Always good to read Murray.

Always good to read Murray. Even when I don't entirely agree with him.

Personally, I gave up on the NDP a long time ago... along with all the other so called parties to capitalism, or of so-called "socialism" or "social democracy" for that matter, including the communists. British Labour was socialist, Kahn, the raper of women (so he is accused)and the head of the IMF, is likewise a "socialist", as is the party in power, now attempting to drive a nail into the coffin of the working masses of Greece.

All these "social democratic" , "liberal" and socialist parties, in my view, including the NDP no less, have evolved over the time since the last Great Depression, to become just "alternative parties in the bullshit game of capitalist democracy"... flying bullshit flags from another time now dead. Though, I concede, the NDP in this country is still likely needing to be experienced by, and exposed to the masses. Which, my bet is, just a little more time that needs to run yet in order to accomplish. (Much of the trade union leadership is the same as well... become just managers of labour for capitalism.)

Anyway, like I say, a little more time will write the final chapter to this NDP story, to be sure.

I'd spend more time on this analysis here, but I am in a hurry to greet some company.

There is, however, in my view again, one positive. All this exposure of the capitalist system going on all around us, and the political parties to it and its bullshit democracy, is likely about to create a new paradigm... in which "the working class masses" will have no other alternative, in the abscence of any other "vanguardist" saviours, but to seize the intitiative and resolve the issues of society, the economy and democracy themselves... for themselves. All of what is, is hopelessly corrupted and ruling class serving.

Which is a good thing... just a tad more complicated. But it's the only real way this revolution is going to happen, and not just re-till over already well plowed, and now thorougly weed infested ground.

What does Canada mean to its citizens?

It seems that it means keeping your head down, hope for the best, and stand behind the bully. This is pretty much like it is in Britain, the US, and most of the world. It seems that we need an evolution in consciousness to overcome the evolution of corrupt power.

If we were able to see the big picture, we would see that the Harper's, the Murdoch's, the Bush's, the Hitler's and the Stalin's are the same tribe and work on the same principle - keep the masses fearful, hungry and confused.

If we were able to envision a construct based on justice and cooperation instead of our trivial pursuits of fleeting superiority, we might have a party that would dare to work on truth.

On the other hand ...

We are able to dedicate our whole lives to our family, our beloved, and we have been known to risk our own lives to save a stranger, even. We have learned how to heal and inspire others, how to analyze problems, how to create little devices that can send messages half way across the world, how to tell stories that remain in the imagination of a reader for a lifetime. We have behind us centuries of building monuments to life, such as art, theatre, music.

So how is it we so easily capitulate to the shallow ambitions of monsters? Why are we willing to watch humanity and all of its diverse expression fed into the meat grinder of war, poverty and structural violence?

In short, why do we give our power away to those who harm us?

The purpose of the

The purpose of the propaganda for more "competitiveness" is the collectivization of of economies under the global dictatorship of the international corporate mafia in the best Soviet fashion, albeit not with bayonets, but with the perceived power of imaginary capital, while calling it "free enterprise".

Harper is a victim of having been born with a very low intelligence and then brainwashed with dictatorial, ruling class theories, known as "conservativism". A low brow megalomaniac, with mental problems written all over him, who will start dismantling Canada by next year.

However, there's now also the beginning of a worldwide awakening of humanity, shown in unrests all over the globe, and here in Canada with the election of 103 NDP MPs, showing taht people are subconsciously looking for help and answers.

Layton had little to do with this success, or does show any sign to be able to take the lead, demanding and implementing a major changes and the repatriation of democracy, lost of fraudulent FTA and similar treaties.

A worldwide depression is inevitable, most likely being forced by the ruling sectors, now that they've taken control of the world's resources with their imaginary capital.

Whether humanity will permit them to execute their empire building plans, remains to be seen ?

I have a feeling that Harper will be forced out of office long before his term is over. He'll go nuts with his present, dictatorial powers and sooner of later people will wake up and oust him, the same way Campbell was forced out , here in BC.

The big question is what can be done to save lives when the depression comes and who has the brains and courage to do it ? It has temporarily papered over with the creation of imaginary, Ponzi scheme capital from the air, but the rulers can't get away with their crime wave forever, because any fraud can only last so long, before the victims wake up and demand accounting.

Ed Deak.

Going for the middle is a

Going for the middle is a dead end for the NDP.

There is no middle.

Conservatives know that there is only one truth, and that consensus is the last position, not the first.

