me that the poorest wont benefit from a tax cut.

quote:

Removing/reducing the GST for people who actually *spend money* (ie. lower-middle class families) is more an issue, I would think, than it is to the poor.

im willing to bet that middle and upper income people buy many more essentials and books than poorer people.

quote:

income tax cuts benefit everyone and they can be tailored more to the people who need it most (ie. reduce it for lower income brackets).

THEY DONT BENEFIT PEOPLE WHO DONT PAY INCOME TAX IN THE FIRST PLACE. HOWEVER EVERYONE PAYS GST INCLUDING THOSE ON WELFARE.

quote:

A broad cut to GST doesn't equalize anything...it doesn't bridge the wealth gap at all...why should some millionaire be targeted essentially "the same" as the lower class? This is some socialist agenda I'm pushing, but the bulk of the "savings" to citizens will be enjoyed by the people who consume the most, not the poor.

yes it is an equal tax break. And rightly so.

[quote[Income tax cuts put money back into an employee's pocket *right away*...it doesn't require them to spend in order to save. Further, for those who earn too little to benefit from an income tax cut...maybe we should put that 2% GST "savings" to better use by instead putting that money into resources that will result in them having a better paying job in the first place. Take that 2% and instead of cutting the GST, earmark it for education and job training.

quote:

GST cuts save money right away. I buy and consume goods daily. I get a paycheque biweekly. I will see real savings everytime i buy something. But yes, let the liberals spend it on something better like government ads at sports arenas or a long gun registry. After all, all we'd do is spend it on beer and popcorn right? [quote]A GST cut is buying votes...by the Conservatives giving back SOME of the tax that the Conservatives implemented in the first place.

and what do you call $40 billion worth of liberal "announcements" just before an election? Altruism?

quote:

Funny how the Liberals are the ones getting slammed for "giving back what they took in the first place" with their budget, yet the Conservative supporters are applauding a GST cut. nice *double standard*

whats funnier is how less than a year ago paul martin was on record as being against any tax cuts even though there was a surplus.

The even funnier part is how he is on record as being AGAINST gay marriage 3 years ago.

Talk about double standards...

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 If you are really concerned about tax paying and the rich saving money you should ask Paul Martin why his billion dollar company is registered in barbados so he can avoid paying canadian taxes.

you would do the same to save tax money, and last time i checked its not illegal.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict A GST cut allows the conservatives to appear as if they are promoting "equality", while in actuality they systemically conspire to remove any sense of equality from Canada.

isnt it the liberals who support state sanctioned racism?

quote:

Originally posted by simms327 you would do the same to save tax money, and last time i checked its not illegal.

right yet paul martin and friends has the nerve to stand there and lecture us about buying beer and popcorn...

step to the back of the line

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 its not dumb. Everyone can spend more which means that tax income may actually go up due to the cut (although not likely).

For that to be possible the percentage increase in consumption would have to equal to the decrease in taxes. For tax-generated revenue to remain the same after the 2% proposed GST tax, actual consumption spending would have to increase by 40%.

HARDLY LIKELY AT ALL --> moot point #1 on Jay's part

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 In martins plan the rich get tax cuts too. And there is nothing wrong with that.

The tax cuts are aimed at lower/middle income families. However, in order to be fair, upper-income citizens were also given tax breaks, to a lesser degree.

Moot point #2 on Jay's part

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 If you are really concerned about tax paying and the rich saving money you should ask Paul Martin why his billion dollar company is registered in barbados so he can avoid paying canadian taxes.

I don't vote for Paul Martin, I vote for the candidate in my riding. There is no direct election of the PM, why are you acting like there is? Ohh that's right, again with the powers of persuation. Feed people enough shit, and they might begin to like it after a while.

Moot point #3 on Jay's part.

my point was, that if harper, your beloved conservative had a multi billion dollar company, if he had the chance hed put it wherever he could to save as much money as possible, no different than martin.

its called running a business and capatilism. profits = god

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf Not when there's a $9 BILLION unaudited slush fund, plus a $45 BILLION EI surplus - all in addition to the "official" surplus. It's time to fix the fiscal imbalance.

True, yes. However the fiscal imbalance was not a Liberal deception as the Conservative party makes it out to be. A small government surplus is advisable and prudent for good governance; better than expected economic growth led to increase tax revenue and ultimately a large surplus.

Furthermore, both the GST cuts and Income tax proposals seek to deal with this issue. So I wouldn't state that it's TIME TO FIX the fiscal imbalance, the work has already begun!

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 its not dumb. Everyone can spend more which means that tax income may actually go up due to the cut (although not likely). In martins plan the rich get tax cuts too. And there is nothing wrong with that. If you are really concerned about tax paying and the rich saving money you should ask Paul Martin why his billion dollar company is registered in barbados so he can avoid paying canadian taxes.

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf Not when there's a $9 BILLION unaudited slush fund, plus a $45 BILLION EI surplus - all in addition to the "official" surplus. It's time to fix the fiscal imbalance. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politic...1330536-cp.html

"Belinda Bounce" topic thread notwithstanding, how about we stick to the topic we are debating? The topic is a 2% GST reduction vs. income tax cuts. I don't give a fuck about Martin's personal financial situation and I don't give a fuck about the budget surplus (in relation to this debate, anyway).

I'm suggesting that it may be better to focus on income tax reductions and targeted spending instead of implementing a widespread, uniform cut to GST for the following reasons:

1. you can target income tax cuts to those who need them most. larger cuts to the lower and middle class and more moderate cuts to the upper class. you can also raise the income threshold where people are required to pay tax, benefitting those in low income, part-time and seasonal positions.
2. instead of losing 2% tax revenue on a consumption based tax (which, by definition, means that those who consume the most save the most), why not keep that revenue flowing and earmark an equivalent amount to directly benefit those who need it (i.e. the disabled, those on EI, welfare, etc)? I suspect that 2% is a LOT of money and could be a signifant benefit to job training, education, etc. for those groups.
3. an income tax cut *immediately* puts money directly back into the pocket of the people and allows them to do with it as they please. They can spend that money or they can save/invest it. Why tie tax savings into spending? well, I suspect that is precisely one reason why an administration would see a GST cut as beneficial, as it theoretically fosters spending (which in turn fosters tax revenue). If anything, I see a GST cut as more beneficial from a gov't standpoint, but not from an individual's standpoint. If you tie savings to spending, people can't "save" the money, right?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 isnt it the liberals who support state sanctioned racism?

Seriously Jay, I wouldn't have expected such an ignorant and outrageous claim from you. But now I'm prepared. Let the stupidity flow!

Who the hell cares about benefitting the poor? I care about what benefits me, and that's all anybody should care about. I'm not talking about handouts - I'm talking about freedom and my right to hold onto my own property.

For the record, I would like to see an income tax cut MUCH more than a GST reduction. However, this debate is incredibly pointless because Martin is not going to follow through on his promise (at least not without raising taxes somewhere else), and anybody with half a brain should know that.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.