|
Provicial Lieberals increase taxes yet again
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
The new "health premium" (income tax) is going up again. You will now pay $900 on average per year more than last year. Also drive clean standards are going up so unless you own a brand new car expect to pay through the nose for costly and un-needed repairs. I guess the Liberals like to tax the poor. Talk about a two-tier driving system.
But hey, i didnt vote for them! (thank god) |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
The new "health premium" (income tax) is going up again. You will now pay $900 on average per year more than last year. Also drive clean standards are going up so unless you own a brand new car expect to pay through the nose for costly and un-needed repairs. I guess the Liberals like to tax the poor. Talk about a two-tier driving system.
But hey, i didnt vote for them! (thank god) |
K well let me give you a quick break down of what I had to pay in the nice two tier system in the U.S.
I sprained my ankle really badly, I had actually torn ligaments and needed to be put in a cast. This is what I paid
Crutches and bandaging - $400
Seeing a Dr. and Xrays - $900
TOTAL $1300
In that same year I got an outer ear infection
Seeing a Doctors Assistant (DIDNT EVEN SEE A REAL DR.) $90
for someguy looking in my ear and writing me a prescription. It took 5 minutes.
So you see i'll gladly pay the $900 Woppeee do!
Lastly, clean air sounds like a bad thing? Give me a break. California has the toughest clean air laws in the world, i'm glad we're following suit. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
How much in taxes do you pay per year? Did you know that 50% of ALL taxes go toward our medicare? We dont JUST pay $900. We are paying $900 MORE for an already bloated system. Im not saying US style is the way to go but there are better ways than our system. Not only that but this government promised "No new taxes". The only difference between Mcguinty and Bush Sr is that Mcguinty didnt say "read my lips".
Also this Liberal government was always squawking about how Drive clean was a money hole and taxed the poor who cant afford new cars and what do they do when they get into office? Do they scrap it? NOOOOO... instead they make it even worse.
I cant wait to boot these liars out of office. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
How much in taxes do you pay per year? Did you know that 50% of ALL taxes go toward our medicare? We dont JUST pay $900. We are paying $900 MORE for an already bloated system. Im not saying US style is the way to go but there are better ways than our system. Not only that but this government promised "No new taxes". The only difference between Mcguinty and Bush Sr is that Mcguinty didnt say "read my lips".
Also this Liberal government was always squawking about how Drive clean was a money hole and taxed the poor who cant afford new cars and what do they do when they get into office? Do they scrap it? NOOOOO... instead they make it even worse.
I cant wait to boot these liars out of office. |
So basically all your mad about is that they're reniging(sp?) on their promises? That's really what it seems like. I may be wrong here but you come off as not really caring about the issues, just the matter of the lying. I personally believe in tough California style clean air laws. Lastly, ofcourse over 50% of our taxes goes to health care, but I also think of people like my mom who doesn't smoke, doesn't drink and has been in and out of the hospitals becuase of her bad heart and boughts with cancer. Bad hearts and breast cancer run in my family. My sister already has had many scares over it. I'll gladly pay so that she and others like her don't have to.
You can rant and rave scream and shout that there are people who are stealing your money. I agree I hate it when people steal my money, I can't stand any fraud to the system. But there's a human element that you seem to always leave out. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Yes i care that they lied. Why? because they comitted fraud.
As for the human element, you are missing what i am saying. There are far better ways to ensure everyone gets health care at a reasonable cost than the one we have now. Its just that nobody is willing to talk about it. Instead they keep increasing taxes to throw money at a bottomless pit. They actually DECREASED health services and INCREASED health taxes all in the same bill. Figure that one out!
As for drive clean, do something for the environment THAT ACTUALLY WORKS and then i'll support it. |
|
|
| goodnet |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Also drive clean standards are going up so unless you own a brand new car expect to pay through the nose for costly and un-needed repairs. |
I knew I shouldn't have taken the restrictor plate off the 'ol Red Dragon.. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Did you know that 50% of ALL taxes go toward our medicare? |
That's not true at all. If that were the case then maybe I wouldn't mind the high taxes so much.
The bulk of our taxes (over 60%) go toward social security (welfare) and interest on the national debt.
---
And to Beh: so, you paid $900. Big deal, that's what health insurance is for! You may be used to the idea of other people paying for your health expenses, but billions of people in other countries (including many European countries) have no problem with the idea that they have to keep a personal health care budget, just like we all keep budgets for food or rent.
Obviously the actual amount of tax depends on the person but on average a person will pay at least a few thousand a year for health care out of their tax money. Most people - NOT just the very wealthy - are spending far more on a tax-funded health care system than they would be on their own private health care/insurance.
