Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
Fundamentally, it is the most inefficient way of delivering services. And who said anything about privatizing everything?
I'm not opposed to sales tax, although it's a slippery slope.
take any major public service ... whether it be health care, education, policing ... and show me some data that says a privatized model is better than a public model ...
When did I say it should be privatized? So I am not going to "show you any data" because it has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are arguing now for the sake of arguing. Because I live on the slight right side of the fence you assume I am for privatization. (Proves my point of how we know everything there is to know about the left, but it is not true vice versa).
All I mentioned was Norway's negative income tax model. (Experimented in Manitoba in the 70s). Read what Norway is doing for those in need (unemployment is skyrocketing in Norway). I applaud them for trying something different. Some economists have suggested it would save Canada 140 Billion dollars a year.
We don't have a tax problem in Canada, we have a spending problem. If you really like a nanny state, check out Norway. Everyone gets 1100 a month in the hope it will encourage people to go make MORE. unlike EI in Canada, you won't get punished financially if you make more. It's really progressive thinking.
When I say government waste I am talking of the bloated beaurocracy. Does not mean I want to privatize everything (and I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out, except you are trying to paint all conservatives as "boogeymen" who are trying to destroy government services). I do believe if you want privatized health care, and can afford it, you should have that option. This is a free country right? Lol
ok ... if you don't want to your money going to gov't because you think they waste money ... then how is the gov't supposed to pay for services that you say you don't want privatized? ... also, if you say they are fundamentally inefficient at delivering services - then you must believe there is a more efficient model ... if it's not via gov't ... who is it by?
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
The evidence is in the decision making. They had a 30 million surplus, they are blowing it as soon as they can. And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive. Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
Fundamentally, it is the most inefficient way of delivering services. And who said anything about privatizing everything?
I'm not opposed to sales tax, although it's a slippery slope.
take any major public service ... whether it be health care, education, policing ... and show me some data that says a privatized model is better than a public model ...
When did I say it should be privatized? So I am not going to "show you any data" because it has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are arguing now for the sake of arguing. Because I live on the slight right side of the fence you assume I am for privatization. (Proves my point of how we know everything there is to know about the left, but it is not true vice versa).
All I mentioned was Norway's negative income tax model. (Experimented in Manitoba in the 70s). Read what Norway is doing for those in need (unemployment is skyrocketing in Norway). I applaud them for trying something different. Some economists have suggested it would save Canada 140 Billion dollars a year.
We don't have a tax problem in Canada, we have a spending problem. If you really like a nanny state, check out Norway. Everyone gets 1100 a month in the hope it will encourage people to go make MORE. unlike EI in Canada, you won't get punished financially if you make more. It's really progressive thinking.
When I say government waste I am talking of the bloated beaurocracy. Does not mean I want to privatize everything (and I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out, except you are trying to paint all conservatives as "boogeymen" who are trying to destroy government services). I do believe if you want privatized health care, and can afford it, you should have that option. This is a free country right? Lol
ok ... if you don't want to your money going to gov't because you think they waste money ... then how is the gov't supposed to pay for services that you say you don't want privatized? ... also, if you say they are fundamentally inefficient at delivering services - then you must believe there is a more efficient model ... if it's not via gov't ... who is it by?
Wow... Your blind socialism just won't allow you to read what I write will it.
I want you to research (for the fifth time I will mention it) what Norway is doing in regards to negative income tax. It is something to really look at. Every adult receives 1100 a month, no questions asked. No EI, welfare, affordable housing, etc. If you make more money, you don't lose the 1100. It encourages people to work, to find a career. They won't take away the 1100 until you reach a certain level of income, unlike EI or welfare.
The bonus! The 140 Billion WASTED in administering those programs, eaten away by government beaurocrats , is saved!. Taxes could be reduced and the negative connotations of social services are gone. No begging the government for EI benefits, welfare, or low income housing.
NOW, I hope you two can finally realize I said NOTHING about privatization. I'm starting to wonder if I am talking a foreign language to you. Oh right, I'm talking slight right ideology, makes no sense because you were never taught it, and never attempt to learn.
So to answer all of your questions, I want the government to administer the services more efficiently, I believe this may be an example of an efficient model. I never said I wanted anything privatized *sigh*. You ASSUMED that's what I meant simply because I'm "conservative". See how prejudiced that is? I mentioned the Norwegian model five times but instead of researching what I was talking about, you jump all over it. Norway is about as socialist as it gets and yet, you still have to argue. It's mind boggling.
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
The evidence is in the decision making. They had a 30 million surplus, they are blowing it as soon as they can. And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive. Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
let me know when you got something specific you want to rail about? ... arguing they had a surplus is absurd, arguing they are spending that surplus is absurd ... all governments all over the world would love a surplus ... and when you happen to live in Alberta now where the oil and gas industry has tanked - it is wise to spend some of that surplus ...
again - feel free to argue about where the actual dollars are being spent ... but railing on the fact they had a surplus and want to spend it to ease the impacts of the fall of oil just seems totally ideologically driven ... i mean - you call nenshi a crook but what has he done that's deserving of that objectively?
