Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 301 to 361 of 361

Thread: Is it finally time for a Sales Tax?

  1. #301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    A low broad based sales tax might be less disproportionally taxing than a gouging single product sales tax but people don't want that. Thus expect to take hits on a number of narrow fronts and so some select group of people will suffer more than average. (Just like layoffs vs general salary reductions.).
    Mathematically, it makes sense...**** off a few people v. pissing off everyone. But how are you going to choose what items get taxed?

    EDIT:

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Or because we acquire more roads and more divided highways than other provinces, simply because we can afford more. Our infrastructure is a lot better than Quebec or Ontario, I don't think it would hurt us at all to take a break for a bit. I don't think its just roads though, its almost every sector of government spending, we pay more. For example, an experienced teacher makes 10k more than in BC, which doesn't make any sense given cost of living is higher there, and we have a backlog of people who can't get teaching jobs.

    In Alberta, teachers make $99,300 on average and B.C. teachers make about $81,500 after a decade of experience, which translates to a 60 per cent increase in salary in 10 years.
    http://globalnews.ca/news/1346218/wa...across-canada/
    True...that's probably why we don't have as much strike as B.C. or at least our strikes are resolved faster.

    http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedfiles/pub...13-14brief.pdf

    Actually ON and AB teacher's pay is pretty close. QB is pretty low but you need to take into account how cheap their tuition. One year tuition is $2300 or so?
    Last edited by Meo; 28-01-2015 at 04:53 PM.

  2. #302

    Default

    ^ or sacrifice a rural area to protect an urban constituency or an urban constituency to protect another. I'd piggyback on the GST for simplicity but still wish the Feds had just taxed everything including food at a very low rate and then upped the return to low income people. (Absolutely everyone should be required to file a tax return and have a bank account for automatic deposits.)

    This article is interesting, but I didn't see the City do much (ANYTHING? ) to prepare itself for this situation.

    Edmonton’s chief economist calls for provincial sales tax in Alberta
    By Vinesh Pratap, February 12, 2015, Global News

    Excerpts:

    "Edmonton’s chief economist is adding his worry to the debate. "If the government is going to rely solely on tax cuts, it’s going to be very, very difficult. Particularly for the City of Edmonton, as I mentioned, because we host the government here,” John Rose said in an interview after giving a Thursday presentation about the city’s current economic outlook. ..."

    "At the provincial legislature Thursday, NDP finance critic Brian Mason expressed worry about a repeat of the mid-90s, when there were deep level cuts from the Klein government. Mason calls the government’s most recent warning “troubling”, adding: “I think something most Albertans will find unacceptable.

    “This time, it’s been entirely predictable and the government has had nearly 20 years to fix things so it never happened again. Anyone who was around during that period will remember the pain, will remember the terrible cuts to our services, the losses of jobs, the losses of homes, the break up of families that occurred as a result.”


    http://globalnews.ca/news/1827372/ed...ax-in-alberta/

    The thread I started way back on June 16, 2006 below. If morons like me can think and act in preparation of such inevitable events, then why are our highly paid, highly pensioned, highly esteemed 'Grand Poobahs' so mentally incapable of such thoughts or actions? Like the City economist said, it's time for an "adult conversation" about stabilizing tax receipts.


    Default Strategy for next Recession/Depression
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...read.php?t=480



    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Right now everyone is looking at ways to spend the wealth flowing into our province but I haven't heard of anyone preparing for the next recession. I'd like the City of Edmonton to start a special committee to raise the issues we'll face when the economy turns down and make public the likely implementation plans.

    We've been here before and up to only a few years ago our city was still working on paying down the 70's boom debts to workable/sustainable levels.

    A bit of trivia - if you do a regressions on oil prices you'll see projected numbers of around $40/bbl not today's $70/bbl. It might be different this time but why? Lately it's been a case of "Here Come the 70s'" but my worry is about another 80s' hangover returning. What was that old bumper sticker; "Please God let there be another oil boom..."?
    Last edited by KC; 13-02-2015 at 02:56 PM.

  3. #303

    Default

    Warren Buffett's ideal tax code - a progressive sales tax...

    http://player.theplatform.com/p/gZWl...&size=530_298#

  4. #304

    Default

    An article in the April edition of Alberta Venture discusses the Sales Tax option.

    Pack Mentality, Could a sales tax survive first contact with its opponents?
    Mar 27, 2015, by Michael Ganley

    http://albertaventure.com/2015/03/pack-mentality/

  5. #305
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,351

    Default

    5%. It would really take a lot of pressure off right now.

  6. #306
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,607

    Default

    ^^ I don't really see the point in lowering corporate and income taxes in conjunction with a PST. Seems to defeat the purpose, doesn't it?
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  7. #307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    ^^ I don't really see the point in lowering corporate and income taxes in conjunction with a PST. Seems to defeat the purpose, doesn't it?
    Those proposals came before the oil price drop. Still, proposals that continue our short term reliance on high and rising oil prices, while ignoring the possibility of price drops, just don't seem too intelligent to me, at any time. Any proposals aimed at correcting our situation though may have to be disingenuous sales techniques to get buy in before additional adjustments.

    Two additional points:

    One, we already have some provincial sales taxes (gas, etc) and the public accepts them if not wants to see them increased in the current environment. Maybe they are seen as "sin taxes" and so are more acceptable than taxing other expenditures.

    Two, we lived quite happily with a 7% GST for a number of years. So a 2% provincial sales tax would only be another step back in time just as health care premiums take us back to earlier times.


    ~
    Last edited by KC; 05-04-2015 at 01:02 PM.

  8. #308

    Default

    One thing that people forget about is that a sales tax is also a tax on corporations. So those in favour of corporations paying more taxes need to take into account the ability of a sales tax to serve as a tax on corporations. (Though corporate income taxes have a benefit in that they aim to only tax the profitable companies - if you can catch them.)

    I imagine that today many companies operating in Alberta, operate similarly to ITT:


    As each new acquisition was swallowed up by the ITT whale, so the separate characteristics that had been made clear in its balance sheet went out of sight as completely as Jonah. The separate profits and losses of each industry —whether hotels, rented cars, or house-building—were no longer discernible in the consolidated balance sheet, and the breakdown of sales showed only the most generalized headings: "Defense and Space Programs" or "Consumer Services." The concoction of the corporate accounts thus became a challenge to the art of a master accountant; the profits and losses could be quietly set off against each other without anyone knowing...


