Thursday, March 31, 2011

Partisan Posturing and Trickle-Down Economics

Hours before a senior Liberal (who for years has been a respected Member of Parliament) was to visit the riding, Phil McColeman sent a message to the Brantford Expositor attacking the Liberal plan to eliminate a corporate tax cut. Phil defended the Conservative plan to cut taxes for corporations while making families wait 5 years for a tax cut:
Calling the Liberal rollback a "tax hike," the statement said: "This increase will kill jobs, stall our recovery and set our families back."…

"Why does John McCallum and the Liberal Party want to kill jobs, stall our recovery and set our families back?" it says.

"Brant's economy and job creators need support, not reckless job-killing tax hikes to pay for billions of dollars in ill-considered spending."
Where to begin?

First of all, it is not a "tax increase", rather it is avoiding a Conservative corporate tax cut – a tax cut that is inherently inefficient.

Second of all, Phil seems to think that cutting taxes for corporations will somehow benefit families more than cutting taxes for families and providing social services. This is called "trickle-down economics". The theory is that if you cut taxes for the wealthiest individuals or corporations, the benefits will "trickle down" to the average Joes/Janes. It's been tried before. It doesn't work.

Third of all, it is in fact the Conservatives who have out-of-control spending. They took a budget surplus and turned it into the largest deficit in Canadian history (see also this blog post from last year). Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page has said that the deficit is "structural", which means that it'll still be there when the recession ends. The Conservatives are wasting tax dollars on e.g. $1 billion for the G20 meeting in Toronto, $10 billion for unneeded new prisons, $30 billion for stealth fighter jets (with no competition for the contract), $130 million on advertising (triple the former amount), and spending $27 million on Economic Action Plan signs.

Finally, it is simply over the top to suggest that the Hon. Mr. McCallum wants to "kill jobs" and "set our families back". Ask yourself honestly: Does any politician really want that? Does anybody really want that? Of course not. It's partisan posturing pure and simple.


Small business Dan said...

According to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, Phil and Jim Flaherty have already increased taxes: Mr. Flaherty is planning to increase EI premiums by a rate of five cents per $100 of earnings for an employee and seven cents for an employer. He says this planned tax hike should elate Canadians because originally he had planned an even larger tax hike of 15 cents for employees and 21 cents for employers.

Only a politician would find this argument compelling.


Former Reformer said...

Conservatives don't cut taxes. They run huge deficits which are really just huge tax hikes on our children. Phil should be ashamed of the $100B future tax hike he has helped saddle our children with.

I've found that this "me first, give-me give-me" approach to life is very prevalent among big C Conservatives born around 1954.

I say big 'C' Conservatives because there are apparently no small c conservatives in the ugly joke that is the Conservative Party of Canada.

Brantford Bob said...

Phil has been a disaster for Brant. We need change. The families of Brant want to be put first, not last.

Phil doesn't understand this. He'd rather let families and their kids pay for tax cuts to wealthy, profitable corporations.


Post a Comment

All comments will be posted except for instances of profanity, spam, hate speech, defamation, etc.