New Democrats should be selling the truth as progressives see it, not jockeying for support in the non existent middle.

If their current positions represent a real reflection of their current ideology, they've left me behind.

Going for the middle is a

Going for the middle is a dead end for the NDP.

There is no middle.

Conservatives know that there is only one truth, and that consensus is the last position, not the first.

New Democrats should be selling the truth as progressives see it, not jockeying for support in the non existent middle.

If their current positions represent a real reflection of their current ideology, they've left me behind.

Harper's attack on the arts sector

Good article:
"Micro-managing cultural grants, making applicants fearful of being cut off (and therefore engaging in self-censorship) and openly attacking select organizations for ridicule or for being "un-Canadian" can have a huge effect over time..."

Yes, a few weeks ago the feds cut a Heritage Grant to the SummerWorks Theatre Festival in Toronto. The previous year Harper had complained about the content of one of the shows (he never saw it of course). The link between the show and the cuts was obvious to the arts community and the message understood clearly.

Around the same time as the Heritage cut, Finance Minister Flaherty announced that Arts groups should not expect to receive subsidies in the future. This would be a huge reversal in terms of long standing policy. The culture industry's contribution to the economy makes the contribution of most other sectors look small. But it has no massive corporate lobby to represent it. The arts sector is also one of the few areas in which Canadians (most of them low-income Canadians - artists occupy the lowest rungs of the income ladder in Canada) explore what it means to be Canadian.

Provincially there has also been an attack on arts funding. Cuts to the BC Arts Council and Gaming (money from casinos which goes to organisations with charity numbers - including many arts and community organisations) have been brutal, resulting in many organisations shutting down.

It's probably no secret that most artists are center or left on the political spectrum. So this is another area in which civil opposition to Harper's government is being censored.

Can the opposition NDP do anything? Unfortunately for artists, their support of the NDP has never been reciprocated by the party, which has not fully updated its notions of who the "workers" are, preferring to throw its lot in with well-organized, elite, big-union workers.

hollinm

some good thoughts here until you got to this part:
"The other system i.e. socialism does not work. Ask Greece, Spain and Portugal."

Not sure what you mean here. Greece, Spain and Portugal aren't socialist - Greece has nationalized more enterprises than the others but their problem arose from bad budgeting issues from the so-called fiscally-conservative governments that ran it for the past two decades. Spain has fewer nationalized monopolies than Caanda.

Perhaps you meant "social capitalist democracies like Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland and others", but then your qlast quote wouldn't quite work.

Maybe best to just drop it and leave it at
"However, I do agree that the CEOs and executives are enjoying big bonuses and salaries while they cut jobs and benefits to the work class."

Makes a lot of sense.

If they walk like a duck ...

Greece: Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), The current prime minister is George Papandreou, president of the PASOK.

Spain: José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, is a Spanish politician and member of the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE).

Portugal: Pedro Manuel Mamede Passos Coelho is president of the Social Democratic Party and the current Prime Minister of Portugal.

Addendum.

In all fairness, the Social Democratic Party in Portugal is really a centre-right party. Not so the other two.

r'man

Everyone knows that in the last election (June 2009) Papandreou came to power. But all he did was lift the veil on what was going on and bring in an austerity package.

It was his right-wing predecessor who should be shouldering the blame for not collecting taxes and not knowing how much money was going out and coming in.

More PIGS

Neither the People's Party (not a left-wing party) nor the Socialist Worker's Party can claim they had nothing to do with the economic problems there. Spanish politics is more complex than that. It would be like the Republicans claiming all the economic problems in the US are the fault of Obama.

In Ireland on the other hand Fianna Fáil was in power from 1997 until 2011. So it can certainly take the blame for what's been going on. The Irish seem to agree as they reduced it to 3rd-party status in the recent elections. The more right-wing Fine Gael is once again the ruling party and the left-wing Labour party is now the 2nd party.

Only Michael Campbell and his disciples think "socialism" was the cause of the problems in Spain, Ireland, Greece and Portugal.

Frank

It's always the other guys fault, isn't it.

Papandreou is president of PASOK. The Panhellenic Socialist Movement, better known as PASOK (Greek: Πανελλήνιο Σοσιαλιστικό Κίνημα, Panellinio Sosialistikó Kínima, ΠΑΣΟΚ), is a Greek centre-left political party and the current majority party in the Greek Parliament. In 1981 PASOK formed the first social democrat government in Greece's history, and subsequently governed the country for most of the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s. PASOK served as the main opposition party between 2004 and 2009. It is a member of the Party of European Socialists and the Socialist International.