    Moreover, the multinationality of ITT made it exceptionally able to defend itself against taxation, like a nomadic millionaire. It was true that it was, at the base, an American company, responsible to American shareholders and subject to inspection and questioning from the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Internal Revenue Service; but that control was diminished by ITT’s global scope. Soon after he became president, [Harold] Geneen held a special conference of his top lawyers and accountants, to discuss how ITT could best make use of the tax havens outside the United States to cut down on its American taxes. The experts were doubtful, but Geneen insisted that ways could be found; and ever since then, ITT has surprised other companies’ accountants by the smallness of its taxes…* - Charlie Munger



    "All conglomerates, when they shot up in the sixties, benefited greatly from the confusion of accounting methods, and the flexibility of the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).
    ...

    "The obscurantism of conglomerate accounting has aroused increasing criticism from inside the profession. One of the most outspoken critics is Abraham Briloff, professor of accounting at Baruch College, New York… He sees conglomerators like Geneen as cowboys who invade the territory of the farmers, sell off the topsoil, and ruin the land; they expand by raping, reaping, bedazzling. He complains about “hot pants accounting,” which reveals the exciting while concealing the essential.
    - Anthony Sampson, The Sovereign State of ITT, pages 144- 147


    http://www.gurufocus.com/news/326966...-counterattack




    Canada lost when Ottawa cut the GST
    BARRIE MCKENNA, OTTAWA, The Globe and Mail, Mar. 24 2013,

    "Every percentage point of GST is now worth just shy of $7-billion a year, according to a recent calculation by the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Two points cost Ottawa a staggering $14-billion."

    The benefit of consumption taxes over income taxes is that they are less likely to distort where and when people spend. Consumption taxes, such as the GST, essentially treat current and future consumption the same. Income taxes, on the other hand, penalize future consumption over current consumption and discourage saving.

    "Consumption taxes aren’t perfect. They’re regressive, meaning they hit the poor disproportionately hard. Unlike income taxes, which are scaled up as you earn more, everyone pays the same GST rate. Ottawa offsets this by giving a credit to low-wage earners.

    Back in the early 1990s, another Conservative government – Brian Mulroney’s – concluded that on balance a national value-added tax on most goods and services was the way to go. Stephen Harper’s Conservatives unwound a big piece of that policy when they ..."

    "Perhaps most distressingly, the GST cut deprived Ottawa of a cushion to weather the next economic crisis that may come its way – a commodities bear market, a housing collapse or a stall in the U.S. recovery."




    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle10271589/


    Is Cutting the GST the Best Approach?
    Certified General Accountants in Canada

    "Taxing consumption is one of the most economically effective methods of generating government revenues. At least eight independently undertaken research studies concluded that consumption taxes impose the least level of distortions on households’ and businesses’ decisions regarding consumption, investment and participation in the labour market. For this reason, reducing consumption taxes yields the least optimal economic pay-off compared to other tax measures. "
    ...

    "Overall, businesses seem to view the GST cut as a positive measure. According to a survey conducted by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB), 51% of the CFIB’s members assign a high priority to lowering GST/HST if the federal government was to reduce taxes.20 Furthermore, business owners gave a higher priority to reducing the GST than to cuts in corporate income taxes and EI premiums."


    http://www.cga-canada.org/en-ca/Rese...008-03_gst.pdf

  9. #309
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    ^ Better to think of it in reverse. Both a sales tax and a corporate tax are taxes on consumers.

    Sales taxes are efficient, stable, predictable, and direct taxes on consumers.

    Corporate taxes are inefficient, unstable, unpredictable, and indirect taxes on consumers.

    Corporations do not absorb corporate taxes. They pass them on to the consumer in the price of their goods and services.

    So the question is: do we want to tax consumers? If the answer is yes, we should institute a stable, predictable, and efficient tax. Corporate taxes are not the answer.

  10. #310
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,512

    Default

    ^^ With the correct exemptions (like the GST has), sales taxes are not regressive. If you are poor, most of your income goes to paying rent (GST exempt), groceries (also GST exempt) and a bus pass (GST exempt again). For those necessities that aren't exempt, you get a credit. As you start making more money, you can afford more non-essential items and you start paying more tax. If you are rich and spend lots of money on fancy cars, fancy new houses, vacations and entertainment, most of your spending is taxed and the government will claw back your GST credit.
    My only real issue with the GST is that the credit is clawed back too quickly, especially if you are married.

  11. #311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^^ With the correct exemptions (like the GST has), sales taxes are not regressive. If you are poor, most of your income goes to paying rent (GST exempt), groceries (also GST exempt) and a bus pass (GST exempt again). For those necessities that aren't exempt, you get a credit. As you start making more money, you can afford more non-essential items and you start paying more tax. If you are rich and spend lots of money on fancy cars, fancy new houses, vacations and entertainment, most of your spending is taxed and the government will claw back your GST credit.
    My only real issue with the GST is that the credit is clawed back too quickly, especially if you are married.
    No that's not correct, all sales taxes are highly regressive. The reason is that higher income earners save a much bigger percentage of their income, than low income earners. As savings are not subject to sales tax, they are far less impacted (even with expensive to administer GSt credit cheques and similar for the poor). Not to say sales taxes are bad, the big advantage of them is they bring in stable consistent revenue for government, more so than other taxes. It just impacts the poor more.

  12. #312
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaerdo View Post
    ^ Better to think of it in reverse. Both a sales tax and a corporate tax are taxes on consumers.

    Sales taxes are efficient, stable, predictable, and direct taxes on consumers.

    Corporate taxes are inefficient, unstable, unpredictable, and indirect taxes on consumers.

    Corporations do not absorb corporate taxes. They pass them on to the consumer in the price of their goods and services.

    So the question is: do we want to tax consumers? If the answer is yes, we should institute a stable, predictable, and efficient tax. Corporate taxes are not the answer.
    Taken to extreme, coporations (an various business entities) need consumers to operate. To be a consumer, you need disposable income. To have the largest amount of income, income tax should be the least. So, no personal tax and large corporate tax would do the trick. Higher prices for goods would potentially be of-set by no income tax.

