Personally, I think this gives far too much credit to the Post, a newspaper that appears to be in continuous implosion mode. But there can be no doubt of an ongoing anti-tax campaign by those who can most afford to pay for and who benefit most from our redistribution system as meagre as it may be. The scary part is that our prime minister Paul Martin has benefitted greatly from tax concessions for his Canada Steamship Lines, but continues to wallow in self-denial about conflict-of-interest allegations. Initally, we were told CSL was placed in a blind trust thereby removing any potential conflict. But that's a bit like an elephant herder claiming his animals are invisible among those massive herds of pigmy rhinos. Fobbing CSL off onto his three sons doesn't remove the conflict any more than giving the company to his wife and expecting us to ignore the ongoing perception of conflict. Will federal transportation policy be shipped out to blind monks for updating (and tax cuts) so that Martin can say I'm clean?

Does not everyone know CSL let all the canadian seaman go and hired on phillipinos and russians, obviously this creates less employment,nes't pas ? Under the federal Liberal tutelage many foreign nationals are attracted to homestead in Canada , as barb mcdougall once showed us it is cheaper to have other countries pay for educating /training potential high taxable persons than doing likewise for Canadians born here . Just witness the fawning over potential emigres from USA ,lefties departing from the Bushland.Sounds similair to Trudeau's welcome of draft dodgers ? How do Canadians get high skills if they are continually being thwarted by Ottawa's penny wise pound foolish policy of foreign nationals first?

Anyone who reads the National Post and incorporates its views into their own does deserve a tax cut. In fact they deserve to be kicked out of this country and sent to the U.S. where they can enjoy a true non-socialist economy.

Just think, if these people don't get a tax cut we will only see one SUV in every driveway not two. And that would be a real travesty.

Maybe a trade could be arranged. We take about 200,000 blue-staters who are applying to move here anyway and in return we send to the US the entire readership of the Post. Just like Bure for Jovanoski, its win-win.

It's not surprising that the canadian council of chief executives, formerly the business council on national issues, called for tax cuts in the National Post because between the 150 ceo's on the CCCE, many of whom are actually americans, they control $2.5 trillion in assets and have annual revenues of $600 billion. In a world where those who have the gold make the rules, they would obviously want to keep more of their gold by changing the rules. It's also not surprising that Leonard Asper of Canwest, owner of the National Post, lets his buddies on the CCCE use his paper to further their agenda. The CCCE boasts about having a hand in many policy developments. On its website it states that, "Over the past two decades, the Council has played a private sector leadership role in shaping fiscal, taxation, trade, competition, energy, environmental, education and corporate governance policies." Scary stuff, and it can only get worse unless money stops talking to those in power.

One of my favorites. http://www.opseu.org/notices/starcolumn.htm

As someone in the so-called "middle-class" who would love more take home pay, I have to admit that it is people with my income that have benefitted the most from social programs. The middle-class, as a group, use and demand more services than any other. It is the high income earners who gain the most when taxes are cut. That is why the owners and CEOs of these big companies have hired journalists who will argue their point for them.

The middle-class benefits the most from social programs? I think the middle-class gets just as much as any other Canadian and we're also feeling the effects of the decades of neglect to the social programs as well. As for the wealthy...these CEO's who cry so loudly for tax cuts...they benefit immensely from other forms of "corporate welfare". Public roads, docks, socialized health care, research and development grants, already low corporate taxes all add up to line their pockets. I read that Warren Buffet (top US financial guru) said something like, " In the financial wars...my side has won." I also think that Warren Buffet is also realizing the deep damage done in these class wars and does NOT promote tax cuts for the wealthy. Let's see if the Post will print this opinion!

It's interesting that the BC government's Select Standing Committee on Finance has just released the report on its pre-budget (pre-election?) consultations, making it very clear that most British Columbians would rather see more funding for social programs or debt reduction, NOT more tax cuts. I think most Canadians ultimately realize that effective public services are the foundation of a healthy social fabric, which is every bit as important, if not more important, than capital.

Heaven forbid getting to keep more of the money that I earn. This is classic Canadian, if they're wealthy and successful punish them by keeping taxes as high as possible. No matter what you say, the wealthy of the country pay a disproportionate amount of the taxes in our country. So the public roads, health care etc.. are actually funded by the, gasp, "rich". The "rich" pay for everything that you use why shouldn't they get a break when economic times are good. The "rich" certainly get hammered the hardest when taxes are raised. This is just a classic case of Canadians being jealous of other Canadians just because they are successful. Oh but I forgot, Its not a matter of how hard you work in order to get ahead and reach your goals in life. It’s about riding the coat tails of government and complaining about others who are more successful than yourself. That’s the Canadian way.

Bongo: Yeah the rich pay for everything, that's a good one!

Actually the rich whine so much they had to buy up all the papers, tv and radio just so they could amplify their whining in case there was a guy somewhere who hadn't heard their incessant whining till now.

We get it, the rich dug deep into the earth and found a huge treasure without the help of anyone else. No labour or resources were used to build their piles of wealth and therefore according to their favourite deity they should not be taxed.

Nobody has as much access to the levers of power than the rich, no one cries out for shifting the tax burden to the poor more than the rich. No one sets up more foundations such as Cdn taxpayers and various Institutes than the rich because they have so much whining to do they need to hire people just for that purpose. They even whine that the donations they make to their paid whiners should not be taxed.

We know the rich have it worse than anyone else yet still we torment them. We're just not very grateful, I don't know why.

What is "success"? Reminds me of Maggie Thatcher who said something like "there is no such thing as society" (circa 1987). She's the one who decimated the British public service and became an icon to the Reagans, Bushes, Campbells, et al. Taxation is by far the best wealth-levelling system yet devised, especially when we have those who think that "freedumb" means a free-for-all, stab-em-in-the-back culture. Every tax dollar that comes out of my pocket means fewer consumables, and that's not a bad thing. Now if we could only get our politicians to get their heads out of the trough long enough...

bongo protect masterss! good bongo! maybe they throw him trickle of crumbs, preciousss...

A lot of rhetoric but not much truth or fact, what i expected. Explain to me how the poor carry the tax burden please. I really want to know. Maybe I should start dreaming about the socialist utopia of communism instead of thinking in reality. And we all know how well Communism has worked.

And we all know how well capitalism is working, especially for the 10% of people who control 90% of the wealth!

Poor Bongo. Proportionally speaking, no, the poor don't carry the tax burden. And that's fair: the burden of survival falls much heavier on them than it does on the wealthy. Your first post implies this is because poor people don't work as hard as the rich, which is both absurd and profoundly ignorant. As is your definition of success. Who needs lots of money? A solid house; a well-fed and well-clothed family; time enough to consider your life, and the world: essentials all easily available to the upper classes with just a fraction of their earnings. It's mean of them to gripe about tens of thousands of dollars they don't really need--dollars that mean the world to families living hand-to-mouth. You call that recognition 'whining'; I suspect that many others in our great country, like myself, simply call it 'Canadian'.

methinks that poor bongo has a severe case of the osterich syndrome: if it's not printed or broadcast in a canwest/global medium, it doesn't exist. you want to talk about burden there bongo ol' chap: when gordo distributed his tax cuts back in 2001 guess who the least amount of taxes cut (proportionally speaking - since this is how you like to put it)? That's right, the working poor. Now I'm not what one would consider working poor; i am what would be considered middle class. You know what i got on my tax cut? About an extra $50 bucks a month. OHH...AHH...Oh wait a minute, that's just eaten away through extra user fees. Damn, what a nice trick gordo. I just love the rhetoric bongo, and talking of rhetoric if you would just stop echoing canwest global for a second: Believing in fair taxation = communism - i just love that one. it's on par with people calling me a bleeding heart or a tree-hugger. I've got news for you bongo, that type of name calling really doesn't hurt the feelings of progressives, it only saddens us that people such as yourself could be so ignorant. anyway, i'll stop rambling

Your arguments are good in a communism sort of way. Of course they don't "need" the thousands of dollars you mention, but why should they give it away? Tell me why someone who has worked hard for their money just give it away? Besides the usual rhetoric of their money was made on the backs of the poor. And for the most part the rich do work a lot harder. I'm not sure if you noticed but CEO ,presidents, managers of any company work 60 hours a week (at least), as compared to 40 hours a week, or as in the case of unions 35 hours a week. Over a year that’s over a thousand more hours per year working. That means a "rich" person works for a year and a half for every year worked by a "worker". Extrapolate that over 40 years and the "rich person" has worked for 20 years more than the "worker", Ironic?. If that’s not working harder I'm not sure what is. Why should someone who has put in that much extra work turn around and start giving money to people who haven't? The more you give out the more people expect (Canadians sense of entitlement because they were born is a good example) and the less they will fend for themselves. I would also like an example of where communism has worked in history. I'm interested in where all your theories are used in a successful real life situation. I also defined success as reaching your goals. One of those goals may be wealth or It may not be.

Yo Bongo, the middle class carry the tax burden not the rich or the poor. What people in the middle class, like myself albeit the lower end, are mad as hell about is a crumbling social structure. Union busting, health and education cutbacks, etc....do not necessarily have the same effect on the poor or the rich as they do on middle class families.