PIIGS, don't forget Italy

Only people that listen local radio shows for their international news would spout such ludicrous and silly suppositions.

There are many reasons. Here are listed some of them:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,774483,00.html

r'man

"It's always the other guys fault, isn't it."

Isn't that what you claimed?

As for Greece, which government was it that sounded the alarm and opened the books up to outsiders? If Papandreou hadn't won the election we still wouldn't know the troubles Greek finances were in.

That aside, Papandreou's personal history is less than stellar. Chances are he's a crook but then I'm not close enough to know.

Italy

Berlusconi was elected in 2001 and he seems to have made a mess. Hard for him to blame the problems of Italy on the centre-left.

Frank

Europe is a fun place to visit and I wish them well with their tax avoidance games and their fully indexed retirements at 55.

I'm quite sure that in all the future elections in Europe the socialists will prevail, all debts will be forgiven, everyone will have full benefits and retire in their 50's and everyone will be rich and live happily ever after.

r'man

Well said fantasyman.

"Culture War"?? No, no, NO.

Get off it. "Culture War"? Whether waged from the left or the right, this is exactly what Canada DOESN'T need. The very term 'culture war' is odious.

"Culture War" was launched as a strategy in contemporary politics by paleo-conservative warhorse and bigot, Pat Buchanan. It is an amoral strategy of demonization, dumbed-down debate, deliberate divisiveness and abandonment of moderation and nuance. There is ample evidence of the corrosive, destructive effect of culture-war politics in the United States.

"Culture War" works when a large and growing part of the population is (or feels itself to be) economically marginalized, with no political voice and no prospects for betterment. The disaffected middle class Americans who coalesced politically as the Tea Party are an example of this.

There really isn't a Canadian counterpart on the right or left.

Culture war + no class war = 0

Having lived in the US and its culture war I have to mostly disagree with Murray, or at least sound a note of caution, that a culture war framed in US terms is more likely to increase our democratic deficit and cement the NDP as the "orange liberal party" that is voted in because it represents a "kind of person" rather than a "body of policy." We also really need to see the heart of cynicism in the culture war and ask if we really want to frame political problems and questions in that way.

The problem with US politics is that elections between both parties are reduced to candidate likability, vacuous except for their vague "culture war" ideas. Since all but a few Democrats talk about class, this actually frees the Republican party to concentrate upon and go even deeper afield with their proto-fascist economic and cultural agenda, since they have little disagreement on the economic front. The Harper government clearly models itself after the Republican party, so we should take note.

Further, the problem with the culture war is that it always gets skewed in favour of "representational" politics, a "kind of person" who is like your dad or an ideal version of yourself standing in for you rather than someone arguing for a policy that has something to do with your life. Elections framed in terms of vague "values" alone end up becoming stereotyped lifestyle and consumer choices. If we go the route of supporting non-conservativism = "cosmopolitanism," we're finished — we're basically saying a non-conservative is an epicure rather than a street fighter. We're handing off all the rural working class to Conservatives, and saying, "these people are yours, take them," the way we've done in Alberta.

So to be short and basic, the culture war has to be tied to something real. This makes it not recognizably a culture war but a cultural war among other things, framed as "insanity, chaos and being ripped off" versus "politics based on reasonableness, dialogue, evidence and research, and money to support the things we want."

A better way to go is challenging the dominant frames of conservatives and the way they pose problems. We need to be saying "politics based on wedge issues, emotion and personal experience are always disconnecting cause A from result B and lead to worse results, than evidence based policy which shares the wealth."

Canada used to be a fun place to live in

Now not so much - it's getting more and more like the USA every day...

@oxygensmith - interesting observations. The problem both here and there is that corporations and 'corporate' thinking have come to dominate much of the discourse - enlisting as they do this (through folks like Grover Norquist and Karl Rove) a lot of ordinary people who've been cajoled into thinking that the corporatist (conservative) agenda is going to be good for them too.

I think that was a kind of culture war and I'm not sure how to fight it - especially given the incurious and passive attitudes of the media.

Old Westie

Trying to stimulate debate with the cute and feeble, "I'm not sure...." - crapola.

The fact is, Canada is becoming less like the US. In Canada we have a functioning democracy that goes all over the map at election time. We now have the third party in opposition. We do not have extremist operatives in control. Frank Graves and other paid spinmeisters came up with zilch. The promise of horror was ignored by the federal Liberal PR hacks and a steady central course has been maintained and is being followed. We do not have the intransigence of the Congress and the concomitant deal-brokering and ultimatum driven brinkmanship. We are somewhat boring but very comfortable, no matter what the complainers yelp they ain't going nowhere because they know on which side their bread is buttered.