  13. #313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaerdo View Post
    ^ Better to think of it in reverse. Both a sales tax and a corporate tax are taxes on consumers.

    Sales taxes are efficient, stable, predictable, and direct taxes on consumers.

    Corporate taxes are inefficient, unstable, unpredictable, and indirect taxes on consumers.

    Corporations do not absorb corporate taxes. They pass them on to the consumer in the price of their goods and services.

    So the question is: do we want to tax consumers? If the answer is yes, we should institute a stable, predictable, and efficient tax. Corporate taxes are not the answer.
    Taken to extreme, coporations (an various business entities) need consumers to operate. To be a consumer, you need disposable income. To have the largest amount of income, income tax should be the least. So, no personal tax and large corporate tax would do the trick. Higher prices for goods would potentially be of-set by no income tax.
    Everything is a 'tax' on consumers.* In Alberta many of those non-corporate "consumers" are actually outside Alberta. We're often building very large scale production facilities to export oil, gas, petrochemicals, forestry products, etc.

    As for taxing our domestic consumers, as I pointed out earlier, we are ok with it and even encourage increasing sales taxes on fuel, cigarettes, etc.


    * or a tax on shareholders and financiers should taxes and other costs reduce profitability and/or create losses.
    Last edited by KC; 29-04-2015 at 11:07 PM.

  14. #314
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^^ With the correct exemptions (like the GST has), sales taxes are not regressive. If you are poor, most of your income goes to paying rent (GST exempt), groceries (also GST exempt) and a bus pass (GST exempt again). For those necessities that aren't exempt, you get a credit. As you start making more money, you can afford more non-essential items and you start paying more tax. If you are rich and spend lots of money on fancy cars, fancy new houses, vacations and entertainment, most of your spending is taxed and the government will claw back your GST credit.
    My only real issue with the GST is that the credit is clawed back too quickly, especially if you are married.
    No that's not correct, all sales taxes are highly regressive. The reason is that higher income earners save a much bigger percentage of their income, than low income earners. As savings are not subject to sales tax, they are far less impacted (even with expensive to administer GSt credit cheques and similar for the poor). Not to say sales taxes are bad, the big advantage of them is they bring in stable consistent revenue for government, more so than other taxes. It just impacts the poor more.
    The GST credit could be simplified by making it an annual refundable tax credit instead of a quarterly payment. For moderately high income earners, much of their savings will be spent later on in retirement and taxed then. That leaves only the highest income earners not paying their share of sales taxes, and that could be addressed with some additional income tax brackets.

  15. #315

    Default

    In some ways this quote may apply to Alberta too. On the back of higher oil prices and the commensurate capital spending we pushed up our population by 50%*, infrastructure, and all kinds of other services.

    Now, the cheap old conventional oil (the profitable stuff) is almost depleted, the high upfront capital cost oil sands plants will be postponed... And no sales tax or other stabilizing tax in Slberta. (The Saudies have no income tax and subsidized oil prices.)


    How Much Longer Can Saudi Arabia's Economy Hold Out Against Cheap Oil? - Bloomberg Business

    "These are things that are absolutely politically explosive,” he said. “You’ve gotten accustomed to a certain lifestyle and that lifestyle is far in excess in terms of luxury that was prevailing in 1998.”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...nst-cheap-oil-


    * Alberta population
    1998 - 2.7 million
    2014 - 4.2million
    https://www.servicealberta.ca/pdf/vs/2001Population.pdf
    ~
    Last edited by KC; 21-08-2015 at 09:44 AM.

  16. #316
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,351

    Default

    Dream on with the big savings account. So many people have pointed out that we are a province of a country, not a country, and it would be virtually impossible to stash money away while other provinces had nothing. Give it up. The best we could do is perhaps a cheque in the mail before Christmas, like Alaska does. I could take that. I think we will need a sales tax soon in Alberta, hopefully not more than 5%. One thing I was hoping for with a new government here was some housecleaning in the civil service but so far all remains the same. I think the same beaurocrats are running the ship and do not see much change in government depts. at all.

  17. #317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Dream on with the big savings account. So many people have pointed out that we are a province of a country, not a country, and it would be virtually impossible to stash money away while other provinces had nothing. Give it up. The best we could do is perhaps a cheque in the mail before Christmas, like Alaska does. I could take that. I think we will need a sales tax soon in Alberta, hopefully not more than 5%. One thing I was hoping for with a new government here was some housecleaning in the civil service but so far all remains the same. I think the same beaurocrats are running the ship and do not see much change in government depts. at all.
    One thing that might make a sales tax or some such scheme more palatable would be to treat it as a big "S" STABILIZATION tax.

    For as long as I can remember, every couple years we're being blindsided by some kind of unbudgeted expenditure: like floods, mad cow, agricultural crop disasters, gas price drops, oil price drops, exchange rate increases, infrastructure or healthcare shortfalls, contractual unfunded pension obligations, you name it. Basically, no one here plans ahead, or even wants to plan ahead.

    So hit us with a 1% top up to the GST and bank it for such foresight 'calamities' -which might accumulate for two maybe three years between crises. Farmers would love it. The oil patch workers and businesses would love it. Govt workers would love it.

    AND EVERYBODY REMEMBER THAT JUST A FEW YEARS AGO WE WERE HAPPILY SHOPPING ALONG WITH A 7% GST!


    ...and maybe for decades before that a hidden 13.5% MST !


    ..and then there's surtax options to hit high income owners.

    $
    Last edited by KC; 21-08-2015 at 05:14 PM.

  18. #318

    Default

    No. We do not need another layer of taxation in any form. Don't forget don't we have to work until the end of June to pay the yearly taxes we pay.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  19. #319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    No. We do not need another layer of taxation in any form. Don't forget don't we have to work until the end of June to pay the yearly taxes we pay.
    Ideally, over time not more taxes paid, just the same taxes collected in a more diversified manner without throwing reasonable expenditures levels way off.

    So if not diversification this way, what's your plan for tough times like we may be about to face? Crank up income taxes or massive cuts? Something else?

