Canada isn't looking too hot these days...
- Thread starter tvstrip
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canada discussion
It is sad and disgraceful what happened in Canada past and hopefully the government can continue to explore solutions to promote truth and reconciliation with native people - doing so will also help relations with all Canadians whether minority or not.
Governments do bad things, that is undeniable no matter what government all over the world, governments are no different than corporations and big companies - they inheret the wrongs of those in charge before them, so they are responsible to right those wrongs as well.
America, China, Russia, Germany, France, England, there is no country that hasn't ******** it's citizens before or now - some are better some are worse, but it all starts with the government are any that support the government thinking that they know better than those they govern. The lesson must be that government isn't always right now or in the past or in the future, and that less government interference in our lives is always better.
Anyways, in Canada at least, I can think of anyone else but Trudeau who is best suited to help the healing process along - he was the only leader of a country that actually was brave enough to march in black lives matter movement.
Governments do bad things, that is undeniable no matter what government all over the world, governments are no different than corporations and big companies - they inheret the wrongs of those in charge before them, so they are responsible to right those wrongs as well.
America, China, Russia, Germany, France, England, there is no country that hasn't ******** it's citizens before or now - some are better some are worse, but it all starts with the government are any that support the government thinking that they know better than those they govern. The lesson must be that government isn't always right now or in the past or in the future, and that less government interference in our lives is always better.
Anyways, in Canada at least, I can think of anyone else but Trudeau who is best suited to help the healing process along - he was the only leader of a country that actually was brave enough to march in black lives matter movement.
@VillellaMcMeans
You're right, there is not a country on this planet that hasn't persecuted a segment of its own citizens, many still do so today (some more openly than others).
The government tried with the truth & reconciliation commission, but that clearly didn't work. So I would ask: What exactly is the solution? If you were PM and could pass anything you wanted, what would you do fix the problem?
You're right, there is not a country on this planet that hasn't persecuted a segment of its own citizens, many still do so today (some more openly than others).
The government tried with the truth & reconciliation commission, but that clearly didn't work. So I would ask: What exactly is the solution? If you were PM and could pass anything you wanted, what would you do fix the problem?
This is very hard to answer... I will say though that the efforts by Trudeau in all his time in power are better than anything any past Canadian government has done in the past - before Trudeau past Canadian governments were ignoring all the issues regarding the first Nations.
While the Truth and Reconciliation effort have not done enough, it is better than what was being done before Trudeau was in power - so I am hopeful that Trudeau will continue to do more for this issue.
If I was in power though I would definitely give the reserves more autonomy from the government...will have to give this more thought but generally more autonomy.
If I was in power I would repeal income tax, totally declare that from now the government will not tax any income whatsoever.
Same for property taxes, eliminate it totally.
Then, I would make all ***** legal just like weed is legal here in Canada, and also create government companies to sell all ***** just the same as the Canadian government controls how weed is sold now in Canada - the is to ensure that the Canadian government can profit from those sales and so the government can ensure the affordability of those ***** to the public.
So to summarize, I would ensure a government monopoly on ***** and health care, then I would ensure a government monopoly on pharmaceuticals too maintained the same way weed is controlled in Canada.
Now that health care, *****, and pharmaceuticals are affordable and widely available - I would make safe ********* and safe **** use sites just as widely available.
I would allow each reserve to operate as a separate country, and negotiate with our government each as a seperate country too.
I would make all government amenities available nearby to all reserves, of that was what the reverse want.
As for Truth and Reconciliation, I would start open and transparent investigations into these issues, meaning that the results of the investigation are open to the public to see what the investigators have discovered right away - instead of waiting till investigations are closed before letting public know what happened.
Also, in the interests of fact finding, I would declare that the will be no criminal prosecutions, doing so will ensure those who have information or know of information that could help will not be prosecuted against - that way the guilty have no reason to hide, they will not be punished by the government for revealing what they know.
That much I can think of to start, doing all those things will promote awareness and public interest into what actually happened. The gradual giving of more autonomy to reserves will allow them to eventually live their lives as closely to how their culture was before Western interferences.
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
If you eliminate income and property taxes, how do you pay for a functioning government? Well, other than profiting off selling ***** to citizens. I can see the slogans now:
- "Affordable Heroin for All",
- "*******! She don't lie."
- "Meth. We're on it." (kudos to South Dakota for that one)
Without taxes, what amenities would be available? Fuck your Old Age Pension, have some smack.
Theopolis Q. Hossenffer
I lost my title in the Stock Market Crash.
