Carney has already cut the capital gains tax, that we were told was created to create generational fairness. As well as the carbon tax, which we were told was a net benefit to the poor. Given the polls seemingly Canadians arent progressive, and they hate taxes on the rich.
I feel like the NDP and the conservatives are both better than the Liberals. The NDP will raise taxes to actually fund the programs, which will lead to higher average standards of living and less future austerity; where the Conservatives will cut and lead to greater productivity gains and greater foreign investment into Canada.
Whereas the Liberals seem to be low taxes, tighter regulation, more unfunded programs, and now using even more debt in an attempt to force capital formation as if it will be different from the last decade. They just seem to say whatever they have to to get elected at any given time with no static leanings left or right, a party of non-denominational opportunists.
FYI both Islam and Switzerland have a wealth tax.
Islam prescribes people must pay 2.5% of their wealth (above a certain exempt amount) as annual tax to the poor and needy. Wikipedia
Switzerland has a 0.5% wealth tax in most cantons, although the details vary. Link
You may use that knowledge to show that wealth tax does exist in some places already, and the idea isn’t unheard of.
Are they proposing it as a yearly tax? That seems like the proposal is just for show. We should be working on implementing an inheritance tax if we want to be serious about taxing wealth.
billionaires have a lifetime of 80+ years. At this rate, you’re not gonna tax Zuckerberg or Bezos in their, or your, lifetime.
Yeah, but just like capital gains, it doesn’t make sense to tax wealth until it is changing hands.
but why not?
How do you value something that was not sold? Some people can paint paintings worth millions others can paint the same painting and it’s worth less than the canvas. If you need to go through and value everything that everyone above a certain threshold has every single year you will get bogged down with accounting work. Especially since these people employ teams of accountants that will be deceiving you every step of the way. It’s much easier to do a one time big taxation event than a small recurring one (see Nate Erskine-Smith’s discussion on this). It’s also much fairer. While you are living you should be rewarded for high earnings, but when you pass your children did not earn that wealth.
It honestly pains me that my values seem to match the NDP platform, but I’m forced to vote liberal because any other vote would benefit conservatives.
That’s not true for every riding. Vote strategically using 338canada.com.
Based on current projections there is minimal risk of NDP winning enough seats to seriously hurt Liberals positions over Conservatives.
If your riding is leaning conservative but NDP is a close second, you should vote NDP, not Liberal (if that’s consistent with your values).
A Liberal minority government is the best outcome of this election on my opinion. An unchecked Carney is a risk of over-privatization (though not nearly as dangerous as Conservatives).
That domain does not load for me.
Should be 338canada.com.
If there is another minority, the NDP can (as they did over the last 4 years) have a role in promoting their policies while providing the balance of power.
It only works when they are willing to call a vote when they don’t get what was promised.
Is unfunded spending not future austerity?
Liberals seem to me to be the most reckless, increasing spending while not raising taxes. They already removed the capital gains tax, and we now spend more on interest than on health transfers, meanwhile we have a doctor shortage.
They just let the future to pay it off, then we suffer like under Chretien.
No, unfunded spending isn’t future austerity. It could be in some cases, but it rarely is. In fact unfunded spending could mean future prosperity. For example building high speed rail or doing R&D for vaccines. We should spend the money for both today as both produce much more in the future than what’s spent. Austerity is usually ideologically driven, not by necessity. We’ve understood this since the Great Depression and we’ve battle tested the Keynes approach. The austerity periodically practiced since the 70s-80s required convincing a lot of people to believe in the free market fundamentalism preached by neoliberalism. It’s time to relearn what we knew before that.
We need to tax the rich, not to fund our government, but to decrease the drastic power they have over our economy, the state and our lives.
Our per capita GDP is basically unchanged since Liberals took over, as the US did very well. So clearly we didn’t build infrastructure with the money which is my problem with the Liberals.
100%. However Carney has come out and said in clear terms this is going to change in concrete ways. Also I liked something he mentioned in a presser the other day - they’ll be getting rid of external consultants and contractors (often large companies) as well as looking at procurement. I read this as curbing public money from going into the Accentures of the world as well as reducing how much we pay service providers like Azure. I suspect curbing dollars going to US companies would also be a priority.
Some really great quality of life improvements for the working class if they could pull it off. It’s a shame that we’re essentially a 2 party system federally.
We need to pressure whichever party is elected to implement electoral reform.
