Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Woe Is Me!

John Ibbitson has a column today which shows just how disconnected from reality Garth Turner truly is. Consider the following:

For Mr. Turner, however, the little guy is the bleeding upper middle class.

Halton, on the edge of Greater Toronto, is full of them: Mr. Turner chronicled their plight in his speech.

He recalled talking to a man whose house "was worth maybe half a million - modest for his neighbourhood. He told me it felt like his life was being squeezed now from all sides. Property taxes, income taxes, GST...'All I've got is this' He kicked the bricks at his front door."

Then there was the woman who decided to stay at home and raise her kids. Her husband makes six figures, but "our friends who have two incomes make a lot less, and always have more money to throw around. The system is killing my family."

Glad to see someone is fighting for this severely disadvantaged demographic.


  • GAG... what a crock. I cannot imagine how anyone can say those things with a straight face.

    By Blogger RedWritingHood, at 9:13 p.m.  

  • I can't agree with you here Bart. I think it's horrible to say that just because someone lives in the suburbs they must be horrible.

    Everyone gets representation. Even people with minivans and white fences. Democracy.

    Discrimination is wrong. Whether it's against one group or another it is unacceptable. If Ibbitson went after poor Chinese instead of middle-class white people, he'd be fired.

    Go Turner.

    By Blogger James Bowie, at 10:20 p.m.  

  • Her husband makes six figures, but "our friends who have two incomes make a lot less, and always have more money to throw around. The system is killing my family."

    Won't somebody think of the children?


    By Blogger Jason Townsend, at 10:52 p.m.  

  • Thank God the Liberal Party has strong progressives like James Bowie that are looking out for the concerns of the poor first and foremost!

    No wonder he was a Martin kool-aid drinker. He's a Tory deep in his heart.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:05 p.m.  

  • People think they could scrape by on just six figures until they actually try it themselves!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:12 p.m.  

  • That woman's comment makes no sense. Her dual-income friends "make a lot less and always have more money to throw around" and the system is "killing her family."

    So... people making "a lot" less have more disposable income? Did Ibbitson miss something?

    By Blogger JG, at 11:41 p.m.  

  • I had a lot more symptathy for Garth's point re. creeping property taxes until I checked out MLS in Oakville/Milton. Consider the following Calgary house (MLS®: C3197277) and then compare it to MLS®: 1073035 (and, for out-of-towners, Bridgeland is *not* a chic area, "panoramic views" notwithstanding).

    By Blogger matt, at 12:05 a.m.  

  • If only I could afford a mortgage on a half-million dollar house.

    Not that I want to contribute to urban sprawl, mind you.

    By Blogger Mark Richard Francis, at 12:15 a.m.  

  • "So... people making "a lot" less have more disposable income? Did Ibbitson miss something?"

    I guess they have more disposable income because they're not spending it all on PSPs, computer games, and hockey equipment for their kids.

    By Blogger Jim, at 12:16 a.m.  

  • Jim,

    In that case, the Conservatives will help even it out a little with the sports credit.

    Gotta keep them rich kids active!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:38 a.m.  

  • Oh and you see, I thought it was hard making a living on 10 dollars an hour. Turns out I'm lucky! Oh imagine having to pay all that tax. So much easier to just not have the money in the first place!

    By Blogger Shawn, at 1:03 a.m.  

  • Garth has not yet, IMHO, reached the pinnacles that Carolyn Parrish did, but I have money on those being surpassed in short order.

    Although he was very well behaved on Duffy Live, I think that's just because Fortier out-thought him & announced Monday that the capital gains tax changes wouldn't happen immediately.

    FWIW, I will always support Liberals, NDP and the Bloc trashing Turner posts. Always.

    GG should grant him the "Putz of First Order" award.

    By Blogger Candace, at 4:13 a.m.  

  • What I find ironic is that Mr. Turner ran in the last election making these promises and now he just wants to break them before he gets to the throne speech.

    Talk about going hollywood.


    By Blogger Q, at 7:46 a.m.  

  • James Bowie is right. What is on display here is classic left-wing envy.

    Ibbotson didn't miss anything. It's called progessive taxation. It's a system that punishes people for earning more. Two people earning $50,000 will have a lower effective tax rate and take home more than a single spouse earning $100,000.

    The spouse of the higher income earner will also not qualify for CPP because, as most of us with children know, staying at home and raising the kids isn't really work, it's play! But of course the children shouldn't be raised by a parent, government daycare workers should be doing that.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:51 a.m.  

  • CG, You are a communist...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:07 a.m.  