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
Please don’t make me dust off my tariff and gold standard arguments. You know what the US didn’t have in the 19th Century? Social Security.
Read about Chet Arthur’s days at the Port of NY. Great profit in collecting taxes and doling out jobs.
First of all, when you mock something at least make it look like you're actually knowledgable about it.
Second, explain what exactly is wrong with affordable heroin for all? Or ******* or meth for that matter? You should stop sneering down from your ivory tower and actually think about what the difference is between giant pharmaceuticals selling ***** and criminals selling *****? One has a license from the government one doesn't.
Third, you cry about what amenities would be available, but you want to ***** or shame others into pitching in for the greater good - sneering people on their high horses like you always seem to either ***** or shame others into doing what you want.
Lastly, to answer your question about how to pay for a functioning government, simply take the amount lost from eliminating income/property tax then add in any new ways to generate revenue from new government enterprises also find savings from ending the war on ***** as well as having less government - there you go, it's called balancing budgets by reducing spending, everyone is taught to do that to survive well why can't governments do the same?
Why don't you dust off some real rational instead of just asking rhetorical questions?
You know what 19th century didn't have either? Alot of things including no war on *****, no nsa, no fbi, no trillions of dollars of government spending etc.
Instead of telling people to go read something, why don't you try explaining why you think you're right?
You say yourself great profit in collecting taxes, you at least agree that being the government is the best racket known of this far in history, why should government spending not be reduced?
Theopolis Q. Hossenffer
I lost my title in the Stock Market Crash.
Even if Government spending is not reduced it could be redirected. Do we really expect WWIII with China or Russia? I support the military but wonder about the political spending associated with it. Keeping jobs in representative's districts often seem to be the deciding factor above needs. Health care, social assistance for those who need it. All could be prioritized if we had the money ****** on needless wars(See Vietnam and Afghanistan in the history pages) and enriching those who already have more than they can spend. The game of life for the wealthy. I got more than you na na na. And regarding *****, sure in a relational society you would do like *****. Make it legal and either sell it in the government stores or licensed dealer. Treatment for those who want help, punishment for those who hurt others while on them. Like Weed is now in most places. Why not you ask, Why Money of course. If is more beneficial to the units of government to continue to fight a war that is unwinnable than to admit failure. Not to mention the Political issue of keeping the populace revved up about it.
An aside to gmase, if you give up all those Government "extras" maybe we could exist on a smaller intake of taxes. If The Donald and his ilk really wanted to make something great other than themselves maybe they could eliminate all those extras that keep people alive when wages are low and cost high. Just say'n
An aside to gmase, if you give up all those Government "extras" maybe we could exist on a smaller intake of taxes. If The Donald and his ilk really wanted to make something great other than themselves maybe they could eliminate all those extras that keep people alive when wages are low and cost high. Just say'n
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
@bubb - great post, but please consider:
National defense is roughly 11% of the federal budget. Income security = 19%, social security = 17%, medicare = 12%, health care services = 11%, commerce and housing credit = 9%. Those services account for roughly two-thirds of the spending. That doesn't include debt, education, training, veteran benefits - another 12%.
Which of those would you consider 'extras' and ripe for cutting?
Mr. McMeans wants to eliminate income and property taxes. From a purely selfish standpoint, eliminating income and property taxes would save me a nice chunk of change. Just when I start thinking taxes are fine and can help other people with healthcare, education, etc., I get bashed for such a position.
Maybe I need to return to my more conservative vision of the world. Mr. McMeans would be more appreciative of it.@bubb - great post, but please consider:
National defense is roughly 11% of the federal budget. Income security = 19%, social security = 17%, medicare = 12%, health care services = 11%, commerce and housing credit = 9%. Those services account for roughly two-thirds of the spending. That doesn't include debt, education, training, veteran benefits - another 12%.
Which of those would you consider 'extras' and ripe for cutting?
Mr. McMeans wants to eliminate income and property taxes. From a purely selfish standpoint, eliminating income and property taxes would save me a nice chunk of change. Just when I start thinking taxes are fine and can help other people with healthcare, education, etc., I get bashed for such a position.
Less of your sarcasm and scoffing at others will be good enough.
So consider this, what percent is income/property taxes in a countries budget? It is 80%, 60%, 70%? Whatever it is it can be gradually reduced and phased out. For example, if new revenues are 10% phase out 10% from income/property taxes, and keep going until it completely eliminated.
That's just me revenue helping to phase out taxes, defunding will reduce taxes too as you already know. So, just pick something to defund, Biden administration already eliminated federal executions - the costs savings the will be from not having to fight court battles over this issue anymore, not alot in the big picture but tens of millions in layers fees and court costs saved by not tying up court rooms and judges etc.
