05.05.2015 11:30 AM

Their tax cut will always be bigger than our tax cut

…not that anyone ever listens to me about these things. 



  1. cynical says:

    Count me a skeptic. Or a cynic.
    And sign me up for taxes that actually support services appropriate to a civilized country.
    This is a race to the bottom.
    And you are right. With Liberals its an election promise. With the CPC its strangling the beast of big government. Do it long enough and we can be just like the US.

  2. Matt says:

    Really have to question Trudeau’s math.

    He says his tax increase on those making over $200,000 will be “revenue neutral” with his tax breaks to the “middle class” between $44,000 and $89,401. He say it will cost $3 billion.

    According to Revenue Canada, there are just under 313,000 Canadians making over $200,000. No way in hell he can get $3 billion out of 313,000 Canadians to pay for the reduction on the “middle class”.

    Plus, on his child care announcement, he’s already $2 billion in the hole right out of the gate. CPC plan will cost $2 billion while Trudeau’s will cost $4 billion. And he has yet to announce how he will make up the gap.

    i mean really. It’s been two years. You’d have thought they would have the plan fully costed before announcing it.

    • Matt says:

      Not to mention any “savings” created by Trudeau’s plans will be wiped out 2 or 3 times over when he introduces his carbon tax and the price of everything goes up.

    • edward nuff says:

      who knew math could be so difficult.

  3. Russ says:

    Are Tax Cuts the real issue ?? I think most people realize taxes are about as low as they can go without really cutting into government services. In the end, it will be a referendum on a tired and slightly incompetent government with the beginnings of a whiff of sleaze.

  4. Matt says:

    Quick math on a 2 income family with no kids shows they’re better of with income splitting.

    One person earning $45000, tha spouse earning 50000.

    Trudeau’s 1.5% Tax reduction results in maximum benefit of $1500.

    CPC income splitting has maximum benefit of $2000.

    • Matt says:

      Should read $55000

      • Matt says:

        Numbers are wrong.

        If the first $44700 and under is taxed at 15%, and the next $44701 to $88401 is taxed at the reduced 20.5%, then the savings in the above example are tiny under Trudeau’s plan compared to the CPC’s income splitting.

        • VC says:

          “I know that math is difficult” – a prominent conservative.

        • VC says:

          Also, it should be noted that, quite apart from your difficulties with basic arithmetic and in addition to your fictitious example constructed in an attempt to discredit Trudeau’s tax measure (which can easily be countered with an equally fictitious example of selective incomes that shows a couple that gains more under Trudeau’s plan than under Harper’s ‘income splitting’), a couple with “no kids” – as is the case in your example – is not eligible for income splitting. Income splitting is only available to spouses with children under the age of 18.

          Thus, even if we entertain your example, a “2 income family with no kids,” then they are decidedly better off with Trudeau’s scheme.

          You would do well to familiarize yourself with your own CPC plan before criticizing others.

    • doconnor says:

      If you have no kids, you can’t do income splitting.

  5. P Brennan says:

    how about things like less government intervention in our lives , dropping tax rates for sure and dumping all these tax credit programs that AG mentions in his latest report

    The other thing I dont get is why there are so many costly to administer programs to get money to the less advantaged – can these not be wrapped up into one…

    Then there is healthcare ..I know a provincial responsibility but how many buildings, computers , staff in this country are tied up in administration , funding formulas, computer systems, legal issues – go no where near a patient

    There seems to be lots of stuff that can be done…

  6. Liam Young says:

    Canadian fiscal policy under the Cons and Liberals: death by a thousand (tax) cuts.
    We need to stop already.

  7. Danny Aldham says:

    When I saw the last Liberal ad slagging the Conservatives for using taxpayer dollars for running government ads I thought something similar.
    This ad played into the Conservatives mantra that government has too much money, there is tons of waste, and taxpayers should cut/gut more government spending and get the money back.

    The Cons like cutting government spending and taxes. Going down that road is similar to a Land war in Asia.
    The Liberals need to offer a real alternative. And this is hard. They need to be the party saying that some government services are good. We need a military, a legal and court system, education, health care, pensions, environmental protection, support for less privileged, roads, transit, water and sewers, garbage pickup, police and fire. Someone needs to make that case that government has an important role in our society & economy. And those services mean that we all need to pay our fare share of the bill, via taxes. That is what I would like to see the Liberals articulate. I know it is tough.

    • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

      Am I the only one that finds it strange to see the Liberal ad on Hockey night that complains about Conservative ad on Hockey night?

  8. MississaugaPeter says:

    You are right.

    But even though your opinion does matter to us it does not not matter to them. They are always right. Hopefully right out the door.

    You previously stated that there was no way that Trudeau would apologize to the over 50 years of age Liberals, but do you think he would/should change the clowns running the bigtop right now, as a sign of reparation?

    • Warren says:

      Nope. Pride goeth before the fall, etc.

      • Rotten Ronnie says:

        “Pride goeth before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs, 16:18)

        Somehow far more fitting than the general misquote for the haughty dauphin leading the LPC over the precipice….

    • DonW says:

      Agreed, Mississauga Peter. After the 2011 election, some wag said that the real problem with the 34 seat humiliation for the LPC was that it was not total annihilation. If they had been reduced to 2 seats, then a complete reinvention would have been unavoidable, like the folks on the other side of the house. But 34 seats gave just enough hope to the Westmount-Rosedale Liberal elites that the Natural Governing Party just needed to play the same game with a different, shiny-new face on the posters. So here we are, pedal to the metal, heading towards another Iggy-style pile up. Still a lot of pride to be shed before the inevitable fall. Reinvention of the party must begin with humility. To say nothing of an honest nomination process. (Honest does not equal open)

  9. Mark says:

    Average Canadian hears that Conservatives are proposing some kind of tax cuts. And then that the Liberals are proposing some kind of tax cuts. Gets mixed up about which plan involves what.
    If “tax cuts” are indeed that person’s ballot question, chances are they will go with the Cons, because their brand is more identified with tax cuts and they are perceived to be more likely to follow through on tax cuts.

    At best this may take a bit of the wind out of the Conservative’s sails in their position as the sole tax-cutters. And the water will get muddied about which tax-cut plan is better for who, and how. But then people will start getting those “conservative” cheques in the mail this summer, and the tax-cut issue will remain in the win column for the Cons.

    All I can say is that I hope Trudeau et al have something a bit more visionary and inspiring in the rest of the economic platform.

  10. Doris says:

    Doesn’t make a damn bit of difference Harper’s budget is shite and is based on trickery:
    3Bn sale of GM shares
    3Bn raid on the EI fund
    3Bn taken out of the PSAC sick leave
    2 Bn out of the contingency

    11Bn in the hole from actual expenses so far and minus the 1.5Bn ‘surplus’ any party winning the next election starts off in deficit by 9.5Bn. So unless all these proposals actually are based on a deficit or program replacement they are all bloody liars.

  11. Ted H says:

    Taxes have been a political football for Conservatives, Republicans, Liberals and Democrats for so long now that the United States is actually taking in less revenue than it did in 1954. The corporatocracy who really runs both Canada and the US just doesn’t want to pay it’s fair share, actually any share. F**k business, it’s not as important as they like to think. As the great American supreme court judge Oliver Wendell Holmes JR. said, ” Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society”. Ever notice how civilization is on the decline.

  12. Matt from Ottawa says:

    Some of the tax cuts will be attractive to the electorate at face value, that is until they really compare both. Personally speaking, regardless of how much someone makes, I dont agree with “taxing the 1%” which seems like a nice catch phrase to piggy back on the US, except our 1% is different. 200K is comfortable, but does not make you rich by any means, and it varies geographically ie) 200K in Brockville is much different than 200K in Toronto. To be honest I find this new tax bracket is nothing but something to appease those with class envy and all it will lead to is less productivity, stifle innovation and create mediocrity. Also, I know many will disagree, but I think the increase to OAS is needed. Many other countries are doing this and the fact that we are living much longer now than when it was created, changes need to be made to keep it sustainable.

    What bothers me is JT is looking for tons of praise for this. I get it, politics is all about grandstanding, but at the same point he reminds me of a kid who wants a gold star for doing his homework…. you know, doing what they are supposed to do. Im happy he finally has some substance (whether you agree with his plan or not) He still has to answer for the much more difficult issues ie) ISIS, C51, Ukraine, provincial issues, etc.

    Just my 2 cents

  13. Corey says:

    It’s not about whose tax cuts are better. Trudeau’s policy is about evening out the field on the fiscal front so that the Liberals can winner the bigger war. There will be more policy announcements to come.

  14. Joe says:

    From my perspective what is instructive is the apparent motive behind the tax cuts. It would seem PM Harper thinks he has reduced the size and burden of government sufficiently to stop taking in as much tax payers money. M Trudeau on the other hand seems to have no motive other than keep his base from eroding and so shouts, “Me too!” Whether I agree with it or not it seems that PM Harper is acting according to his philosophy while M Trudeau is acting like a substitute drama teacher who is bereft of ideas, philosophy or plan.

  15. Jim Goss says:

    Trudeau’s first plank is simply excellent and damn near bullet proof. When the right-wing-all-the-time National Post runs two positive articles about Trudeau, it does raise both of my eyebrows:



    Geez, even the Toronto Sun editorial stumbled to find a problem with it. All they surmised is that they need to see more. That’s damn near praise coming from the Tory Sun……er Toronto Sun.

    • Matt says:

      Michael den Tandt is Trudeau’s #1 fanboy. Don’t put too much stock in anything he says.

      Keely McParland wrote a piece warning Trudeau risks alienating older Canadians, you know those people who actually vote with ttaking away the increase to the TFSA.

      He also points out Trudeau has indicated he wants to work with the provinces to “top up” CPP payments and heavily invest in country wide infrastructure projects.

      Where exactly will that money come from given he’s already $2 billion short on his child care plan?

  16. doconnor says:

    “all it will lead to is less productivity, stifle innovation and create mediocrity”

    I seriously doubt this will happen. If someone is so obsessed over money that this marginal tax increase would make a difference in thier efforts, thier innovation probably of little benefit to society, anyway.

    Where things less innovate in the ’50s and ’60s when the top tax rate was much higher? In fact productivity grew at a faster rate back then.

  17. gyor says:

    As a NDPer, Between the Tories and Liberals fighting for the rightwing vote and what’s going on in Alberta, I’m feeling really good about our long term propects.

  18. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Alberta, R.I.P. A moment of silence, please.

  19. Gaspar dela Nuit says:

    Desperation filters through the ranks of the LPC now that the Trudeau Economic Team has revealed it’s tax promises and delivered by economic guru Justin, to a doubting audience. Methinks an Orange Wave is submerging the lil’ Red Tent and washing Justin away. Soon it will be Justin Who?

  20. chuckercanuck says:

    There’s really good news in Justin’s tax cuts. Its a bright day for Canada. Justin has basically said, “the Harper years have been tremendous years. We don’t need to anything more than a little tinker here and there.” I’m so excited to know that either way, Con or Grit, we are getting more Harper-style government. That’s terrific.

    Of course, I’m unhappy with the crass class-warfare stuff. Sticking it to the people who already pay umpteen times more taxes than anyone else. Of course, its disgusting to pander to the basest instincts of people who think that all high-income people had that high-income via birthright like Trudeau. And yes, it is ridiculous to think that a household in Vancouver making $200,000 per year is filling their Jacuzzi with champagne and sending their kids to school with foie gras sandwiches.

    But its still wonderful to know that the Liberals have joined the Conservatives in helping to reduce the footprint of the federal government. With this tax cut, Justin will not have any place to impose some major dream or national mission. Imagine him trying to make some big promise? He’d be laughed off the stage! But obviously, the tax cut was the major policy plank….

    Harper or Trudeau… Its still Pax Harpernia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.