True Blue? Not quite. More so an "I want the PMO with a majority, so I'm going to appear human but do not worry, I will still support my friends" type of budget. Sound familiar to these guys? But, give their position in the house, I guess supporting the budget would look pretty bad.
Well, that's the simple analysis of it. The CBC wrote this about the Finance Minister Flaherty's budget that was tabled in the house on Monday. They have an analysis, but here are my thoughts on a few points of Mr. Flaherty's "interesting" budget.
1) Changes for individual tax-payers
$2000.00 tax credit, to give $310 per child of tax relief, depending on income. Awesome. Now as Mr. Flaherty, who makes a cabinet ministers "wage", Canadians can save for a computer, or as he did the day before "by [my] son a pair of skates.". Yup, the old boys club is indeed in touch with working families. Charitable donations, given by publicly listed securities to private companies will not be subject to taxes on capital gains. OK. So, could someone define these "charitable donations?" What sort of private company even needs charitable donations?
2) Changes for business tax-payers
Well, they kept the wonderful 15% mineral exploration tax credit. While I know that mineral exploration is not oil or tar sands exploration-perhaps more detail is needed. As in, corporations should not get this 15% tax credit. They do not need it! Of course, there are also the tax-reductions to business investment. Superficially, okay. But, again, are corporations, as defined, given these tax-reductions? Somehow, I do not think this company, or this one, need more tax reductions. Just a thought.
3) Changes for travellers
Well, now Johnny can bring $400.00 worth of American beer across the border after a 48 hour trip, rather than only $200.00 worth. Goody. Who buys $400.00 worth of stuff over a 48 hour period? Mall-rats? Somehow, I think mommy and daddy's credit cards will be happier without this part of the budget. AND in addition to the awesome superfluousness of the previous article, the federal government will introduce a tax system and ministry that will attract international conventions and events. Correct me if I am wrong, but were the conservatives entirely against this event? So much for supporting your own budget.
4) Changes for Seniors
Lots of tax credits. Awesome. Not so much about supporting seniors who do not have RRSPs to fall back on, seniors who have no income other than their pensions, and others. Now, yes, there is an age tax credit. But, what if they cannot use this tax credit? What if someone over 65 makes under $22,000 a year? Too bad, this credit now useless! It seems like a "here are your dollars to those who worked at a white collar job all your life, now be quiet and stop complaining." Enough on that.
5) Changes for the Disabled
Registered Disability Savings Plan. Alright! Now that you have spent all your dollars getting little Johnny his special autism medication, you get to save for it AND buy it at the same time! Brilliant. I will not even mention new cancer and AIDS medications in stage 4 clinical trials that are not covered by Medicare, despite many of their promising results.
6) Changes for the unemployed
Hey, "Working Tax Benefit". Basically, if someone finds a menial, low paying job they will get an income tax credit. This is meant to encourage individuals to get off welfare. It is combined with money given to job training. Sounds pretty good-if money is the only thing that matters. But, what about satisfaction with a job, choices, dignity? Maybe this will help people get job training, maybe it will decrease the reliance on social services and get people back into the work-force. But...how long can this last? Rather than creating an alternative agency to invest in job training, does not it make more sense to invest these funds into the already created employment insurance training-or changing the requirements for employment insurance training so these people will be eligible? I am no expert, but why create something when you have another service that can already provide it?
7) Changes for women
What could this mean? ten million dollars to fight "programs such as combating violence against women and girls". Okay. So, these programs. Do they include protection for sex-trade workers, and the recognition that these women are people and deserve the same treatment of anyone else? Violence against women and girls. Will this include the right to choose, especially after violent sex-acts? Probably not. Are there any programs to support equality of women in the workplace? Perhaps the ideas that women do not belong "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen" and are not automatically the primary care givers of a house-hold will be supported. My bet is these are not exactly the programs that will be supported.
8) Changes for aboriginals
Yay! More money being thrown at things. But, I suppose the problems of the Lubicon Cree, Fort Chipewyan and other aboriginal groups who have been side-swept by uncontrolled boom, and total disregard for traditional heritage are far to mundane for Mr. Harper or Mr. Flaherty to care about.