  • It's like that Monty Python skit...

    "Oh, yeah, but we had it tough..."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:08 a.m.  

  • What absolutely stuns me about you baby Grits is how blinkered you are to the real world. Who do you think used to vote Liberal under Chretien, and to a lesser extent Martin? The middle class, thats who. What PMSH has figured out which is not surprising, since he is Canada's first middle class PM is that there is more middle classers than any other demographic. Turner and he may differ, but they are representing the same folks.

    Who (beside corporations buying influence) do you think used to fund your Party, and why is it so broke now? You have become a party of the elites, but the elites still only get one vote. The corporate elite cannot buy influence directly anymore, which spells trouble, but it also leaves you fighting with the NDP for the labour elites, witness Buzz's antics of late. The interesting thing about your leadersip contest is that almost every likely participant would be described as of an elite. Please do keep up the good work.

    To those of you who think that overtaxing the middle class will do anything for the poor except sate the envy which Dr. Strangelove mentioned, wait til you have a mortgage and teenagers. It is fascinating that Canada taxes it's middle class to death, yet taxes it uber-wealthy elites less than the USA. Actually, given who's been governing it isn't that fascinating at all.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:23 a.m.  

  • Personally, I would like to know when it became acceptable to be so damned selfish. In poll after poll, Canadians state that one of the defining things about this country is universal healthcare. Essentially, the concept of "neighbourliness" - everyone contributes to the greater good, and if you need it, it's there for you.

    The universal childcare plan was a similar concept.

    And yet, here we have all these damn yo-yos complaining about taxes. My husband and I make over $200,000 a year running a small business, and when I write my large cheques (personal and corporate) to the Receiver General, I am HAPPY TO DO SO.

    You know why? To (mis)quote Oliver Wendell Holmes, "I like taxes - they buy me civilization."

    So shut the hell up already, you selfish babies.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 9:52 a.m.  

  • I am so sick of people claiming that staying at home and taking care of the kids is as hard work as actually going to a job. My parents had to do BOTH, that is hard work!


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:30 a.m.  

  • Harper as Canada's first middle-class PM? Um, ever heard of Joe Clark? Or Lester Pearson? Or John Diefenbaker?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:46 a.m.  

  • What the hell is giving "the whip hand"?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:47 a.m.  

  • "Harper as Canada's first middle-class PM? Um, ever heard of Joe Clark? Or Lester Pearson? Or John Diefenbaker?"

    Obviously, you are a delusional left wing Liberal type. Don't you know that Stephen Harper is the greatest Prime Minister in our history? He's only been in office a couple of months and look what he has accomplished. He's pissed off the good citzens of Vancouver- Kingsway, had the shortest post election joneymoon in history, muzzled his caucus, gagged his cabinet, deported evil tax paying Portugeuse workers, stonewalled the press, and given every indication he will lay several fond kisses upon the ass of George W. Bush. Greater than Alexander, wiser than Socrates, more campassionate than Buddha, holier than Christ and better looking than Fabio, you must hail this man.
    Stephen Harper: God of the Masses!


    By Blogger Don, at 11:00 a.m.  

  • Doggeral,

    I paid around 95k in Fed Tax's this year, and I've yet to get the courage up to see what my provincial tax is going to finish up at...

    So if your so cheerful about paying tax's, your more than welcome to write a cheque out for mine.

    When your paying around 46% of your income into the Government, you let me know how you feel then.

    Otherwise, shut the fuck up, as I've no doubt you as a small business person spend a great deal of your time using company money to cover your personal expenses, while showing the least amount of income you can get away with. Which leaves only the GST as your true tax burden.

    Ultruism is not a typically redeeming quality in a small business.

    The Capital Gains tax savings would mean a great deal to my bottom line, and I fail to see why my hardwork should benefit everyone else but me.

    I agree with you Candace, Turner is first class ass, who deserves a number nine buttplug shoved down his throat.

    (My apologies, but as you no doubt recognize, tax time is a particularly bitchy time of the year for me)

    By Blogger Joe Calgary, at 11:02 a.m.  

  • The Liberals are the champion of the poor? Ha! Please... you guy's are delusional. The difference between the Liberals and Tories is very little. You guy's swap policy depending on the polls. If it takes winning over the middle class to regain power I have no doubt the Liberals will adopt a game plan on just how to do that next election. There's no high moral stand off against the "evil" and "heartless" Conservatives. How you can take yourselves seriously taking a partisan stand is beyond me. You both share the same principles. Get into power and do what you have to to stay as long as possible. The NDP are out to lunch at the best of times. If they truly wanted a chance at ruling they would have to start playing the game just like the Liberals and Tories and adopt the faithfully blind mind set of "my team's better than your team." Go team Blue/Red/Yellow!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:45 a.m.  