Being a warrior in a culture war might attract members of the opposite sex and I'm not saying there's no joy or value in that, but to save the world? Oh please!!!

r'man

Oh c'mon, you don't see ANY similarities?

Look, your side is in power year after year so that makes you happy. And the other 60% are automatically "complainers" to you. Its not exactly rocket science as to why you don't see any problems in how Canada or BC are being governed.

But I recall very well how over-the-top you get when the threat of "coalition government" pops up federally or the NDP moves into the lead in opinion polls provincially.

Don't expect logic, Frank

Especially from a guy who can't seem to get that Spain's had a Conservative government for longer than BC has. And higher unemployment, deficits and debt and a bigger crash too.

And let's not even talk about Portugal - when one looks at the names all one sees is Socialist-this and Social-that - one would think Portugal was entirely occupied by leftists somewhere further down the road from Che, until you look and realize that the name Conservative was electoral death since the military gave up power in the 1970s.

Which would explain why you had Socialist governments in Portugal privatizing and selling off state enterprises, cutting welfare, joining the EU, fighting unions, and abandoning agrarian reform in favour of large landownings and private finance.

And how come nobody's mentioned Ireland yet? The country that wrote the book on frothy neo-economics for Europe is now realizing that their 14 years of bubble-economics inducted into Ireland by Fianna Fail in the 1980s doesn't serve left-leaning governments any better than right-leaning ones.

Conservative governments stand on greed and fall on greed. Left-leaning governments learn to pick up the pieces, but every once in a while, I notice they get captivated by greed too. Must be a human thing.

So if it walks like a jackbooted pig, and it talks like a jackbooted pig ("four legs good, two legs bad"), but Realisticman still wants to believe them PIIGS are actually ducks, just let him.

There's no accounting for how some people get licences to drive either. And regretfully, you don't need anything more than a pulse to vote.

Viva Zapatero?

José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, member of the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE). He was elected for terms as Prime Minister of Spain in the 2004 and 2008 general elections.

As for the employment, after having completed substantial improvements over the second half of the 1990s and during the 2000s which put a few regions on the brink of full employment, Spain suffered a severe setback in October 2008 when it saw its unemployment rate surging to 1996 levels. During the period October 2007-October 2008 Spain had its unemployment rate climbing 37%, exceeding by far the unemployment surge of past economic crises like 1993. In particular, during the month of October 2008, Spain feared its worst unemployment rise ever recorded and, so far, the country is suffering Europe's biggest unemployment crisis

In January 2011 Spain's Unemployment Rate had risen to 20.33% exceeding Prime Minister Zapatero's target rate of 19.4 percent.

2004 - 2011. My guess is that Spaniards are getting the seven year itch.

NDP and opportunity

If the NDP use their 103 seats and official opposition status to advantage they will offer up a very persuasive argument in favour of increasing social programs for average Canadians...who are after all the majority. A successful argument will translate to votes...though with FPTP...numbers are terribly skewed...and with no minority presently the idea of Proportional Representation has passed...too bad the Liberals thought they were the natural governing party of the country...too bad such a small percentage of the vote translated to a Harper conservative majority...the NDP really has to distinguish itself as the party of the average Canadian...and looking out for their interests...that would provide a reasonable alternative to Mr Harper's vision of Canada that looks suspiciously like the US of A...and we really don't want that...

Dobbin the Old War Horse

This article is unbelievably silly, even for the Tyee. It begins with ridiculous stereotypes of left versus right, such as cosmopolitan as opposed to parochial, and then proceeds to base its 'arguments' on these nonsensical premises. The NDP does not have to try to show it truly represents Canadian culture--whatever that is. It just has to do what it always does. Just promise the government's dependents more free stuff. That brings in the crowds every time. [MEAN COMMENT DIRECTED AT WRITER REMOVED.]

Canada propped up its banks - just like the good ole USA

Our Gini coefficient is trending the wrong way and you choose to ignore it.

I was actually responding to something someone else posted r/man - after seeing your performance over that Stanford letter I can't see why I'd expect anything of consequence from you on this subject.

You haven't disappointed! If you don't think we've got Karl Roves and Grover Norquists here in Canada - you haven't been paying attention on this file either.