  20. #320

    Default

    Hold the line on the basic tax deduction amount for 3 to 5 years.
    Hold the line on every departments budgets. How many times do government departments spend money on non essential items just so they can say they need more money because they spend all that they got in the last budget cycle. I'm talking about departments that decide they want new desks, chairs, computers etc. because they have surpluses in their yearly budgets. No bonuses to government managers.
    When the economy is doing well the three levels should hoard as much money as possible for downturns.
    Hold off vanity projects (non essential infrastructure) until the economy is in better shape.
    Negotiate better rates when borrowing money. Pay down debts asap.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  21. #321

    Default

    A billion bucks (see below)... Instead of a sales tax, maybe a lot more user fees (aka premiums) to build up multiple insurance reserves for all things potentially disastrous - and unbudgeted. (To cover forest fire fighting and replacing towns like Slave Lake, to cover floods and replacing towns like High River, to cover cattle illnesses to cover disasters like Mad Cow export bans, ...


    Alberta declares province-wide agricultural disaster

    "The declaration allows the government-run Agricultural Financial Services Corporation to access reserve funds and pay out above average insurance claims more quickly. ..."

    "The ministry is considering ways to help producers feed livetock, which, for example, could include transportation subsidies targeted at the people who need it most, Carlier said. For now, insurance should be “the first line of defence,” he said.

    “My crystal ball is as cloudy as the next person’s, and I hope we don’t have any more droughts in the near future,” Carlier said.

    “Droughts are a natural part of the landscape. Our farmers are hard working, a resilient bunch. They’ve worked through drought before and with a little bit of assistance, will work through this one.” "


    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...627/story.html
    2013 below $3-4 billion. Also likely unbudgeted (or no dedicated reserves contingencies available) - meaning the funds had to come from somewhere and cause disruption of other planned expenditures. Who knows what the final cost to the province was. The point is, it's highly disruptive and could be fiscally disasterous under certain conditions.

    Province boosts cost of Alberta floods to $6 billion

    "When the Tory government released its first quarter financial report last month, the province estimated it would be on the hook for around $3.3 billion of the total costs.

    Horner said he thinks that figure may now approach $4 billion, adding that firm figures for the total cost of the flood and the province’s financial burden should be reached ..."

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Pr...392/story.html

    Last edited by KC; 23-08-2015 at 07:21 PM.

  22. #322
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,750

    Default

    Maybe they should have let people's own insurance cover things like the flood.

  23. #323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Maybe they should have let people's own insurance cover things like the flood.
    Costs likely go well beyond people own available coverage.



    Here (see below) a lack of money will be the excuse.
    Flood mitigation should be prioritized, say Calgarians - Calgary - CBC News
    "Studies have been done," said CRCAG co-president Brenda Leeds Binder. "The engineering design is underway and this project must be built and there is no excuse not to act now."

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ians-1.3119305

  24. #324
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,750

    Default

    People get benefits from living in these areas but don't want to pay for the risks. There should be special assessments so they can pay for the flood mitigation themselves. This isn't Manitoba where half the province is a floodplain.

  25. #325

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    People get benefits from living in these areas but don't want to pay for the risks. There should be special assessments so they can pay for the flood mitigation themselves. This isn't Manitoba where half the province is a floodplain.
    The same applies to Alberta itself with it's reliance on volatile resources and commodities. So, again, if not a sales tax to aid and stabilize government needs to enable intelligent governing, then what? We are going back to progressive taxation but in tough times, capital losses, etc. mean you're"chasing rainbows". Ideally high receipts taken in during good times would be banked for tough times. Hahaha - as if that would ever happen.

    A huge line of credit maybe? (We do tend to borrow during good and bad times - maybe we should only borrow during bad times - but we'd pay quite a margin to do so. Who wants to lend to a company going down the tubes.)

    Maybe Albertans need to pay a portion of their salary into a special reserve to provide better assistance when job losses occur, taking any onus off the Province to 'create jobs' in response to various commodity price collapses. Some kind of user pay system superior to just EI, which runs out years before commodity cycles recover.


    Crude oil collapses to a stunning new low
    MYLES UDLAND Aug. 24, 2015

    http://www.businessinsider.com/crude...gust-24-2015-8
    Last edited by KC; 24-08-2015 at 10:15 AM.

  26. #326
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    teh city of gold
    Posts
    1,063

    Default

    A sales tax might be a good idea, but that would be the death blow for the NDP IN Alberta! They would not get re-elected for another 100 years. They are not going to get re-elected in Alberta as it is because a provincial NDP gov't has never gone back to back terms.

    NDP seems to be cursed! They get into power and the economy craps out. They get the blame even though the previous gov't(usually PeeCees) #%^##### up the economy
    Stop illegal aliens! Enforce the LAW!

  27. #327
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,538

    Default

    Blame can be fairly laid to the NDP in Manitoba, they royally messed things up. Greg Selinger raised the PST which has proven to be VERY unpopular, which is one of the primary reasons why he is the least popular premier in Canada. As for BC Glen Clark must take quite a bit of the blame rather than the party though.
    http://www.winnipegsun.com/2015/06/2...larity-ranking

  28. #328
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    ^ That is the precise reason why the words "sales tax" drive fear into the hearts of Alberta politicians.

    Our voting public is incredibly shortsighted, narrow minded, and simply uneducated on the policies they are deciding on. Sales taxes are more efficient, more stable, and better fitting of the benefit principle than any other tax. Moreover, people have to pay taxes either way! Not having a sales tax does not mean you pay less taxes. It means you pay for things from another tax, you cut your services and let your infrastructure crumble, or you pass the bill to the next generation with debt. There is no other option.

    The only argument I can see against sales taxes is that they can be regressive, but that is easily remedied with exemptions and reimbursements. But that isn't the argument average Joe Albertan uses, they rant on about "those damn socialist taxes" - probably as they drive 120km/h down their provincially funded highway.

    The governments in question you referenced should be criticized for other things, not a PST. Sales taxes are superior form of taxation and are uniformly supported by economists - even conservative ones in Calgary on harper's speed dial!

  29. #329

    Default

    In the huge scheme of things, a (small) sales tax it would not make a difference to "most" people. It's because we're not used to it (or spoiled) that we complain.

    Seriously what's a 2% sales tax (I make the assumption they would go small, rather than full blown 7-9%).

    2% means every $5,000.00 you spend, you pay an extra $100. That's a dinner + movie (for one), 33% of that new phone you're switching up (but have to sign onto a 2 year plan), a month of that internet+cable bundle at home.

    EDIT: But yeah, probably spells doom for the NDP if they do that (even if it's the best option to balance out the budget).

  30. #330
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    There's a headline in the National Post today, that "Canadians pay more in taxes then they spend on essentials".

    Since, obviously, education, health care, streets, policing and emergency response are not essentials.

    And no matter what you spend on clothing, shelter and food it's all essential.

  31. #331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    There's a headline in the National Post today, that "Canadians pay more in taxes then they spend on essentials".

    Since, obviously, education, health care, streets, policing and emergency response are not essentials.

    And no matter what you spend on clothing, shelter and food it's all essential.
    Earlier today I saw a headline about taxes taking 42% of income... So if you google lowest taxed countries you find a bunch of countries depleting some resource to subsidize their citizens. Let the good times roll.

    And on those that have the "Let the good times roll" mindset...

    Those that are distrustful sometimes crave cash so much that they are penny wise and pound foolish...
    ie they want the cash in their hands and don't see any other value. ...
    Earl King

    ".. sell the rights to his music for a flat fee instead of waiting for royalties. ... "

    I bet King counted himself as very lucky...

    https://books.google.ca/books?id=Dyk...0songs&f=false

    "Hendrix recorded ''Let the Good Times Roll'' for the 1968 album ''Electric Ladyland,'' which provided significant royalties through the years for Mr. King..."

    Pg 340
    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/ar...ies-at-69.html
    Last edited by KC; 27-08-2015 at 01:37 PM.

  32. #332
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Saudi Arabia!

    12c Gas!
    No Income Tax!
    $100B expected deficit this year!

  33. #333

    Default

    So, as oil prices decline and more and more people are going to feel the direct threat to their own jobs, I'm wondering if there will be a change in attitudes here?

    Government employees will of course favour it but those attitudes in the private sector might change in interesting ways.

    If a sales tax allowed for lower taxes on companies would attitudes change?

  34. #334

    Default

    ^if the NDP keeps spending highest of any province in Canada (even though we aren't growing the highest anymore), and oil prices stay down for a few years, there won't be any choice, other than a debt time bomb. Realistically though, they are already a hated government (jacking up everyones future power bills via the carbon tax isn't a way to win friends), so they will probably do what left wing governments typically do, continue to run up the debt, forcing a more responsible government to have to take the tough measure to deal with it in the future.

  35. #335
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    If a sales tax allowed for lower taxes on companies would attitudes change?

    No, Albertans are shortsighted, pigheaded, and blind to their unsustainable oil revenue addiction. Our fellow Albertans want a combination of low taxes and excellent government programs, and they aren't happy with anything but. Point out that you can't have your cake and eat it too, and they call you a left wing commie socialist trying to ruin the province.
    Last edited by Jaerdo; 13-01-2016 at 09:56 AM.

  36. #336
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,538

    Default

    So let me get this straight, if people are short of money you think they'd want to pay more money in a tax? Why would anyone want to do this?

  37. #337
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,351

    Default

    Everyone needs to just hold tough and oil will be back on the boom before Rachels term is up and we will be back in the pink before the next election. Its just the way it goes. Planes, trains, trucks, and automobiles and whatever else are not magically converting to some other energy form tomorrow evening or anytime soon.

  38. #338
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,162

    Default



    Uh....Top_Dawg can't see it.

    Top-Dawg figgers we'll be takin' it up the stink for a long time before we get any pink action.

  39. #339
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Dawg View Post


    Uh....Top_Dawg can't see it.

    Top-Dawg figgers we'll be takin' it up the stink for a long time before we get any pink action.
    Comment of the day award goes to.....Top_Dawg

  40. #340

    Default

    A smart political move. If oil recovers, they are off the hook and they can do what the PCs did for decades. However, if oil doesn't recover and income taxes and selected sales taxes (sin taxes, carbon taxes, etc) don't compensate for the revenue decline, the NDP will have to start slashing expenses. At that point, people will realize that that's a best case scenario for services. So, if you want to keep any of the services, you have to find a better model for funding it and so that doesn't leave many choices. (Very similar to people living beyond their means personally, all platitudes and ideology aside, at some point some hard choices have to be made..)

    Of course, by that time it may be a right wing government in power that is bringing in a sales tax to everyone's cheers.


    Alberta’s finance minister rejects call for sales tax from coalition of academics | Edmonton Journal



    Alberta Finance Minister Joe Ceci is slamming the door on sales taxes, despite a push from academics.

    With the province’s budgetary deficit set to exceed $6.1 billion in 2015-16, a coalition of 19 university professors, economists and pundits have written a letter to Alberta Premier Rachel Notley calling for a five-per-cent sales tax harmonized with the federal GST. The group says a 10-per-cent HST would raise $5 billion in new revenues and “significantly address the province’s current fiscal problems.”

    Ceci rejected the idea Monday, saying Albertans aren’t on board.

    “Hard no. We didn’t run on it. We won’t do it,” he said, promising no PST or HST will be implemented before the next election and no “significant” new revenue-generating taxes will be introduced in the spring budget.
    ...

    The coalition, however, argues that massive cuts to provincial services would “deepen Alberta’s current fiscal difficulties while crippling future projects.” The negative impacts on low-income earners could be mitigated through rebates, it said.
    ...
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/poli...n-of-academics
    Last edited by KC; 21-02-2016 at 11:43 AM.

  41. #341
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,351

    Default

    Must be tough for the rest of Canada to think aid or help of any kind for Alberta when they all pay provincial sales tax and we don't. It also must be tough for our premier to ask knowing we pay no PST and other Canadians all do.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 21-02-2016 at 11:39 AM.

  42. #342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Must be tough for the rest of Canada to think aid for Alberta when they all pay provincial sales tax and we don't. It also must be tough for our premier to ask knowing we pay no PST and other Canadians all do.
    I don't even think it's on anyone's radar. We were near debt free when the rest of them were only building up their debt levels to ever higher levels. Alberta has made the tough choices (not the smartest) a number of times while other provinces have carried on with bad spending practices.

  43. #343

    Default

    It would have been nice during the good times. Right now higher mid and top MTR income taxes and steeper progressivity may create the least harm. Sales taxes in practice over time become regressive and like the promise of clean nuclear power, the dirty secret is the problem of the accumulation of waste radioactive fuel. Here too with sales taxes that dirty secret of increasing accumulation of regressivity needs to be addressed before a plan is put in place.

    The beauty of higher income taxes is that, one, your're taking the proceeds up front and not dependent on their spending*, two, they are only going to hit those keeping their jobs and, three, there is incredible resistance to wage rollbacks as a means to keep people working, so if many layoffs are going to occur anyways, the government needs funding to redeploy to create jobs. Right now, luck of circumstance has given the government incredibly cheap debt but it needs higher tax receipts to keep its credit rating up.

    NEW
    An advantage no more: Alberta needs a sales tax, economists argue
    Finance minister rules out PST in Thursday's budget, but a $10B deficit looms
    By Briar Stewart, CBC News Posted: Apr 12, 2016


    In February, a group of 19 academics penned a letter in the Edmonton Journal, calling on the government to adopt a harmonized sales tax, arguing that it is not only a necessity, but it is already part of the "fiscal fabric" in all other provinces.

    "If you ask individuals, 'Would you like to pay more taxes?' they say, 'No.' But what other options do we have? How do we come out of this problem?" says Ergete Ferede, an economics professor with Edmonton's MacEwan University and one of the signatories of the letter.

    Ferede says that if the province were to implement a five per cent sales tax, which is the rate in neighbouring Saskatchewan, Alberta would generate roughly $5 billion. That is half of the province's projected deficit

    "We need to have this discussion sooner or later," he says, but adds he is not surprised the government quickly shut down the group's plea.

    "All political parties, all colours argue that having a sales tax in Alberta, it is political suicide."


    Alberta was a PST pioneer


    Alberta is the only province in Canada without a provincial or harmonized sales tax, but it was also the first province to impose one.
    ...



    So the questions remains, just how will the budget deal with the looming $10 billion deficit?

    "How is the province going to get out of it?" Mintz asks. "Besides hoping that oil prices come back up, which has been, unfortunately, what previous governments have done."





    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...dget-1.3526928

    * in recessions even the highly paid tend to restraint their spending and they also tend to invest abroad and not locally.
    Last edited by KC; 12-04-2016 at 09:08 AM.

  44. #344

    Default

    When elected officials "think", everyone listens...


    "the provincial government needs to accurately reflect the costs of natural disasters in the budget."


    Disaster levy? Wildfires spark renewed calls for Alberta consumption tax
    'It would be helpful not for today, but for tomorrow and for the future,' economics professor says
    By Kim Trynacity, CBC News Posted: May 18, 2016 5:00 AM MT Last Updated: May 18, 2016 1:51 PM MT

    ...

    But the official opposition has a different take on the situation.

    Wildrose MLA Derek Fildebrandt said the provincial government needs to accurately reflect the costs of natural disasters in the budget.

    "The last thing Alberta needs right now is another tax," said Fildebrandt. "Especially when we're going through a severe recession with little sign of letting up."

    ...

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...-tax-1.3586669
    Last edited by KC; 19-05-2016 at 09:55 AM.

  45. #345

    Default

    Here’s an article from a couple years ago, and today we’re a couple more years deeper in debt (which no one is happy about but it created a soft landing).

    However, oil hasn’t gone back to $100/bbl and we’re not yet receiving the $100 billion a year or whatever it was in outside capital for oil sands plant construction.) Shale has killed that business for now.

    Anyway this history was interesting:

    An advantage no more: Alberta needs a sales tax, economists argue

    Finance minister rules out PST in Thursday's budget, but a $10B deficit looms


    Briar Stewart · CBC News · Posted: Apr 11, 2016 3:04 PM MT | Last Updated: April 12, 2016

    “...
    Ferede says that if the province were to implement a five per cent sales tax, which is the rate in neighbouring Saskatchewan, Alberta would generate roughly $5 billion. That is half of the province's projected deficit

    "We need to have this discussion sooner or later...”


    Alberta was a PST pioneer

    Alberta is the only province in Canada without a provincial or harmonized sales tax, but it was also the first province to impose one.

    Back in 1936, in the midst of the Great Depression, Alberta was drought-stricken. Grain prices had collapsed and provincial finances were in shambles.

    Alberta's new Social Credit government, led by William "Bible Bill" Aberhart, passed the Ultimate Purchasers Tax that established a two per cent provincial sales tax.

    It was repealed the following year after public pressure.

    Fast forward 80 years, and Alberta's books are crippled by low energy prices, but there is still no public appetite for a sales tax. A poll conducted in January by Mainstreet Research (formerly known as Mainstreet Technologies) found that the majority of Albertans don't want to see the government use a PST to make up its revenue shortfall.

    The 'Alberta advantage'

    Selling the idea of a sales tax in the province is particularly difficult because its very absence is part of what has been billed as the "Alberta advantage."

    But Jack Mintz, who is with the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary, argues that political catchphrase doesn't ring true anymore.

    "I think that Alberta not having a sales tax has created an Alberta tax disadvantage," he says.
    ...”


    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...dget-1.3526928




    Alberta's $6B budget shortfall: running the numbers | CBC News
    “Premier Jim Prentice raised eyebrows this week when he suggested he is open to hearing from people who think Alberta should have a sales tax.

    The province is forecast to end the year with a $500-million deficit. And Alberta now faces a revenue shortfall in the range of $6 billion to $7 billion next year.”


    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...bers-1.2911788



    Last edited by KC; 05-04-2018 at 05:30 PM.

  46. #346
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,842

    Default

    we have a sales tax, carbon tax is going into general revenue= ST

  47. #347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    we have a sales tax, carbon tax is going into general revenue= ST
    Totally agree and that’s what I called it long ago. Even if it weren’t going into general revenue it’s a sales tax/sin tax. And it was first introduced by the PCs. The NDP broadened it.

    However, it it gets dumped, then we’re right back to relying on income taxes and oil royalties to pay for services. The good old days of relying on perpetually bad oil price forecasts to decide how things like healthcare are run.

    Albertans should consider eliminating corporate income taxes, then taxing Corp earnings on a flow-through shareholder basis, plus gains and dividends better, and then figuring out a good, economically flexible balancing methodology between user fees, sin taxes, a consumption tax (PST) and employment and other income.

    Then bank oil and gas and other royalties into a trust fund like Lougheed originally intended.
    Last edited by KC; 06-04-2018 at 09:56 AM.

  48. #348

    Default

    I noticed a couple weeks ago that my restaurant bill had HST on it, which is the first time I saw that in Alberta, and it was always just GST before. Is this a sign of what's coming? I hate that they do this in Ontario. Lump all the taxes together into "HST" so that you can't see what each tax is, like they're trying to hide their crazy high PST, but not really fooling anyone who can do simple math...

  49. #349

    Default

    As always: now is not the time



    Why there won't be an Alberta sales tax any time soon, and who's to blame for provincial pipeline paralysis | CBC News

    “...
    “Q: As a province, we're still riding the economic ups and downs of the royalty roller-coaster. You've spoken in the past about how we need to have a conversation about a PST [provincial sales tax].

    A: No, no, no — I haven't been talking about that.

    Q: Your exact quote is: "In the long term, is this a conversation we need to have? I think it is — but not right now. It needed to happen in the context of a government needing a mandate."

    Is this something you want Albertans talking about in the coming campaign?

    A: No. Not at all.

    Q: Why not?

    A: Because we are working really hard to bring Alberta through a recovery and to get our oil and gas industry back on its feet — and to do a lot of other work that we have been doing to promote diversification and economic development.

    Now is not the time to bring something like that in.

    Instead, what we need to do is carry on with what we have been doing, and on some fronts it has been successful. ...”


    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...deau-1.4952511

  50. #350
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    As always: now is not the time

    ...
    now is not the time? probably true. the time was probably 40 years ago but we didn't when we should have. so the only real question is when do we wake up to the fact that we made a stupid mistake and it's time to correct it.

    the ndp made a stupid election promise in the last election saying they wouldn't bring in a provincial sales tax and they made an even stupider decision not to ignore that promise and bring one in.

    and the comments in that cbc interview amount to nothing more than happily digging a bigger hole for the province to climb out of instead of working on a solution - they're the sort of ignoring the real problem comments that i would expect form the ucp, not the ndp. we all know the province of alberta has more of a lack of income problem than a spending problem and this would plug that gap to the tune of between 6 and 8 billion dollars a year in year one with no additional infrastructure required as long as it was harmonized with the federal gst as the feds would do the collection and distribute the monies from day one.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  51. #351

    Default

    Unfortunately no one tries to qualify the income problem. It’s not just the drop in royalties. The tax base must have expanded dramatically in many other ways as well - based on decisions that are now unsuitable for the times. (Transactions generate both income and consumption taxes.)

    Over the past 15 years we built up services, infrastructure and population* based on untold billions of direct capital investment. Not just that to build the mega-plants but also the investment and borrowings by everyone expanding their businesses, taking out mortgages, etc. as the expansion continued. That cash flow / cash and debt injection has certainly slowed to a huge degree as well.

    Then there’s the aging population and the inevitable rise in health care costs. Increasing the population doesn’t lower those costs. At best it reduces the proportion but unless that higher population somehow generates higher net income for the province and not just divvies up the same old pie into small pieces, the expenditure problem is pretty much unchanging.


    This isn’t to ignore the fact that in a provincial recession, PST revenue flowing to the government wouldnt also take major hit, but I would guess it would fall at a slower rate.

    Government budgeting should be a tiered, triaged system. Core, really core, government services and fixed liabilities and obligations need to be identified and predictable and near assured revenue streams tied directly to them. Then everything else should be openly classed as economy dependent. Labour contracts and non-core services should be clearly subject to grow and contraction based on some combination of current conditions and some rolling average measure of the economy’s condition. Oil prices and royalties collapse and non-core government services get squeezed or raise their fees. All management and union contracts start taking wage cuts. The government then doesn’t borrow to keep the lights on, it borrows to save the economy from collapse, to keep companies afloat and to make work or hire unemployed to prevent a deflationary spiral and unwarranted hardship.

    Basically, departmental budgeting is useless in the face of the volatility our economy goes through.


    As an aside, the equalization payment system has a similar fatal flaw. They should have had farmers design a system where you don’t lose the farm by designing in a propensity to create commodity driven liquidity crises.

    * utilities build for “peak demand” - peak forecast/projected demand. In the old days of huge upfront capital plant cost, if the demand growth didn’t materialize, the costs were sunk and if the utility wasn’t able to reneg, say by going bankrupt, then the ratepayers paid the tab - for decades. Same for the province, we build out and entrench costs during peak growth phases that are unlikely to be sustained. Eg creating two half-full subdivisions based on airy-fairy forecasts and then facing the prospect of decades of underutilized schools, roads, services, etc. Worse, struggling residents earning far less than projected and so fighting every single tax increase to maintain the existing infrastructure.
    Last edited by KC; 03-01-2019 at 03:21 PM.

  52. #352
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Unfortunately no one tries to qualify the income problem. It’s not just the drop in royalties. The tax base must have expanded dramatically in many other ways as well. (Transactions generate both income and consumption taxes.)

    Over the past 15 years we built up services, infrastructure and population based on untold billions of direct capital investment. Not just that to build the mega-plants but also the investment and borrowings by everyone expanding their businesses, taking out mortgages, etc. as the expansion continued. That cash flow / cash and debt injection has certainly slowed to a huge degree as well.

    Then there’s the aging population and the inevitable rise in health care costs. Increasing the population doesn’t lower those costs. At best it reduces the proportion but unless that higher population somehow generates higher net income for the province and not just divvies up the same old pie into small pieces, the expenditure problem is pretty much unchanging.
    emphasis added...

    with apologies to red rose tea, only in the rest of canada you say? pity...

    and that's the issue.

    transactions without a provincial sales tax in alberta don't generate any sales tax revenue for the province of alberta.

    transactions conducted in alberta by businesses registered elsewhere in canada don't generate any income tax revenue for the province of alberta.

    even salaries paid in alberta to workers who's home address as of the 31st of December is in a different province don't generate income tax revenue for the province of alberta.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  53. #353

    Default

    Don’t forget, we have consumption taxes too. (Add now add the carbon tax.). Also transactions often spread the wealth so that expands residential, commercial and industrial construction and thus property taxes (a consumption tax?).


    Maybe I’m being ridiculous:

    It’s ridiculous to call a carbon tax a sales tax. Here’s why.
    A carbon tax is no more a sales tax than income taxes are, writes University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe
    Jun 18, 2016
    https://www.macleans.ca/economy/econ...tax-heres-why/

  54. #354

    Default

    Provincial sales tax and carbon levy needed to help balance Alberta's books: U of C professor – Calgary Herald
    BY BILL KAUFMANN
    ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: SEP 5, 2019

    https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...of-c-professor


    Alberta should bring in a PST: report

    https://edmonton.citynews.ca/2019/09...-a-pst-report/
    Last edited by KC; 05-09-2019 at 06:19 PM.

  55. #355

    Default

    Yeah, good luck with that. Your average Albertan will only go for tax reductions. Cut taxes + cut services that they don't personally benefit from = prosperity

  56. #356

    Default

    Lorne Gunter hits the nail on the head, however unfortunately he just doesn’t get it in terms of the reality of our population, our economy, our reliance on a commodity, our one-company-town existence. He gets the big picture but not its context. He needs to understand how for a hundred years now the peaks and troughs of our economy has evolved into a leaching economy.

    Few here in Alberta work at doing anything that is productive and exportable so all we can do is sell each other food services, cars, houses, cell phones, cell phone service, provide health services, social services, education, financial services, build each other houses, repair those houses, truck things to the stores so people can haul that stuff back to their houses, expand the roads and infrastructure serving those houses, build schools, build towers build everything that serves those people who are here and living off each other’s services. Unfortunately very few here can do anything to directly increase our exportable products and services which pay for everyone else’s livelihoods. For every bread earner a dozen beneficiaries are able to spend, spend, spend.

    We also sit here and sell each other our opinions, our ideologies and our dogmatic beliefs through media, associations, political and regulatory bodies. All necessary to service a population but unproductive activities from the point of directly boosting Alberta’s economic output.


    We live and bring our population up to our peak royalty stream potential here. Which necessarily includes the population and spin off population enabling and living off the capital expenditures for peak oil sands plant construction (peak construction to work towards peak oil extraction here). Eg importing foreign capital for creating one oil sands plant creates a bunch of design and construction jobs. Those temporary jobs create a whole host of associated needs that appear to be permanent needs.

    When plant construction slows or stops we are left with only a bit of maintenance activity and the royalty stream. Just like a Ponzi scheme we count on a continued supply of fresh capital to continuously keep the construction game going. Construct a bunch of new plants beyond our own labour capacity and we import new citizens and along with them we get to construct new houses for them (via bank capital they import for their mortgages) and construct new roads, schools and so on (all requiring importing more and more financing capital). A Ponzi scheme that begets a dozen more Ponzi schemes.

    So here in Alberta we largely just service the people that live here and we mainly just live off the proceeds of a couple export sectors.

    Moreover we are increasingly living off production that requires a smaller and small human workforce either by its nature or because automation allowed them to design out the human component. We are left with only the royalty stream and borrowing when it and the boom time capital and people importation scheme vaulters.




    GUNTER: Why bringing in a PST won't fix Alberta's fiscal problems

    https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/colu...iscal-problems
    Last edited by KC; 06-09-2019 at 07:50 AM.

  57. #357

    Default

    ^ Exactly. More taxes = more money for govt to spend. Unless and until systemic changes are made to how things operate in this province wrt to unions, salaries, efficiency, and shock horror - privatize some health procedures there should not be a PST.


    Last time I checked, ON has HST, and a massive deficit. Implementing a PST wont magically fix everything, guaranteed. As a province we have to start working more efficiently, smarter and accept changes, that includes a PST ONLY IF spending changes are made.

  58. #358

    Default

    We should first stabilize the per capita spending gap between us and more "civilized" jurisdictions first, and ensure we don't skim $2 billion every year out of the Heritage Fund to plug budget holes. Then, you bring in a PST.

    Ultimately, the name of the game is sustainable population growth. We are not served by a transient population that will leave the moment the times are tough. Alberta needs to sell an "Alberta Mindset" (whatever that is), to people who want to have a perch here and sit back and watch the rest of the world burn.

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Provincial sales tax and carbon levy needed to help balance Alberta's books: U of C professor – Calgary Herald
    BY BILL KAUFMANN
    ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: SEP 5, 2019

    https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...of-c-professor


    Alberta should bring in a PST: report

    https://edmonton.citynews.ca/2019/09...-a-pst-report/
    Last edited by Safir; 06-09-2019 at 11:02 AM.

  59. #359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
    ^ Exactly. More taxes = more money for govt to spend. Unless and until systemic changes are made to how things operate in this province wrt to unions, salaries, efficiency, and shock horror - privatize some health procedures there should not be a PST.


    Last time I checked, ON has HST, and a massive deficit. Implementing a PST wont magically fix everything, guaranteed. As a province we have to start working more efficiently, smarter and accept changes, that includes a PST ONLY IF spending changes are made.
    100 % correct. Any government in power will merely just increase their spending appetites, and while the initial monies can balance a budget, eventually, the spending will just increase until the deficits again appear, only this time you now have a 5-7% PST on top of everything. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

  60. #360

    Default

    Benefits seem very generous, lots of %100 coverage

    https://www.una.ab.ca/files/uploads/..._Agreement.pdf



    https://www.una.ab.ca/files/uploads/..._2013_2017.pdf

    triple time for working Aug weekend and xmas, 2.5 time for anamed holiday, double time for regular OT

    And this is only one group ! What about EMS, police, fire, ETS drivers etc, etc. A shake out on this is needed

    Last edited by rupikhalon001; 08-09-2019 at 09:05 PM.

  61. #361

    Default

    No matter what system we have, politicians will borrow and they won’t borrow wisely according to any economic cycle or opportunistically per the yields of the day. I have no idea how that problem can be fixed.

    So I figure we should fix what we can. A PST is just one option. It’s not perfect but it provides better balance on the income the government needs and doesn’t need.

    Unfortunately now we have a debt / deficit situation to deal with where politics will distort any reasonable and practical approach to improving our economic condition.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •