Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
Given that the provinces themselves don't pay anything for equalization payments, delineating the source of the federal revenue isn't really that valuable of an exercise. It's like complaining that property taxes in a rich neighborhood are funding roads in a poorer neighborhood where per capita tax revenue is lower. It's just a basic fact of federalism and progressive taxation.
You're going to have to explain how cheaper daycare results in lower salaries. I'm not really following the logic.
|
All I was trying to say is that earning 100k a year or 80k a year with a 20k childcare benefit is the same thing (so long as you use the childcare benefit). But on an average salary chart, it appears that you are making 20% less than your 'richer' neighbour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
Again, no provincial money is going to equalization payments so there's no provincial money to be saved. What you're asking for is basically a federal tax rate that is lower for Albertans only, since that's the only thing that's going to accomplish your goal of a vastly lower net contribution to the federal treasury from Albertans.
|
Not at all. I'm asking that federal tax dollars be used federally and not as a slush fund.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
Given that per capita GDPP of the 5 main receivers of equalization payments (QC, MB, NS, NB, and PEI) has shown relative growth when compared to the other provinces, I don't see a basis for this argument.
|
If this is true over the long run, then I'm impressed. Although I would question how Quebec (which has been a beneficiary of the program since 1957) could have above average growth for over 50 years and still be a have-not Province. Either it started orders of magnitude behind, or it is only growing faster in the short-term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
|
I am at work right now and can't devote the time to read it, but it looks interesting. I'll take a read this weekend if I have time. Thanks.