Fundamentally, it is the most inefficient way of delivering services. And who said anything about privatizing everything?
I'm not opposed to sales tax, although it's a slippery slope.
take any major public service ... whether it be health care, education, policing ... and show me some data that says a privatized model is better than a public model ...
When did I say it should be privatized? So I am not going to "show you any data" because it has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are arguing now for the sake of arguing. Because I live on the slight right side of the fence you assume I am for privatization. (Proves my point of how we know everything there is to know about the left, but it is not true vice versa).
All I mentioned was Norway's negative income tax model. (Experimented in Manitoba in the 70s). Read what Norway is doing for those in need (unemployment is skyrocketing in Norway). I applaud them for trying something different. Some economists have suggested it would save Canada 140 Billion dollars a year.
We don't have a tax problem in Canada, we have a spending problem. If you really like a nanny state, check out Norway. Everyone gets 1100 a month in the hope it will encourage people to go make MORE. unlike EI in Canada, you won't get punished financially if you make more. It's really progressive thinking.
When I say government waste I am talking of the bloated beaurocracy. Does not mean I want to privatize everything (and I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out, except you are trying to paint all conservatives as "boogeymen" who are trying to destroy government services). I do believe if you want privatized health care, and can afford it, you should have that option. This is a free country right? Lol
dude ... seriously ... i've not once mentioned right or left, conservatism or socialism ... you are griping about partisan ideologies when there are in fact none being placed ... stop using this as a crutch from the discussion ...
first of all - go back to this discussion ... you said that governments are FUNDAMENTALLY the least efficient way of delivering services ... so, if you say you don't support privatization ... I asked if you don't want to give the gov't your money and you don't think they deliver services then your contradicting yourself somewhat by saying you want gov'ts to deliver efficient services ...
we all want gov'ts to deliver efficient services but yet you rail on taxation daily ... you constantly spew myths like we are over-taxed ... when in fact we aren't ... especially if you live in alberta ...
nothing you say is presented in a sound argument ...
as for norway - i honestly can't believe you are using Norway as an example because it is arguably one of the most socialist countries in the world ... our taxation levels don't even come close to what they are in Norway and plus they nationalized their oil there ... basically all the profits that we let oil companies make go to the people of Norway ... so, really, any program they can put forth is affordable because they have the money ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
The evidence is in the decision making. They had a 30 million surplus, they are blowing it as soon as they can. And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive. Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
let me know when you got something specific you want to rail about? ... arguing they had a surplus is absurd, arguing they are spending that surplus is absurd ... all governments all over the world would love a surplus ... and when you happen to live in Alberta now where the oil and gas industry has tanked - it is wise to spend some of that surplus ...
again - feel free to argue about where the actual dollars are being spent ... but railing on the fact they had a surplus and want to spend it to ease the impacts of the fall of oil just seems totally ideologically driven ... i mean - you call nenshi a crook but what has he done that's deserving of that objectively?
Absurd it isn't, because that money belongs to taxpayers Of course they "love a surplus" because they can blow all your hard earned tax dollars.
Wise to spend the surplus or invest it in our and the next generations futures by paying down debt?
The government should only spend what they have budgeted for, it is not their money. They are in place to serve us, the citizens. They work for us. If they get a surplus that money should go back to the citizens, through debt reduction or important infrastructure.
If 15 million dollars was needed for low income housing, put it in the budget. Don't make a rash decision to thrown 15 million into low income housing! You budget for it.
It amazes me that this is such a foreign concept to people. No one cares how much of our tax dollars go to just paying the interest on debt.
Fundamentally, it is the most inefficient way of delivering services. And who said anything about privatizing everything?
I'm not opposed to sales tax, although it's a slippery slope.
take any major public service ... whether it be health care, education, policing ... and show me some data that says a privatized model is better than a public model ...
When did I say it should be privatized? So I am not going to "show you any data" because it has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are arguing now for the sake of arguing. Because I live on the slight right side of the fence you assume I am for privatization. (Proves my point of how we know everything there is to know about the left, but it is not true vice versa).
All I mentioned was Norway's negative income tax model. (Experimented in Manitoba in the 70s). Read what Norway is doing for those in need (unemployment is skyrocketing in Norway). I applaud them for trying something different. Some economists have suggested it would save Canada 140 Billion dollars a year.
We don't have a tax problem in Canada, we have a spending problem. If you really like a nanny state, check out Norway. Everyone gets 1100 a month in the hope it will encourage people to go make MORE. unlike EI in Canada, you won't get punished financially if you make more. It's really progressive thinking.