The problem is not even that a public health care system is that expensive or inefficient. The problem is that the Liberals think we can fix it simply by throwing money at it, without any plan or policy whatsoever regarding what to DO with the money. Simply put, it all gets wasted. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
But it has shown in California that emissions have been reduced becuase of their tough laws. Also by increasing the cost of cars, people will be more inclined to use mass transit more. Sure that doesn't sound very right but hey whatever that works.
Regarding healthcare, I have no doubt it can be improved. But read a few articles about the other side.
http://www.umanitoba.ca/centres/mch...es/cprkiv11.htm
As it seems though no matter what I would, could say would change your mind. You've pretty much given up on anything else other then scrapping the whole entire system and replaceing it with some quasi-public/private entity?
If that's the case then why just keep complaining? Everyone says if you don't like it do something about it. What I do suggest is start nagging your MP or MPP. There's a term in public policy circles called "satisficing". It basically means that to be able to make changes in government all parties of interest must be satisfied. But to do that requires almost little to no change. It's impossible to get everyone involved to agree on the slightest of changes, so the status quo is just simply adhered to or modified only slightly. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Beh, that whole article focuses on cost and ignores quality. That's the folley of all the health care studies out there supporting public systems. What they should be looking at is value - services over cost. Maybe I pay a lot more for a meal at marché but I think what I'm getting is a little better than McDonald's.
Not that I have any real problem with a public system - I just think it's ridiculous to disallow private care and that people should be able to opt out of the public system. And certainly nothing you say is going to change my mind on that - every study showing the "evils" of a two-tiered system has been performed or sponsored by some far-Left political lobby group and relies on data from organizations that we already know we can't trust (like the UN). |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
That's not true at all. If that were the case then maybe I wouldn't mind the high taxes so much.
The bulk of our taxes (over 60%) go toward social security (welfare) and interest on the national debt.
---
And to Beh: so, you paid $900. Big deal, that's what health insurance is for! You may be used to the idea of other people paying for your health expenses, but billions of people in other countries (including many European countries) have no problem with the idea that they have to keep a personal health care budget, just like we all keep budgets for food or rent.
Obviously the actual amount of tax depends on the person but on average a person will pay at least a few thousand a year for health care out of their tax money. Most people - NOT just the very wealthy - are spending far more on a tax-funded health care system than they would be on their own private health care/insurance.
The problem is not even that a public health care system is that expensive or inefficient. The problem is that the Liberals think we can fix it simply by throwing money at it, without any plan or policy whatsoever regarding what to DO with the money. Simply put, it all gets wasted. |
I absoloutly agree with you, it won't get fixed if we spend more on it. However you have to understand we're coming up on the largest healthcare problem ever, all the baby boomers are getting older and I bet you a good number have not saved up enough to even afford a living, forget health insurance. How could we solve that dilemma?
Don't forget we have a socialist government here. Digi please define Socialism becuase i'm sure you can put it much more eloquently then I. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Not that I have any real problem with a public system - I just think it's ridiculous to disallow private care and that people should be able to opt out of the public system. And certainly nothing you say is going to change my mind on that - every study showing the "evils" of a two-tiered system has been performed or sponsored by some far-Left political lobby group and relies on data from organizations that we already know we can't trust (like the UN). |
Lol digi I guess our personal ideals come into effect then. Are these groups inherently good or evil?
So if it's an article by a conservative think tank then its perfectly fine and believable? I'm just busting your b's by the way =] |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by drgoodvibe
Lol digi I guess our personal ideals come into effect then. Are these groups inherently good or evil?
So if it's an article by a conservative think tank then its perfectly fine and believable? I'm just busting your b's by the way =] |
I know you are - and articles by conservative think tanks have to be read with the same amount of skepticism as articles by far-Left groups.
Not every source is "liberal" or "conservative". I hesitate to even use the term "non-partisan" because all that implies is that it's neutral between Democrats and Republicans - it still means nothing as to whether or not the source is inherently Left- or Right-wing. I try to read material that is objective!
As a rule of thumb, I tend to discredit any source that uses the following terms as anything more than parody:
"The rich" / "The poor" / "The needy"
"compared to America/the USA"
"distribution of wealth"
"equality" / "inequality"
"black-and-white world view"
Ya catching my drift here? I'm only interested in sources that offer information on what works and what doesn't work, not sources that try to tell me how a system best suits a political belief that they think I should share.
It's been proven numerous times in Europe that two-tiered systems work just fine; Canadians seem to oppose this simply on the basis of jealousy, that some people might be getting better health care than they are, and I think that is how Canadians approach a lot of policy issues. And don't tell me that Canadians don't think this way, because they do - I see it all the time - their answer is not a carefully-considered rebuttal but more of a knee-jerk emotional response that they can't seem to rationalize.
I could define Socialism but why do you want me to? |
|
|
|
|