At least Warren Buffett isn't afraid of the the truth.

zalm

Don't expect the r/man to mention Ireland - the emerald tiger was at the centre of his arguments supporting globalization five years ago right here at Tyee.

He won't be going there. He couldn't sustain the case then and events, as we've all seen, have proved him wrong once again.

frommycolddeadhands

You'd have to move to Canada to experience what Canadian culture is.

And although you suggest the NDP copy Conservative strategy and promise everyone a boutique tax cut while running up record deficits I think most of us expect more from them.

Ireland

The centre of my argument then was that Ireland was enjoying massive growth with international corporations setting up shop and the economy on a roll. Everyone went on as though building and selling property would never end. It's an interesting story. Since Ireland crashed it is interesting to note that the Irish government has insisted that they will not raise their low corporate tax rates.

Excellent story here:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2011/02/michael-lewis-on-how-merrill-lynch-and-brian-lenihan-stuck-the-people-of-ireland-with-a-debt-of-106-billion.html

r'man

That was a good little read, thanks

Frank

Try and get a copy of the magazine to read the whole story. It is very well written, compelling and explains much.

Frank

Actually, it's all here:

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/03/michael-lewis-ireland-201103

Your argument....

Totally ignored the 'fact' that the major reason Ireland did as well as it did was because of the assistance it got from the EU after joining the EMU in 1999.

Cutting its strings with Great Britain - which had used Ireland as little more than a garden plot and a source of cheap labour - was the real reason for its success.

Its current problems are, interestingly enough, not all that different from the world's problem - too great a reliance on a global economy supported by little more than cheap goods built in sweat shops and a financial system run on little more than hot air.

Several people here at Tyee tried to point this out at the time and you totally ignored them - exactly the same tactic you used relative to the Stanford question and the HST.

Oh, and by the way

Pee Wee and his government (along with the American government) have already backstopped Canadian banks to the tune of about 186 billion dollars - if we see another round of that nonsense then Canada will soon be in the same shape Ireland is....

Cutting its strings! Ha, ha

GWest says that Ireland did well because of handouts from the EU. Yeah? Don't forget, son, that the investments flowed in too. That's where the real money and jobs came from!

"To stimulate economic expansion, the Industrial Development Authority encourages and facilitates investment by foreign interests, particularly in the development of industries with export potential. Special concessions include nonrepayable grants to help establish industries in underdeveloped areas and tax relief on export profits. Freedom to take out profits is unimpaired. Engineering goods, computers, electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals and chemicals, textiles, foodstuffs, leisure products, and metal and plastic products are among the items produced. Much of the new investment has occurred since Ireland became a member of the European Union.

Annual foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into Ireland increased steadily through the 1990s. In the period 1988 to 1990, Ireland's share of world FDI inflows was only 70% of its share of world GDP, but for the period 1998 to 2000, Ireland's share of FDI inflows was over five times its share of world GDP. In 1998, annual FDI inflow reached $11 billion, up from $2.7 billion in 1997, and then jumped to almost $15 billion in 1999. FDI inflows to Ireland peaked in 2000, at over $24 billion, mainly from high-tech computer and pharmaceutical companies. FDI inflow dropped sharply to $9.8 billion in 2001 with the burst of the dot.com bubble and the global economic slowdown.

Leading sources of foreign investors in terms of percent of foreign companies invested in Ireland have been the United States (43%), the United Kingdom (13%), Germany (13%), other European countries (22%), Japan (4%), and others (5%). As of 2000, the primary destinations of foreign investment have been, in order, manufacturing, finance, and other services.

Read more: Foreign investment - Ireland - tax, export, annual http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Europe/Ireland-FOREIGN-INVESTMENT.html#ixzz1SgVzQwoQ

r'man

Thanks again, that article was educational and funny as hell.

Mr Dobbin - another reality check

Mr Dobbin and many of you in this group seem to forget that you are on the fringe. Try this little quiz.
I believe that the State should never get close to taxing income at anywhere close to half of what you earn as happened in BC in the nineties (~55%).
Who has the most support in Canada? Mr Dobbin or me and then consider whether we're a conservative country or a socialist one.

Again, Mr Dobbin makes these odd statements such as the following regarding Stephen Harper:
".......he is: relentless, focused, motivated and unafraid of his enemies. He not only has the power of the state behind him, he has a party that runs circles around the others in fundraising"
So, Mr Dobbin wants to see, as leader of this country, someone who gives up easily, can't keep his mind focused on any issue, is lazy, is frightened to death of the opposition and can't organize anyone to run to proverbial peanut stand.

