Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
An increased fuel tax would only be economically viable if it was offset with reduced income and corporate taxes (which is precisely what is stated in the linked article). Dion's proposal does exactly that, but whether you can trust him to actually follow through with that promise is, of course, a personal decision.
|
I think that's exactly what this election for Dion comes down to for me and probably a bunch of different voters. Quite frankly my opinion on the Liberals is that when it comes to party philosophy it really comes down to power for power's sake. Any good governance that comes out of them is a byproduct of their own ambitions to pick winners and losers in this country.
What happened the past 2.5 years is Harper reduced the GST 2% and cut taxes down to revenue levels that almost put us in danger of a yearly deficit when the economy is in a downturn. Liberals will hammer on this point this campaign. However the real reason they don't like this is because that 10 billion dollar cushion was used by them in the past to buy votes, pad the party's finances, and reward their friends. The way I see it is I'd rather the cash be in my pocket than spent in this manner.
With the carbon tax they can take in the revenue and distribute it in the form of tax cuts and incentives to whomever they feel based on whatever criteria they choose (Which is why he's not applying it to gasoline, and providing addtional incentives to truckers etc. The criteria has been politically engineered as opposed to really doing what's best for carbon reduction). The end effect is once again the Liberals picking winners and losers and wielding more power. This kind of garbage makes Layton's cap and trade system seem more economically, environmentally, and politically responsible on a relative basis (I feel really dirty saying that but it's the truth).