Don't even get me started on Communism, it seems to work just fine in Cuba despite attempts by the worlds superpower to crush it.

so bongo, no working "poor" person works over 40 hours a weak eh? Here's my hypothesis/generalizations: most working "poor" don't work more that 40 hours a weak because the companies won't let them because then they would have to pay overtime (and don't say that CEO's don't get overtime - that's a load of crap). Also, are you saying that every "poor" worker is lazy and doesn't want to make money? Do they enjoy struggling to make ends meet? I don't think so. What you've stated is one of most common myths out there: that poor people don't work hard. Take into consideration the numbers bongo. There are a hell of a lot more poor workers out there than CEO's. I would bet that on average, the working poor work longer hours than CEO's do - and a lot harder. What your buddies at canwest fail to report are for every so called lazy union worker there's probably 1000 more that bust their ass off despite the fact the the neo-con agenda continues to make it hard for them to scrape a descent living together. And finally, which attitude is more pathetic bongo: 1. when times are tough, it's good to know that the gov't will help me get things together. 2. i work for my money, the rest of you can f-off, if i want 3 SUVs in my 6 car garage, well i deserve it.

Saying every measure to alleviate poverty puts us on the slippery slope to communism begs the comparison whereof every removal of a social support puts us on the slippery slope to true capitalism as you will find in the 3rd world. We've already had that debate Bongo. Can we move on?

As for CEO's, yes, Belinda Stronach worked her tail off. Why, she went to university for a whole year before becoming a member of the super-rich. Poor dear, why didn't we make her prime minister again?

As a socially disabled ,not phsyically,nor mentally, I know my opinion does not have "gravitas"but here it comes watch out! My landlord hands over my rent to the local city,thereby paing for roads and schools and police and fire dept. ,etc..Iget this money from the province I turn around and support many common features of Canada to a much higher percent than I want but none the less I do. After all it is taxpayer's funds, cycled to other people. Do we begrudge the mortgage firms and insurance firms[not owned by a consortium of poor folks i think ] and grocery store clerks etc. Perhaps best to think of it as recirculated taxes the very poor do in fact do something marvy through this canada they fight inflation by not auctioning upo the price of everything. Also this benefits frugal people who wish to underspend rather than competitively consume. Not so bad ,unfortunately the drug abusers become my neighbours, the judges do know addicts do not live in their neighbourhood ,so it cheaper to not incarcerate those citizens. As I noted don't take me seriously no one ever does.

Bongo: pure socialism and pure communism don't work, and nobody here is advocating those systems. But you seen to be advocating pure capitalism. But capitalism is antisocial; without socialist controls, capitalist "society" is simply a modernized law of the jungle. If you value the tenets of Canadian society--I'll be generous and assume you do--you must realize they are impossible to sustain without some form of wealth redistribution. The question "why should they give away their hard earned dollars?" is therefore more aptly put "what taxation is required to support the society Canadians want, and are tax revenues used efficiently to get us there?" Those points can and always will be debated, but to argue against the need for taxation is to advocate a return to feudal times.

I love how worked up all you get about the "rich" it really is amusing. First things first I hope the Geek is sarcastic. And yes the true forms Capitalism and Communism do not work. And if you think CEO's work less than a "worker" your sadly misinformed and this ignorance could be the root of your uninformed opinions.(enough with the Belinda Stronach referances, she's 1 of 100,000) All I get fired back at me is a bunch of rhetoric that is simply untrue. Speak facts please, I'm sorry I'm talking in real life not ideology. Simply put the further you go towards socialism/communism the worse off society as a whole is. Communism is great theory, but terrible in practice. As income approaches complete equality, productivity disappears. For example: people work so they can make money to support themselves. They work driven by the incentive of making more money and succeeding Human nature includes a desire to "do better" and, therefore, make more money or advance in a job. In an attempt to make more money, people are driven naturally work harder and longer, seek further education for themselves, and develop skills which distinguish them as rare talents among that labour which is available as supply. (I guess im the only one who believes in that last part though) Under true communism, income is completely equal. When there is nothing to achieve by working harder or longer, people begin to become idle. People begin to work less or not work at all because there is no longer the incentive of making more money or advancing in job. When there are no workers, production drops to nothing. It will then be true that all incomes are equal but this equal income will be zero. I will leave you with a quote from one of the greatest leaders the world has ever seen, that is if you do believe in freedom, do you? "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill

Hey Bongo, ever heard of the social contract? It's a useful abstraction.

Your hypothetical rich bastard gets to drive to his CEO job on roads and over bridges paved by taxpayer $$, and he gets to call the taxpayer-funded police when the communist hordes are knocking at his gates. When they knock his gates down and trash his mansion, he can go to the taxpayer-subsidized airport and fly off to exile on the taxpayer-subsidized airline.

He gets all this in exchange for the measly one-half of one-percent of his income (after his team of lawyers are finished) that he pays in taxes.

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. Quit complaining....

State one single fact, not rhetoric. "And if you think CEO's work less than a "worker" your sadly misinformed and this ignorance could be the root of your uninformed opinions." This is not a fact, just rhetoric. "Enough with the Belinda Stronach referances, she's 1 of 100,000." No she isn't, rhetoric, not fact. "All I get fired back at me is a bunch of rhetoric that is simply untrue." It is true, calling it otherwise is more rhetoric. "I'm sorry I'm talking in real life not ideology. " No you're not, you're talking in generalisms that have no factual basis beyond your own "wish it was this way". "Simply put the further you go towards socialism/communism the worse off society as a whole is." And this comes from where? More rhetoric. "Communism is great theory, but terrible in practice. As income approaches complete equality, productivity disappears." Please find me a real communist country anywhere on the map so we can check this rhetoric. Or do you mean socialism? Please check Sweden, probably the most socialist country out there. Your rhetoric is not substantiated by looking at what happens there. "They work driven by the incentive of making more money and succeeding Human nature includes a desire to "do better" and, therefore, make more money or advance in a job." More rhetoric, I would say most people are driven to survive not "succeed". "In an attempt to make more money, people are driven naturally work harder and longer, seek further education for themselves, and develop skills which distinguish them as rare talents among that labour which is available as supply. (I guess im the only one who believes in that last part though)" Yes, you probably are which means its just more rhetoric. "Under true communism, income is completely equal. When there is nothing to achieve by working harder or longer, people begin to become idle." I thought more leisure time would be a good thing. Why, they might spend it with their kids... "People begin to work less or not work at all because there is no longer the incentive of making more money or advancing in job. When there are no workers, production drops to nothing." No problem, CEO's don't need workers, they do all the work themselves, that's why they make 500 times more money. As for Winston Churchill, he made great speeches. The Brits threw him out right after the war when they wanted more than words after losing so many to save his little empire.

Bongo, if you seriously want facts you could--and should--go look them up yourself. That way, when you find the facts, you can post them here and show everybody how right you are. We'll all wait right here.

Oh, and while you're at it, why don't you bring back some facts to back up your own claims? Like the claim that the rich pay for everything. That's an interesting claim. Where can I go to find out the numbers on that?

Thanks for the poli-sci 101 lesson bongo but none of here are advocating that we become a communist state. Perhaps we need to step back here. 1. You claim that the rich are overtaxed and deserve the tax breaks because they work harder. 2. You demand that people give you numbers and fact yet you yourself do not (what you've been doing is hypothesizing). 3. You can't seem to get beyond equating our belief that rich should pay more in tax with some kind of cold war soviet communism. Well bongo, 1. as i stated, it is a common myth frequently reported on in the mainstream news that the poor are lazy and do not wish to work. It is FACT bonge that the working poor general work long hours not just at one job, but sometimes at two. Take into account that a large proportion of working poor are single mothers and that just compounds the problem. 2. Although i don't have exact figures bongo (i've just don't memorizes statistics but rather retain the jist of them), it is a FACT that when gordo et al. handed out tax cuts in 1991, the rich got a significantly larger percent of their taxes cut than did the poor. And this is compounded by the fact that many of the service that the poor require just to survice were cut. 3. Do not accuse any of us of spewing ideology until you yourself get off of your neo con high horse. Tax cut do not work - I now ask of you to provide us just one example of where a tax cut has stimulated an economy. And please do not say B.C. because the economy here is not booming, despite what canwest tells us.

Let's try that again with paragraphs : State one single fact, not rhetoric.

"And if you think CEO's work less than a "worker" your sadly misinformed and this ignorance could be the root of your uninformed opinions."

This is not a fact, just rhetoric.

"Enough with the Belinda Stronach referances, she's 1 of 100,000."

No she isn't, rhetoric, not fact.

"All I get fired back at me is a bunch of rhetoric that is simply untrue."

It is true, calling it otherwise is more rhetoric.

"I'm sorry I'm talking in real life not ideology. "

No you're not, you're talking in generalisms that have no factual basis beyond your own "wish it was this way".

"Simply put the further you go towards socialism/communism the worse off society as a whole is."

And this comes from where? More rhetoric.

"Communism is great theory, but terrible in practice. As income approaches complete equality, productivity disappears."

Please find me a real communist country anywhere on the map so we can check this rhetoric. Or do you mean socialism? Please check Sweden, probably the most socialist country out there. Your rhetoric is not substantiated by looking at what happens there.

"They work driven by the incentive of making more money and succeeding Human nature includes a desire to "do better" and, therefore, make more money or advance in a job."

More rhetoric, I would say most people are driven to survive not "succeed".

"In an attempt to make more money, people are driven naturally work harder and longer, seek further education for themselves, and develop skills which distinguish them as rare talents among that labour which is available as supply. (I guess im the only one who believes in that last part though)"

Yes, you probably are which means its just more rhetoric.

"Under true communism, income is completely equal. When there is nothing to achieve by working harder or longer, people begin to become idle."

I thought more leisure time would be a good thing. Why, they might spend it with their kids...

"People begin to work less or not work at all because there is no longer the incentive of making more money or advancing in job. When there are no workers, production drops to nothing."

No problem, CEO's don't need workers, they do all the work themselves, that's why they make 500 times more money.

As for Winston Churchill, he made great speeches. The Brits then threw him out right after the war when they wanted more than words after losing so many to save his little empire.

Hey Bongo, you're giving us drums a bad name!

Yup, good job all, jump all over me. Imagine how boring it would be without me. Show me one example of a successful communist country that's all I ask. Just one. Please. That countries leader can't have murder millions of people to stifle their uprisings. Just one please. I don't understand either why as soon as you become professionally successful or wealthy all of a sudden you’re a horrible person and you are all of a sudden not a taxpayer. Explain. I'm a little confused on that part. So Frank how do you motivate a population without reward for their work, just curious. Once again sounds good coming from Marx but in reality, very hard or impossible to do. I Well the highest taxpayers pay on average 40,000 from taxable income where the middle is around 5,000. 40,000 pays for a lot more stuff than 5,000. Basic math. But I am sure I am wrong and 5,000 does pay for more than 40,000 because it comes from a morally superior low wage earner. I'm sorry I invested in my future when I was younger. Yes that means working terrible jobs and going to school to gain experience in order to plant the seed of success. Maybe I should have been getting hammered and smoking joints so I could ask for handouts and high taxes too instead of giving up all my money. And by the way socialism and communism is the same thing. The main difference is, socialism is the government centrally controlling everything and having everyone’s wages equal, where as Communism is the people controlling for the people and since that is impossible really all Communism is really socialism. So they are one of the same with slight differences mainly, communism is academic and socialism is practiced. So lets list some socialist (communist) states over the last while USSR, North Korea, and Cuba. Boy those were/are model countries that everyone can learn off aren’t they. I know we will never agree due to the fact that I wish government would have less involvement in my life and you wish they had more. For the life of me I don't understand why you want the government to control your life? Don't you want to control your own destiny? One last question. If you won the lottery would you be willing to give 95% back to the government because you don't really "need" it? You would probably say yes just to spite me but we all know you wouldn’t. So explain to me why I should give all my money I work for to you and you shouldn’t give your lottery money away?

Oh wow, you guys are taking Bongo seriously, I love it. Haha, bet anything he works at McD's and is just a sh** disturber. If he works so hard, why is he on here at 9am, 10am, 11am, noon and 2 in the afternoon- on a WEDNESDAY??!!

Welcome to the world of the CEO... hahaha

"For the life of me I don't understand why you want government to control your life. Don't you want to control your own destiny" asks our latest capitalist visitor. As a matter of fact I would love to have a bit more control over my destiny, but it appears capitalists, who have been pushing a race to the bottom over the past two decades, have ensured my destiny isn't going to be quite the life I had visioned. Many of my friends and neighbours feel the same way and some of them are business people. Besides the dismal financial future we face, all those big profits from coal, oil other resource extraction and useage industries have helped introduce global warming. I know, I know, you aren't directly responsible because you were out making a buck at the time. I'm more concered that government keep some controls on how much of your profits you retain, because you earned those profits while benefiting from the system the majority want in Canada. You know, roads, hospitals, courthouse - you could fill a phone book with all the benefits you enjoy. (They really don't grow on trees, you know), so it would truly be Canadian of you to recognize that FACT. Pay your damned taxes and next time, please bring some real facts into the debate.

Bongo, you're hopeless :) Okay, we've abandoned the "facts" bit I see.

Now Sweden is more of a socialist economy than the USSR was. But you don't want to look at it in spite of me pointing it out. Why? Because your theory that the system can't work would fall to the ground. That's the trouble, facts are stubborn.

I've never bought a lottery ticket, don't believe in gambling. Interesting that you do.

How about them Lions :)

I've noticed this a lot lately among ideologues. They say things that are just insupportable. Manifestly untrue things that if you take one minute to analyze are obvious bullshit. Then they get people to argue with them as if they were taking a position in some difference of opinion type conversation. Then they have you.

Example: "cutting the taxes of the rich leads to increased investment". Of course it does. In offshore tax sheltered numbered accounts. They say this just before they rob you, and keep saying it while the resulting recession and borrowing jag bankrupts us all. They never stop saying the lie even when faced with overwhelming evidence. They always get away with the money.

Example 2: "People work for money, it's provides the only incentive, without which they wouldn't work at all." Untrue except at the level of survival. If you are so poor that you may lose your food and shelter, then money is your motive, otherwise status is. Status is recognition of ones value by the community. If it takes a fancy car to get that, it's false. Status could flow in many ways, such as the Potlatch system in use here until a couple of centuries ago. No money there, but lots of incentive to produce.

You can think of lots of examples for yourselves. Our society's leaders have completely lost contact with truth, and now seem unable to tell the difference between it and being believed in a lie.

It seems Mr. Bongo, too gutless to use his real name, ignores what I posted earlier "And we all know how well capitalism is working, especially for the 10% of people who control 90% of the wealth!" He seems to deteste communism so much, but any valid arguments against capitalism he seems to ignore. Fighting rhetoric with rhetoric will obviously get us nowhere, but fighting rhetoric with brutal truth seems to have the same affect. Conservatives like Bongo hold the notion that anyone left of center automatically wants more government, but it's not true. More government no, less corporate influence on government yes. Fewer tax cuts for wealthy elites yes. But the best bongoism of the day has to be "Human nature includes a desire to "do better" and, therefore, make more money or advance in a job. In an attempt to make more money, people are driven naturally work harder and longer, seek further education for themselves, and develop skills which distinguish them as rare talents among that labour which is available as supply." I love it when people try to say that it's human nature to do 'this or that.' What those people fail to recognize is that human nature is different across the world, and it has evolved over hundreds of years. In some places people boil kittens for food, but here that is considered wrong. Christians used to be fed to lions for entertainment. But does that mean that it is in our nature to want to torture kittens for food, or to find it entertaining to see someone torn to shreds by a lion? When anyone claims something to be human nature, I always make it a point to demand to see their PHD's in the following subjects anthropology, sociology, theology, history, and psychology. Only then would I be able to be less skepticle of someone who claims something to be human nature. And when he speaks of education, he fails to realize that soon it will only be the wealthy that can afford further education, so even if some people have a desire to do better, they'll have more obstacles in front of them than ever before. But one things for sure, Bongo chooses to ignore valid criticisms, but choosing to hear and see what one wants is human nature. But I'm no expert.

I'll go back to the quote made by Warren Buffet Bongo, ( a hard-working financier...meaning making huge fortunes shifting around large sums of money but really adding nothing as far as productivity goes. He is now on record saying that the wealthy do get a free ride on infrastructure built on taxpayer subsidized public projects..."My side has won" he states. Why does Warren Buffet, one of those top 10% elites, now pronounce that tax cuts for the wealthy should not be allowed? Has he had a change of heart? Does he realize the damage done to the social fabric? Have they really killed the goose that lays the golden eggs? The big lie about modern day economics taught by right-wingnuts is that the world is full of bountiful, endless resources and there will be jobs for all...except those lazy stoners. The smart CEO's are the ones looking at sustainability and that includes taxes that cover the general good.

Once again the people who pay the most taxes some how aren’t taxpayers. Explain. That is what your argument is. Lets step back for a second. There is a $9 billion surplus, when you get surpluses this big there is bound to be huge amounts of waste in order to spend this money. This has been demonstrated time and time again by the federal liberals. So why not give it back to the people who earned it? I guess we do need another gun registry. Also the tax structure in the United Stated in vastly different from the Canadian version so the Warren Buffet quote doesn't mean a whole lot to me so you don't need to use it a third time. Also socialism in nature is more government, actually it is government controlling just about everything. So when you say that your not for more government control in your life but for socialism your contradicting yourself. The wealthy do not get a free ride on infrastructure and other government provided services. The CEO that you despise so much pays more taxes in a year, through personal and business, than you do in your life. But once again your money is morally superior so I guess you can buy more infrastructure with it. If your going to go against me at least do it Franks style, he doesn't straight out spread lies. I cannot comment on Sweden due to the fact I'm not an expert on Scandinavian countries with populations under 10,000,000, but in time I will know more to rebut your argument that Sweden is the best country in the world to live in. So economics is actually not "the world is full of bountiful, endless resources and there will be jobs for all" like PRW said. That is wrong, period. The basic principle of economics is the exact opposite, that there are limited amounts of resources, natural and labour, in which to capitalize on. Scarcity, that’s the first thing any economics teacher/person will tell you. That is not taught by any right wing nut, once again spreading lies, but at least it makes you feel good. So how will any country succeed without motivation. Our current motivation is money, like it or not (reality not theory), what would you replace money with? Basically it's obvious that all you are jealous of people with money. It's not your fault that’s the Canadian way. If someone is successful try and bring them down, not rise up to their level. I leave you with the this. Socialism is the less successful trying to bring the successful back to their level. (Success is defined in money terms due to the fact that it's the only constant measurement among the entire population). You cannot argue that, that’s what income redistribution is, and that’s what you obviously support so vigorously through high taxes and increased government involvement in your life.

Bongo, you're for government control too. Please go outside and tell your local police officer and fireman that you want to be an individualistic cowboy and their services aren't required. Stop using our roads. Unhook yourself from the grid. All that "public" stuff is socialistic and it must drive you crazy so just let go and stop contradicting yourself. :)

As for Sweden, read what I said. I said its the best example of a socialist economy, not that is was the best society in the world. That of course would completely depend on your point of view. But you can choose to retire there at 25 or something yet most people prefer to work. This is in direct opposition to what you said they would do given your view of human nature. I think what Sweden proves is that when you remove the stress of needing to do whatever to survive people still work but they enjoy their life more because they feel more secure within their society. I believe, and this is only my opinion, that when your basics are covered and you know they'll be covered regardless of future failure you can take more chances including upgrading skills or starting your own business. Can't be too bad, even guys like Markus Naslund, who has everything here, want to raise their kids in Sweden in preference to Canada.

As for income redistribution, yes, I support it. No tribe or society can survive without it. Shared costs and benefits works whether you're talking insurance, policing, education etc. The cost of going it alone is too high in most cases.

Wrongo Bongo:"The CEO pays more taxes in a year than you do in your whole lifetime". As a raw monetary amount maybe yes, but not in an equal percentage of total income. Are you telling me that these CEO's are not taking advantage of the tax code by hiding their income Bongo? Can you or I hire an expensive tax accountant to find every loophole in the tax code that favours the wealthy? You've never heard about offshore accounts in the Caymans? Why did PM Martin move his shipping company to the Bahamas? Can you or I do that with out income? The Warren Buffet quote does hold water because it doesn't matter what nation you are talking about, taxes are taxes! The point is: here is a wealthy elite saying it is wrong for further tax cuts for the wealthy. Why would he say that if your theory is so logical? As far as your theory on "just work your ass off, you'll get rich and if you don't, dwell in your life of miserable poverty" continues to deny that in the real world, a lot rests on your status of birth, the opportunities one is exposed to due to money, most of the wealthy are wealthy due to inheritance, not skills or effort, and, access to higher education. How can you explain that George W Bush was accepted to Yale on a C- average? Yeah, that explains the fairness of the capitalist system alright.

The NDP are usually social democrats who are much more to the right than communists. It is fatuous to compare Canadian socialists with communist countries.

It is only in BC that the right wing claims a monopoly on being for "free enterprise"

I agree Sue. Anyone comparing us commies to those lame sold-their-soul NDP'ers should be sent to Gulag immediately.

Here is my last post for this topic, Maybe. First off Markus Naslund is back in Vancouver to AVOID paying the ridiculous high Swedish taxes. Ironic, Yes. Also high taxes promote tax evasion,(Naslund) if the taxes were at a reasonable level there would be less tax evasion (Naslund). So in a sense you are making my point for me guys I thank you. Why would you upgrade skills or improve yourself for the workforce if there is no benefit? I'm not saying I don't want government control, I want less of it. How can you justify no tax cuts when government needlessly wastes tens of millions or billions annually. Well better them spend it than me, no its better I spend it than them. And by the way we do live in a country were anyone can be rich. You just need the determination and work ethic. You do not need to be born into a rich family to succeed. For every George Bush there is a Bill Gates, for every Belinda Stronach there is a Sean Combs. You make choices in life, if you want to be a teacher you know you'll never make a lot of money. So why become a teacher and bitch about not making enough. If money was that important to you why didn't you get a business degree instead of a teaching degree. Why should someone who made the correct choice constantly pay for people who made wrong choices.

Bongo, you're playing games. Naslund is not evading taxes, he works here, not in Sweden. When he's done he's leaving Canada and moving back to Sweden so his kids can go to school there. Why?

You may ask why the Swedes would upgrade skills etc, but people do it. You'd have to ask them why, but saying they wouldn't do it because it doesn't fit your view of human nature when in fact they are already doing it means you should adjust your view of human nature not deny the existence of something that makes no sense to you. Since the Swedes could just retire if they wish, why do they work at all? Why do rich people in Canada continue to work? Maybe people just like working even when they don't need to? Maybe when they don't need to work to survive they're even more productive because they're there because they want to be?

As for tax cuts, didn't Paul Martin as finance minister provide one of the biggest tax cuts in Canadian history? Did not the BC Libs provide a 25% income tax cut? (We'll ignore all the other taxes raised for now) How much further do you want to go?

As for using Bill Gates, bad example, he was a rich man's son who had a very soft landing available if he had failed. Are you advocating we should all have that soft landing available to us so that we too can be like Bill Gates, George Bush et al? I think that would be great and a lot of talent could be better employed.

One problem Bongo is you're arguing extremes and using straw men to demolish arguments that no one here is putting forward. The only person talking about communism is you. Perhaps you're using your view of communism because its the only system you can find that looks worse than the current system in BC under the Libs?

Naslund WAS going back to Sweden, but he could not stay there because he had to pay too much in tax. Wake Up. Ask him why he is living in Vancouver right now and not playing hockey in Sweden. I caught you, now admit it. He is not working now, he is living here for one reason, evading taxes. He could also want to go back to Sweden because he was born there and he is Swedish. If Matt Cooke was moving his kids there after hockey you would have a point, but he seems to want to stay in the country he was born. If you love high taxes so much why don't you and your friends out there start paying more of your wage to the government, I’m fine with that. I'm sure if you called up any government agency and made a donation they would accept it, try donating to the sponsorship program i hear they spend money very effectively. Oh but you just want me to pay more taxes I see. Hypocrite.

By the way the BC Liberals have increased spending in BC by about 9 billion in 4 years, the NDP increased spending by about 10 billion over 10 years. Wow, the Liberals have grown the economy quicker than the NDP and in turn can spend more money on programs without running deficits and while lowering taxes. Amazing. A heartless, cutting government that actually has increased spending at a pace far greater than the NDP. Does that make the NDP right wing then, or just an ineffective governing body?

wow bongo, you've dumbed this arguement down to about a low as it can get. markus naslund is here for fanancial reasons - NOT because he trying to avoid paying taxes (and please, pray tell, how are you so privy to this information). Once again, you've taken a point, spun it more times than a washing machine and spit it out as fact. Here, i'll bring it down to your level: If you don't like paying taxes, having a social safety net, universal health care, services that assist your fellow citizen, etc., then, please, move to the U.S. Not to sure what your point is with your liberal vs. ndp comment, but i'm sure you'll spin that one too and go off on another tangent that noone else brought up...

Bongo, Naslund WILL be going back to Sweden because that's where he wants to raise his kids. He said so. It was a news item. According to you he should be happy to have escaped socialism. Funny how he worked hard all his life to become a good hockey player. According to you he shouldn't have worked at all since he lived in a country where you don't have to.

You're squirming Bongo, every post you go off on new tangents because you find your previous posts unsupportable. No matter, I'll follow.

Raising taxes only on myself? Raising taxes only on you? Two more examples of straw-men. No one here called for only you to have your taxes raised, we're just arguing your point that we all should have more tax cuts. If one wants to be taxed at a higher rate than the government asks, there are charities to donate to, many do just that. Here's a thought, if you believe so much in tax cuts, why don't you support the removal of sales tax, MSP premiums and all income tax on say the first $20,000? That would be a tax cut that would help the working poor more than the BC Libs' cut. Or is that not enough because it doesn't target CEO's?

As for the Liberals, have you looked at the actual growth rates in the economy? Your point would have some validity if it was true. But its not. All you right-wingers seem to live with the delusion there was no growth in BC under the NDP. Once again Bongo, facts are stubborn.

After all, the NDP also balanced the budget, twice. Its not rocket science. The Libs now have more money after the NDP handed them a balanced budget (which they squandered) and the feds balanced theirs and have now been sending their surpluses to the provinces when they're not paying down debt and cutting taxes. Add to that the rise in commodity prices and really its like the Libs won a lottery. Unfortunately, unlike most other lottery winners they seem to think it had something to do with them.

Oops, forgot to mention the low interest rates the BC Libs were handed. Its helped the entire Canadian economy. Entire. Do you believe there would be a construction boom here without historically low interest rates? Of course you do, but no one else does.

Even NDP-run Saskatchewan is now a "have" province Bongo. And it turns out they did it almost 2 years ago.

Bongo, dear...really, I must jump in! The rich don't have to pay taxes to support the social safety net for our, uh, asset-challenged fellow Canadians. We could turn Canada into one of those lovely Third World countries like the one where I grew up, where we could keep it all to ourselves (no income tax, really!). Granted, we all had high walls, dobermans, round-the-clock security and bodyguards to swat away the snarling beggar kids who accost you in the street wherever you go (...Canadians have no idea what aggressive panhandling is, I really don't know what Mayencourt is on about!). And the worst part is finding good help--maids, gardeners, etc. or for the business--it's simply impossible to find people with a decent education and a work ethic who don't spend all their time trying to steal from you for $350/month. Nothing works--believe me, it's a constant frustration! Everything's broken and dirty, no one takes pride--poor dears, can you blame them, really? And don't ever get sick unless you have one of those insurance deals that will fly in the Med-Evac jet for you at the first sign of a sniffle (not cheap, believe me)! The weather is divine, of course, but trust me, dear, everyone eventually gives up and moves to Canada or Europe and just keeps a condo for holiday visits. Yes, it's boring, boring but stable, but one can't have everything, try as one might...

“By the way the BC Liberals have increased spending in BC by about 9 billion in 4 years, the NDP increased spending by about 10 billion over 10 years. Wow, the Liberals have grown the economy quicker than the NDP and in turn can spend more money on programs without running deficits and while lowering taxes. Amazing. A heartless, cutting government that actually has increased spending at a pace far greater than the NDP. Does that make the NDP right wing then, or just an ineffective governing body?” Well-said Bongo. Have you ever noticed how often NDP'ers try to pretend that the economy simply fixed itself? Claims like the Liberals "won the lottery" and the NDP had "bad luck". The scary part is that I think most who support the NDP really think running a government is all about luck. Small wonder they failed so miserably in the 90's. The argument that really makes me laugh is the guy who pays 5K a year in taxes - You give him a 5% tax cut and he saves $ 250 bucks and then you have the guy that pays 50K a year in taxes and you give him only a 2% tax cut and he get's $ 1,000 back. Along comes Mr.NDP spin-doctor who says "this was a tax cut only for the benefit of the wealthy who got 75% more in return than the low income earners. Imagine if we all paid the same tax rate regardless of income, as is the case you know where? Guess what group would pay a whole bunch more in taxes and what group would pay a whole lot less? Sounds fair to have everyone pay equally right? Someone actually referenced Cuba as a role model? Please.

Go back to believing your fairy tales Mr Lahey, now let the adults talk :)

Ya, Mr. Lahey. Can you imagine the whizz-bang who tossed out Cuba as a role model, eh? I believe it was that guy Bongo you were quoting ad-nauseum (above)with such delight. "Well said"? Indeed, I'd say.

Actually Mr Lahey is really Gary Farrell-Collins, you can tell by the way he uses percentages. For the record, $1000 is 4 times $250, not 75% more. Of course, I'm probably just an NDP spin-doctor attacking BC Liberal math :)

I just want to say that we on the left should probably just come to accept that Lorne Calvert and Gordon Campbell are economic geniuses now. Lorne wasn't too good at first but after oil prices rose, interest rates fell and the feds started handing out cash he became a genius. Same with Ralph Klein. In his first term he was obviously incompetent, unable to balance the budget without huge cuts, but his IQ rose with the price of oil :)

Wile E. Campbell is the greatest genius of all because unlike Klein and Calvert he didn't take office till the cash started to roll in. Somehow he ran up billions in debt anyway.

The NDP had someone trained in economics as finance minister, the Libs have a flight instructor. A big mistake in a province that prefers fantasy over fact.

Alas Frank, The province only prefered fantasy over fact during the 90's. The myth of those fast cat ferries, fudget budgets and a new bridge for the Okanagan. Unlike the bridge that was burned in Nanaimo-Gate. You seem a tad riled up Frank, was it my comment for more fair taxes ? Or de-bunking the tax cuts for the rich fable ?

A flat income tax would hurt most Canadians. It would severely hurt the bottom earners who have a negative net worth. The only fair tax cut would be to increase the basic exemption, so that everyone gets back the same number of dollars. The more you earn the more you take home, even if you move into a higher tax bracket. There is still plenty of incentive to work hard. Why would anyone want to make the Canadian tax system more like that of the States?

Precisely my point Contumely, if the wealthy did not pay as much tax, the less wealthy would have to pay more. The provincial tax cats were most significant for the LOWEST two tax brackets, however if you pay less, conversely you will get less in return. While the wealthier technically got a bigger income tax cheque back, it was of a lesser percentage of the total amount they paid. Hence the argument that the tax cuts only affected the wealthy is a spin. For those who advocate on behalf of the less fortunate it seems a conflict to criticize any government policy that would see more funds end up to those in greater need. I know some will throw that “clawed back in service charges” argument however not necessarily as it would depend what types of service charges that particular person might end up paying. Fire away.

You did not debunk any "tax cut to the rich fable". There are higher tax brackets for higher earners. There is nothing to debunk. We need to debunk the total dung that was the BC Liberal "fudget budget" nonsense. A fraction of one percent is a balanced budget, period. Some BC Liberal launched a law suit about this and it was thrown out of court. It was total nonsense, period.

It was also the BC Liberals who sold the fast ferries for next to nothing. The money spent on those ferries went into the BC economy. This is not going to happen with the BC Liberal ferries build in Germany. Voting NDP is about voting for people. Voting BC Liberal is about voting for blind and selfish policies.

Nanaimo-Gate was one person and one person alone. Do you remember his name? Was it Dave Stupich? It had absolutely nothing to do with Mike Harcourt and the NDP government that was in power in the 1990s.

The BC Liberals under their previous name, the Social Credit Party, had plenty of stupid spending during their reign. We had Expo 86, BC Place, SkyTrain and the Vancouver Convention Centre. All of these projects went far over budget. BC Place and the SkyTrain have not been paying for their own upkeep. BC Place sits empty most of the time and does not earn enough to keep the roof inflated.

The BC Liberal scandals have been very real scandals. Not some fabrication by the opposition.

Bongo- Clearly not all people are driven by cash. That's why not everyone "studies business". How idiotic, how would that work if everyone set out to do the same thing?? I have lived in countries where I paid NO taxes for years, with money piling up in my bedroom and an unending flow of disposable income. But you know what? THERE CAME A POINT when the $$ just didn't cut it anymore. All the material crap I could get my hands on was junk, and I knew it; the air I was breathing was sh**, the fact that I didn't have health care scared the living daylights out of me (especially when I was averaging a scooter accident every week) and I had to face a fact: I was never going to sell my soul, or continue doing something/being somewhere my heart was no longer into,... just for $$. "Success is defined in money terms due to the fact that it's the only constant measurement among the entire population"... what the HECK are you on, man?? (I guess you can afford coke?) If there is one thing money isn't, it's "constant". It's PAPER!! It's a figment of our warped way of structuring the world. The importance placed on it is insane. I will always be ok, I will always survive, because I have friends and love and confidence and strength and resourcefulness on my side. THOSE are constants, Bongo. I feel sad for you and for all others like you. Are you really that scared? Of life? Do you honestly think you are nothing (not a success) if you don't have money? That people won't like you? Poor Bongo...

Bongo, (Mr Lahey) You have yet to debunk anything. Just once, just once I'd like to see you answer a post before you run off on a new tangent. So now we're onto the BC Libs tax cuts. Somehow the whole interest rate/commodity/federal transfer thing has become ancient history. Fine. Tally-ho.

The 25% tax cut was not a true tax cut. It was "tax-shifting". The other taxes (a billion worth, according to Lib-friendly Can-West) that rose to help the Libs recover that lost revenue mainly hit the working-poor and lower-middle class. It totally ate up any benefit the original tax cut would have provided and more. Their taxes actually rose. So your 25% cut only helped those with higher incomes. This by the way is called debunking.

Now where are you going to go? Away from tax cuts and back to declaring CEO's the engine of the economy? Or perhaps that foreign ownership is a good thing? I await your next post on pins and needles.

I just have to say, should anybody really take seriously the words of someone who can't even spell his own name? Is it Lahey, or Lehay?

It's actually probably Bongo under a pseudonym, maybe the name of one of his teachers. Trust me, Bongo is a high school student. As someone intimately acquainted with what High School students' debating looks like, I can assure you, you're wasting your breath on somebody who is arguing his point of view because he's never even heard a different one. You can also tell he's an uneducated kid (like myself, sadly) by his ignorant comments about Communism. I doubt he could tell you the first thing about how a centrally planned economy works (not that I could, but at least I know what one is).

It's fun to argue with simpletons, I suppose--it gives one a feeling of superiority--but really, this guy has had enough attention, don't you think?

Sue, Perhaps you have never heard of the open market before – the “fast” cats sold to the highest bidder, but wouldn’t it be great if they had a refund and we could get our money back like most things you buy that don’t work? Guess what with these ferries built in Germany they come with a performance based money back guarantee – imagine that, some security for our tax dollars. The real question is why can a country like Germany build these ferries for well over 100 hundred million less than we can right in our own BC backyard? Money spent on those fast ferries went into our economy? We borrowed the money to build those ferries, it is part of the near 17 billion in debt that the NDP try to deny they added onto our kids, yes even you high school student get to help pay for that, apparently more so than the wealthier tax-payers according to Frank. Do you really think Sue if you put $ 450 Million on your credit card to build ferries that don’t work you are actually helping the economy? Tell you what Sue, I have a job proposal for you – I’ll go and borrow enough money to pay you decent union wages for seven years on a project that will fail. After that you can pay those wages back to me for the next 20 years plus interest, only now you don’t have the job as the project failed so what now?

Mr Lahey, are you Gary Collins?

Leave it to the BC Liberals (previously call BC Social Credit Party) to pay for failed projects like Expo 86, BC Place, Skytrain and in the near future the 2010 Olympics and occasionally pay union wages and still have enoromous debt to show for it.

I just hope that the BC Liberals are not successful in their quest to privatize BC Hydro. There are certain things that simply MUST be kept in the hands of the public. Geez, with a government like this one, they might even start privatizing jails, a ridiculous practise that they do in some of the states. (And if they did, I am sure we would hear in the media that it is all about the hidden hand of the market and the efficiency of smaller government and all of that other neoliberal cheerleading rhetoric.)

Has anyone considered the premise that as Canadians were are not so much overtaxed as the Americans are perhaps undertaxed. The US debt load is 7.4 Trillion dollars US (roughly 8.8 Trillion CAD) or in smaller terms a per capita debt of approx 25000.USD (29750 CAD) Versus Canadian Debt of 500 Billion dollars CAD (420 billion USD)again in smaller terms a per capita debt of approx 15000.CAD (12600 USD). Their debt is increasing at a rate of 1.4 billion/day while ours in decreasing at a rate of approx 20 million per day allowing for continuing reductions in interest payments which are returning to Canadians through increased spending by government perhaps not always on the correct programs or programs we would like to see but coming back in anycase. It seems to me that there is a case to be made that the so-called fiscal conservatives are in fact very poor money managers. As we in Canada have learned very painfully, you cannot borrow your way out of debt as appears to be the situation in the US.

Conservatives are the worst money managers in the world. It's funny, those who whine about tax cuts and then point to the States never bring up their huge crippling debt. That debt will have to be paid off sometime. I would rather be in the situation Canada is in. Funny too that all these economists, bankers, business people who are whining but were educated in Canadian Universities in the 60's and 70's never complain about their tax payer supported degrees, yet now they are bitching that students should pay their own way.

Lahey, Lehay et/al, could you please expand a bit on that comment about the German ferries being so much cheaper to build in Germany than in BC? You see, I was left with the impression you (as in we the government), didn't even have the decency to ask BC ship builders what their costs would be. Of course, this is the same government that tore up contracts after telling voters it would honor them. And am I to assume that since our credit rating has been dropping since your government took office, the German manufacturers will be asking for some of the payments up front to ensure things don't suddenly get shredded?

Allan, I suggest you do some research for starters and log onto to Standard and Poor's (international credit rating agency) where you can learn that our provincial credit rating was recently raised, and it was the performance of this government that was mentioned specifically as one of the reasons why. While there you can learn that it was downgraded not once, but twice under the former NDP Government. After you are done there you can start you ferry research. First off, the BC shipbuilder is actually the American owned Washington Marine Group, a Division of parent company Seaspan. The Washington Marine Group submitted a tender that was over 900 pages. It had two construction options, the cheapest with the hulls being manufactured in China, and the more expensive being modularly built in BC. Even using the cheapest method, and factoring in having to pay import duties, BC taxpayers are saving over 100 Million dollars. A hugely significant amount of money. I can appreciate that you were "left with an impression" that made you think otherwise. However this is exactly the kind of misinformation being widely circulated by Unions and the NDP as most (at least in their organizations) take no time to truly research the real facts.

To Lahey; I think what taxpayers want since I am one is the retention of JOBS in BC with taxes accruing from those JOBS staying in BC. Your government has a penchant for exporting JOBS out of the province using our tax dollars to fund those JOBS in other countries where our tax dollars are being taxed from these other countries who are benefiting. You might also check out if the Feds are going to forgive the import duty which as I understand it having been a customs broker for over 30 years is in the range of 25% of the transaction value, I suspect that this will negate any savings that your government and BCFerries might consider. Additionally, if a Canadian Shipyard complains of unfair subsidies being paid to the overseas shipyards by their foreign governments CRA can assess additional dumping duties ontop. So if I were you I would sure hope that none of the eastern shipyards complain. Let's not even discuss the hundreds of millions of dollars in spin-offs to the local Canadian and British Columbian economies that have been lost. If it is going to cost us $100 million extra to build here sobeit, at least I would have the knowledge and satisfaction that the dollars are staying here and contributing to our economy from which our government would have recovered 30 to 40% of the excess through local taxation. This was not a good deal for British Columbia and not a good deal for Canada.

Hey Gary Collins (Mr. Lahey) why won't you ever respond to any of my letters? Come on, I'm waiting! I'd like to know why this Sodexho company should be cleaing BC hospitals when people are catching infections? I'd like to know why contracting out our MSP services to an American company with ties to the Pentagon is beneficial to British Columbians? I'd like to know how come you keep breaking promises, then spend over 1 million dollars to tell BC what a great job you think your Government is doing? I'd like to know why your PR people get 10 thousand dollar raises and me, as a public servant I get zip. I'd like to know why my tuition at UBC has risen over 75% in two years yet it is still hard to get into needed classes. Come on Gary, answer me! I'd like to know why you, a flight instructor, think you are somehow qualified to manage the finances of this province? Only six more months left of Liberal crap, thank goodness.

Gary, I'm so disappointed you didn't respond about those shredded health care contracts I also wrote of.... or the promises to honour them before the 2001 election. And speaking of the ferries, how many worker-hours are expected to be generated for the German shipyard workers? You researched that too, didn't you? It's "a hugely significant amount of money" BC shipbuilding workers and our entire economy will miss out on. Add the multiplier factor that you guys like to roll out and you're talking olympian-size buckets of cash coming back into your cofers. But we know you care Gary, because of your generosity to our oppressed wealthy,(BTW-you've debunked nothing)and to the pub owners of BC, now setting records adding liquour stores to their cold beer&wine huts and drinking lounges. Strange, because few communities suffer the lack of a good BCLC store, a better price and much more choice for the consumer. You know those stores we all own and you want to close, which, over the years have generated $100s of millions in revenue to help pay for health care, education, safe streets and things that families and communities need. Oh, I almost forgot the safety net that your government tossed to all those poor beleagured Atlantic Salmon farmers who were threatened by all those wild salmon that swim close by to take advantage of the tons of fresh sea lice available thanks to the farmers efforts.

Time to stir up the pot, I was the one who originally brought up communism not Bongo and yes I used Cuba as an example. After 40 years of one of the most cruel and unwarranted trade embargo's they aren't doing too badly and Canada has much to learn from the Cubans in the area of remaining independent of US rules/laws/culture/finance.

Here are a few facts about Cuba.

1. Nearly 100% literacy in the population, the U.S. by comparison is sitting at around 94%

2. A life expectancy of 76 years, the highest in Latin America and not far off of Canada's

3. Free health care for all Cuban citizens including worldwide recognition as being one of the leaders in eye surgery procedures. The U.S. no health care for citizens. 4. Free education for all citizens in Cuba, including university and college. In Canada we pay for post secondary education and don't even get me started on the U.S.

Cuba has developed a culture and economy which is totally independent of the United States even though the two nations are only 70 miles away at the closest point. Where would Canada be if the U.S. put a 40 year trade embargo on our country? There are many myths and tales you will hear about Cuba but please don't forget that most of these come from the mainstream media which has definitively demonstrated that they have a strong interest in a completely capatilist system with no social fabric, Canwest anyone?

There are those who would claim that while Cuba may try to look after all of its citizens as best as it can there is still the issue about a lack of basic human rights and freedoms. I will not argue that Cuba and Castro are lacking in this area but I will instead ask those people to question how much personal freedom they have in their country. In the U.S. they have the patriot act and in all of North America we have governments which are more or less controlled by powerful multinational companies. Furthermore in Canada we are overwhelmed with U.S. culture and we are slaves to at least some of America's political beliefs. Legalization of marijuana, the missile defence system, BC health records falling under the patriot act, are a few of many examples of the power of influence the American's carry in our country. The facts are undeniable for strong socialism not watered down socialism. After 40 years of injustice, which by the way has been denounced by many countries and the catholic church, Cuba remains the most politically stable and wealthiest of all developing nations in the world. Just compare it to its neighbours or other similar countries for a second and you will realize how strong and prosperous a country it really is.

"Condemn me, it does not matter. History will absolve me." Fidel Castro

So you’re all telling me that if you headed out looking to buy a car; and you have two options; The Fleisenberger model comes from Germany has a full warranty, impressive reviews, a proven track record and is significantly cheaper. The Washingtonian has never been built before, but most of it will be built locally, yet has no warranty, no track record, and is significantly more expensive. You would buy the Washingtonian? It never ceases to amaze me how far you will go in trying to validate your point. With viewpoints such as yours it becomes more understandable what happened with the NDP in the 90’s and clearly will continue to happen in the present day.

Just to take your car analogy a little further Mr. Trailer Park Supervisor. People buy hybrid vehicles not because they are cheaper or have a proven track record or a better warranty, they buy them because they make sense. More expensive and better for the environment. Ferries built in BC, more expensive (perhaps) but the money stays here and unionized workers can afford to buy houses, go on vacations, send the kids to school. Its so simple it amazes me that you can't get your head around this. Out of the ferry bids how much is being spent on labour, contracted out and union, and how much on raw materials? You can basically write-off the labour if these boats are built here because the money will mostly stay here. How can Campbullites argue against this when they argue for tax cuts that will put more money into the economy? Its f-ing retarded.

Campbell and Mr. Lehay Collins are not in favor of putting money back into local economies, they are in favor of putting money into friends', and international corporations' pockets. They are in favor of selling us out. It's disgraceful really. They thought by throwing us dogs a little bone in the name of a measly middle and lower class tax cut we'd be grateful and not bitch and moan when they gutted everything, broke contracts and privitized the hell out of the Province. It shows you how much they think of us and those in the "heartlands" should really consider this next May if they are planning to vote Liberal.

To Lehay, Lahay and Sons: In your car analogy you miss the point. Why not here, in this province? Why give all our power and jobs away? All good ideas have to begin somewhere - the problem is there are just too few politicians with the foresight, courage, and real common sense to take that first step.

For example, one of your favourite political heros, (haha) I'm sure, Tommy Douglas, using his home turf of Saskatchewan as the testing lab, showed that it was possible to develop and finance a universal medicare system. Those first groundbreaking steps in Saskatchewan are significant ones, just like that hybrid car. They showed what was possible. Then other provinces wanted the same advantages. Soon what began as a small conquest on an equally small but innovative battlefield ballooned into an enthusiastic political activism, eventually forcing the government of the day to institute a national health care system. In effect, our whole country benefited from the experimental hybrid model and lined up around the block to buy the National Health Care car.

But again, just like your decision to have the ferries built in Germany, your government is the kind that keeps betting on the Fleisenberger model in all things, making the Fleisenbergers rich and our own province so much poorer. Just no imagination for real change. And even less courageous leadership and real common sense. Anyway, won't bother you any longer, you must be busy, as now you've got your latest Fleisenberger model to deal with "the fast transit fiasco" ...

The LOWEST two income tax brackets were reduced, that said you need to have an income and pay some taxes first for that to be of any benefit, so I do see your point that those reductions would not be of any asistance to someone with no taxable income.

Has anyone noticed that Mr. Lehay hasn't actually denied he is Gary Collins?

Mr Lahey, refer to posts above for the debunking of your low income tax bracket fluff. Like the BC Libs you fail to learn from previous information and would prefer to just say the same things over again. Guess that's why Campbell is the most unpopular premier in Canada.

