Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby
My apologies, wasn't my intention to ignore anything at all, I just took on a lot to respond to at that moment 
Obviously it's a fairly substantial and likely indigestible increase for most people, and I didn't mean for it to come across as "Hey what if a government did that tomorrow?" but rather, "What if Canada slowly built itself toward that?"
I'm not at all denying it would fund a more socialist state, but to me that isn't a bad word. While the idea of daycare or children attending school for free obviously doesn't appeal to you, what about a free, expansive health care? What if you didn't have to worry about what job you had because healthcare was already covered? What about higher pensions and an earlier retirement age? I'd like to retire before 67, personally. Early retirement creates more opportunities for a young, educated workforce to find employment, so it does have a greater benefit than just supporting those of retirement age.
Consumption taxes are a very small drop in the pond compared to income tax (which should also be raised). I understand that it may be of no direct benefit to yourself right now, but high taxes do inevitably benefit everyone. Granted, I'm bias, but it is partially because of that bias that perhaps I don't see the problem you're getting at fully. In scenarios common to this, as tax goes up on items, so too does minimum wage. As I said, it's not as though this is an immediate, feasible solution, but one that Canada could be benefitted by building towards. |
It is funny you should mention retirement, because when I look at your plan, that is precisely what I would be losing out on under it. Your tax increases would severely degrade my ability to save for my own retirement, thus forcing me to rely on the welfare state. I would no longer be able to plan to live to a standard I determine and would instead be largely forced into the standard the government dictates, which all to often caters to the lowest common denominator.
Additionally, the idea of retiring earlier and making room for younger people in the workforce presupposes that the population trends support that. Canada is a country that has an aging population on average, meaning that allowing people to retire earlier under your welfare state philosophy only places an ever increasing burden on a shrinking working population. You could only pay to maintain your scheme with ever increasing taxes and an ever growing disincentivization for any individual to try and get ahead.
As far as "free healthcare" goes, nothing is ever free. And if there is one thing that Alberta well demonstrates, simply throwing more money at the system does not result in a better system.
tl;dr version: The problems with your system are that (1) it removes individual responsibility, (2) it forces everyone to live under government mandated standards of living and (3) removes incentives to try and improve one's position.
Or, simply, the government is not better suited to determine how I live my life than I am.