Alberta Taxes

[edslunch]

Another year, another shortfall in education funding, larger class sizes, etc. despite promises of stable funding. Is that how we want to prepare for the future?

Some will argue we have an expenditure problem and there's merit to that. But it's only half the problem. We also have a revenue problem that's directly tied to our reliance on resource revenues and our tax regime. It's great that in boom years we're awash with cash but it hurts us during the lean.

Alberta is a wealthy province and has a high proportion of well-paid citizens (not just on CP). Why not implement a more sensible tax system that provides more stable funding and allows us to build up petro-reserves. Suppose we introduced a sales tax or made income tax more progressive to collect more revenues through taxation. Stop spending resource revenues - put 100% in the Heritage fund. Over time as the fund generates more investment income use a portion to reduce tax levels.

I don't know what level of taxation is required to make this work but I'm guessing this is feasible. Probably political suicide too but someone could make the noble case for this.

Status quo is lurching from one extreme to the other which also ought to be political suicide except for the apathy of the electorate.

It comes down to what kind of Alberta we want. I, and many people I know, would be quite happy to pay a bit more if it results in better services. And yes, "better" should also include "efficient"

[mariners_fever]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Some will argue we have an expenditure problem and there's merit to that. But it's only half the problem. We also have a revenue problem that's directly tied to our reliance on resource revenues and our tax regime. It's great that in boom years we're awash with cash but it hurts us during the lean.

Not really when we have the highest per-capita revenue in the country. Not to mention we already spend twice more per-capita than any other province in many areas.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by mariners_fever

Not really when we have the highest per-capita revenue in the country. Not to mention we already spend twice more per-capita than any other province in many areas.

Even if we could balance the budget without 40 kids in a class and slashing post-secondary programs I would still maintain that direct reliance of resource revenue is a bad policy that leads to uncertainty every year.

[GGG]

How is the Catholic school board in Calgary able to have smaller class sizes than the CBE given that they have the same per student funding? I think that until we can figure out why the CBE is much more expensive to operate than other comparable school boards they shouldn't recieve more funding.

I do agree that we should develop a model which weans us off resource revenue over a 20 year period and creates a sustaining fund to reduce income taxes and would be in favour of a tax increase to do that. Perferable an HST type tax that would just add 1 or 2% to the GST and follow all the same rules to avoid any additional administrative costs.

Health Care funding needs to be capped at the rate of inflation and we need to start unfunding treatments if neccessary to reign in costs.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Another year, another shortfall in education funding, larger class sizes, etc. despite promises of stable funding. Is that how we want to prepare for the future?

Some will argue we have an expenditure problem and there's merit to that. But it's only half the problem. We also have a revenue problem that's directly tied to our reliance on resource revenues and our tax regime. It's great that in boom years we're awash with cash but it hurts us during the lean.

Alberta is a wealthy province and has a high proportion of well-paid citizens (not just on CP). Why not implement a more sensible tax system that provides more stable funding and allows us to build up petro-reserves. Suppose we introduced a sales tax or made income tax more progressive to collect more revenues through taxation. Stop spending resource revenues - put 100% in the Heritage fund. Over time as the fund generates more investment income use a portion to reduce tax levels.

I don't know what level of taxation is required to make this work but I'm guessing this is feasible. Probably political suicide too but someone could make the noble case for this.

Status quo is lurching from one extreme to the other which also ought to be political suicide except for the apathy of the electorate.

It comes down to what kind of Alberta we want. I, and many people I know, would be quite happy to pay a bit more if it results in better services. And yes, "better" should also include "efficient"

This was the Liberal platform in the last provincial election and it wasn't quite political suicide, but people vote with their wallets.

[mariners_fever]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Even if we could balance the budget without 40 kids in a class and slashing post-secondary programs I would still maintain that direct reliance of resource revenue is a bad policy that leads to uncertainty every year.

Loosen up the red tape and increase the incentives for these universities to seek out more benefactors to provide scholarships and donate to infrastructure building, like every other country in the free world.

Class sizes are directly the cause of a bureaucracy that grows exponentially as opposed to directing those monies towards teachers. Evidenced in post above re: Catholic school sizes.

We currently have a government whose solution to these problems is to throw more cash at them, how's that working???

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by GGG

How is the Catholic school board in Calgary able to have smaller class sizes than the CBE given that they have the same per student funding? I think that until we can figure out why the CBE is much more expensive to operate than other comparable school boards they shouldn't recieve more funding.

I do agree that we should develop a model which weans us off resource revenue over a 20 year period and creates a sustaining fund to reduce income taxes and would be in favour of a tax increase to do that. Perferable an HST type tax that would just add 1 or 2% to the GST and follow all the same rules to avoid any additional administrative costs.

Health Care funding needs to be capped at the rate of inflation and we need to start unfunding treatments if neccessary to reign in costs.

Good question about Catholic vs CBE, CBE should not be immune to scrutiny. And while I used education as the example since it directly affects my family, I meant this as a taxation/revenue thread not an education one. So yeah, health care is a big issue too.

I'm thinking a more progressive income tax would be more palatable. There are a lot of well off people here - would it hurt them to pony up a bit more? I also heard that if we raised corporate taxes to the level of the next lowest province it would raise $18B - not that we want to go all that way but that's a big chunk of change.

[GP_Matt]

I think the right politician could sell the public on higher taxes but they need the trust of the public first. Right or wrong, a lot of people think the government wastes a ton of money and if you give them more money they will just waste it faster.

To Slave, I can't see a future where Raj is our great visionary leader of the Liberal party who sells the province on a new way forward. I think it will take someone new and probably under a banner that isn't red.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Good question about Catholic vs CBE, CBE should not be immune to scrutiny. And while I used education as the example since it directly affects my family, I meant this as a taxation/revenue thread not an education one. So yeah, health care is a big issue too.

I'm thinking a more progressive income tax would be more palatable. There are a lot of well off people here - would it hurt them to pony up a bit more? I also heard that if we raised corporate taxes to the level of the next lowest province it would raise $18B - not that we want to go all that way but that's a big chunk of change.

Sales tax is actually quite a progressive tax in that it doesn't tax essentials and the more you spend the more you pay in tax. It also generates revenues from tourism as all the people from Saskatchewan shopping at our IKEA. Also the current GST rebates help out the <40k earners and I assume would be continued to be applied. The other part of a Sales tax I like is that it is clearly visible. You know what you are paying.

Now you could just tax those earning over 150k by making a new bracket and that would go over well politically but really removing our reliance on resource revenue and the long term reduction of income taxes is something everyone should fund.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Another year, another shortfall in education funding, larger class sizes, etc. despite promises of stable funding. Is that how we want to prepare for the future?

Some will argue we have an expenditure problem and there's merit to that. But it's only half the problem. We also have a revenue problem that's directly tied to our reliance on resource revenues and our tax regime. It's great that in boom years we're awash with cash but it hurts us during the lean.

Alberta is a wealthy province and has a high proportion of well-paid citizens (not just on CP). Why not implement a more sensible tax system that provides more stable funding and allows us to build up petro-reserves. Suppose we introduced a sales tax or made income tax more progressive to collect more revenues through taxation. Stop spending resource revenues - put 100% in the Heritage fund. Over time as the fund generates more investment income use a portion to reduce tax levels.

I don't know what level of taxation is required to make this work but I'm guessing this is feasible. Probably political suicide too but someone could make the noble case for this.

Status quo is lurching from one extreme to the other which also ought to be political suicide except for the apathy of the electorate.

It comes down to what kind of Alberta we want. I, and many people I know, would be quite happy to pay a bit more if it results in better services. And yes, "better" should also include "efficient"

Ok, you say we have a revenue problem, can you prove it? how much are we spending and receiving compared to other provinces. You are not going to get anyone to agree to a tax increase without showing facts....

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I think the right politician could sell the public on higher taxes but they need the trust of the public first. Right or wrong, a lot of people think the government wastes a ton of money and if you give them more money they will just waste it faster.

To Slave, I can't see a future where Raj is our great visionary leader of the Liberal party who sells the province on a new way forward. I think it will take someone new and probably under a banner that isn't red.

Look you guys got more seats in the election, but I didn't think that was on the line or I would've worked a lot harder!

I do agree that Raj will probably not be the visionary leader. I just think that its amusing that the ideas here that are coming for progressive taxes, sales taxes and increased taxes for people at certain income levels are exactly what the Liberals were arguing for, and what was presented as platform. Just goes to show that policy is worth very little these days.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Look you guys got more seats in the election, but I didn't think that was on the line or I would've worked a lot harder!

I do agree that Raj will probably not be the visionary leader. I just think that its amusing that the ideas here that are coming for progressive taxes, sales taxes and increased taxes for people at certain income levels are exactly what the Liberals were arguing for, and what was presented as platform. Just goes to show that policy is worth very little these days.

And I voted for them, I just have a short memory :bag

[Cuz]

Just throwing this out there, but how much money do you think we could save by merging the catholic and public systems?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cuz

Just throwing this out there, but how much money do you think we could save by merging the catholic and public systems?

I think a lot. It would basically mean 1/2 the overhead, less infrastructure to build and over the longer term less to maintain. It would also mean that we would have one system to adminster everything from the funds, to the hiring and implementation. Just having one board itself would save roughly $1m a year in Calgary.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Slava

This was the Liberal platform in the last provincial election and it wasn't quite political suicide, but people vote with their wallets.

Not really, people vote against their economic interest all the time. Why do poor white people vote in-large for conservative parties? Ideological dissonance is the issue and motivated reasoning.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Ok, you say we have a revenue problem, can you prove it? how much are we spending and receiving compared to other provinces. You are not going to get anyone to agree to a tax increase without showing facts....

The proof is that we don't have enough money to meet the previously agreed budgets for education and other areas. Now maybe those budgets were too high - that's a different discussion - but it doesn't change my main point that basing your finances on fluctuating resource revenues is a terrible way to run the province. Maybe I should have said we have a revenue stability problem rather implying that we simply need more revenue.

[CaptainCrunch]

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a wasteful spending problem.

We can't keep saying, its ok to pay a little bit more and a little bit more and a little bit more, because first of all it never ends. Second of all you start squeezing out poor and lower middle class people.

Our health care system in this province isn't underfunded. Its run by wasteful morons who haven't figured out the balances.

We can't keep doing the simple answer of raising taxes over and over again at a federal, provincial and municipal level without then demanding to better know where the money went and what programs aren't necessary at this point in time.


I'm not advocating lowering taxes either, I'm decrying the natural wasteful nature of governments who think the best way to fix problems is to throw money at it then cry poor.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

Look you guys got more seats in the election, but I didn't think that was on the line or I would've worked a lot harder!

I do agree that Raj will probably not be the visionary leader. I just think that its amusing that the ideas here that are coming for progressive taxes, sales taxes and increased taxes for people at certain income levels are exactly what the Liberals were arguing for, and what was presented as platform. Just goes to show that policy is worth very little these days.

Sorry about that.
I haven't been very involved in politics since the election. I am no longer on the board of directors and won't even make the annual meeting this year.

Although we did trounce you guys, so I always have that memory. Unfortunately it didn't matter all that much.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Cuz

Just throwing this out there, but how much money do you think we could save by merging the catholic and public systems?

I attended Catholic school as a kid, and thought it was a normal thing, because, well, I grew up in it.

Every time a foreigner asks me about our school system here I find it makes me realize just how odd it is we have a publicly funded school system associated with a religion.. but only for one religion.

I'd be on board for combining everything.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Complex problems demand complex solutions. Good thing we have a well educated electorate who won't succumb to ideological bickering!