  • Joe Calgary - Sorry, if you're bringing in enough income to be paying almost 100K in taxes, the very LAST thing I am going to feel for you is sorry.

    Get down off the cross - we could use the wood.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 11:51 a.m.  

  • Get down off the cross - we could use the wood.

    Ah, screw it. Let's just burn it with him on it. He won't be missed.

    (Those who don't want to pay their taxes should dry up and blow away. As my dad used to say on another topic, go back to Russia!)

    By Blogger Tybalt, at 12:22 p.m.  

  • I'm not suggesting you feel sorry for me Doggeral, I'm suggesting that as a small business owner you are almost by default cheating the system just to run your business.

    Tell me, do you write off gas, paper products, car depreciation...etc.

    When you buy coffee, toilet paper, paper towels, electronics, do some of them find there way into your house?

    If you say no, then your the only small business person in the country who doesn't scoot stuff into their household, and put it under their business.

    So saying something like ""I like taxes - they buy me civilization.",
    is a little hypocritical don't you think?

    After 20 years in business, mostly my own. Including publicly listed companies,which file regularly and are audited by independent firms, I've yet to see a small business that could withstand a true, indepth audit... would yours?

    Your welcome to my cross, the Government takes damn near everything else anyway.

    By Blogger Joe Calgary, at 12:22 p.m.  

  • Yeah right, you might not miss me, or people like me, but you'd sure as hell miss our money.

    Luckily, we don't trust Liberals to look after the household, us neo-cons do it ourselves.

    Where will your leftist leanings lead your family, as the tax man comes to your spouse or children, and wants to be paid because your dead.

    By Blogger Joe Calgary, at 12:40 p.m.  

  • Anyone have a violin I can borrow.

    Poor old Joe Calgary has to pay $100 000 in taxes...

    Damn Fiberal guberment! They are taking the shirt off poor Joe's back!

    So Joe how much did you make last year $300 000 ? $400 000? more?

    Conservatives are such Pu$$ie$

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:48 p.m.  

  • Okay kids, put the pinata stick down. This should not be a flame war amongst the classes...

    Just becasue Doggeral thinks it's okay to pay a bunch of taxes, and in fact, feel good about it *cough* doesn't mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that Joe Calgary should feel happy about doing it.

    Hell I pay not near as much and I hate it. How many years of hard work did it take for Joe to reach the level he's got? Stress, hours, etc? Now think that for every 2 hours you are working, you only get to keep one. And that has to go for everything - kids, house, electrical, etc... before it really becomes yours. It'll end up that 10 minutes out of those 2 hour blocks you are working (so 40mins a day) is actually yours to spend.
    It's enough to make one sick. I'm very certain that (as any reasonable person would) that Doggeral makes every effort to minize the income first. I know countless businesses that take on a 'shadow employee' in order to make less profit.
    The focus here is on progressive taxation. If I and my gf make 50k and 30k, we will get taxed much lower than a guy and gal making $80k and 0. Income-splitting is what needs to be happening.
    I'd love to pay my share, but thats it.
    You people calling Joe Calgary a whiner likely don't know what it takes to be an entrepreneur and take risk, and watch half of your reward slip away thanks to Big Government.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:18 p.m.  

  • No more sob stories about those who can't manage their money. No more sob stories about the beleaguered middle class. When our Regina-area neighbourhood group pushed City Hall on local public transit cuts, all we heard from the real estate sector was how home purchases were being put off because of property taxes. This from people who already owned homes.

    Spare me.

    We heard these middle class sob stories from Turner during his years as a "Sun" columnist. Perhaps the wife may be better off listening to her own heart and conscience rather than some Bible-spouting Pastor and husband who demands complete obedience. Perhaps Ibbotson and "the Globe" might take the time to find out exactly who these people might be.

    David Imrie - dave.imrie@gmail.com

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:24 p.m.  

  • Doggerel,

    The point is that government revenues are at an all time high, expanding much faster than the economy, and are the poor better off? Are there less of them? Is healthcare better than it used to be? Are the roads better? Is education better?