When I say government waste I am talking of the bloated beaurocracy. Does not mean I want to privatize everything (and I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out, except you are trying to paint all conservatives as "boogeymen" who are trying to destroy government services). I do believe if you want privatized health care, and can afford it, you should have that option. This is a free country right? Lol
dude ... seriously ... i've not once mentioned right or left, conservatism or socialism ... you are griping about partisan ideologies when there are in fact none being placed ... stop using this as a crutch from the discussion ...
first of all - go back to this discussion ... you said that governments are FUNDAMENTALLY the least efficient way of delivering services ... so, if you say you don't support privatization ... I asked if you don't want to give the gov't your money and you don't think they deliver services then your contradicting yourself somewhat by saying you want gov'ts to deliver efficient services ...
we all want gov'ts to deliver efficient services but yet you rail on taxation daily ... you constantly spew myths like we are over-taxed ... when in fact we aren't ... especially if you live in alberta ...
nothing you say is presented in a sound argument ...
as for norway - i honestly can't believe you are using Norway as an example because it is arguably one of the most socialist countries in the world ... our taxation levels don't even come close to what they are in Norway and plus they nationalized their oil there ... basically all the profits that we let oil companies make go to the people of Norway ... so, really, any program they can put forth is affordable because they have the money ...
- not a crutch, a fact. - governments as they are currently run are inefficient at delivering services - I never said I didn't want to give the government my money, :lol. There you are again making stuff up. I want the government to deliver services more efficiently. This can be done. We need government, but not one with a sense of entitlement to my hard earned money. - I rail on OVER-Taxation. And we are over taxed, period. We have over 60 kinds of taxes and fees off the top of my head, plus income tax. If you don't think we are over-taxed that is your opinion, one I (and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation who represents our interests) do not share. - my argument is sound, you continue to misconstrue my statements and continually assume I want privatization or "no government" which is absurd. You have yet to find a way to convince me the government must be run the way it is. - "I can't believe you used Norway as an example" is exactly the kind of politically prejudiced comment I expected . You have not read or looked into what they are doing. Nor have you considered the economic implications of their plan. It has NOTHING. To do with nationalized oil taxation levels, or the like. This is affordable to any country. The numbers are available if you just look for yourself, but instead you argue against something you clearly know nothing about.
Here, read a little. Educate yourself. Then when you want to argue about why I think this can work in Canada and actually reduce government spending and thus reduce taxes, I'll,have an intelligent discussion. Or don't. I have made my point.
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
The evidence is in the decision making. They had a 30 million surplus, they are blowing it as soon as they can. And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive. Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
let me know when you got something specific you want to rail about? ... arguing they had a surplus is absurd, arguing they are spending that surplus is absurd ... all governments all over the world would love a surplus ... and when you happen to live in Alberta now where the oil and gas industry has tanked - it is wise to spend some of that surplus ...
again - feel free to argue about where the actual dollars are being spent ... but railing on the fact they had a surplus and want to spend it to ease the impacts of the fall of oil just seems totally ideologically driven ... i mean - you call nenshi a crook but what has he done that's deserving of that objectively?
Absurd it isn't, because that money belongs to taxpayers Of course they "love a surplus" because they can blow all your hard earned tax dollars.
Wise to spend the surplus or invest it in our and the next generations futures by paying down debt?
The government should only spend what they have budgeted for, it is not their money. They are in place to serve us, the citizens. They work for us. If they get a surplus that money should go back to the citizens, through debt reduction or important infrastructure.
If 15 million dollars was needed for low income housing, put it in the budget. Don't make a rash decision to thrown 15 million into low income housing! You budget for it.
It amazes me that this is such a foreign concept to people. No one cares how much of our tax dollars go to just paying the interest on debt.
I
dude ... you are saying it belongs to the people ... but in your article it says they are giving back to the people through freezing transit fares and other things ... that's essentially a tax cut in some way ...
again - if you don't like how it's spent ... that's your prerogative ... just like council was split on how to spend it ... but making outlandish statements like he's a crook just makes your position weak ...
as for paying down municipal debt ... it's a balance between investing in municipal projects that will help sustain the economy and growth for your city ... do you wait until you have all the money in the bank before you buy a house? ... most people don't ... obviously, there are levels of debt that become burdensome but carrying debt in it of itself is not an issue ... the majority of us all carry debt ... I would expect in Calgary (and I don't know for sure) but that all the debt it currently carries has a payment mechanism in place for it similar to people and mortgages ...
Fundamentally, it is the most inefficient way of delivering services. And who said anything about privatizing everything?
I'm not opposed to sales tax, although it's a slippery slope.
take any major public service ... whether it be health care, education, policing ... and show me some data that says a privatized model is better than a public model ...
When did I say it should be privatized? So I am not going to "show you any data" because it has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are arguing now for the sake of arguing. Because I live on the slight right side of the fence you assume I am for privatization. (Proves my point of how we know everything there is to know about the left, but it is not true vice versa).
All I mentioned was Norway's negative income tax model. (Experimented in Manitoba in the 70s). Read what Norway is doing for those in need (unemployment is skyrocketing in Norway). I applaud them for trying something different. Some economists have suggested it would save Canada 140 Billion dollars a year.
We don't have a tax problem in Canada, we have a spending problem. If you really like a nanny state, check out Norway. Everyone gets 1100 a month in the hope it will encourage people to go make MORE. unlike EI in Canada, you won't get punished financially if you make more. It's really progressive thinking.
When I say government waste I am talking of the bloated beaurocracy. Does not mean I want to privatize everything (and I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out, except you are trying to paint all conservatives as "boogeymen" who are trying to destroy government services). I do believe if you want privatized health care, and can afford it, you should have that option. This is a free country right? Lol
dude ... seriously ... i've not once mentioned right or left, conservatism or socialism ... you are griping about partisan ideologies when there are in fact none being placed ... stop using this as a crutch from the discussion ...
first of all - go back to this discussion ... you said that governments are FUNDAMENTALLY the least efficient way of delivering services ... so, if you say you don't support privatization ... I asked if you don't want to give the gov't your money and you don't think they deliver services then your contradicting yourself somewhat by saying you want gov'ts to deliver efficient services ...
we all want gov'ts to deliver efficient services but yet you rail on taxation daily ... you constantly spew myths like we are over-taxed ... when in fact we aren't ... especially if you live in alberta ...
nothing you say is presented in a sound argument ...
as for norway - i honestly can't believe you are using Norway as an example because it is arguably one of the most socialist countries in the world ... our taxation levels don't even come close to what they are in Norway and plus they nationalized their oil there ... basically all the profits that we let oil companies make go to the people of Norway ... so, really, any program they can put forth is affordable because they have the money ...
- not a crutch, a fact. - governments as they are currently run are inefficient at delivering services - I never said I didn't want to give the government my money, :lol. There you are again making stuff up. I want the government to deliver services more efficiently. This can be done. We need government, but not one with a sense of entitlement to my hard earned money. - I rail on OVER-Taxation. And we are over taxed, period. We have over 60 kinds of taxes and fees off the top of my head, plus income tax. If you don't think we are over-taxed that is your opinion, one I (and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation who represents our interests) do not share. - my argument is sound, you continue to misconstrue my statements and continually assume I want privatization or "no government" which is absurd. You have yet to find a way to convince me the government must be run the way it is. - "I can't believe you used Norway as an example" is exactly the kind of politically prejudiced comment I expected . You have not read or looked into what they are doing. Nor have you considered the economic implications of their plan. It has NOTHING. To do with nationalized oil taxation levels, or the like. This is affordable to any country. The numbers are available if you just look for yourself, but instead you argue against something you clearly know nothing about.
again ... feel free to continue to make inferences that aren't there ... you rail about being pegged as a conservative/right-wing even though i've not made any generalizations while you are ...
haha ... obviously the canadian taxpayers federation thinks we're over-taxed ... i'm not sure how anyone can really think that especially living in alberta ...
you are right i haven't read about norway and what you talk about ... i know a bit about norway but never heard of this negative income tax model ... i tried doing some google searches but nothing comes up ... you posted a link so i'll read ..
Here, read a little. Educate yourself. Then when you want to argue about why I think this can work in Canada and actually reduce government spending and thus reduce taxes, I'll,have an intelligent discussion. Or don't. I have made my point.
ok ... definitely don't agree with that model based on your article ... like what social services are gonna be cut? ... can you send a link showing norway's use because I'm pretty sure norway still provides a plethora of social services ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
Nice, it's amazing how secretive and non-transparent all levels of government can be. City council in Calgary has a 30 million dollar surplus (tax payers money).
Instead of saving it and lowering taxes or investing it to hopefully lower taxes (since everyone looks up to Norway), they are going to blow it however possible. It is just so infuriating. When does this foolishness end?
you may not like what he's doing with the money ... but how is he a crook?
also ... in alberta - you pay no PST ... and Calgary is on the low end of property taxes in the country ... how can anyone complain about taxes in Calgary? ... it's mind blowing that people still think we are like so heavily taxed - it's absurd ...
so, instead of celebrating a municipality that actually derived a surplus ... you let your partisanship drive your criticism ...
If the budgeting was done properly, there would be no surplus. Raising property taxes 3 to 5 percent per year when it is obviously not needed is thievery. If they needed low income housing (and I'm not opposed) it should have been in the original budget. I am tired of government agencies running around at the end of the fiscal year to blow our tax dollars, just to be sure they get the same allocation of funds the next year. They treat it like it is THEIR money when it is OURS. How is this anything but stealing?
I know Calgary has reasonable property taxes in comparison to Vancity or Torana, but it is the principle. Invest it, pay down debt, something constructive.
I'm pretty sick of this, and it happens at all levels of government. Nenshi is a liar as he ran originally on the premise he was a fiscally conservative mayor. Now tax dollars will go to help billionaires diols an arena for professional athletes. Didn't agree with it in Edmonton, don't agree with it here.
Politicians and civic officials and their feeling of entitlement remind me of rich brats like Paris Hilton.
dude ... the provincial conservatives ran surpluses all the time ... i can't believe someone actually is complaining about a surplus ... no one can budget an entity with expenditures and revenues in the billions to be spot on ...
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
The evidence is in the decision making. They had a 30 million surplus, they are blowing it as soon as they can. And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive. Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
let me know when you got something specific you want to rail about? ... arguing they had a surplus is absurd, arguing they are spending that surplus is absurd ... all governments all over the world would love a surplus ... and when you happen to live in Alberta now where the oil and gas industry has tanked - it is wise to spend some of that surplus ...
again - feel free to argue about where the actual dollars are being spent ... but railing on the fact they had a surplus and want to spend it to ease the impacts of the fall of oil just seems totally ideologically driven ... i mean - you call nenshi a crook but what has he done that's deserving of that objectively?
Absurd it isn't, because that money belongs to taxpayers Of course they "love a surplus" because they can blow all your hard earned tax dollars.
Wise to spend the surplus or invest it in our and the next generations futures by paying down debt?
The government should only spend what they have budgeted for, it is not their money. They are in place to serve us, the citizens. They work for us. If they get a surplus that money should go back to the citizens, through debt reduction or important infrastructure.
If 15 million dollars was needed for low income housing, put it in the budget. Don't make a rash decision to thrown 15 million into low income housing! You budget for it.
It amazes me that this is such a foreign concept to people. No one cares how much of our tax dollars go to just paying the interest on debt.
I
dude ... you are saying it belongs to the people ... but in your article it says they are giving back to the people through freezing transit fares and other things ... that's essentially a tax cut in some way ...
again - if you don't like how it's spent ... that's your prerogative ... just like council was split on how to spend it ... but making outlandish statements like he's a crook just makes your position weak ...
as for paying down municipal debt ... it's a balance between investing in municipal projects that will help sustain the economy and growth for your city ... do you wait until you have all the money in the bank before you buy a house? ... most people don't ... obviously, there are levels of debt that become burdensome but carrying debt in it of itself is not an issue ... the majority of us all carry debt ... I would expect in Calgary (and I don't know for sure) but that all the debt it currently carries has a payment mechanism in place for it similar to people and mortgages ...
I call it as I see it. He ran as a fiscally conservative mayor and he is anything but. His sense of entitlement is apparent as his "popularity" has risen. It is a theft of taxpayers dollars.
Here, read a little. Educate yourself. Then when you want to argue about why I think this can work in Canada and actually reduce government spending and thus reduce taxes, I'll,have an intelligent discussion. Or don't. I have made my point.
ok ... definitely don't agree with that model based on your article ... like what social services are gonna be cut? ... can you send a link showing norway's use because I'm pretty sure norway still provides a plethora of social services ...
Of course you don't. As I Stated waaaaaay back many many posts ago, Norway is changing towards this model. The point of the entire model is that SOME of the bloated social services (and the huge government beauocracy which eats up tax dollars) can be eliminated. I will say it again lol: I've said the same thing a half dozen times at least. Give them a guaranteed income. Don't make people jump through hoops to get help! First they have to go to the EI office, then go to a low income housing board, and a plethora of other government hacks who decide if you are worthy of TAXPAYERS money.
Read the other posts again to learn more. Ive explained this to you ad nauseum.
Norway, the most socialist country in all the world, is moving to negative income tax this year. Norway, #1 according to the UN in places to live in the world (Canada is 9th, right behind the US), is moving towards this progressive form of taxation.
The enemy of any democratic country is big, bloated government, the bureaucracy lives to sustain and grow the bureaucracy. This is an effective way to provide a strong social safety net, without the need for government hacks to make you feel like a piece of shit every time you need help. You get a 1100 bucks a month, no questions asked. Go make more money! We won't take any of it away. Doesn't take as many government hacks to deliver a simple, streamlined social safety net.
Best part? Those government hacks with their feeling of entitlement can try to make it in the private sector. Win win
With that, I close my case and will move onto another topic. Cheers!
I like him, wonder if he can play the political game enough. The left does not like people who are in your face and tell you how it is, unless you agree with them
Arlene Dickinson reacts to her form Dragon's Den co-star Kevin O'Leary's pledge to invest $1M in the oil sector if Alberta Premier Rachel Notley resigns
Some recent comments have been removed. Please see the Posting Guidelines and the Announcement at the top of AMT. Please discuss the topic not the people discussing the topic. Please respect topic integrity by not derailing discussions. Discuss, disagree and debate politely. It's possible to disagree with people without being abusive, and it's a requirement here. Please take your personal issues with other members off the forum. If you see a problem post, report and ignore. Please do not put your posting privileges at risk. Thank you. http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/228366/forum-posting-guidelines http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/67751/bombs-dropping-down
O'leary is a blowhard idiot. you can always tell alot about people who like him, because he believes you are right just by being the loudest and most condescending.
Post edited by HughFreakingDillon on
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
O'leary is a blowhard idiot. you can always tell alot about people who like him, because he believes you are right just by being the loudest and most condescending.
I agree he's a blowhard. I will admit that he's a pretty entertaining blowhard, and I do not at all connect him to the likes of Trump, who is on a whole other level of awfulness. But money is #1 for O'Leary by a long shot. He is VERY willing to step on the little guy if it means more money. That is actually NOT a quality that any clear-headed individual who gives even a small shit about the welfare of people should be looking for in a politician.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
O'leary is a blowhard idiot. you can always tell alot about people who like him, because he believes you are right just by being the loudest and most condescending.
I agree he's a blowhard. I will admit that he's a pretty entertaining blowhard, and I do not at all connect him to the likes of Trump, who is on a whole other level of awfulness. But money is #1 for O'Leary by a long shot. He is VERY willing to step on the little guy if it means more money. That is actually NOT a quality that any clear-headed individual who gives even a small shit about the welfare of people should be looking for in a politician.
when I used to watch Dragon's Den, I actually hated it every single time he opened his mouth. I didn't find him entertaining as the heel. I found him an asshole.
you are right, absolutely. he would be the worst politician in history.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
O'leary is a blowhard idiot. you can always tell alot about people who like him, because he believes you are right just by being the loudest and most condescending.
Some recent comments have been removed. Please see the Posting Guidelines and the Announcement at the top of AMT. Please discuss the topic not the people discussing the topic. Please respect topic integrity by not derailing discussions. Discuss, disagree and debate politely. It's possible to disagree with people without being abusive, and it's a requirement here. Please take your personal issues with other members off the forum. If you see a problem post, report and ignore. Please do not put your posting privileges at risk. Thank you. http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/228366/forum-posting-guidelines http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/67751/bombs-dropping-down
O'leary is a blowhard idiot. you can always tell alot about people who like him, because he believes you are right just by being the loudest and most condescending.
I agree he's a blowhard. I will admit that he's a pretty entertaining blowhard, and I do not at all connect him to the likes of Trump, who is on a whole other level of awfulness. But money is #1 for O'Leary by a long shot. He is VERY willing to step on the little guy if it means more money. That is actually NOT a quality that any clear-headed individual who gives even a small shit about the welfare of people should be looking for in a politician.
I respect your opinion and whether or not you believe me, money is not as important to me as Kevin. (Im happiest on a mountain and those days are free, in fact the best things in life are free).
However, we cannot live without money. Your opinion of Kevin is based solely on his television persona. I watched the OLeary Lang Exchange before I knew of Dragon's Den. I did not always whole heartedly with him (never known a single person I have).
Now, a true capitalist like OLeary does create JOBS. He cares enough about money that one of the big derivatives is driving the economy. For those of us who want a comfortable life and a good job, you need capitalists like him to take the RISK. If you take the risk, you should be awarded the riches of your gamble.
He is not the "corporate America" you hate. He is a venture capitalist with talent. My question was, does that make him a good politician? Everyone's hero Naheed Nenshi is a blowhard in my opinion, but everyone seems to love him so he is a good politician. I was not discussing his politics, but his political appeal. Are we moving to a celebrity type political environment in Canada?
Arlene Dickinson reacts to her form Dragon's Den co-star Kevin O'Leary's pledge to invest $1M in the oil sector if Alberta Premier Rachel Notley resigns
I didn't watch this, but I can assume she was not in favour
I actually thought it was a rather silly comment by OLeary. I believe in democracy and the majority chose Notley's NDP. Fair enough. It is not good for democracy to have unstable government. It is not good for investment.
Besides, a 1 million dollar investment in the oil sector is a drop in the bucket. I earned almost that in my four best years combined in Fort McMurray as a contract safety advisor making $1000 a day on a 10 and 4 shift. Plus they paid for lodging, flights, and a limo ride to and from the airport.
It's not Notley's fault the economy is floundering, this was bound to happen. Energy based economies are always boom-bust. I grew up in coal and copper mining towns. You just have to put a little in the kitty for the rainy days
Arlene Dickinson reacts to her form Dragon's Den co-star Kevin O'Leary's pledge to invest $1M in the oil sector if Alberta Premier Rachel Notley resigns
I didn't watch this, but I can assume she was not in favour
I actually thought it was a rather silly comment by OLeary. I believe in democracy and the majority chose Notley's NDP. Fair enough. It is not good for democracy to have unstable government. It is not good for investment.
Besides, a 1 million dollar investment in the oil sector is a drop in the bucket. I earned almost that in my four best years combined in Fort McMurray as a contract safety advisor making $1000 a day on a 10 and 4 shift. Plus they paid for lodging, flights, and a limo ride to and from the airport.
It's not Notley's fault the economy is floundering, this was bound to happen. Energy based economies are always boom-bust. I grew up in coal and copper mining towns. You just have to put a little in the kitty for the rainy days
I agree with everything you have said here. I wish more people would be able to come to this conclusion here in Alberta.
Blaming the current government for the downturn in oil and the resulting consequences to our economy is, to put it plainly, dumb. But we all know there is no shortage of dumb people to go around.
^^^^^ Having said that, this is not the time for a royalty review. The government has wasted significant time and economic resources towards this endeavour, and dollars to doughnuts the result of this investigation will be to "stay the course". They even spent money building a website to promote the royalty review! I wonder who scored that contract? Interestingly, 770 had a story this week that non-Union government employees are receiving wage cuts, while union members are being put on a "salary freeze". This seems a little unfair, don't you think?
I cannot blame the NDP for the downturn, but I am watching closely to see what they do to right the ship. This carbon-tax is plain theft, and I do not agree with it.
Comments
and your argument about governments spending money year end to gain allocation for next year is just plain absurd ... this is not the accounting department at some company making sure they don't get their budget cut ... municipal revenues are predicated on a variety of streams that isn't going to change whether they spend the money or not at the end of the year ...
seriously, if you don't like how the money is spent ... argue that ... but your points are simply not valid re: taxation and end of year spending ...
And if you don't think government agencies do this, you sir, are very naive.
Has nothing to do with which government did it, I voted for the WildRose Alliance since the end of the Klein years because the provincial PC's blew money like drunken sailors.
I want you to research (for the fifth time I will mention it) what Norway is doing in regards to negative income tax. It is something to really look at.
Every adult receives 1100 a month, no questions asked. No EI, welfare, affordable housing, etc.
If you make more money, you don't lose the 1100.
It encourages people to work, to find a career. They won't take away the 1100 until you reach a certain level of income, unlike EI or welfare.
The bonus! The 140 Billion WASTED in administering those programs, eaten away by government beaurocrats , is saved!. Taxes could be reduced and the negative connotations of social services are gone. No begging the government for EI benefits, welfare, or low income housing.
NOW, I hope you two can finally realize I said NOTHING about privatization. I'm starting to wonder if I am talking a foreign language to you. Oh right, I'm talking slight right ideology, makes no sense because you were never taught it, and never attempt to learn.
So to answer all of your questions, I want the government to administer the services more efficiently, I believe this may be an example of an efficient model.
I never said I wanted anything privatized *sigh*. You ASSUMED that's what I meant simply because I'm "conservative". See how prejudiced that is? I mentioned the Norwegian model five times but instead of researching what I was talking about, you jump all over it. Norway is about as socialist as it gets
again - feel free to argue about where the actual dollars are being spent ... but railing on the fact they had a surplus and want to spend it to ease the impacts of the fall of oil just seems totally ideologically driven ... i mean - you call nenshi a crook but what has he done that's deserving of that objectively?
first of all - go back to this discussion ... you said that governments are FUNDAMENTALLY the least efficient way of delivering services ... so, if you say you don't support privatization ... I asked if you don't want to give the gov't your money and you don't think they deliver services then your contradicting yourself somewhat by saying you want gov'ts to deliver efficient services ...
we all want gov'ts to deliver efficient services but yet you rail on taxation daily ... you constantly spew myths like we are over-taxed ... when in fact we aren't ... especially if you live in alberta ...
nothing you say is presented in a sound argument ...
as for norway - i honestly can't believe you are using Norway as an example because it is arguably one of the most socialist countries in the world ... our taxation levels don't even come close to what they are in Norway and plus they nationalized their oil there ... basically all the profits that we let oil companies make go to the people of Norway ... so, really, any program they can put forth is affordable because they have the money ...
Of course they "love a surplus" because they can blow all your hard earned tax dollars.
Wise to spend the surplus or invest it in our and the next generations futures by paying down debt?
The government should only spend what they have budgeted for, it is not their money. They are in place to serve us, the citizens. They work for us. If they get a surplus that money should go back to the citizens, through debt reduction or important infrastructure.
If 15 million dollars was needed for low income housing, put it in the budget. Don't make a rash decision to thrown 15 million into low income housing! You budget for it.
It amazes me that this is such a foreign concept to people. No one cares how much of our tax dollars go to just paying the interest on debt.
I
- governments as they are currently run are inefficient at delivering services
- I never said I didn't want to give the government my money, :lol. There you are again making stuff up. I want the government to deliver services more efficiently. This can be done. We need government, but not one with a sense of entitlement to my hard earned money.
- I rail on OVER-Taxation. And we are over taxed, period. We have over 60 kinds of taxes and fees off the top of my head, plus income tax. If you don't think we are over-taxed that is your opinion, one I (and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation who represents our interests) do not share.
- my argument is sound, you continue to misconstrue my statements and continually assume I want privatization or "no government" which is absurd. You have yet to find a way to convince me the government must be run the way it is.
- "I can't believe you used Norway as an example" is exactly the kind of politically prejudiced comment I expected
Here, read a little. Educate yourself. Then when you want to argue about why I think this can work in Canada and actually reduce government spending and thus reduce taxes, I'll,have an intelligent discussion.
Or don't. I have made my point.
again - if you don't like how it's spent ... that's your prerogative ... just like council was split on how to spend it ... but making outlandish statements like he's a crook just makes your position weak ...
as for paying down municipal debt ... it's a balance between investing in municipal projects that will help sustain the economy and growth for your city ... do you wait until you have all the money in the bank before you buy a house? ... most people don't ... obviously, there are levels of debt that become burdensome but carrying debt in it of itself is not an issue ... the majority of us all carry debt ... I would expect in Calgary (and I don't know for sure) but that all the debt it currently carries has a payment mechanism in place for it similar to people and mortgages ...
haha ... obviously the canadian taxpayers federation thinks we're over-taxed ... i'm not sure how anyone can really think that especially living in alberta ...
you are right i haven't read about norway and what you talk about ... i know a bit about norway but never heard of this negative income tax model ... i tried doing some google searches but nothing comes up ... you posted a link so i'll read ..
As I Stated waaaaaay back many many posts ago, Norway is changing towards this model.
The point of the entire model is that SOME of the bloated social services (and the huge government beauocracy which eats up tax dollars) can be eliminated.
I will say it again lol: I've said the same thing a half dozen times at least.
Give them a guaranteed income. Don't make people jump through hoops to get help! First they have to go to the EI office, then go to a low income housing board, and a plethora of other government hacks who decide if you are worthy of TAXPAYERS money.
Read the other posts again to learn more. Ive explained this to you ad nauseum.
Norway, the most socialist country in all the world, is moving to negative income tax this year. Norway, #1 according to the UN in places to live in the world (Canada is 9th, right behind the US), is moving towards this progressive form of taxation.
The enemy of any democratic country is big, bloated government, the bureaucracy lives to sustain and grow the bureaucracy.
This is an effective way to provide a strong social safety net, without the need for government hacks to make you feel like a piece of shit every time you need help. You get a 1100 bucks a month, no questions asked. Go make more money! We won't take any of it away.
Doesn't take as many government hacks to deliver a simple, streamlined social safety net.
Best part? Those government hacks with their feeling of entitlement can try to make it in the private sector. Win win
With that, I close my case and will move onto another topic. Cheers!
Merry access to all. Ho Ho Ho
if only that would happen.
^^^^^^
Ain't that the truth my friend. Dignity for everyone. Imagine what a better world it would be.
Merry Christmas!
Canadian politics just may get a little more interesting
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/am-not-donald-trump-says-brash-oleary-mulling-202840133.html
I like him, wonder if he can play the political game enough. The left does not like people who are in your face and tell you how it is, unless you agree with them
Arlene Dickinson reacts to her form Dragon's Den co-star Kevin O'Leary's pledge to invest $1M in the oil sector if Alberta Premier Rachel Notley resigns
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/dueling-dragons-dickinson-on-o-leary-s-calls-for-notley-to-resign-1.3403024
Thank you.
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/228366/forum-posting-guidelines
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/67751/bombs-dropping-down
-EV 8/14/93
you are right, absolutely. he would be the worst politician in history.
-EV 8/14/93
However, we cannot live without money. Your opinion of Kevin is based solely on his television persona. I watched the OLeary Lang Exchange before I knew of Dragon's Den. I did not always whole heartedly with him (never known a single person I have).
Now, a true capitalist like OLeary does create JOBS. He cares enough about money that one of the big derivatives is driving the economy. For those of us who want a comfortable life and a good job, you need capitalists like him to take the RISK. If you take the risk, you should be awarded the riches of your gamble.
He is not the "corporate America" you hate. He is a venture capitalist with talent. My question was, does that make him a good politician? Everyone's hero Naheed Nenshi is a blowhard in my opinion, but everyone seems to love him so he is a good politician.
I was not discussing his politics, but his political appeal. Are we moving to a celebrity type political environment in Canada?
I actually thought it was a rather silly comment by OLeary. I believe in democracy and the majority chose Notley's NDP. Fair enough. It is not good for democracy to have unstable government. It is not good for investment.
Besides, a 1 million dollar investment in the oil sector is a drop in the bucket. I earned almost that in my four best years combined in Fort McMurray as a contract safety advisor making $1000 a day on a 10 and 4 shift. Plus they paid for lodging, flights, and a limo ride to and from the airport.
It's not Notley's fault the economy is floundering, this was bound to happen. Energy based economies are always boom-bust. I grew up in coal and copper mining towns. You just have to put a little in the kitty for the rainy days
Blaming the current government for the downturn in oil and the resulting consequences to our economy is, to put it plainly, dumb. But we all know there is no shortage of dumb people to go around.
Having said that, this is not the time for a royalty review. The government has wasted significant time and economic resources towards this endeavour, and dollars to doughnuts the result of this investigation will be to "stay the course".
They even spent money building a website to promote the royalty review! I wonder who scored that contract?
Interestingly, 770 had a story this week that non-Union government employees are receiving wage cuts, while union members are being put on a "salary freeze". This seems a little unfair, don't you think?
I cannot blame the NDP for the downturn, but I am watching closely to see what they do to right the ship. This carbon-tax is plain theft, and I do not agree with it.
-EV 8/14/93