9) Changes for skilled foreign workers
Give the power to the provinces to figure out who is qualified for what. Great. Just look at the example shown here. Somehow, I am lead to believe that the provinces can not be trusted with this program. There are plenty of people who are "ready, willing, and able" to work in Canada-hire these people. Then, ensure that any foreign workers are given proper information about labour laws and labour rights, so that all workers in Canada are treated fairly.
10) Changes for farmers
Two one-time payments. One to assist farmers immediately, one to help the provinces with transfer payments. A 60/40 cost share between the provincial and the federal governments will be established, using federal money initially. But, what about the wheat board, what about promoting Canadian agriculture abroad? Promoting organic farming methods, which are becoming a very good market for Canadian agricultural products.
11) Changes for Students
Well, lets see what Mr. Flaherty and Mr. Harper have in mind for the next generations of Canadians. Again, more scholarships for graduate students (of whom account for only about 10% of the original undergraduates who enter post-secondary education). And, only 1000 new students will be benefited. Yup, 100 students more a province will have access to masters or doctoral research. After this announcement, more lifts on the maximum amount of money that can go towards RESP's and Canadian Education Savings Grants. Nothing about getting to the root cause-investing more in University Infrastructure and making tuition more affordable to hard working Canadian students and families. Still, access to post-secondary education is blocked for those without the capital to invest in undergraduate education, let alone graduate education.
12) Changes for Research
More money into research institutions at Universities, as opposed to funding students. I am not saying research is a negative thing, far from it! Investment in research is a good thing. But, in order to create new research projects, spaces, and bring forth new ideas students must be supported throughout their undergraduate education first. Currently, undergraduate students (and K-12 students, really) are "taught for the test", and education has become a job training ground. Higher education is there to allow creative thinking and the explosion of new ideas, and cultures. Now, students who wish to take advantage of these "Changes for research" will put their noses to the grind-stone for four years, get into their masters/doctoral/MD program, finish their degree, and realize they missed the eight best years of their lives. No wonder doctors tend to have worse and worse bed-side manners!
13) Changes for the environment
Polluters beware! If you cannot afford to buy a green vehicle, you will be taxed for using your older vehicle. To those who ride your bike (and are therefore more healthy and creating zero emissions during travel), to bad, no benefits for you. And, of course, the tax system will be rebalanced so that oil-sands companies are encouraged to invest in green energies. Over the next eight years the accelerated capital cost allowance will be phased out. Well, great, by 2015 when asthma and other debilitating conditions related to pollution have become epidemic maybe the pollution rates from these projects will go down. A bit.
15) Changes for health care
YAY! There is only one-and-a-half more years to wait until a national strategy for mental health will be formed to start exploration of this issue. Awesome. And, instead of creating a national plan to address wait-time issues, or make health-care even across the board or (dare I say it) enhancing the public system on a federal level, everything is off-loaded to the provinces. If the provinces create a plan to address wait times, they get money, if not...well, too bad. There is also talk of using the Canada Health Info-way to shorten wait times. Well, to shorten wait times for what? Are we talking creating a national organ donor registry that will match all potential donors, across provincial boundaries and regional health-care centres? How would such a system be prioritized? Who gets first shot, the 40 year old with children, or the 5 year old with at least 70 years left? What about parental donors that do not match their child, but match another families child? Would there be an exchange? Moving the first child higher on the waiting list, in exchange for the second child receiving a transplant? Quite simply, there are a lot of health care issues that simply cannot be addressed in the current happy-go-lucky provincially controlled system we have, and further funding to an info-way or similar program will not fix the systemic problems of underfunding and mis-allocation of resources that entrenches the current medicare system. (perhaps I'll post more on this later)
Well, that's my analysis (or rant, however you want to classify it) of the federal budget. I would like to note that all I did was listen to Mr. Flaherty present, and then read all about the budget. So, if there are gross inaccuracies, blame it on the fact that I am far to damn busy to read that whole 450-ish page document that is a federal budget.
Well, that's the simple analysis of it. The CBC wrote this about the Finance Minister Flaherty's budget that was tabled in the house on Monday. They have an analysis, but here are my thoughts on a few points of Mr. Flaherty's "interesting" budget.
1) Changes for individual tax-payers
$2000.00 tax credit, to give $310 per child of tax relief, depending on income. Awesome. Now as Mr. Flaherty, who makes a cabinet ministers "wage", Canadians can save for a computer, or as he did the day before "by [my] son a pair of skates.". Yup, the old boys club is indeed in touch with working families. Charitable donations, given by publicly listed securities to private companies will not be subject to taxes on capital gains. OK. So, could someone define these "charitable donations?" What sort of private company even needs charitable donations?
2) Changes for business tax-payers
Well, they kept the wonderful 15% mineral exploration tax credit. While I know that mineral exploration is not oil or tar sands exploration-perhaps more detail is needed. As in, corporations should not get this 15% tax credit. They do not need it! Of course, there are also the tax-reductions to business investment. Superficially, okay. But, again, are corporations, as defined, given these tax-reductions? Somehow, I do not think this company, or this one, need more tax reductions. Just a thought.
3) Changes for travellers
Well, now Johnny can bring $400.00 worth of American beer across the border after a 48 hour trip, rather than only $200.00 worth. Goody. Who buys $400.00 worth of stuff over a 48 hour period? Mall-rats? Somehow, I think mommy and daddy's credit cards will be happier without this part of the budget. AND in addition to the awesome superfluousness of the previous article, the federal government will introduce a tax system and ministry that will attract international conventions and events. Correct me if I am wrong, but were the conservatives entirely against this event? So much for supporting your own budget.
4) Changes for Seniors
Lots of tax credits. Awesome. Not so much about supporting seniors who do not have RRSPs to fall back on, seniors who have no income other than their pensions, and others. Now, yes, there is an age tax credit. But, what if they cannot use this tax credit? What if someone over 65 makes under $22,000 a year? Too bad, this credit now useless! It seems like a "here are your dollars to those who worked at a white collar job all your life, now be quiet and stop complaining." Enough on that.
5) Changes for the Disabled
Registered Disability Savings Plan. Alright! Now that you have spent all your dollars getting little Johnny his special autism medication, you get to save for it AND buy it at the same time! Brilliant. I will not even mention new cancer and AIDS medications in stage 4 clinical trials that are not covered by Medicare, despite many of their promising results.
6) Changes for the unemployed
Hey, "Working Tax Benefit". Basically, if someone finds a menial, low paying job they will get an income tax credit. This is meant to encourage individuals to get off welfare. It is combined with money given to job training. Sounds pretty good-if money is the only thing that matters. But, what about satisfaction with a job, choices, dignity? Maybe this will help people get job training, maybe it will decrease the reliance on social services and get people back into the work-force. But...how long can this last? Rather than creating an alternative agency to invest in job training, does not it make more sense to invest these funds into the already created employment insurance training-or changing the requirements for employment insurance training so these people will be eligible? I am no expert, but why create something when you have another service that can already provide it?
7) Changes for women
What could this mean? ten million dollars to fight "programs such as combating violence against women and girls". Okay. So, these programs. Do they include protection for sex-trade workers, and the recognition that these women are people and deserve the same treatment of anyone else? Violence against women and girls. Will this include the right to choose, especially after violent sex-acts? Probably not. Are there any programs to support equality of women in the workplace? Perhaps the ideas that women do not belong "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen" and are not automatically the primary care givers of a house-hold will be supported. My bet is these are not exactly the programs that will be supported.
8) Changes for aboriginals
Yay! More money being thrown at things. But, I suppose the problems of the Lubicon Cree, Fort Chipewyan and other aboriginal groups who have been side-swept by uncontrolled boom, and total disregard for traditional heritage are far to mundane for Mr. Harper or Mr. Flaherty to care about.
9) Changes for skilled foreign workers
Give the power to the provinces to figure out who is qualified for what. Great. Just look at the example shown here. Somehow, I am lead to believe that the provinces can not be trusted with this program. There are plenty of people who are "ready, willing, and able" to work in Canada-hire these people. Then, ensure that any foreign workers are given proper information about labour laws and labour rights, so that all workers in Canada are treated fairly.
10) Changes for farmers
Two one-time payments. One to assist farmers immediately, one to help the provinces with transfer payments. A 60/40 cost share between the provincial and the federal governments will be established, using federal money initially. But, what about the wheat board, what about promoting Canadian agriculture abroad? Promoting organic farming methods, which are becoming a very good market for Canadian agricultural products.
11) Changes for Students
Well, lets see what Mr. Flaherty and Mr. Harper have in mind for the next generations of Canadians. Again, more scholarships for graduate students (of whom account for only about 10% of the original undergraduates who enter post-secondary education). And, only 1000 new students will be benefited. Yup, 100 students more a province will have access to masters or doctoral research. After this announcement, more lifts on the maximum amount of money that can go towards RESP's and Canadian Education Savings Grants. Nothing about getting to the root cause-investing more in University Infrastructure and making tuition more affordable to hard working Canadian students and families. Still, access to post-secondary education is blocked for those without the capital to invest in undergraduate education, let alone graduate education.
12) Changes for Research
More money into research institutions at Universities, as opposed to funding students. I am not saying research is a negative thing, far from it! Investment in research is a good thing. But, in order to create new research projects, spaces, and bring forth new ideas students must be supported throughout their undergraduate education first. Currently, undergraduate students (and K-12 students, really) are "taught for the test", and education has become a job training ground. Higher education is there to allow creative thinking and the explosion of new ideas, and cultures. Now, students who wish to take advantage of these "Changes for research" will put their noses to the grind-stone for four years, get into their masters/doctoral/MD program, finish their degree, and realize they missed the eight best years of their lives. No wonder doctors tend to have worse and worse bed-side manners!
13) Changes for the environment
Polluters beware! If you cannot afford to buy a green vehicle, you will be taxed for using your older vehicle. To those who ride your bike (and are therefore more healthy and creating zero emissions during travel), to bad, no benefits for you. And, of course, the tax system will be rebalanced so that oil-sands companies are encouraged to invest in green energies. Over the next eight years the accelerated capital cost allowance will be phased out. Well, great, by 2015 when asthma and other debilitating conditions related to pollution have become epidemic maybe the pollution rates from these projects will go down. A bit.
15) Changes for health care
YAY! There is only one-and-a-half more years to wait until a national strategy for mental health will be formed to start exploration of this issue. Awesome. And, instead of creating a national plan to address wait-time issues, or make health-care even across the board or (dare I say it) enhancing the public system on a federal level, everything is off-loaded to the provinces. If the provinces create a plan to address wait times, they get money, if not...well, too bad. There is also talk of using the Canada Health Info-way to shorten wait times. Well, to shorten wait times for what? Are we talking creating a national organ donor registry that will match all potential donors, across provincial boundaries and regional health-care centres? How would such a system be prioritized? Who gets first shot, the 40 year old with children, or the 5 year old with at least 70 years left? What about parental donors that do not match their child, but match another families child? Would there be an exchange? Moving the first child higher on the waiting list, in exchange for the second child receiving a transplant? Quite simply, there are a lot of health care issues that simply cannot be addressed in the current happy-go-lucky provincially controlled system we have, and further funding to an info-way or similar program will not fix the systemic problems of underfunding and mis-allocation of resources that entrenches the current medicare system. (perhaps I'll post more on this later)
Well, that's my analysis (or rant, however you want to classify it) of the federal budget. I would like to note that all I did was listen to Mr. Flaherty present, and then read all about the budget. So, if there are gross inaccuracies, blame it on the fact that I am far to damn busy to read that whole 450-ish page document that is a federal budget.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment