Of course there are historical examples of caveats to that. The NEP, for example, destroyed the economic livelihood of much of Alberta and Albertans for a significant period of time. Regional and national economies can certainly be affected negatively by bad policy.
Not suggesting at all that this is the case here, just that it wouldn't be accurate to say no matter what policy was implemented it wouldn't affect our economy.
Nope, they were taken from a Financial Post article which were taken directly from the government's own numbers.
Regardless of the source, the facts are the facts, and the vast, vast majority of lower and middle income households derive no benefit from increasing the contribution limits.
They're not proposing replacing anything. They want to maintain the limits that have existed up until this year.
Why is $10K all of the sudden some magic, inalienable number that is beyond reproach? Obviously there is a point at which raising the exemption no longer serves the majority of Canadians, so where is that? Based on the data I'd say at around $5K, or perhaps even lower.
Ridiculous. Do you feel the same way about the RRSP? How many Canadians contribute anywhere close to their 18% annual limit? The vast majority of lower and middle income households derive no benefit from the accumulation of RRSP contribution room, and yet it exists.
I don't think anyone is arguing against contribution room in general, it's just a question of balancing value with affordability. RRSP defer government tax revenue until they are cashed, but TFSA eliminate it altogether so there is a significant cost in terms of lost taxes. Is that money better spent (or in this case not collected) for a relatively small number of people who can take full advantage of TFSAs or on other programs/cuts that benefit more people?
The Following User Says Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
I don't think anyone is arguing against contribution room in general, it's just a question of balancing value with affordability. RRSP defer government tax revenue until they are cashed, but TFSA eliminate it altogether so there is a significant cost in terms of lost taxes. Is that money better spent (or in this case not collected) for a relatively small number of people who can take full advantage of TFSAs or on other programs/cuts that benefit more people?
Yeah but it doesn't eliminate tax revenue altogether, it eliminates taxation on growth. You have already paid taxes on the initial investment, while an RRSP defers the taxation on the initial investment as well.
10k in taxes collected today is worth 100,000 in 30 years. You don't get to count the lost taxes on growth while at the same time discounting the growth potential of the money already paid in taxes on the initial investment.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to EldrickOnIce For This Useful Post:
I don't think anyone is arguing against contribution room in general, it's just a question of balancing value with affordability. RRSP defer government tax revenue until they are cashed, but TFSA eliminate it altogether so there is a significant cost in terms of lost taxes. Is that money better spent (or in this case not collected) for a relatively small number of people who can take full advantage of TFSAs or on other programs/cuts that benefit more people?
So why not tax capital gains on primary residence sales too then?
Over the past 10 years, people have made a LOT of money selling their homes, and that is all tax free... With ~ 75% of Canadians owning homes, that is probably worth FAR more tax revenue for the government than the current TFSA limits.
You did read down further as well, though, where the Liberal candidate himself was asked to leave the same polling area two days earlier?
So everyone is cheating, i guess?
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to EldrickOnIce For This Useful Post:
I think they should just allow campaigning at the stations, or at least outside them anyway. It seems like every election there are these issues and no real penalty anyway. I mean say its election day and someone is accused of campaigning outside a polling station...even if they're in the wrong and leave, whats the penalty? Basically nothing. Might as well allow it and just remove the kinds of grey area discussed in that article and let everyone pester voters until the last possible second.
So why not tax capital gains on primary residence sales too then?
Over the past 10 years, people have made a LOT of money selling their homes, and that is all tax free... With ~ 75% of Canadians owning homes, that is probably worth FAR more tax revenue for the government than the current TFSA limits.
Houses are generally people's main investment and a change would affect the majority of Canadians, why would you want to mess with that? TFSA's are a secondary investment vehicle, well used at the $5000 level but much less so at $10,000. Rolling it back is simply a choice to prioritize programs that benefit more people.
Speaking of electioneering, I had a visit from a Harper campaigner last night and I must say even I can't ever remember a campaigner who seemed less interested and enthusiastic about the candidate. I get that Harper will win in a landslide in this riding so he doesn't have to campaign hard for votes, but he could have at least sounded convincing and sounded like he wanted the candidate to win. Nice guy though, talked a little football too, but just not a good campaigner.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
You did read down further as well, though, where the Liberal candidate himself was asked to leave the same polling area two days earlier?
So everyone is cheating, i guess?
Carefully vetting articles for things like facts and partisanship biases doesn't support the narrative that a vocal minority on this board is trying to sell.
__________________
Pylon on the Edmonton Oilers:
"I am actually more excited for the Oilers game tomorrow than the Flames game. I am praying for multiple jersey tosses. The Oilers are my new favourite team for all the wrong reasons. I hate them so much I love them."
You did read down further as well, though, where the Liberal candidate himself was asked to leave the same polling area two days earlier?
So everyone is cheating, i guess?
shhhhhhh
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Carefully vetting articles for things like facts and partisanship biases doesn't support the narrative that a vocal minority on this board is trying to sell.
Agreed. The Liberal agenda is disgusting. God help us if they win. I'm moving to Zimbabwe.
I mean can you even imagine...free drugs, safe injections sites, brothels. Harper is seriously concerned for Canadians.
"Justin [Trudeau] refuses to acknowledge the damage that drugs do to families and communities," Harper, referring to the Liberal leader, said in a written statement from his office.
"He wants to allow the sale of marijuana in corner stores and increase the number of heroin injection sites, dangerously misguided policies that would only make drugs more accessible to our children."
