[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Grey Fox]

It only serves the rich, the NDP plan would better but the Cons plan is not bad for the middle class.

[Malthus]

Malthus, the mandatory increases come with employer matching.  Voluntary increases do not.   As a result the only people who benefit from voluntary contributions are those who have cash left over after maxing RRSP and Tax free savings accounts.  So who is that going to benefit?

Yes, it would only serve those with cash in hand - but it is not actively regressive like tax-sheltering.

While I'd prefer the Lib plan that does both, my social-concience side can't get mad about this latest Con plan. Nor can my Mono side rub its hands in evil glee about it, like it can about the increase in TFSA limits. 

[crazy canuck]

Malthus, the mandatory increases come with employer matching.  Voluntary increases do not.   As a result the only people who benefit from voluntary contributions are those who have cash left over after maxing RRSP and Tax free savings accounts.  So who is that going to benefit?

Yes, it would only serve those with cash in hand - but it is not actively regressive like tax-sheltering.

While I'd prefer the Lib plan that does both, my social-concience side can't get mad about this latest Con plan. Nor can my Mono side rub its hands in evil glee about it, like it can about the increase in TFSA limits. 

We will have to see the details. Iirc CPP payments are tax deductible in the sense that they are not counted in the calculation of employment income so I think it probably would be regressive.  Of course this could all just be posturing like the changes to the calculation of capital gains that never saw the light of day a couple of elections ago.

[crazy canuck]

The Globe published a follow up piece.  I think it explains exactly what the Conservatives are up to here.

University of Calgary tax expert Jack Mintz, who led the retirement research project for Finance Canada and produced a summary report in December 2009, agreed that details such as whether specific benefits are guaranteed or not make a huge difference on whether such an idea has policy merit. Dr. Mintz said it would likely be more costly for the CPP Investment Board to track individual accounts and there would be issues in terms of how contributions and withdrawals are treated for tax purposes.

"The question is what are we talking about?" he said. "I think [the consultations] might be partly to get this off the table for the next election."

[Barrister]

And what is Premier Notley's first official action as Premier?  Why more government spending of course!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/rachel-notley-announces-103-million-boost-to-education-budget-1.3090867

[Josephus]

And what is Premier Notley's first official action as Premier?  Why more government spending of course!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/rachel-notley-announces-103-million-boost-to-education-budget-1.3090867

I would hope so.

[Barrister]

And what is Premier Notley's first official action as Premier?  Why more government spending of course!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/rachel-notley-announces-103-million-boost-to-education-budget-1.3090867

I would hope so.

I guess a six billion dollar deficit doesn't worry you?

Look - if she were doing this as part of her overall budget I wouldn't mind - then everything gets costed out, and she can think about how she's going to pay for this spending.  But it just seems like a bad sign to me.

[crazy canuck]

100 million in spending on things that seem sensible and urgent doesn't seem to be a bad idea.  If the deficit is six billion doesn't it makes sense to spend money on things that will ultimately increase economic output (ie better educated workforce) and in relation to the young offenders centre, reduce crime and ultimately reduce the cost of the criminal justice system.


It seems that most of this is refusing to implement changes the Conservatives were going to make because they disagree with those policy decisions.

Let us know if the NDP makes a policy decision that is a poor decision.  Then I would probably be with you.  But you are in danger of crying wolf too many times here 

[Barrister]

The new Justice Minister, Kathleen Ganley, is a labour lawyer.  Fair enough, coming from the NDP.

What her official bio doesn't state was that she was called to the bar in 2012.

To be fair she's only a couple years younger than me, so presumably law was a second career for her,  But again, her official bio doesn't state what that first career was.

To be fair, our new ADM is a very well respected former prosecutor from our department.

[Neil]

Damn, if Harper's Conservatives aren't going be wise economic stewards, then there's really no reason to vote in the federal election, is there?  If I can't justify a Conservative vote, and the Liberals and NDP are hostile to my province, that kind of leaves acts of political violence as the only option, right?

[crazy canuck]

Ok, I will bite, what did they do?

[Neil]

Ok, I will bite, what did they do?

Nothing special.  It just seems that they're dead set on cutting tax revenue in various ways.  That's unwise.  I'm not saying that I'm considering an attack or anything, but if the Conservatives lose my trust, then what other option do I have?

[crazy canuck]

but if the Conservatives lose my trust, then what other option do I have?

Get to the end of the line buddy.  The queue has been forming for a while now.

[Josephus]

I'm so glad all you richies are seeing the light of day

[Neil]

but if the Conservatives lose my trust, then what other option do I have?

Get to the end of the line buddy.  The queue has been forming for a while now.

Sooo...  Wanna form a group dedicated to political violence?