Canadian politics thread

..et d'autres discussions ennuyeuses
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 21099
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 57 times
Received rep: 177 times

Re: Andrew Scheer is a Bashful Penis Flytrap

Post #3651 by Dr_Chimera » Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:14 pm

Canada has actual monuments of nazi collaborators: http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/ ... connection
User avatar
Germz
Registered Broad
Posts: 15884
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:48 pm
Location: USA
Has given rep: 98 times
Received rep: 66 times

Re: Andrew Scheer is a Bashful Penis Flytrap

Post #3652 by Germz » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:30 pm

Ukrainian-Canadian and Jewish-Canadian relations are a hornet's nest waiting to be stirred up. Even B'nai Brith knows that some fights are not worth fighting at this point.
User avatar
Germz
Registered Broad
Posts: 15884
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:48 pm
Location: USA
Has given rep: 98 times
Received rep: 66 times

Re: Andrew Scheer is a Bashful Penis Flytrap

Post #3653 by Germz » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:31 pm

Objectively speaking, though, Ukrainians are bastards.
senate
Registered Broad
Posts: 6767
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:36 am
Has given rep: 251 times
Received rep: 215 times

Re: Andrew Scheer is a Bashful Penis Flytrap

Post #3654 by senate » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:15 pm

User avatar
The Bytown Boozer
Registered Broad
Posts: 1694
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:29 am
Has given rep: 209 times
Received rep: 114 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3655 by The Bytown Boozer » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:13 am

I've said before & I'll say it again: Kim Campbell is woke af now.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3656 by Craig » Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:20 pm

Ontario conservatives are starting to put out policy, and in a refreshing change of pace it's not entirely idiotic:

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark ... taxes.html

It's heavy on tax cuts, which is sorta dumb when the economy is booming and there's a hefty load of debt. I especially think cutting the small business tax rate is bad policy, though the Liberals are doing that to. I like the extra money for mental health and I'm intrigued by their plans to take over the subways.

Ditching cap and trade isn't something I would normally go for, but I can see the appeal of just opting for Trudeau's federal system and ditching California and Quebec. The article is a little confusing in that area though, how does removing that tax pay for other spending?
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3657 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:17 am

I would just like a government that is willing to cut expenditures first to right the ship before cutting taxes. Is that too much to ask?
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3658 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:55 am

Do you guys really need lower expenses or taxes? Perhaps what you need is some reorganization/reprioritization of expenses? I dunno. I don’t follow Ontario politics or economics. High level, at a time when the economy is doing well on the aggregate level but of increasing inequality (more abroad, but here to), seems cutting down on expenses/taxes just exarcebates inequality which is a big defining issue of our times.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3659 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:57 am

If I didn’t like the way libs are handling things on a competence level and thought a shake-up was needed, I’d vote ndp before cons right now. Just feel the heavy global trend of growing inequality pushes the solutions left, rather than right.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3660 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:09 am

Dog wrote:Do you guys really need lower expenses or taxes? Perhaps what you need is some reorganization/reprioritization of expenses? I dunno. I don’t follow Ontario politics or economics. High level, at a time when the economy is doing well on the aggregate level but of increasing inequality (more abroad, but here to), seems cutting down on expenses/taxes just exarcebates inequality which is a big defining issue of our times.


Well, they're proposing cutting taxes on the first 40k of income by like 10% and the second 40k by like 25%. That takes the bottom bracket to 4.5% and the second to 7.1.

I don't think we particularly need to reorganize anything. The tax burden is reasonable and expenses are fairly reasonable. I'd tweak things a little personally, put a couple billion more toward mental health and several billion more toward public transit. I'd also try to do something around energy costs, probably phase out the no-longer-needed premium they pay for wind and solar energy over time. But otherwise I think this is one of those times where a steady hand is good enough.

You know it's odd. Wynne is historically unpopular and has a reputation for incredibly bad policy, but if you press people on it they normally can't actually come up with much in the way of tangible complaints. She inherited a gas plant scandal from 2011 that there's no proof she was actually involved with. She sold off part of a public utility and used the proceeds to pay down the debt and invest in infrastructure. She's got a lame scheme to keep hydro prices artificially low for a bit at the cost of making them slightly higher in the future.