    My point is/was not selfishness, it is that increased taxes both on a relative and absolute basis have not improved public services, and an easy case could be made that they have deteriorated. Throwing money at these problems has not solved them, so perhaps it is time for a rethink. The average middle class taxpayer struggles to build a life and educate their kids to give them a good start. The largest expense for a middle class family is taxes....income, excise, consumption, property etc. ad infinitum, consuming more than half of every dollar earned. The services we pay ever more for are getting worse, and we see gun registries, Kyoto lunacy, HRDC graft, sponsorship etc.

    If you think objecting to this is selfish, than I'm selfish.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:37 p.m.  

  • First, it's "Doggerel", not "Doggeral".

    Second, my business would indeed withstand an audit, and I'm proud of that. We don't cheat, we follow the rules and we pay our fair share. Everything we deduct is legitimate.

    And third, Roby, um, have you stopped to consider what you GET for those taxes? Like (among other things) healthcare, roads, education and an infrastructure that permits you to connect to the internet in order to COMPLAIN ABOUT PAYING TAXES?

    My God - some of you are talking like we live in tents in the middle of the tundra. You don't know how good you have it.

    I stand by my earlier statement - whiny babies.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 1:39 p.m.  

  • Thank you for correctly spelling my name, Anonymous.

    And yes, I think you're selfish for complaining about Kyoto - but that's ok. Your kids will be paying the tab for that one.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 1:41 p.m.  

  • Dave Imrie,

    Since governments at all levels absorb more than half of the national income, and I have to wait a year for an MRI, but I can get one for my cat at midnight on Sunday tells me everything I need to know about who cannot manage money, and it isn't citizens or taxpayers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:43 p.m.  

  • Roby? 40 minutes a day?

    If you think spending money on your family is such a burden, perhaps you shouldn’t have family.

    It’s like you guys want a prize for having kids or something?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:46 p.m.  

  • Joe Calgary:

    I do not pay as much in absolute terms as you do but I still pay as much in proportion of my income and I do not have problems making ends meet. Indeed, I am able to save a considerable amount each year.

    How do I do it? Sound money management. You should try it sometimes.

    Nothing pisses me off more than hearing people who make high six figure incomes complain that they do not have enough money because their taxes are too high. What bullhsit. Here is a thought for you sir, think of taxes as a business expense, plan for them and make your other financial decisions accordingly. You will find that your money problems will be reduced.

    If you are unwilling to do that then my next piece of advice is to quit your current job and go work in a convenience store at 20K per year. I can assure you that you will not have to worry about taxes then.

    By Blogger ottlib, at 1:47 p.m.  

  • Iran to weaken US dollar ?
    Oil to trade in $Euros instead of $US dollar.

    You read this and wondered..
    Here is the final word why there is no chance
    Iran would pull that off.
    Wednesday, 29. March 2006, 18:48:24

    Dollar, Euro, Euros, exchange ...
    from the March 29, 2006 edition


    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 2:19 p.m.  

  • Please give Jason $10 so Liblogs can continue. go to Cherniak on Politics to donate. Liblogs is a privilege for us, not a right.

    He needs to incorporate to protect his liability. This is what he feels he has to do for his comfort in order to ensure liblogs continues without jeopardizing his future.

    Liblogs helps us get read and listened to. It also easily keeps us in touch with one another.

    Please donate. It's easy. You can even use a friends credit card and then give them $10 if you don't have one or mail him a cheque. PayPal is a double blind system that is very secure. I checked.

    $10 is not very much for what we get to do here.

    If you have already donated. Thank-you and ignore this message.


    By Blogger S.K., at 2:28 p.m.  

  • Dr. Strangelove writes:

    Ibbitson didn't miss anything. It's called progessive taxation. It's a system that punishes people for earning more. Two people earning $50,000 will have a lower effective tax rate and take home more than a single spouse earning $100,000.

    A single spouse earning about $100k would in general pay no more than about 45% of that in taxes. Sure, two people together earning 50k will have a lower effective tax rate, thanks to the progressivity of the tax system. But in order to take home more after taxes, they'd not only have to be paying NOTHING in taxes, they'd actually have to receive money back as well to make up for the fact that they earn less than the person making 100k gets after taxes. Someone needs to sharpen his math skills.

    Forgive me, Joe Calgary, but if you're paying 95k in taxes at 46% of your gross, you're making over 200k per year. That's about twice what my family's gross income was when I was growing up, and we were always very comfortably upper middle class.

    Cry me a river.

    By Blogger JG, at 2:37 p.m.  

  • Let's see, I make about $46,000 a year, my wife around $23,000. Sure, we do better than a one income home making $69,000 but we are not so well off as a couple making $35,000 each. Why is that? Why is that fair? Sorry, I just don't care if you rich Libs think I'm whiney or if the truly poor think I should "donate" more to them through taxes. At some point we reach a limit as to what is reasonalbe to take and we have been there for quite some time. My wife and I cannot afford a house where we live, not even close, and our careers limit us in our ability to move to a cheaper city. So when I hear that single employable welfare recipients only receive $350/mo in BC for housing I wonder why they expect to have a right to single occupant housing but I, the guy who works for a living, has to take in renter just to consider buying a house.

    Sure taxes pay for lots of nice things, but you lefties are never happy, you always want more, like universal daycare. I can't afford your dreams anymore, I have a few of my own I'd like to have a chance at someday.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:40 p.m.  

  • Doggerel,

    My apologies on the misspelling. My point is lost you though. My issue is a family making 80k spread over 2 incomes is being taxed less than over one income. The number doesn't even matter - the issue I have is that while one parent is at home and they are depending on one income, they are being penalized to do so by paying higher taxes.

    Now on your point. yes, some of these fundamental things (healthcare, roads, public education) are valuable and are funded through the taxbase. Fine. (I will argue on the internet though. I paid $4000 for an antenna to have a line of sight to a cable company who made a private investment, so you are 100% wrong on that one.)

    Is it fair for a wife/husband who stays at home to raise a family and live on one income instead of two to be taxed higher than a family where both parents are working?

    I applaud your selflessness, but some people believe that working more for less is regressing, not progressing. And I know how good I have it. That said, I believe people should pay their fair share, and not penalize some families who have made a choice to do things differently.

    FWIW - Thats not poor money mangement, thats poor tax code structure. I worry about that because at one point I thought about possibly staying home and living off my gf (future wife's) income, becoming a 'Mr. Dad.' The taxes of it make it a tougher lifestyle.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:50 p.m.  

  • Anon@12:40 knows what I'm talking about.

    I'm not feeling bad for Joe Calgary, ftr. I'm telling you that there needs to be a fairer system to tax family incomes so that it reflects the wealth of the whole family, not one earner within it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:54 p.m.  

  • Anon 12:40

    You and your wife should change careers if you are unhappy. I pay more in taxes than you and your wife combined. You don’t see me whining. But than again I am socially responsible Liberal as opposed a whiny conservative.

    Trust me if you are making $70 k a year the guy on welfare has a standard of living substantially lower than yours.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:01 p.m.  

  • "Sure taxes pay for lots of nice things, but you lefties are never happy, you always want more, like universal daycare. I can't afford your dreams anymore, I have a few of my own I'd like to have a chance at someday."

    I couldn't agree more. How much more of my paycheque will they need to take before they actually feel good about the world they live in? To hell with childcare. Pay for it on your own dime. I'm sick of it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:15 p.m.  

  • Dear Anonymous @1:15 - I agree! And you know what? I'm also sick of hearing all those sick people whining. Give me my $2500 a year and to hell with them - pay for your own healthcare!

    Please. This is the kind of ridiculous selfishness that oughta be illegal. Why don't you go live in I'm-Only-Out-For-Myself-istan?

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 3:52 p.m.  

  • Dog...blogger, please spare me your self-righteous crap. To compare child care to health care is completely missing the mark. Do you want the state to run everything in your life? Must we support every little whinner out there who's lives are so tough they can't support themselves? We have a pretty good social safety net as it stands. I see no need to expand upon it. Obviously you do, in fact, you think my "selfish" thinking should be outlawed. Do you prefer living under a Stalinist state? Good luck with that.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:05 p.m.  

  • Listen, Anon, I don't think making it easier for working families to get a leg up by helping them get their kids into decent daycare would turn Canada into a "Stalinist State" (whatever that is). It would simply allow more parents to get into the workforce, consume more products made by Canadian companies, pay more taxes and increase our GDP.

    Sorry to hear you're not in favour of that.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 4:09 p.m.  

  • Okay Josh Gould, let's do the math:

    According to Ernst & Yonge, in 2005, a spouse who makes $100k will have an effective tax rate of about 30% and take home about $70k for a household income of $70k.

    Alternatively, a double income family where each spouse earns $50k will each have an effective tax rate of about 21% translating into an after-tax income of $39.5k each. Multiplied by two equals $79k.

    Here's the really hard math:

    $79,000 take away $70,000 comes to $9,000. That's the difference in extra household after-tax income for our two working spouses - exactly what the lady in the article was alluding to.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:19 p.m.  

  • dr strangelove.

    So what's your point? The lady in the article gets to stay home.

    If she wants an extra $9,000 she should either get a part time job or divorce her husband and marry a guy making $112 850 a year instead of $100 000.

    You people are nuts, you don't want to subsidize a SMALL amount for daycare, so that a person will earn money and pay back a LARGER amount in taxes. Thus in effect reducing YOUR tax burden.

    If you could get off your ideological horses, you would see that YOU win when someone else goes back to work even if you subsidize the daycare.

    Instead you expect the rest of us working stiffs to give you special privileges because you CHOOSE to stay home with the kids.

    God damn Conservatives logic.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:53 p.m.  

  • dr strangelove

    It looks like you are more interested in social engineering than good tax policy.

    Kind of ironic eh? That's exactly what you Conservatives say about Liberals.

    Another example of Harpocrisy?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:17 p.m.  

  • I'm Anon 12:40, and to the anon whose advice is that my wife and I change careers: Screw You! I have a good deal of education and experience in my carees path, as my wife does, and you think I should just up and quit? And what, make less in a less expensive town and be right where I am? Or make the same and be happy that i have more money to give to the welfare state? And one more thing, I agree that my wife and I have better standard of living than someone on welfare, but that's because I work for a freakin' living, went to University, never got hooked on drugs even when I was unemployed or had life crises, and I generally obey the law. I SHOULD have a better standard of life if I work hard for it. Again, SCREW YOU! and anyone else who thinks otherwise.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:20 p.m.  

  • I can see that many of you Anons don't understand that it is bad tax policy. It's not a social engineering experiment, it's levelling the playing field so parents can choose what they want to do, instead of being forced.

    If she wants an extra $9,000 she should either get a part time job or divorce her husband and marry a guy making $112 850 a year instead of $100 000.

    It's stuff like this that will keep liberals out in Stornoway forever, assuming this is a liberal anon and not an NDP anon. I thought lefties liked "A woman's right to choose."

    I know lots of ya will simply agree to disagree. But if this was levelled out the Conservatives will have a huge leg up on the Libs, imho, once it was calculated for savings. Why it hasn't been done is because just that - it will drop the revenues from income taxes substantially.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:36 p.m.  

  • Roby

    "It's stuff like this that will keep liberals out in Stornoway forever"

    Open a history book buddy.

    "I thought lefties liked "A woman's right to choose." "

    She has a choice, work or stay at home. All choices have costs. I am not intrested in subsidizing this whiny woman's choice.

    I will subsidize daycare because in the end the person will end up paying back more in taxes and my tax burden will be decreased.

    "It's not a social engineering "

    It is social engineering, it just happens you favour this kind of social engineering.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:16 p.m.  

  • Anon 5:16,

    You expose yourself with the comment that when someone goes to work, your tax burden will be reduced. I've been paying taxes in this country for 23 years, and they go one way.....up. Your comment is an ivory tower theory, and those theories stay in the tower because they don't apply to the real world.

    Today is a case in point. We have finally ratcheted up the governments share of the economy to a point where we can fund our myriad of do-gooder schemes in addition to health, education, justice and defense (you know the things government is supposed to do) in relative balance, and what do we do? Do we say "there, we've done it, we don't need to grow government by more than population"? No sir. Government moves into entirely new areas of the economy and our lives. Government grows, period. Trudeau may have said government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, but he and his ilk over the last thirty years have made sure government has business in every other room in your house.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:31 p.m.  

  • Anonymous 6:31

    "I've been paying taxes in this country for 23 years, and they go one way.....up"


    My tax rate has been going down for almost the last decade and I make more money than ever. What country are you living in? The federal government and almost every province have been reducing taxes.

    Just because you do not see the economic benefits of having more people working, earning and paying taxes does not mean that those benefits do not exist.

    All those people working instead of staying home has kept your taxes down.
    If all those people stayed home, YOU would be paying for their health, education, justice and defense ENTIRELY.

    You would much rather complain and whine than acknowledge that reality.

    Open your eyes grandpa.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:50 p.m.  

  • Wow, anonymous 7:50, you have an amazing grasp of economics. Do you have an equal grasp of population dynamics? How about this little gem: Because people have to have two incomes to support the tax burden our government has placed on us, many women choose to postpone or forego children because they (and their spouse) cannot afford the time or costs of childrearing. or they have 1 or 2 children, which is below replacement value. The end result is fewer new workers to support the retiring workers, and we need massive immigration just to stay even. Maybe grandpa remembers a time when it wasn't so, maybe he knows more than some jumped up, under-educated Liberal sycophant with too many ideas how to spend other people's money. Screw You, too.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:56 p.m.  

  • "My husband and I make over $200,000 a year running a small business, and when I write my large cheques (personal and corporate) to the Receiver General, I am HAPPY TO DO SO."


    Horny Toad

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:00 a.m.  

  • "I am so sick of people claiming that staying at home and taking care of the kids is as hard work as actually going to a job"

    I agree, and that is why daycare workers should only get minimum wages, if that.Actually, they should probably be volunteers.

    Horny Toad

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:04 a.m.  

  • Anon 7:50,

    I'm glad for your tax rate...on income. How's that CPP contribution rate doing, how are your health premiums? Government revenue as a share of national income is at an all time high. Governments have one source of revenue.....taxes. I don't care what they call it, people pay more and more.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:18 a.m.  

  • Anon 8:56

    People make choices. They choose half million dollar houses, nice cars and Caribbean vacations over having many children. That’s that thing we call freedom, grandpa. You just happen to disagree with those priorities.

    If you want to crusade against decadent lifestyles be my guest.

    If affordability was the main factor in how many children one has than the poor would hardly ever breed and rich would have tons of children.

    But guess what even the rich CHOOSE to have few kids, because they CHOOSE to have other priorities.

    As I said you are trying to social engineer and pretend otherwise. Don’t worry you are not alone in your hypocrisy, it a common Conservative trait.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:35 a.m.  

  • Horny Toad

    Nice strawman you got there.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:37 a.m.  

  • You know, anon, you're right, the poor do seem to somehow have many more children than the middle class. Funny that. I guess I'm picky and actually want my kids to have a decent chance at life. But, so you know, I don't live in a half-million dollar house, just a quarter million dollar apartment, with two bedrooms, and I've never been to Cancun or the Carribean (or any other resort, for that matter). The people I know who do go don't do it on disposable income, they finance it, often from the equity in their home.

    Oh, it's about choices, alright. Choices like, how many kids can I raise in 2 bedroom highrise with no playgrounds or SAFE parks nearby? Am I willing to give up my career and move to a trailer in North Butthole Saskatchewan, live on welfare or some low wage job, have lots of room for kids, but no money? I guess I'm selfish, I want to have the same life my parents had, a modest house with a yard, a reliable car, and enough money for a family vacation at a motel on Lake Okanagan. Right now, that's a fantasy.

    Of course, taxing me more for a national daycare program, punishing me for having one large and one small income instead of two medium ones, and taking even more tax because the poor don't have what I have, that's the Liberal way. Yup I'm selfish.

    But on that selfish note, I bet I could argue that it's the Liberal that is more selfish. Take nationalized daycare. It will tax all and be available to all (in theory), that sounds fair. Except that it isn't universally available, it's mostly available to middle class and wealthy urbanites who work 9-5. Equal taxation but unequal service. But most Liberal voters are 9-5 middle class/wealthy urbanites. And the same goes for out vaunted medicare. Seems you can't go 5 block in TO or Vancouver without hitting some kind of hospital or health care clinic, or even a family doctor. But if you are a ruralite, you pay the same and get much less service. Funny how few Liberals get elected in rural ridings, isn't it?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:37 a.m.  

  • So why are you whining? Move, get a better job, etc etc. I have no kids, I already help pay for your kids schooling, healthcare etc. Now you say you don't want to pay your fair share of taxes also. What's next? Tax breaks per children? After all you do have more mouths to feed, on the same income as a childless person right?

    As a single high income childless person, I am already helping pay for the services you use.

    How much more of MY money do you want?

    I am more than willing to subsidize daycare if you will go to work, earn money and pay taxes for the services you and your kids will use. That reduces my tax burden.

    I am not willing to pay for all your family's services while you sit at home.

    If your lifestyle is economically unviable where you live or doing what you do for a living, stop whining, and change your lifestyle. We urbanites already subsidize you ruralites, we send billions (With a B) of our tax dollars out of the cities to you people.

    You are not interested in fairness in taxation but minimizing your own tax burden and having other pay for the services you and your family will use.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:25 p.m.  

  • And above you see exactly why the Liberal will be in Stornaway for a good, long time. Now if only we can fit some of the better quotes onto a billboard or two. I'm sleeping much beeter these days . . .

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:28 p.m.  

  • "I have no kids, I already help pay for your kids schooling, healthcare etc".

    anon 10:25, Each child in public education or receiving any other public service will have exactly the same opportunity to repay society for their education as taxpayers.

    When your need healthcare the most neither your pension dollars nor the gov't will be able to provide you with those services without hiring the kids that the public system is investing in today.

    You have every right to be childless, but do try to enjoy the free ride with a little more respect for the folks doing the heavy lifting.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:33 p.m.  


    I am more than willing to help pay for your kids educations, for welfare checks, for defense etc etc with my tax dollars

    All I ask is that others also do so, that they don’t use excuses to get out of paying their fair share and thus increase MY tax burden.


    As a young single high income earner with no dependants, I am probably paying one of the highest marginal tax rates in the country and using the least amount of government services.

    You should be thanking me for paying your damn taxes! Instead you ungrateful freeloaders want even more of my money while you stay at home and don’t work?

    As for the Liberals being in Stornaway, give me a break! You form one SLIM minority against a scandal plagued government and think you are unstoppable?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:48 p.m.  

  • anon at 11:43:

    The most I've waited for an MRI was six weeks (and it was NOT urgent). One Sunday near midnight I experienced severe chest pain which, due to a pre-existing condition, required a trip to the Emergency Room. I was seen at once and treated (mercifully, it was not a serious matter). That's when the system works. I've owned numerous cats through the years - here in Winnipeg, one vet clinic sees pets outside regular hours (for an up front fee). Few cities have those.

    People make choices. Don't whine about them.

    David Imrie

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:50 p.m.  

  • the upper middle class must be bleeding red ink because they are the only ones who have enough money to pay for all the Liberal welfare projects, do us all a favour and stop bleeding.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:49 p.m.  

  • To avoid losing that income, although most credit cards indemnify the user from loss, you are advised not to use any credit card on the web.

    Spyware kits sold for fifteen dollars available on the web
    Thursday, March 30, 2006 at 21:24 by Peter Smith

    Experts at Sophos have discovered a Russian web site that sells spyware kits, called WebAttacker, for fifteen US dollars (about ten UK pounds). The web site, which refers to its creators as spyware and adware developers, markets the strengths of its kits, makes the kits available for online purchase and offers technical support to its buyers.

    Included in the kits are scripts designed to simplify the task of infecting computers - the buyer spams out a message to email addresses, inviting recipients to visit a compromised web site.

    Samples found by Sophos's global network of monitoring stations used newsworthy topics to lure unwary users. One presented itself as a warning of the deadly H5N1 bird flu virus, providing links to a bogus web site, which purported to contain advice on how to protect "you and your family". The other claims that Slobodan Milosevic was murdered and invites users to visit the site for more information. These web sites then attempt to download the malicious code remotely onto the user's PC by taking advantage of known web browser and operating system vulnerabilities.

    Carole Theriault, senior security consultant at Sophos, said.
    TG [The rest of the story] = http://itvibe.com/news/printarticle.asp?id=4001

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 7:14 p.m.  

  • Isn't funny how many Liberals claim to have big incomes, and pay big taxes. Hell, they're happy to pay big taxes 'cause it goes towards good projects. Funny, you see, because these same big talking Liberals don't seem to be donating too much money to their prefered party. If you are so happy to write a cheque why is the Liberal party in so much debt?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:39 p.m.  

  • Oooooh, Such uncomfortable logic.
    Yeah. How come? TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 9:52 p.m.  

  • You have a strange definition of logic.

    Maybe conservatives just like "donating" money because they know they will make it back ten fold with special targeted tax-cut for their special interest group? :)

    But seriously, I suspect generally Conservatives are older and have more money and thus can afford to donate more often.


    I am genuinely very happy to give back to my country and pay my fair share of taxes. I consider it part of my civic duty to help out the less fortunate. I guess I am a bleed heart.

    I live a very comfortable life. It bothers me when people who make even more money than myself pretend that they are some less well off. Especially when there are actually people who are less better off, and could use the help. The lady in this article is a prime example. With house hold income of over $100 000 and despite getting to stay at home, she complains that she doesn't have all the goodies her neighbors have.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:33 p.m.  

  • And once again I thank the Lord for such arrogant, self-satisfied and judgmental twits who populate the Liberal blogosphere. I can hardly wait to put some of these wonderful quotes to use.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:59 p.m.  

  • I gave the Liberal Party $250 last year, and I have the Christmas card to prove it.

    Paul Martin's kids are ugly.

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 6:59 p.m.  

  • Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!
    I have a reward credit cards site.
    Come and check it out if you get time :-)

    By Blogger Bill Harrison, at 2:44 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home