Mr Dobbin, in my opinion, has the support of about 5% of the population. He does not accept that and laughably considers himself mainstream. That's something he will have to work out sometime. In the mean time I get my occasional comic relief.

john corman

John Corman, apparently, still doesn't understand the tax system or the concept of marginal tax.

Nobody in BC has EVER paid anything like 55% tax on their income...

I hope to hell you're wrong about how many Canadians think like you do john, because if you're correct we haven't got a hope.

Your statements are the risible ones - not Dobbin's.

Oh and the idea that foreign investment

Is such a great idea doesn't play all that well in Ireland these days either...and we're going to rue the day we decided we'd let virtually any clod into this country so long as they could pull together a million and a half dollars...

R/man

The 'assistance' was low or no interest loans from the EMU - loans the global greed pigs used to set up Ireland as a floating factory to penetrate the EU economy.

All of which, as we've seen since 2008, was built largely on phony money, hedge funds and credit default swaps...the British banks, not surprisingly, being some of the biggest and greediest pigs at the trough.

The problem is, your guys always pig out at the banquet and leave before the bill comes due...

You should have underlined this sentence

Freedom to take out profits is unimpaired.

No shit sherlock!

GWest - You're, as always, Brilliant

You're right, the rate was more like 54%. I can't believe I made such an enormous error.
You state that:
"Nobody in BC has EVER paid anything like 55% tax on their income".

Let's consider this. You earned, in 1996 $80k. Your basic tax would be about $28,861 (2010; $18,080).
Now, if you had of earned another $20k you would have paid $39,694 or, an additional $10,833. I'll make the calculation for you as you might be challenged to figure it out. The tax on that income would have been a little over 54% whether you like it or not.
Sorry, but I do appreciate your loyality to the socialist cause and your misquided tenacity.

BALONEY

Again, you seem to have totally misunderstood the concept of a marginal tax rate applied to the next dollar of income - for it is only those extra dollars which are taxed at the 54% rate.

Therefore, exactly as I wrote, NO CANADIAN has every paid anything like 50%, let alone 54% tax on their income.

As for your little example, the actual tax paid was 39,694/100,000 which is, the way I do math - slightly less than 40%.

Were you thinking of some kind of "new" math?

I appreciate your loyalty to the idea that you can get away with saying anything.

Just don't think you can get away with it.

This is what you wrote:

That is simply and comprehensively WRONG.

Believe what you like, but don't pretend it is the truth.

I think higher the highest rates of tax, on incomes over $100,000. are entirely appropriate.

So do the administrations of many of the most successful countries in the world.

Also places where the extend of inequality which blights this country these days is much less than it is in Canada.

Next time you want to bitch about high taxes perhaps you could use this phrase:

'I believe that the State should never get close to taxing marginal income (all income over, let's say, $100,000.) at anywhere close to (fill in whatever tax rate on that 'extra' income causes you to have heart palpitations).'

You make that effort at actual honesty and I won't correct you again. Because I know that honest Canadians who’ll read that will not be crying crocodile tears for the people who are bleeding this country dry and not paying their way.

GWest - you are a strange fellow

The issue is whether anyone paid tax at ~54% in BC in the nineties. You say no but acknowledge that they would have been taxed at a rate of ~54% on income over a certain level.
Earth to GWest. That's the point. No one should be paying over half of any of their income to the state.

Wow, 5%

Do you really figure that high?

I would have though more like 2-3ish, and only then in the inner city areas around social-studies heavy plush university campuses.

I agree, the comedy is always fun. You sure know how to get the tax man all riled up! Don't get him started on the HST, he doesn't like that one, except in Ontario and Nova Scotia, I think.

Strange? Just read your own words - you wrote them

Now you won't admit they were categorically wrong.

The issue, quite simply, is that you posted nonsense - words which were both misleading and inaccurate.

Why am I not surprised you haven't got the wit to admit it.

No one, no one, paid 54% tax on their income.

If I hadn't been in such a good mood I would have also pointed out that there's a difference between 'earned' income and taxable income which you've also ignored.

However, one lesson is enough for tonight.

I'm perfectly sanguine with the fact that I pay taxes at the highest marginal rate of tax - I just wish the rate were higher.

As Warren Buffett observes, the fact that wealthy people pay such a small share of their income in tax is a disgusting shame.

The fact that people like you and the r/man crow about it is even more disgusting.

Earth to j corman - start pulling your weight and stop complaining about the fact you make a lot of money.

It's unseemly.

Nice to see you've found a friend though.

We're all worried about taxes John

I think its wrong that low income people have to pay a high percentage of their income in taxes and fees and tolls and premiums and so on.

Since 3.8% of the population controls 66.6% of the wealth I think a wealth tax is in order. Could allow us to get rid of a lot of other taxes. Could even reduce your income tax John. You'd like that I assume? Unless you believe that that 3.8% doesn't have a big enough share of the pie and the other 96.2% have too much?

GWest - You don't quit do you

You stated:
"No one, no one, paid 54% tax on their income."

Income is every dollar you earn whether it's earned income, passive income, investment income, capital gains, pension income or social assistance.(I likely missed a couple) Each dollar of income can be taxed at a different rate depending on its status and how much other INCOME you have. So, the first $10k of INCOME is tax free. For those with no deductions the next $10k of INCOME could be taxed at about 20% and so on until you get to someone who earns ~$150k. Additional INCOME to him would attract taxes at a rate of 43.7%.
In 1996 INCOME over ~$60k in BC was taxed at ~54% so grow up and accept it.

Frank

If you look at a single mother of two in BC earning $30k per annum she does not pay taxes on a net basis. She actually is a net benefactor of the tax system (taxes paid less various credits and grants) It's not an ideal situation but, how much more can we do for all the people that find them selves in that predicament?

I've read those stats about a few people in canada owning everything but, it doesn't face the reality check. There are a few Bill Gates that skew the stats but not to the degree you refer to.(imho)

I was not complaining about our current tax structure because the current rates aren't too bad. At a certain lever of income in BC you're paying 43.7% in taxes which seems a bit punitive but, other wise the system is working fairly well.
I only brought income tax levels up to highlight Mr Dobbin's confusion as to how Canadians actually feel. In his communist brain he's convinced that Canadians are anxiously waiting for the opportunity to once again pay more than half of some of their income in taxes. He's delusional but I still love reading the guy if only to see what the goofies are contemplating.

I wish I could respond to all

Good to hear Jerry and Ed on some of the larger issues, as well as G West, Frank, Zalm, et al. Mostly good stuff, some humorous, but considerable mis or left out info.

One example was how former, ousted Ontario Conservative premier Mike Harris, as guest speaker a few years ago, touted the "Irish Tiger" as a model to emulate to a Maritime business conference.

He neglected to mention Irish, free post secondary education that resulted in an overabundance of a potential, highly skilled workforce emigrating elsewhere. That likely attracted big corps to Ireland more than the tax cuts.

It was only when the bankers, fund managers privatization weasels and sub-prime style promoters got involved that the Irish Tiger nearly went extinct.

So Jerry, I agree with much of what you have written, but I don't see where you would want us to go.

As an environmentalist, egalitarian and social justice advocate, I can only vote NDP of the major parties as the least of evils, although strategic voting in this ludicrous FPTP system has taken me elsewhere occasionally. Who would you vote for in the short term (until the "revolution")? Surely not the Rhinos.

Of many subjects, I really despise formal politics, but I remain a political junky so as to try and keep working to maintain some semblance of democracy in place. We have some in the system who work much harder at this, despite the slime oozing out of the system.

Ed, I would like to think that Harpo could leave earlier than the end of his mandate, but I don't see it unless a second financial recessionary wave, or worse, is in the cards. In any event, his cabal would likely continue. I also give him more brains than you do, albeit less heart.

As Alba pointed out, I too wondered for many years why progressives never purchased a media outlet to counter the overwhelming right, although in retrospect, newspapers may have been a poor investment.

Janetv.. we are sucked into giving all this up by the ongoing media and so-called authoritative manipulation by the elite. Media literacy is not well taught in our educational system, if at all. I, among others who have responded in Tyee blogs, recommend reading Donald Gutstein's "Not A Conspiracy Theory". It's a real eye opener to those who were not exposed to this previously.

Oxygensmith, you are correct in pointing out Lakoff's frames. Many conservatives have pointed out that we need to change our lenses of evaluation without mentioning the frames of reference. This is not "cultural warfare", but the politically incorrect "class warfare", as Naomi Klein pointed out some years ago in her Globe article.

Labels

The 'Socialist" label has become a propagandist reference for a very long time. Despite very different ideologies, Mussolini, Stalin and Hitler all called themselves socialists at one time or another.

Perhaps taking up the discarded, red tory label of "Progressive" makes a lot of sense for the left, although true conservatism has an environmental and sustainable meaning that is currently ignored in the rush to shareholder wealth.

More comments are possible but time presses.

Still, I'll never forget the Alberta idiot who called to say that the CBC was the Communist Broadcasting Corporation (isn't that an oxymoron?) or the Texan who called Cross Country Checkup to blame the world recession on Greek socialism while completely ignoring Wall Street hedge fund managers.

We surely live in interesting (and idiotic) times.

John Corman

"but, how much more can we do for all the people that find them selves in that predicament?"

We could do quite a bit more. We could get rid of sales taxes, MSP premiums, bridge tolls and what not. Lower or eliminate the price of transit. Reduce or eliminate tuition. Provide affordable or even free child care and so on.

"I've read those stats about a few people in canada owning everything but, it doesn't face the reality check."

Huh? Not sure where you're going here. The numbers are what they are. Just as you point out a certain level of taxation and say that's not right, I'm pointing out how a small number of people own most of the wealth in Canada and say that's not right.

One can argue about the morality of your 43.7% taxation figure or my 3.8% owning 66.6% figure but what's the point of arguing the numbers themselves? They can be easily looked up.

Why quit when I'm ahead

The only thing that matters when you use a term like INCOME is total income. The effective tax rate on income is the percentage of tax one pays on that income.

You were simply wrong - you're now compounding the wrong - tax rates rise according to income - it's called 'progressive' tax.

However, the only thing that really matters is the amount of total tax you pay AND, as is clear, no one paid 54% of their income in tax in British Columbia.

The wealthy, in fact, depending upon how they earn their income, almost always pay less than they should.

Warrren Buffett knows it; I know it; you know it.

You just haven't got the character to admit it.

I know how the tax system works and I know what standard meanings of words in the English language - you, apparently, don't.

Furthermore, you're rude and can't, apparently, have an actual disagreement without resorting to name calling.

You should look into that.

And, furthermore

Why would anyone question the necessity to raise taxes on people who, in your reference year, 1996, were earning significantly MORE than $80,000. (as an individual) when it became necessary to generate additional revenue to continue to provide services to ALL British Columbians and especially poorer British Columbians and individuals who DID NOT HAVE INCOMES OF ANYWHERE NEARLY THAT LEVEL?

Anyone who would reject that necessity would, in my view, be a fan of the Tea Party/Grover Norquist idiocy which has brought the US to its present state in order to protect the perquisites of wealthy individuals and owners of business jets?

Taxes, fair and progressive taxes, are the price we pay for a civilized and humane society. Period.

A war needs Propaganda

Ok if we are going to pursue a cultural war lets:

Create an outlet or battlefield to wage this war ie Newspaper, blogs whatever

Educate canadians as to what culture they belong to, if thats possible. Problem is many people describe themselves as conservative and liberal. How they do it, I don't understand.

Use humor as ammunition. Canadians cant agree on very much when they describe their political ideologies. We do however, have a good sense of humor and the Harper government over the next few years will give us lots to cry about but an equal amount of hypocrisy and satire to work with.

Frank - There's Stats and there's Stats

You comment about the wealth distribution in Canada and state:

"Since 3.8% of the population controls 66.6% of the wealth"

That has a significant CCPA stench about it making it close to being worthless. Think about it for a second. With all the real estate owned by millions of individuals that 3.8 - 66.6% ration is possible. The biggest corporations, banks, are mostly owned by pension funds. The Ont. retired teachers being by far the biggest investor in Canada.

The CCPA will say anything if it feels that one of its union backers will benefit.

GWest - Another reality check

Young fella you are a piece of work. Your comment above:

"Furthermore, you're rude and can't, apparently, have an actual disagreement without resorting to name calling."

I was about to respond, but, I'm speachless.

John Corman - These are the words YOU used...

...grow up and accept it.

In a post just above us here addressed to me.

If you don't think that kind of a statement is rude and amounts to name calling then I think you'd better decline to respond.

Now you've stooped to this:
Young fella you are a piece of work.

I disagree with virtually everything you seem to believe; I don't think you're post is accurate and I don't think your attitude is either helpful, constructive or appreciative of the need for a fair and progressive system of tax to pay for our collective needs.

But, I can say that about your 'ideas' without attacking you as a person.

Apparently that kind of debate is something you're incapable of sustaining - on the evidence posted above.

Cheers.

Next time see if you can actually keep your remarks to the issue at hand and stay out of the ad hominem gutter.

erratum

That should be... 'I don't think your post is accurate...'