But she's also stewarded the economy from below average employment and growth to above average on both counts. She's also brought alcohol sales to grocery stores, which is a pretty popular decision. All in all, it's really not that bad of a record. It doesn't merit the hate she gets.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29437
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 201 times
Received rep: 122 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3661 by mayoradamwest » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:26 am

Yeah but she's a woman and wanted kids to learn about s.e.x.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3662 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:01 pm

Craig wrote:
Dog wrote:Do you guys really need lower expenses or taxes? Perhaps what you need is some reorganization/reprioritization of expenses? I dunno. I don’t follow Ontario politics or economics. High level, at a time when the economy is doing well on the aggregate level but of increasing inequality (more abroad, but here to), seems cutting down on expenses/taxes just exarcebates inequality which is a big defining issue of our times.


Well, they're proposing cutting taxes on the first 40k of income by like 10% and the second 40k by like 25%. That takes the bottom bracket to 4.5% and the second to 7.1.

I don't think we particularly need to reorganize anything. The tax burden is reasonable and expenses are fairly reasonable. I'd tweak things a little personally, put a couple billion more toward mental health and several billion more toward public transit. I'd also try to do something around energy costs, probably phase out the no-longer-needed premium they pay for wind and solar energy over time. But otherwise I think this is one of those times where a steady hand is good enough.

You know it's odd. Wynne is historically unpopular and has a reputation for incredibly bad policy, but if you press people on it they normally can't actually come up with much in the way of tangible complaints. She inherited a gas plant scandal from 2011 that there's no proof she was actually involved with. She sold off part of a public utility and used the proceeds to pay down the debt and invest in infrastructure. She's got a lame scheme to keep hydro prices artificially low for a bit at the cost of making them slightly higher in the future.

But she's also stewarded the economy from below average employment and growth to above average on both counts. She's also brought alcohol sales to grocery stores, which is a pretty popular decision. All in all, it's really not that bad of a record. It doesn't merit the hate she gets.


Misread your initial post, then. Though you were on board with the con’s platform with a few reservations. Those proposed tax cuts are pretty massive, just seems like good old con « cut taxes and [something, something, who cares if it doesn’t work]....profit? ».
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3663 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:05 pm

They're not that big. Cutting the bottom rate from 5 to 4.5 isn't that big a deal, but it's not what I'd do.

The good news is they're at least not just trying to cut taxes for the richest like the republicans.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3664 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:09 pm

If they can limit their platform to this and resist the urge to do something stupid like promise to fire 100k public servants, I think they'll probably win the election. Ontario has wanted to ditch the Liberals for like three elections in a row, but the conservatives and NDP insisted on constantly trotting out unelectable dimwits so we had no choice.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3665 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:25 pm

Wasn’t the cut to the second bracket more substantial? 10%+25%? Anywho, it’s not cutting the highest brackets which is worse, but its still cutting « everybody’s » brackets, so higher earners that top off those brackets get the most tax savings.

The Quebec libs just did something similar (but lower scale and more balanced). Moderate cut to lower brackets, so people that exceed the bracket get the most dollar reduction. $100 check to each family with a kid in school because trying to buy votes and wasting money. Poverty reduction program that seems promising. Significant increases to social insurance checks.

I’m in redistribution mood in this day and age. Current tax rates in Quebec/Ontario seem reasonable to me. I’m more inclined to redistribute to lower earners exclusively and invest in infrastructure. Inequality is bad for the economy long term. Affects demand. Think redistribution is needed to sustain consumer demand long term.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3666 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:33 pm

Quebec’s alternatives to the libs are really crappy. The CAQ (which may well win) are right wing populists lite. The PQ is impopular are have no coherent platform. QS is too far left to be mainstream outside of a few areas in Montreal). The libs have done fine, in my book. Governed in a centrist manner, bit to the right. But they’ve been in power for ages and the public pwrception is worn. Not so much unlike Ontario. I’m really dredding a CAQ win on the back of playing to right wing xenophobia to take everything outside montreal.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3667 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:49 pm

9% to 7.1, iirc. Yeah, a little bigger. Still not that massive.
User avatar
The Bytown Boozer
Registered Broad
Posts: 1694
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:29 am
Has given rep: 209 times
Received rep: 114 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3668 by The Bytown Boozer » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:06 pm

Fuck that, I'm voting for Wynne just to piss off all the racist uncles.

I don't even particularly like the lady, but the sheer amount of anger she elicits from the reactionary oafs in this province is truly a thing of beauty.
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3669 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:35 pm

I don't dislike the current government, other than the wasting money on pet projects,like they did with all day kindergarten when they started it. I get the concept, but would rather they spend the money to improve the already ingrained social services (education and health mostly). But now that it is here, I doubt it will go away any time soon.

I mostly don't care about things like beer in grocery stores or legalizing marijuana (federally) or anything like that. I don't think they really make much of a difference on society.

I think selling off provincial assets that make money is a bit of a waste, but if it doesn't meet the mandate of the government, and it reduces the debt, it makes sense to do it. Better than when Ernie Eaves wanted to sell things off at a loss just so he could balance his budget. Not much better, but still.

All in all, the government hasn't really done much either positive or negative in my mind. At least not enough to make me want to turf them more than anyone else. I can't imagine that either of the other two parties would be any better.

The only reason that they might be turfed is the discontent of the federal government's tax policy, and the unions potentially working against them (teachers and college profs).
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3670 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:39 pm

The Bytown Boozer wrote:Fuck that, I'm voting for Wynne just to piss off all the racist uncles.

I don't even particularly like the lady, but the sheer amount of anger she elicits from the reactionary oafs in this province is truly a thing of beauty.


Oh this is turning into a race thing? No wonder Greg is switching sides.

:danson:
Westy
Registered Broad
Posts: 2344
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:55 pm
Has given rep: 1 time
Received rep: 6 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3671 by Westy » Sat Nov 25, 2017 6:58 pm

Craig wrote:
Dog wrote:Do you guys really need lower expenses or taxes? Perhaps what you need is some reorganization/reprioritization of expenses? I dunno. I don’t follow Ontario politics or economics. High level, at a time when the economy is doing well on the aggregate level but of increasing inequality (more abroad, but here to), seems cutting down on expenses/taxes just exarcebates inequality which is a big defining issue of our times.


Well, they're proposing cutting taxes on the first 40k of income by like 10% and the second 40k by like 25%. That takes the bottom bracket to 4.5% and the second to 7.1.

I don't think we particularly need to reorganize anything. The tax burden is reasonable and expenses are fairly reasonable. I'd tweak things a little personally, put a couple billion more toward mental health and several billion more toward public transit. I'd also try to do something around energy costs, probably phase out the no-longer-needed premium they pay for wind and solar energy over time. But otherwise I think this is one of those times where a steady hand is good enough.

You know it's odd. Wynne is historically unpopular and has a reputation for incredibly bad policy, but if you press people on it they normally can't actually come up with much in the way of tangible complaints. She inherited a gas plant scandal from 2011 that there's no proof she was actually involved with. She sold off part of a public utility and used the proceeds to pay down the debt and invest in infrastructure. She's got a lame scheme to keep hydro prices artificially low for a bit at the cost of making them slightly higher in the future.

But she's also stewarded the economy from below average employment and growth to above average on both counts. She's also brought alcohol sales to grocery stores, which is a pretty popular decision. All in all, it's really not that bad of a record. It doesn't merit the hate she gets.


This post brought to you by the Ontario Liberal Party™. :nucks:
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3672 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:27 pm

Go ahead and refute something I said, westy. I could use the laugh.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3673 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:28 pm

Refute means to prove something is wrong.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3674 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:44 pm

Craig wrote:I could use the laugh.


The barman says, “We don’t serve time travelers in here.”

A time traveler walks into a bar.
User avatar
mcphee
Registered Broad
Posts: 36073
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:27 am
Has given rep: 101 times
Received rep: 200 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3675 by mcphee » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:21 pm

Craig wrote:Refute means to prove something is wrong.

Silly Craig. If you fute, and it doesn't quite do the trick, you go back and refute.
Westy
Registered Broad
Posts: 2344
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:55 pm
Has given rep: 1 time
Received rep: 6 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3676 by Westy » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:48 pm

Craig wrote:Go ahead and refute something I said, westy. I could use the laugh.


Hydro, dumbass. Or are you looking forward to paying $250/month for hydro in 10+ years? The AG confirmed Wynne's hydro plan is bullshit, and she's just doing it to buy voters for the upcoming election. It's clear you're some government sucking leech working in the public sector, but in the private sector this is called fraudulent accounting.

Greg, thanks for the chuckle.
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3677 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:54 pm

So you think you know something about accounting now? Please go ahead and explain to me what you know about accounting, and which part of the accounting for it is fraudulent.
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3678 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:00 pm

See, the thing is, Westy, you can't just go about throwing out words that sound nice to the people who you are trying to impress without actually understanding what they mean.

I don't think you understand a single thing about accounting, nor do I think you understand much about law, and even less about fraud to be able to make a judgement call on this issue.

