The theme seems to be “reduce operating spending, increase capital spending”. We’ll see how that will blow over with the opposition.

  • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    the public service exists to serve the public, cutting the workforce ends up reducing services.

    But what services did we get with our ridiculous expansion of the public service over the last four years?

    charge Google for the billions that we were supposed to get before Carney bowed down to trump.

    If memory serves, the tax in total, wad supposed to bring in 2 billion. We are paying an order of magnitude more than that to deal with tarrifs affected industries. It seems pretty reasonable to assume something that hits trump’s donors so precisely would elicit a reaction that would cost us much more than we brought in.

    I’d say tax the billionaires

    Sure, I’d like to as well. But there are I think less than 100 billionaires in Canada. Say we could soak them for even another 100 million a year each (which would be extraordinary and almost require some wild changes to the tax code because of the nature of their wealth, but let’s put those complications to the side.) Groovy. Until what, 1 in 10 decide it’s worth that 100 million plus the existing difference to move to the States or elsewhere. It’s a tricky balance and I’ve yet to see any of our populist “just tax the rich!” really show their math.

    Edit: finished my thought after clicking accidentally.

    • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      But what services did we get with our ridiculous expansion of the public service over the last four years?

      Lets see what we miss out on if this budget passes.

      If memory serves, the tax in total, wad supposed to bring in 2 billion. We are paying an order of magnitude more than that to deal with tarrifs affected industries. It seems pretty reasonable to assume something that hits trump’s donors so precisely would elicit a reaction that would cost us much more than we brought in.

      Great that’s 2 billion we left on the table. We are paying more, but guess what bowing down to trump has left us where exactly? Are we just supposed to keep bending over for trump and his cronies? Fucking nationalize shit if they play that game.

      Sure, I’d like to as well. But there are I think less than 100 billionaires in Canada. Say we could soak them for even another 100 million a year each. Groovy. Until what, 1 in 10 decide it’s worth that 100 million plus the existing difference to move to the States or elsewhere. Its

      Good riddance they are a plague. Make them pay their taxes before they leave. They don’t bring in anything, they cost us. We subsidize their businesses, think O&G. We burn the planet so they can have another yacht, that they got through tax loopholes. Fuck them

      • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Good riddance they are a plague. Make them pay their taxes before they leave.

        Ummm, did you forget you propsed they would be the solution to our budget woes? Or are you not old enough to pay taxes and don’t realize we do those on an annual basis? (Putting aside the fact that most billionaires don’t earn it on taxed wages but more that they own unsold stock.)

        We are paying more, but guess what bowing down to trump has left us where exactly?

        One of the best tarrif rates in the world?

        Fucking nationalize shit if they play that game.

        Dafuq? You’re saying nationalize google?

        Jesus though, this is why it can be so hard to take progressives seriously. This is just mindless slogan yelling with zero thought.

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          Ummm, did you forget you propsed they would be the solution to our budget woes? Or are you not old enough to pay taxes and don’t realize we do those on an annual basis? (Putting aside the fact that most billionaires don’t earn it on taxed wages but more that they own unsold stock.)

          I never said they would be the sole solution lol. I’m old enough to pay taxes and I’m pissed that my tax dollars subsidize them, you should be too. There are businesses that get crazy tax breaks that we should take back, spend taxes on the population not the ultra wealthy. Yes close the fucking loopholes.

          One of the best tarrif rates in the world?

          I’d rather not be kissing his ass at all.

          Dafuq? You’re saying nationalize google

          The infrastructure yes, but Google won’t leave Canada if we enforce our laws because there are millions of Canadians and they would still make criminal amounts of money.

          Jesus though, this is why it can be so hard to take progressives seriously. This is just mindless slogan yelling with zero thought.

          And this is why it’s so hard to take centrists seriously, this is just mindless asskissing and excuse making to keep getting bent further and further over the barrel. We keep this up and you will own nothing and be happy for it, with no rights, no privacy, living in a corporate town using musk bucks to buy your Microsoft verification cans.

          • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            I remain unconvinced that cuts for austerity purposes are ultimately beneficial, raise taxes on the ultra wealthy instead

            never said they would be the sole solution lol.

            Okay, so if we’re admitting your first plan of tax the wealthy is a little myopic here, which tax breaks are you considering removing? And how will this stop those businesses from instead, setting up shop in a lower tax, lower regulation, larger single market like Americas?

            I’d rather not be kissing his ass at all.

            How many people should lose their jobs because of your sense of pride? Just curious.

            Google won’t leave Canada if we enforce our laws because there are millions of Canadians and they would still make criminal amounts of money.

            Read what I wrote about the digital services tax. The concern was not that Google would leave.

            And this is why it’s so hard to take centrists seriously

            He just descends into mindless sloganning again. Everything I’ve said can be backed up, whereas your thoughts aren’t even consistent in this single thread!

      • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Okay, but the person to whom I’m responding wanted to save money by taxing them. So, what services would you cut to be rid of the people who are paying for those services?

        • patatas@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          The problem with the existence of billionaires is really the wealth inequality itself, not the number of dollars in their bank accounts.

          Inequality is what gives the ultra-wealthy their outsized influence in the political economy.

          Dollars are not scarce items; the government can issue currency essentially at will. Taxes aren’t there to fund services. They exist to reduce inequality.

          So yes, tax the billionaires. And if they leave: we’re better off that way too!

          • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Sorry, I seriously disagree with about all of this.

            Inequality is what gives the ultra-wealthy their outsized influence in the political economy.

            This is about Canadian politics. We have strict rules and limits on donations, advertising and support. Like anything, could probably be better but it’s a pretty fair balance.

            the government can issue currency essentially at will.

            Apologies but this is childishly ignorant. Look to most countries in South America about the consequences of doing so. Inflation is very real and reducing the value of the Canadian dollar hurts those who can afford it least.

            Taxes aren’t there to fund services. They exist to reduce inequality.

            Absolutely not. Being equally poor without teachers, doctors, roads, defence, I mean my God.

            tax the billionaires

            We do. You let me know how much you think we do currently, how much more you would like.

            And if they leave: we’re better off that way too!

            Who needs hospitals, schools, emergency responders etc anyway? At least we won’t have dumb ol’ rich people anymore!

            • patatas@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              12 hours ago

              You’re welcome to disagree - but everything I said is factual. If there’s something you don’t understand, I’m happy to explain - just ask.

              • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                12 hours ago

                the government can issue currency essentially at will.

                Okay, sure, this is technically true. In the same way that technically, you can drink bleach it’s just a very bad idea.

                • patatas@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  It’s literally how we dealt with the first phase of the Covid pandemic. Was keeping millions of Canadians from being evicted a bad idea?

                  • MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 hours ago

                    Covid, and emergencies like it, are entirely the point of fiscal responsibility!

                    In an emergency, you can max out your credit. If you do that on the regular, for non emergencies, not only will you end up paying an absurd amount of interest, but you won’t be able to borrow more when the next emergency happens!