Pick something else to defund, like the police for example? Billions of dollars can be saved there just by taking away their tazers and pepper spray and other militarized items etc.
How about repealing some dumb laws and bylaws? Like seat belt laws or helmet laws or other laws that are useless. The money saved by freeing up court finds and judges and prosecutors are some millions.
No point in getting into an accounting debate over numbers, the government is a business run just like any other small business or corporation, just generate revenue somewhere else and phase defund out what is not wanted.
Simple.
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
Job and life delayed my response.
“Sneering down from an ivory tower” I like that and will use it as my title for a little bit. Thank you.
I would posit that I am very knowledgeable about the subject, despite your interpretation. In fact, one could suggest mocking doesn’t necessarily require such effort.
Please point out where I said there was a problem with heroin for all. A government profiting off the sale is my issue. Using profits from these transactions to fund government would not appear to be prudent.
What is the difference between giant pharma and street criminals? From a business standpoint there is no difference – sell more, make more. We are all probably familiar with the Sackler ******, Purdue Pharma, and Oxycontin. Or, the insulin issues created by Big Pharma. Stepping back and actually thinking about it: Big Pharma also sells pharmaceuticals which help with ***** pressure, cholesterol, pain relief, cancer. Your local corner pusher does not usually deal in those. Those medicines have extended lives and improved the quality of life for millions. That is one huge difference.
I am not certain how to take your third point. You are saying I am shaming or ******* others into ‘pitching in for the greater good’.
Income taxes account for roughly half of revenue in Canada and slightly below in the US. Canada’s defence budget is 7% of spending. Eliminating it won’t save very much. Governments have a difficult time cutting spending because citizens like their own special perks (‘extras’?). The top 3 in Canada are Old Age Security, Health Transfer, and Fiscal Equalization. Cut those constituents off and see what happens.
There are two ways to balance a budget – increase revenues or reduce spending. I would suggest a combination of both would be practical. Increase corporate taxes and implement a more progressive (i.e., higher rates for larger incomes, lower rates for smaller incomes) individual tax code.
Competing with religion, government is either the first- or second-best scheme for generating income.
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
You call *************** officers 'pigs' and lecture me on scoffing and sneering? Give me a break.
It is not as simple as you suggest. Governments are trillion-dollar enterprises. Seat-belt or helmet laws have little impact to the court system. In fact, they probably save money overall by reducing injuries and premature deaths. Federal executions don't tie up that much money either. Major reform is needed.
Cutting military spending makes sense. Stopping needless wars and skirmishes would be great.
Theopolis Q. Hossenffer
I lost my title in the Stock Market Crash.
gmase I think you misunderstand me. I don't have a problem with a Sweden style society. As Ben Franklin has been purported to have said" We must all hang together for if we don't we shall surely hang separately". I don't mean communism whatever that really is as we surely don't have any on this planet. After protecting their populace I feel that a governments main duty is to care for their citizens. The truth as I see it is that most or at least many Americans want stuff like Sweden has(read the polls) they just don't want to pay for it. ******** are taught to share but when most become adults its Mine, Mine, Mine and to hell with you. Or at least the Hell with your kind. As we have said here before Capitalism works so well because it is based on a primary Human trait. Greed. And greed evolved because it was necessary for individuals and small groups to accumulate as much stuff as possible to survive. My views on a lot of things have changed as I have gotten ancient. I have to make myself review my positions on a lot of things as it is easier to find an opinion and stick with it. I find it strange that although most Americans have no problem with Bezos and his ilk gathering a vast majority of the worlds wealth, it ***** them to share a little bit or pay a little more to help other just like them. And our "Leaders" often use that very thing to keep the divisions going. I have rambled on long enough. See what happens when you get me started?@bubb - great post, but please consider:
National defense is roughly 11% of the federal budget. Income security = 19%, social security = 17%, medicare = 12%, health care services = 11%, commerce and housing credit = 9%. Those services account for roughly two-thirds of the spending. That doesn't include debt, education, training, veteran benefits - another 12%.
Which of those would you consider 'extras' and ripe for cutting?
Mr. McMeans wants to eliminate income and property taxes. From a purely selfish standpoint, eliminating income and property taxes would save me a nice chunk of change. Just when I start thinking taxes are fine and can help other people with healthcare, education, etc., I get bashed for such a position.
"Governments have a difficult time cutting spending because citizens like their own special perks (‘extras’?). The top 3 in Canada are Old Age Security, Health Transfer, and Fiscal Equalization. Cut those constituents off and see what happens." gmase
And while I am going I would love to hear the old white Trumpistas howl if their Medicare and Social Security were taken away. Talk about your Biblical Great Wailing and Gnashing of Teeth.
Last edited:
gmase
Nattering Nabob of Negativism
I get you and agree with you. We occupy the same centerish space and we both have changed positions over the past years.
(PS - I am not sneering at you by the way.)
Theopolis Q. Hossenffer
I lost my title in the Stock Market Crash.
"(PS - I am not sneering at you by the way.)" I have been sneered at by the Best! And that is the least of what they did. My skin is now about a foot thick. Insults bounce off.
Oh. Job and life delayed your response. Good thing you pointed that out in your post because the whole world just waiting for you to reply. Do you posit that you only one with a job and a life to delay your replies?
I see you haven't replied to my posts that I quoted you in @Straight Shooter and @Luxman threads either last few weeks, how important your job and life must be.
I would posit as you posit that you like to point on how knowledgable you are on any subject and I also posit that your knowledge is so great that one such as yourself does not necessarily require much effort to mock others.
What an interesting change of tone from you. You want me to please point out where you said there was a problem with heroin for all.
Well, ok. Here is your quote below:
Oh. I see. You didn't say there was a problem. You were only mocking and scoffing at my ideas from your ivory tower. No sarcasm there, you're only wondering out loud with great concern that without taxes there'd be nothing left for you - whoops, not just you but all the poor and needy, what a caring soul you are!
So, according to your quote above, governments and **** companies like pharmaceuticals do so much good with their profits that the harm they cause is acceptable to you. But the local street pusher doesn't do enough good for you to accept them - well maybe if they donate some of their proceeds to the needy, would that be enough for you and the others up the your ivory tower to accept? Ever thought that the money they make from selling ***** might be feeding their needy families already?
Or how about before the kind and generous government legalized weed, many cancer patients had no access to it but from your local street pusher? So back then the local street pusher providing the weed that cancer patients need is doing enough good for you to accept. How kind of you all in your ivory towers to render kind judgements upon others. Is this the huge difference you speak of in your quote above? Maybe the government should criminalize Tylenol, then when it's so rare that the street price is so expensive that your street pushers can profit, they will provide it to people who need it - and that will be such a good deed you and those in the ivory towers will accept them.
You seem to agree with me that the are two ways to balance a budget - increase revenue or cut spending.
Well what the problem? You say governments deal with trillion dollar budgets, doesn't any other company deal with budgets? It's just numbers, there's nothing to be afraid of, whether the number are big or small math is to math. Yet you warn in your quote - cut those constituents off and see what happens!
Will the world end? There was a time without income tax only 100 odd years ago in america before world war 1, seemed people were living fine then.
So you say half a countries revenue is from income/property tax, so what your point? You think it's impossible to phase out? Well why not try before scoffing at the idea.
When prohibitions against *******/******** existed people that provided those things made profits, now that governments have taken over those businesses did they use the new revenue to decrease income/property taxes from 50% of the countries revenue to 49.99% or whatever number you think it's worth? Nope, because people like you scoff at the idea of reducing taxes, you yourself said in your quote above - without taxes what amenities will be available? Fuck pension, have some more smack.
Why not consider ideas instead of mocking them? Are you afraid no one will pay their taxes and you'll have less amenities? That is what I mean by shaming others to pay taxes, the ******* is when people like you applaud people going to jail for not paying taxes - going to jail is government using ***** to make people pay taxes.
So to summarize, all I'm saying is find new revenues to phase out income/property taxes over time.
I don't have the perfect answer on how to find new revenue, I don't work for the government so it's not my job - so you don't have to use sarcasm when I suggest ways to consider on how to find new revenues.
The bottom line is that any company big or small can diversify their revenue streams and reduce spending too, the governments of the world are no different.
Even Alberta and Texas can diversify away from oil, it just takes time and effort.
So, it is possible for governments to diversify their revenues away from taxes, it takes reimagining - just like defunding police takes reimagining.
You have a problem with me calling police pigs? Give you a break?
Explain why I shouldn't call the bad ones pigs?
I already told you in the other threads that I respect good cops, but they are rare - but the majority are pigs like the pig that ****** George Floyd, 4 out of 4 pigs that day did not save George Floyd, what did that tell you about the majority?
Also explain why do you care if I call them pigs? Are they so sacred to you that any criticism of then offend you?
Similar threads
- Locked