Perhaps you should stop parroting whatever biased source you have been reading and actually try to find out facts about something first before you start throwing out terms you don't truly understand.
Westy
Registered Broad
Posts: 2344
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:55 pm
Has given rep: 1 time
Received rep: 6 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3679 by Westy » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:05 pm

Boring Choice #2 wrote:See, the thing is, Westy, you can't just go about throwing out words that sound nice to the people who you are trying to impress without actually understanding what they mean.

I don't think you understand a single thing about accounting, nor do I think you understand much about law, and even less about fraud to be able to make a judgement call on this issue.

Perhaps you should stop parroting whatever biased source you have been reading and actually try to find out facts about something first before you start throwing out terms you don't truly understand.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/o ... -1.4358168
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/o ... -1.4110539

CBC is biased against the Ontario Liberals. Vote OLP please. :nucks:
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3680 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:07 pm

You obviously didn't read that or didn't understand what it said. There is no discussion of fraud in that.

Again, either learn what things mean or don't discuss them. All you are doing is making yourself look like a fool.
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3681 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:11 pm

In the thread, Westy has shown to not understand:
- Accounting
- Law, specifically as it relates to fraud
- the role of the Auditor, in this case the Auditor General
- Opinions expressed by said auditor
- the difference between opinions and facts
Westy
Registered Broad
Posts: 2344
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:55 pm
Has given rep: 1 time
Received rep: 6 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3682 by Westy » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:55 pm

Boring Choice #2 wrote: :nucks: :nucks: :nucks:


It's accounting fraud in the eyes of the voter, which is all that matters. And you can't prove otherwise bud. But keep making your posts LOL they're hilarious.
User avatar
Boring Choice #2
Posts: 6183
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 1979 6:06 am
Has given rep: 230 times
Received rep: 244 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3683 by Boring Choice #2 » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:04 pm

Again, if you don't understand something, you should really not talk about it.

It's not fraud. It might not even be an accounting error, which is what you should be arguing. It might just be (per the article) a disagreement in the accounting treatment.

But you just keep saying stupid stuff. It's okay to not like what the Liberals have done. It's not okay to say they committed a crime on the sale of an asset when the transaction was perfectly legal. It again shows your ignorance.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3684 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:21 pm

Lol, I even talked about the hydro thing. It's dumb and a blatant attempt to boost her approval rating, but it's really not that big a deal.
User avatar
mcphee
Registered Broad
Posts: 36073
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:27 am
Has given rep: 101 times
Received rep: 200 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3685 by mcphee » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:23 pm

My dog was at the vets today. Infected anal glands. Quite the procedure. I told The Sidewinder why I couldn’t meet him for a beer today and he pointed out that my wife had to deal with 2 assholes now.

The Sidewinder is funny.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 38062
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 23 times
Received rep: 175 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3686 by Craig » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:25 pm

He is funny! Tell him Craig thought that was funny.
User avatar
mcphee
Registered Broad
Posts: 36073
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:27 am
Has given rep: 101 times
Received rep: 200 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3687 by mcphee » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:26 pm

Craig wrote:Lol, I even talked about the hydro thing. It's dumb and a blatant attempt to boost her approval rating, but it's really not that big a deal.

I feel like they have that stink to them that a party gets when they’ve been in power too long, but the alternatives aren’t pretty
User avatar
mcphee
Registered Broad
Posts: 36073
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:27 am
Has given rep: 101 times
Received rep: 200 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3688 by mcphee » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:27 pm

Craig wrote:He is funny! Tell him Craig thought that was funny.

D, my D , not poster D, thought it was funny too. Understandable
User avatar
Germz
Registered Broad
Posts: 15884
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:48 pm
Location: USA
Has given rep: 98 times
Received rep: 66 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3689 by Germz » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:03 pm

I've been out of the province awhile, but a couple of years ago at least the Hydro thing was causing a lot of worry. Far away from Queen's Park, older folks with fixed incomes and working people who never financially recovered after getting laid off were seeing huge spikes in their bills. Really destabilizing to people in precarious financial sitations. Maybe now that Wynne has given them a temporary reprieve they will be better prepared the next time, who knows. But if I were them, I'd still be angry.

Patrick Brown, on the other hand, is an outright tyrant who isn't afraid to flirt with electoral fraud and has alienated a lot of long-standing PC party folks. But this is 2017 - it's possible that voters won't care. We are in a good moment to elect tyrants and fraudsters. Brown's policies seem less stupid than that moron Hudak (the single worst party leader I've ever seen in Canadian politics). And the OLP have been in power for so, so long.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 27655
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 144 times
Received rep: 260 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3690 by MP » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:19 pm

I can't believe the libs didn't turf Wynne, they're gonna get destroyed this election. Except, I still hate both the other party leaders. I totally get why respectable people don't want any part of politics, but fuck me, what a steaming pile of DNA we have to vote for every four years.

Give me smaller civil service, flatter and simpler tax code, nuclear energy, and debt reduction.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3691 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:33 pm

How does a flatter tax code make sense? You people realize there is a very worrisome and ever growing gap in income and wealth equality? That will only speed up and get worse with automation? Flatter brackets just compounds the problem.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 27655
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 144 times
Received rep: 260 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3692 by MP » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:38 pm

Dog wrote:How does a flatter tax code make sense? You people realize there is a very worrisome and ever growing gap in income and wealth equality? That will only speed up and get worse with automation? Flater brackets just compounds the problem.

IMO, it does if you do it while removing most tax deductions.

I'd also like the province to go to one school board.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3693 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:41 pm

I don’t mind getting rid of school boards. Heck I don’t mind getting rid of elected offices in most municipalities.

I’ve never bought the zero net change simpler tax code thing.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 27655
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 144 times
Received rep: 260 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3694 by MP » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:48 pm

Dog wrote:I don’t mind getting rid of school boards. Heck I don’t mind getting rid of elected offices in most municipalities.

I’ve never bought the zero net change simpler tax code thing.

Why not, when only the higher earners are the ones that are able to use said deductions?
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3695 by Dog » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:52 pm

MP wrote:
Dog wrote:I don’t mind getting rid of school boards. Heck I don’t mind getting rid of elected offices in most municipalities.

I’ve never bought the zero net change simpler tax code thing.

Why not, when only the higher earners are the ones that are able to use said deductions?


Because I think you can’t separate public/economic policy from tax incentives, so what you’ll end up getting is flatter tax rates and relatively little else. I think “simpler code” is code for “lower taxes”.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 27655
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 144 times
Received rep: 260 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3696 by MP » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:57 pm

Dog wrote:
MP wrote:
Dog wrote:I don’t mind getting rid of school boards. Heck I don’t mind getting rid of elected offices in most municipalities.

I’ve never bought the zero net change simpler tax code thing.

Why not, when only the higher earners are the ones that are able to use said deductions?


Because I think you can’t separate public/economic policy from tax incentives, so what you’ll end up getting is flatter tax rates and relatively little else. I think “simpler code” is code for “lower taxes”.

It's not code, I'd like lower income taxes, and would prefer that consumption taxes to drive policy, further lowering my income tax.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3697 by Dog » Sun Nov 26, 2017 7:16 am

MP wrote:
Dog wrote:
MP wrote:Why not, when only the higher earners are the ones that are able to use said deductions?


Because I think you can’t separate public/economic policy from tax incentives, so what you’ll end up getting is flatter tax rates and relatively little else. I think “simpler code” is code for “lower taxes”.

It's not code, I'd like lower income taxes, and would prefer that consumption taxes to drive policy, further lowering my income tax.


I was on the « sales taxes are more efficient » bandwagon for a while too, but ultimately believe that is also code for « flatter taxes ». I don’t think you can replicate nearly as progressive a tax system with sales tax.
User avatar
Zardoz
Registered Broad
Posts: 12220
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:48 pm
Location: Toronto
Received rep: 148 times
Contact:

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3698 by Zardoz » Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:35 am

As someone who now makes a decent amount of money I'm all for lowering income tax. I would not have said that a year ago though.

Though I'm probably still not middle class. :(

What is the income threshold for middle class now anyway?
[CENTER]Image[/CENTER]
[SIZE="1"]Bring us your idiots, your hussies, your blue and your dreamy. Your steady, your huddled, your fisted and creamy. Your villains, your filthy, your cunts and your meese. Your carpenters and fishers and pastors and beasts. Your rednecks, your Safas, your trolls and your Brits. And like all good sailors, we like us some tits.[/size]
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3699 by Dog » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:25 am

I’m like at the 1% threshold and don’t want lower taxes. It’s not about me, it’s about society. Well, a balance between the two.

:why:
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 53195
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1039 times
Received rep: 635 times

Re: Canadian politics thread

Post #3700 by Dog » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:29 am

I don’t think either the left or right have all the answers. they need to be played against each other and strike a balance and where that balance is will depend on where society is at. During a period of high inequality and wealth concentration, you need a push left. During social stratification and stagnation, a push right. Rinse, repeat.

Return to “Le mur de messages”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest