Tories find small cuts to reduce spending by $1B

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Wow, you must think Canada is a poor place to want to visit if the only way we can get tourists to come here it to give them a tax break. Why should Citizens have to pay it but tourists, not?
One of the dumbest rules ever.

I don't think the GST rebate is to attract people to visit Canada. I think it was intended for those already in Canada to encourage them to spend a little more on things that they plan to take home with them. IIRC hotel and restaurant bills- they still pay the tax on those. But it encourages them to buy souvenirs and stuff like that to take home. Once home people will ask them "where did you get that?" "Canada; beautiful country- you should go."

Not the absolute best use of our money; I agree. But certainly not the dumbest either.

[Kobasew fan]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I don't think the GST rebate is to attract people to visit Canada. I think it was intended for those already in Canada to encourage them to spend a little more on things that they plan to take home with them. IIRC hotel and restaurant bills- they still pay the tax on those. But it encourages them to buy souvenirs and stuff like that to take home. Once home people will ask them "where did you get that?" "Canada; beautiful country- you should go."

Not the absolute best use of our money; I agree. But certainly not the dumbest either.

I agree that this reimbursement of GST does not encourage people to come abroad for tourisim purposes. As you read in this link
it says
"But the Canada Revenue Agency defended the reduction, saying less than 3 per cent of foreign visitors -- 939,000 -- applied for rebates in one recent year."

So I'm entirely in favour of getting rid of this wasteful spending.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lurch

Not at all. I'm saying if marijuana is shown to be a great painkiller, who will spend money to find this out b/c if it turns out to be true, you can't patent a herb/weed. As such, there is little incentive for research with marijuana privately. It's kind of like research into the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables - how much of it is privately funded?

I see.

What benefit is it of the government to research it then? I think it is widely accepted that marijuana can be effectively used as a pain killer, so what is left for the government to research?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Lurch

Not at all. I'm saying if marijuana is shown to be a great painkiller, who will spend money to find this out b/c if it turns out to be true, you can't patent a herb/weed. As such, there is little incentive for research with marijuana privately. It's kind of like research into the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables - how much of it is privately funded?

What about opiates?? That is from illegal sources yet they can make synthetic copies. They can do the same.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by ken0042

IIRC hotel and restaurant bills- they still pay the tax on those.

Actually they did get the GST back from Hotels. They didn't get it back from consumable goods, ie:Gas, meals, tours.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Actually they did get the GST back from Hotels.

Hmmm, I see that you are correct. I'm just wondering if that was changed at some point; because when I worked at a hotel in the mid 90's we were told to stop handing the forms out because people were getting mad about not being able to claim the tax back from their hotel bill.

One thing I just thought of; previously you needed to spend $715 before you would get a refund. Now the amount is $834 because GST went down. (Minimum rebate is $50.) The conspiracy theorist in my wonders if somebody in gov't saw that most claims were for just over $50, and they would be paying out a lot less anyways; that by saying they are scrapping the program are they really just finding a way to say they saved money; when that money would never have been spent anyways.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Hmmm, I see that you are correct. I'm just wondering if that was changed at some point; because when I worked at a hotel in the mid 90's we were told to stop handing the forms out because people were getting mad about not being able to claim the tax back from their hotel bill.

One thing I just thought of; previously you needed to spend $715 before you would get a refund. Now the amount is $834 because GST went down. (Minimum rebate is $50.) The conspiracy theorist in my wonders if somebody in gov't saw that most claims were for just over $50, and they would be paying out a lot less anyways; that by saying they are scrapping the program are they really just finding a way to say they saved money; when that money would never have been spent anyways.

The minumum rebate is not $50. Each reciept has to be $50 before tax. Anything under will not be considered as it would take the people who go through the reciepts to long to look at $5 receipts. The total claim has to be $200 dollars, meaning you only have to spend $200 to make a claim. So either 4 reciepts of $50 or 1 reciept of $200.

From what I understand, they were paying out about 70 million a year. I wonder if that cost included the operating costs to run the program.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The minumum rebate is not $50. Each reciept has to be $50 before tax. Anything under will not be considered as it would take the people who go through the reciepts to long to look at $5 receipts. The total claim has to be $200 dollars, meaning you only have to spend $200 to make a claim. So either 4 reciepts of $50 or 1 reciept of $200.

From what I understand, they were paying out about 70 million a year. I wonder if that cost included the operating costs to run the program.

Right from the VRP website.

To claim a refund:

• You must be a non-resident of Canada,
• You must have original receipts,
• Your eligible purchases of goods and or short-term accommodation must total at least $200CAN (before taxes),
• Each receipt for eligible goods must show a minimum amount of $50CAN (before taxes),
• You must provide proof that the goods were removed from Canada within 60 days of delivery to you, and
• We must receive your application within one year from the date the goods were exported and/or the short accommodation was paid or became payable.

[Flame On]

Some more fuel to the fire.
The CBC website (sorry to quote such a "Communist" source as many here will deam it) has this about the axing of moneys to heritage projects and museums. I'm sure many here will praise the frivilous spending on such wasteful resources as museums but before you do you may want to read the Conservative parties own recomendations....

And it is especially puzzling as it comes on the heels of a report by the standing committee of Canadian heritage to the House of Commons that recommends increased stable funding to museums.
"We had a commitment from the Conservative government that said museums were a priority and that they would be making new investments in the sector," he said.

While many museums in Europe are subsidized to the extent they're free to the public (British Museum, Natural History Museum for example) we're going the other way it seems.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Some more fuel to the fire.
The CBC website (sorry to quote such a "Communist" source as many here will deam it) has this about the axing of moneys to heritage projects and museums. I'm sure many here will praise the frivilous spending on such wasteful resources as museums but before you do you may want to read the Conservative parties own recomendations....

While many museums in Europe are subsidized to the extent they're free to the public (British Museum, Natural History Museum for example) we're going the other way it seems.

If we can get this damn debt paid off, we wouldn't have to worry about cutting all these programs. Debt servicing costs are one f the largest expenses, if not the largets, of all the governments spending. (around 36 billion a year) Can you imaging what we could do with that extra money once we pay off the debt??.

Lets do like Ralphy did and hunker down for a few years and get this paid off. Once it is...we will have the best counrty in the world by far.

[Julio]

Under $34 b last year actually in debt charges, but your point is valid. This is down hugely from the past both in absolute $ and as a percentage of the total g'vt spending (16.2% as opposed to almost double that during the worst years during the Mulroney era and again during the mid 90's)

[transplant99]

The government isnt going to be using weed for testing anymore??

Great news.

More for the rest of those that use it!!!

Win-win.

[FireFly]

Two things... whether or not the government tests the weed, people will still use it for relief, and doctors will still 'prescribe' it. My sister who died of pancreatic cancer was told by her doctors to smoke more weed as it increased her appetite. Had nothing to do with the pain relieving qualities of the drug. There is more than one benefit to marijuana.

As for the GST thing... With the rebates, people may have spent that money on duty free things in the airport. However, then the government gets nothing. Helps our economy? Sure. Helps our government? No. As there was no tax on the item, the government gets nothing back. This is a way for the government to get some of the money that tourists spend. Otherwise, they get nothing. Why should only the businesses gain money from tourists and not the government?

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Lets do like Ralphy did and hunger down for a few years and get this paid off. Once it is...we will have the best counrty in the world by far.

Yeah, but than we'll have too much wealth and unprecedented growth that we can't anticipate and plan for.