A bunch of fiscal ideas will ultimately hurt the middle class, like “eliminating Tax Free Savings Accounts as a means of tax avoidance” and “taxing capital gains and stock options at the same rate as salaries or wages.” If your retirement fund holds U.S. stock, you won’t like the “international tax on the purchase, sale, or transfer of the four principal types of financial assets — shares, bonds, foreign currency, and derivatives.”
Fans of more redistribution, they’re again suggesting “a minimum annual income for landed immigrants, permanent residents and citizens of Canada covering all ages, life stages, abilities and family status.” So free money for anyone who sets foot in Canada, no questions asked.
Nationalization is big: “The only way to significantly reduce smoking in Canada, and eventually wind down this unhealthy industry, is to de-commercialize the Canadian tobacco industry.”
Richmond, B.C., members have resolutions to nationalize banks, insurance companies and the auto industry. They also want the Hamilton company U.S. Steel to be nationalized and given over to “community democratic control” because, well, because they don’t like the company.
Richmonders also want to “reduce the work week throughout Canada to
32 hours, without loss of pay or benefits to workers, and to outlaw mandatory overtime.” Meh, a bit too big government, but I’ll take it!
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
For what it's worth, guaranteed income is actually a well-supported idea. Whereas something like EI gives people an incentive to not work (because if you're working, you can't claim it), guaranteed income isn't lost when you work, so people are encouraged to seek extra income.
In defense of the NDP conventions are a way for every party to allow their wack doodles to feel included, none of it actually happens, much like the anti immigrant anti abortion wackdoodle crap that always floats around reform and tory conventions
For what it's worth, guaranteed income is actually a well-supported idea. Whereas something like EI gives people an incentive to not work (because if you're working, you can't claim it), guaranteed income isn't lost when you work, so people are encouraged to seek extra income.
By whom? Guaranteed income is terrible.
The Following User Says Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
. Nationalization is big: “The only way to significantly reduce smoking in Canada, and eventually wind down this unhealthy industry, is to de-commercialize the Canadian tobacco industry.”
The Mohawks are going to love that.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
I believe, a lot of these measures never even make it to real debate. They were saying that pretty much anyone gets to bring something to the table (there were 600+ measures or so?) and then they get rid of the ones that aren't very popular. The CBC was reporting in fact that the NDP was trying to become more centrists and get rid of a lot of it's left leaning policies and talk.
This happens with every party, the Conservatives always have someone who brings in the abortion issue and the religion issue, etc. in these big conventions. Doesn't mean anything in the long term usually.
For what it's worth, guaranteed income is actually a well-supported idea. Whereas something like EI gives people an incentive to not work (because if you're working, you can't claim it), guaranteed income isn't lost when you work, so people are encouraged to seek extra income.
Honest question as I don't know much about this guaranteed minimum income but how would it give people incentive to work?
Knowing nothing about it I imagine if the minimum income was say 20k/year, you could sit on your butt collect 20k, or work some min. wage job make maybe 15k and they would give you 5k to help you reach the 20k minimum. Am I incorrectly assuming how it sounds?
EI doesn't work properly if it keeps people from working, or allows them to work for 3-4 months out of the year, and then take the rest of the year off and collect EI.
I do believe the Feds were saying they would work on punishing the people who were doing that.
I would love to hear the argument in favour of guaranteed income. Especially if Freidman supported it.
Honest question as I don't know much about this guaranteed minimum income but how would it give people incentive to work?
Knowing nothing about it I imagine if the minimum income was say 20k/year, you could sit on your butt collect 20k, or work some min. wage job make maybe 15k and they would give you 5k to help you reach the 20k minimum. Am I incorrectly assuming how it sounds?
I would sit on my butt, and collect bottles and cans one or two days a week.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Honest question as I don't know much about this guaranteed minimum income but how would it give people incentive to work?
Knowing nothing about it I imagine if the minimum income was say 20k/year, you could sit on your butt collect 20k, or work some min. wage job make maybe 15k and they would give you 5k to help you reach the 20k minimum. Am I incorrectly assuming how it sounds?
I'll let Andrew Coyne explain it:
Quote:
The basic idea behind the GAI is sound: to consolidate a number of federal and provincial programs, some in cash and some in kind, into a single, universal, unconditional cash benefit, delivered through the tax system. The base amount would be modest: perhaps $10,000-$12,000 per person. Critically, it would be taxed back only gradually, say at 25 cents on the dollar, as earned income rises. Compare that to current practice, where benefits are often withdrawn dollar-for-dollar, or in the case of benefits in kind like free dental care or prescription drugs, are denied altogether to those who leave social assistance: an effective marginal tax rate of 100% or more.
I like how Mulcair termed himself a "Layton-ite" in that piece, in response to being asked if he was a "Blair-ite". Mulcair's problem is that the electorate is coming to realize that Layton is dead, and Mulcair has to stand on his own two feet. So far he's failing, and it is being reflected in the polls. He's lost a third of the NDP's support in Quebec and is stagnant everywhere else. And I suspect everywhere else will turn red when Trudeau is coronated.
Wait, if we paid out 10,000 to lets say 25 million Canadians wouldn't it come out to $250,000,000,000?, in as you put it a combination of program and cash.
Canada spends half of that per person federally on health care alone.
What it sounds like your proposing is the tax free exmption level actually becomes a check and people can decide what services they use?
The whole thing seems incredibly goofy and silly.
But it would certainly play up to the 99%ers who vote.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
I was briefly reading on Wikipedia. Sounded like NDP is pretty much a European Social Democratic party according to it. According to this thread they almost sound more left-wing than that.
NDP holds a convention wackiness ensues