May I ask Mr. Lahey whether he knows what precentage of a paycheck paid with BC taxes to a BC family will be recovered in taxes? Please compute income tax and sales tax on all goods purchased by said BC family, and taxes paid by employees of BC businesses who sell those goods to those BC workers. Seems to me your famous $100 million saving kinda starts to shrink a bit, no?, Then let's calculate the other end, the prosperity of the German towns and businesses pays for education and such for their kids, which will help them compete better against us in the future, so you've not only sold our chances for prosperity now, but our hopes for prosperity down the road, too. How efficient of you to be so thrifty with our money.

Oh, well. may I point out that the reductions to the two lowest income tax brackets were not real, but a deception. The average saving in tax was way under $100 per family, while the average increase in fees, premiums and such was way over $300. Sometimes as much as $800.

Factor in the reduction to services used and needed only by the poor, and you see clearly that the poor had their burden substantially, often catastrophically, raised.

Count the homeless before. Now count them again after. Subtract the first number from the second. Consider the remainder a statistic.

Standard and Poor. How perfectly droll. And they say Liberals have no sense of humour.

Thanks to the fraudulenttheories of neoclasical economics, people have been brainwashed to believe that everything government does is wrong and wasteful, but everything done by giant corporations is beneficial. At least, governments are responsible and accountable to a certain degree on how much they tax and what they do with it ? What nobody dares to mention is that corporate profits are just another form of self imposed, unilateral taxation, without any accountability, or expectations of benefits to the public. As a business owner in BC since 1957 I know that profits are necessary for the survival of businesses, but at certain level they become criminal and outright theft. The purpose of corporate mergers and the resulting oligopolies has nothing to do with cost cuttings, but increased profits extorted from the public. With all the taxcuts and free trade subsidies to major corporations with the free movement of capital, plus the cutting of wages and benefits to workers, outsourcing and their replacement with minimum wage part timers, how is it the every time we go shopping prices have increased? Why do we hear the claim of "rising costs" all the time ? Because they are stealing monies from the public's pockets and take them abroad as weapons for their globalized colonizing schemes. Neoclassical economics are not an economic theory, but the biggest crime wave in history, destituting and killing millions every year and ruining the environment for corporate profit demands

Ed Deak, your final sentence is what they call a brilliantly apt gem and sadly so true.

"Capitalism is indeed organized crime, and we are its' victims." - Refused

Lynn,I think your point about"some body has to take the leed" or words to that affect is right on the money and we need more of that instead of this continual pissing contest between the left and the right.A good example of this was when Glen Clark came up with the Fast Ferry idea and I was one of the first,as you know from a previous discussion,to sing his praises.This was differcult for me because most of my friends are more right than left, and I really thought that Clark and his buddy Moe really should be in jail.So emagine how I felt when Clarky boy made such a mess of it.I'm sure you can emagine the jibes I got"the NDP couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery"or words to that affect.The unfortunate part is that within this monumental failure the people ie you me the government etc failed to notice the successfull part of this story, we actually built these ships.Could this have been utilized with this latest contract,I think it should have been,but with the only BC company bidding being American and not knowing whether or not it had the financial and mechanical infastructure to be successfull,I am sure you can see why the government went elswhere.They were not as brave as Clark,but they are just as arrogant.[interesting to see who Clark is working for now] By the way did you know that the definition of an economist is somebody who can tell you tomorow why what he recomended yesterday did not come true today.An interesting thought when when reading through this lot above. Back to taxes.Why don't we have some kind of graduated flat tax?The problem with our current system is that the more money you make,the more the tax system allows you make.As an example, an individual with no disposable income cannot fund an RSP where as a person who has can and they get money back to boot.This is a double kick at the can that all tax payers subsidize.I think that all deductions should be elliminated and that over a certain level of income[sustainable living][this is the graduated part] everybody pays the same tax % of their incomes.This would still give people the incentive to improve their lot,but at the same time level the playing field.It would also reduce the cost of a very over populated tax department both provincially and federally. I think the biggest problem in our society is debt,which is bought about by excessive and incompudent government aswell as personal greed.Our tax system has evolved into such a horrible mess,that all it does is keep accountants and lawyers in business. Then you have the abillity of certain individuals to become small corporations and you wouldn't believe the benifiets that can have.Its no bloody wonder the left gets pissed off even though they can do exactly the same if they have the abillity.We have to get rid of all this crap that continually stokes these fires and we have to do it in such a way as to engourage free enterprise,reduce government, make it responsible to us not itself and have a social conscience that fits our financial means.We have to have an agender that works for all not this party crap.

Lynn,I think your point about"some body has to take the leed" or words to that affect is right on the money and we need more of that instead of this continual pissing contest between the left and the right.A good example of this was when Glen Clark came up with the Fast Ferry idea and I was one of the first,as you know from a previous discussion,to sing his praises.This was differcult for me because most of my friends are more right than left, and I really thought that Clark and his buddy Moe really should be in jail.So emagine how I felt when Clarky boy made such a mess of it.I'm sure you can emagine the jibes I got"the NDP couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery"or words to that affect.The unfortunate part is that within this monumental failure the people ie you me the government etc failed to notice the successfull part of this story, we actually built these ships.Could this have been utilized with this latest contract,I think it should have been,but with the only BC company bidding being American and not knowing whether or not it had the financial and mechanical infastructure to be successfull,I am sure you can see why the government went elswhere.They were not as brave as Clark,but they are just as arrogant.[interesting to see who Clark is working for now] By the way did you know that the definition of an economist is somebody who can tell you tomorow why what he recomended yesterday did not come true today.An interesting thought when when reading through this lot above. Back to taxes.Why don't we have some kind of graduated flat tax?The problem with our current system is that the more money you make,the more the tax system allows you make.As an example, an individual with no disposable income cannot fund an RSP where as a person who has can and they get money back to boot.This is a double kick at the can that all tax payers subsidize.I think that all deductions should be elliminated and that over a certain level of income[sustainable living][this is the graduated part] everybody pays the same tax % of their incomes.This would still give people the incentive to improve their lot,but at the same time level the playing field.It would also reduce the cost of a very over populated tax department both provincially and federally. I think the biggest problem in our society is debt,which is bought about by excessive and incompudent government aswell as personal greed.Our tax system has evolved into such a horrible mess,that all it does is keep accountants and lawyers in business. Then you have the abillity of certain individuals to become small corporations and you wouldn't believe the benifiets that can have.Its no bloody wonder the left gets pissed off even though they can do exactly the same if they have the abillity.We have to get rid of all this crap that continually stokes these fires and we have to do it in such a way as to engourage free enterprise,reduce government, make it responsible to us not itself and have a social conscience that fits our financial means.We have to have an agender that works for all not this party crap.

I'm not rich and never expected to be. I'm not middle class, either. I'm a full-term writer so that puts me just about on the same financial rung as your average welfare recipient. I pay taxes. I've paid them since my first pay checque at my first job. Income tax, sales tax, whatever tax, I pay it. I have a vehicle which I drive on the roads, when I'm sick I can see a doctor, if I need to I can go to hospital, my grandchildren attend school, and NO I don't have a lot of what they will insist on calling "disposable income"....... but I'd be willing to bet everyone who has posted on this subject is FAR better off than their U.S. counterpart. Your health care alone elevates you above the U.S. worker. Your hospital coverage puts you in a very favoured class. Your employment insurance, welfare..you name it... comes from the taxes we pay. Yeah, they're high. Hell, look at the price of Coke and Pepsi and how little you get for your money and your taxes might not look so high. Junk food gives nothing, costs too much, nobody is bitching.....and all the right wingers who are sobbing on behalf of the rich might want to look at the fact that ALL the benefits we enjoy came because the UNIONS, representing the WORKERS fought for and won for us the standard of living which puts even our poor well above the plight of workers in many other countries. Poor Naslund didn't like the taxes in Sweden? Gee, I'll cry. Stuff like that could break an old woman's heart. Adam Zimmerman was making 13 million dollars a year the last I heard... now I'm really sad...yeah, we pay high taxes. You have the choice, now..is your glass half full or half empty? Mine is half full...I know I'm very fortunate. I got my 'flu shot without having to travel to a foreign country!! "Little things mean a lot"......even the whiners on this post have obviously got computers... ask someone who lives in an abandoned car how hooked to the internet they are...if we have to pay more taxes to improve the health care system I'll pay. It might mean less "disposable income" but hey, you can't take it with you and without health care you might be leaving us a lot sooner than necessary. Take another look at your glass... it's fuller than you seem to think it is.

If one looks at economic growth figures, you can see that in recent years Canada has been consistently outperforming most European economies in large part because of our lower tax rates. Now that we are into a situation of spiraling federal surpluses it creates the opportunity to do three things: pay off the federal debt, reduce taxes and/or spend more. Paying off the debt means that money that would otherwise go to pay interest can now go to health care, infrastructure spending, or even having a viable military. I think reducing the tax burden particularily on the working poor would also be beneficial. Personally I think it is scandalous that a low income family of four can be living in poverty and still see a substantial portion of their income taxed away. So I think a fair and balanced approach is to continue utilising a significant portion of each federal surplus to pay down the debt, reducing income taxes for the working poor as well as lowering UI premiums while spending more money on health care and other public priorities. This seems to be exactly the policy the federal Liberals are following.

The problem is Mike; most in the left are incapable of admitting anything positive has occurred in the last few years. Instead we must pretend that everything was wonderful during the 90’s and is terrible today.

Basically the mirror-image of what the right says then.

Mr. Lahey; The problem is, sir, that you seem unable to understand that the reason people disagree with you is not that they're stupid or deluded, but that they think you're wrong.

You display an attitude that used only to be found in the religious, as a component of faith. In it's new meaning, not it's original one of constancy. You feel that you own the truth, and all must believe as you believe. Neither evidence nor argument will convince you. If they don't argee and accept as revealed truth all you say, then you explain it all again in detail, if they still don't, you dismiss them.

Nobody has claimed that nothing positive has happened lately. Many of the people who are refuting your statements here don't appear particularly leftish. They really do think you are dangerously wrong, and are offering you evidence and argument to support their positions. In return you are offering them an odd sort of repetitive chant. You simply ignore the evidence and argument and restate your original position. We lowered taxes for the poor, you say. But the poor pay the government more now, you're told. But we REDUCED their taxes, you repeat. But homelessness is exploding, you're told. But WE reduced THEIR taxes, you reply. The UN and humanitarian groups report that child poverty in BC is way up, we say.BUTWEREDUCEDTAXES.

Believe it or not, your statements are convincing fewer people every day, and just repeating them over and over and over only persuades the weak minded or the faithful.

Canadian values have been shaped by the harshness of Canadian winters. We are practical people. We grew up co-operating to survive. We look after our own needs and keep the things we need to survive in our own hands. We look after each other. We understand hard times and band together against them. You fail absolutely to comprehend that. Your philosophy seems to be tell people whatever they want to hear then sell off their stuff when you get power. And as for the poor, well, how could anybody be poor when we're getting so darn rich. There must be something wrong with em. Don't look, walk by quickly. Let's go home and read the statistics again.

Economics is not a philosophy of life, it's a bookkeeping technique. Even Capitalism is a mere distribution scheme. One which has lately fallen into the hands of very limited thinkers. For what it's good for, it's a good scheme. It provides good incentives and so forth. If you try to apply it to life, you will wind up a psychotic, trying to sell your children because you have discovered a market for them. And your parents because they cost more than they can earn these days.

I point out to you that both of those examples are drawn from recent BC Government policies.

The flaw in your line of thinking Bailey is that you make conflicting statements. I agree people who understood the reality of hard winters, and needing to work together to surive built this country. It was hard work and not handouts that built this country and all that we have today. In the old days you worked hard, and took responsibility for yourself, and your family. Nowadays people don’t take responsibility for their own actions; instead they blame the government and whomever else they can. It’s crap. What you fail to understand about is that people work hard to provide for their families not to sell them, nor wait for a government handout to provide for them.

Thank you for replying to my argument with an argument of your own. It shows respect and I appreciate it.

This word nowadays seems to imply a change in the conditions from previously to now. Allow me to offer you an example of such a change. A few years ago, for reasons never made clear to me, we closed large portions of our mental institutions. This was just after the Residential School abuses had cost the jobs of several politicians who had barely been born at the time the abuses were committed, thanks to the doctrine of ministerial responsibility and our habit of demanding human sacrifices in lieu of rational problem solving. It was studied and concluded that institutions were probably abusive by their nature, and certainly attracted abusive people to their staffs and management because of the inherent power dynamics in them.

Whatever the reasons, thousands of people all over Canada, but in Vancouver certainly, were put onto starvation level pensions, handed their prescription scrips, and placed into crappy rooms in rubby hotels around Main and Hastings. Where the landlords recieved the pension cheques directly, as though having the money they could then be trusted to do right by these people. Follow the Code of the Slumlord I suppose.

'Be sure to take your meds' they were told, and that was that. Remember now, we're talking about schizophrenics, manic depressives, fetal alcohol damaged people, abuse survivors, all of whom were so badly damaged that they had warranted institutionalization. Just about the only ones not dispossesed in this way were those who had been to court and been ordered confined to protect themselves or society.

As you'd expect, these new pensioners were talked out of their meds, robbed of their cheques and living in the alleys of the East End in short order. Halucinating, starving and freezing in the cold. This was the first big increase in the level of homelessness in Vancouver that I witnessed myself.

Please explain exactly whose laziness this represented. In what way did they fail to take responsibility for their own actions, and cause their own misfortune? Was it doctrinally correct that they be given the chance to work hard to provide for themselves and their families? Were they too great a burden for a civilization as poor as ours to bear?

What you fail to understand is that word 'people' you use doesn't only mean people like you. I'm sure you function well in the marketplace, and can support your children just fine. Many people will never do so. Many people are mentally, physically, spiritually, culturally so different from you that they will never, repeat never find a way to live in the marketplace that nourishes you so lavishly. But they are still people, still Canadians, our children, our neighbours. What does it make us when we kick them down, blame them for their condition, and smugly watch them starve in the cold, or steal bread and clothes, or commit suicide in their fear and despair.

No matter what economic scheme you use, some will thrive, some will get by, and some will find themselves unable to function at all. This is as true 'nowadays' as 'in the old days', as it will be in the future. If we fail to provide for all from the prosperity created by those who can produce, we must carry the weight of their misery on our own souls.

Oh, by the way, I didn't mean to imply that they would sell their own children. It was other people's children, the children of the poor they sold when they repealed the child labour laws. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

Bailey - Thank you for echoing my thoughts and feelings, you have put to words those things I have long discussed with friends and other politicos. Governments have put so many people out into the streets without the safety net that as Canadians we hoped would always be there. We need to get back to that kind of caring for the less fortunate and those who have been economically disenfranchised. Once again thank you.

I actually appreciated that response Bailey, and in fairness, I was unaware that mental institutions had been closed. I do not deny that there are those who are incapable of looking after themselves due to physical or mental challenges, nor do I deny as a society that we need to provide for them. So here is my issue – no matter what we try and do for these less fortunate, it will take financial resources to help solve these problems. Like this government or not, and please no simplistic “on the backs of the poor arguments” there is a surplus on hand today. We know from the past that voting NDP will only see the money spent on big labor unions, projects and issues that will not help theis segment of society either – so what would you suggest is a solution that can directly help these people ?

A solution? House them, feed them, clothe them, give them back some dignity.

Let them find ways to live outside the markets, then help them organize themselves in those ways.

Quit being so afraid to allow others to be other. If they can live well co-operatively we all might learn something by helping them do that, and they might just be able to pull it off. Even if it annoys the entreprenurial.

Stop wrecking their chances to succeed by denying them the right to improve their situations by their own efforts, I mean stop confiscating the earnings of recipients of social assistance. It only reinforces their poverty and further strips them of hope and dignity. When they fall into need, help them enough so that they might someday be less needy, even partially support themselves.

Do all this without insisting that if only they were more like you, they wouldn't be in this fix. It isn't true, it could never happen, and it just makes you seem slightly crazy yourself.

Please try to keep in mind that money used to be a symbol of value, useful for exchange. Since the gold standard was removed it's only a representation of a symbol of value. I know it seems very real and important to you, but it's only a useful fiction, and will never fit all the needs of any real society I can imagine. There must be ways to do that which money cannot do, or the whole scheme will fail like a building that can't bend in the wind. It will crash, and the angels will weep for us.

And speaking of useful fictions, there is no surplus, it's a trick of bookkeeping. They borrowed way more this year than they claimed was surplus, so their surplus really is more like a cash draw on a credit card than any indication of actual income.

And no Canadian government of any stripe has ever, as far as I know, spent any money at all on any unions of any size.

I was with you there for a while. As far as persons with a disability is, the Ministry of Human Resources does try to provide all of these basic needs. In fact my understanding is that this group was recently given a base rate funding increase, the largest one time increase ever, and more money than was given under the NDP. At the same time, my understanding is that this government actually doubled the amount of money that this group could earn to partially assist themselves, as you have advocated for, something the former NDP government did not do either. So let me ask you this, as you seem to have a level of knowledge in this field. What exactly was it that the NDP did for this group of people that was of greater benefit than is being done now? Keep in mind I am not suggesting that more does not need to be done; I am just curious what the former NDP government was doing better to assist.

The NDP may not be any more competent than the Liberals, but they lie less. Both parties seem to be floundering and lost in the face of the threat from the compulsory polarization being forced on western democracies by the fundamentalists. It's all us and them. I mean, it isn't, but everybody is required to take sides, to dislike some group because they differ. The left, the right, the poortherichtheblackthewhitesthenativesmenwomenarabsjews, God, anybody at all. It doesn't seem to matter much who, as long as you can differentiate them.

Who said that if they can keep you from asking the right questions, they don't have to worry about the answers? You suffer from this malady yourself, when you said you were with me for a while, but then realized you could reject me based on some lame characterization of the poor as people in your power. Who can be permitted or denied the fruits of their labour at somebody else's whim, and trapped on welfare by policy. How many false categories do you have in which to keep people who differ from you in their places?

The current government treat half of BC as enemies. They are sworn to serve them, but never will, because of these false categories. It's dangerous, it's stupid, and it prevents us from ever having a chance of solving the very real problems facing the human race on planet Earth.

The former government were admittedly not too bright, but at least they kept trying to do their sworn duty the best they could against great and underhanded opposition.

The solution is as I stated it. House them, feed them, clothe them and help them find a life they can live that will allow them to do the best they can and keep their value as human beings intact. In order to make this solution work, of course, you have to be willing to remove your foot from their necks and offer them your hand instead.

WOW BONGO HIT A NERVE! I for one as a very poor person know thatif i pay rent i am taxed for police scholls and local gov't paschas whether i like it or not so even the poorest pay in their rent for roads scholling for all those so called middle class people and their roads etc. The flat fee always benefits those whom have more left in their pockets after paying the fee that is why the rich get subsidy by the poor that is what they want and that is what canada will give them. Hooray for canada!