Apolitical Staples

Instead of getting fancy, can’t we just have an across the board decrease in income tax? If I could pay even $50 less a month to the cause of socialism and dependency, I’d be a slightly happier man.

I thought that’s what the budget would have, this time — income tax cuts.

Anyway, that income-splitting thing can go in the ‘08 budget, if this parliament survives that long. Need some sort of tax cut to go into the election on…

At risk of agree with Occa….er, Alan, I think that it would be hard for Conservative who’s mantra has always been “personal responsibility” to advocate something as collective as income-splitting.

Just sayin’.

Mike, let’s see if I have this right…are you equating the the family unit with the societal collective? I hope that was just a bit of sarcasm. But somehow I really think there’s people out there - way out there - he think like that.

Broad based tax cuts are coming.

Harper will have done enough on the environment to at least neutralize the issue, if not capitalize on it, and such a good news budget will put him in near majority territory.

Expect an election this year.

Ah, Chester. You almost make me believe.

Dr. Strangelove - to Mike, there is no dividing line between collective and private matters, hence there is no dissonance in his statement. Pooling resources within a family is just the same as confiscating and redistributing resources on a societal level. Accepting assistance from a family member is the same thing as taking an anonymous handout courtesy of a fleeced taxpayer on the other side of the continent.

Believe, Alan, believe.

This is a big disappointment. The Tories better be careful in striving too hard to appear as a centrist party. To win, and to distinguish themselves from the Liberals, they need to be bold in reducing taxes and advancing the interests of the individual tax payer. Lately, it’s been hard to tell the difference between the Tories and the Liberal Party. This news seems to be consistent with their recent drift to the left on the environment.

Great, I’m glad tax cuts can go to everyone. Without spending cuts (which there should be, but I”m not hearing about any major spending cuts), there is limited amount of taxes to cut. Instead of income splitting we should work towards a flat tax, which would make income splitting pointless.

I think that it would be hard for Conservative who’s mantra has always been “personal responsibility” to advocate something as collective as income-splitting.

Not at all. One’s “personal responsibility” can easily include one’s dependent spouse and children.

No, no disonance at all Occam. You claim that everyone ought to exercise “personal responsibility”, yet you are prepared to let them be taxed as a group? I would hardly call that personal responsibility and individualism. Hmm interesting. Should then people be allowed the right to negotiate other things based on voluntary inclusions in a group? Oh I don’t know, like say, employment contracts? Just wondering.

“are you equating the the family unit with the societal collective?”

No, why do you think that? I am merely pointing out that you, and OC and a few of the others here, bleat like sheep in heat if someone suggests that certain groups, big or small, get government money or favours, claiming personal responsibility. It’s just sort of funny to hear you advocate collective action when it happens to favour you.

Funny indeed.

Alan, have you heard the term ‘Vulgar Libertarian’ before? Just curious

“Not at all. One’s “personal responsibility” can easily include one’s dependent spouse and children.”

So therefore I should pay less tax by having the taxable amount based on what the whole family unit earns, rather than the individuals within it? Well, let’s hope grandma and grandpa move in and we can income split 4 ways instead of 2!

I suppose that some of you have some interesting arguments about how much to tax this group or that group of people, but to do so is to presuppose that wherever the government gets their money, they won’t waste it and steal it and buy elections by giving it away to people who couldn’t be bothered earning money the old fashioned way. I mean, do any of you really know how governments work? What really goes on in government departments when they’re on buying frenzies at the end of the fiscal year, when they’re hiring people, when they’re letting out major contracts and awarding grants and loans, and when they’re feuding with each other over the size of their offices and desks?

If the government salaries in your neck of the woods are continuing to grow far faster than the salaries of ordinary blokes, and your favorite political party continues to find more and more sneaky ways to create government dependencies, and continues to horsetrade your money and your rights behind closed doors with political parties whom they compared to the Antichrist only in the last election - then arguing about the finer points of the tax code is a rather futile exercise.

So therefore I should pay less tax by having the taxable amount based on what the whole family unit earns, rather than the individuals within it?

The whole family has to be supported by the family’s income. I frankly don’t understand the enthusiasm progs have for taxing families at different rates based on family structure. Usually they are so rational about their approach to taxation and so dedicated to erasing income gaps.

All the progs who bleated for years about the value of a woman’s work in the home are even further in the hole on this one. Dig deeper, or climb out?

No offense Greg, income splitting and all would be great eventually - but what about those of us who aren’t married? We vote too and I want my damn tax cut along with everyone else. I’d rather see the rate of taxation drop across the board.