Quote:
Originally Posted by Antithesis
Once again, the difficulty we're having seems to arise from different understandings of what a consumption/sales tax would involve. I would expect that a sales tax would involve very little increased burden on the poor (especially when combined with some sort of tax credit that could be applied, but again, I am not an accountant). The basic staples that are actually categorized as needs - food, housing, utilities - would not be taxed in this manner, I would assume.
While I am not an accountant, what I am is a teacher, and what you are saying about the work kids do is patently false. There is no teacher that I have ever worked with that would refuse to give a student a paper copy of an assignment in order to complete their work. Further to that, even if a computer were required in order to complete work, schools are outfitted with all sorts of technology that students can use. They could arrive at school early, stay late or work over lunch hour. I don't want to turn this into some sort of 'teacher thread' but again, I have never encountered a teacher - let alone an entire school - that would not support a child in such an endeavor. Students can learn all of the things you've discussed without needing their own personal laptop or iPad or iPhone or iWhatever.
It's been pointed out (I think by Slava, even) that a pure consumption tax would actually reduce the burden on the poor in terms of taxes. I don't know if that's the way to go - I don't think we want our sales taxes in Alberta to get that out of line with the rest of our neighbors. I think a combination of removing the flat provincial income tax, slightly increasing corporate taxes and a small sales tax is probably the way to go here. I'm sure my opinion is different from many here but I appreciate the dialogue. Again, I expect it should be relatively easy to ensure that those less fortunate actually pay less in terms of taxes with the implementation of a sales tax in addition to some other changes.
And for the record, I do not think it would be easy to find a person more understanding and appreciative of people who find gainful employment of any type. As a union member, I personally place significant value on the working person no matter what color their collar may be.
|
I understand exactly were you are coming form, I understand the exemptions for food, utilities, clothing.......
I fully understand the argument that the rich will pay more into the consumption tax than the poor.
I think you are completely missing our argument. If you maintain the same flat 10% income tax and add a 3% consumption tax, any way you cut it you are increasing the tax burden for everyone. The rich say we consume more so we will pay more into it. I am saying if a poor person is left with left with $100 month after the essentials of life, they will spend that every single month and you are leaving him with
$97!. If a rich person if left with $1500/month and puts $500 in savings, and spends $200 out of province you are taxing him 1.6% of his disposable income leaving him with $1476. So yes the rich guy put in $24 this month and the poor guy put in $3. But you had double the impact on the poor guys life. And that is completely ignoring the cost of the debt cycle many people find themselves in that will be amplified by any additional tax burden.
You are also missing the problem that when you exempt Child Care, Food, Clothing, Utilities... Rich people spend allot more on all of these, so they proportionately enjoy more benefit from the exemptions
It also concerns me that the cost to the government of managing a consumption tax would be far greater than the cost of raising income taxes.
As a society if we are saying that there are people who can hold down full time jobs should not be allowed to enjoy the benefits of modern life and give there children every opportunity, we are striving far far too low. I thought we lived in one of the richest places on earth with the highest standard of living.
I welcome you to get rid of you computer, your cell phone, your car, stop registering any extra curricular activities, and then continue feeling you can put enough time in at work, or you that are providing your children with enough resources to excel in life. Even better do all of that with then understanding that upon retiring you will have to take a part time job just so you can buy your grand children a cheap Walmart Christmas present. Then come back and tell someone working 40-60 hours/week in the richest place on earth deserves that. It just makes no sense.
I also am no expert but I suspect that poor people having a higher percentage of the personal income after taxes in the province, would be a more effective way to support those in need that social programs like the food bank, right to play, whats the program that provides meals for grade school students in the morning? There are costs and logistics associated with redistributing wealth that would not be there if you just left the working poor with a bigger piece of the pie to start with.