Vote Buying 2005
The Liberals are at it again, more than willing to dump millions of taxpayer dollars down the drain in a blatant attempt to buy votes. This time, it appears to be a two pronged assault.
First we have the announcement that since the last home heating rebate program was such a boondoggle, well, we’ll just try again. The last time out they flushed $1.5 billion down the loo, so this time they have scaled things back a tad and will only wave bye-bye to $500 million of yours and my hard earned tax dollars. Oh, but not to worry! Since the Auditor General lambasted the previous program for cutting cheques to dead people, prisoners, and thousands of people who have their heating costs included in their rent, (since they used the list of recipients of the GST credit to concoct their target list) those crafty Liberals will this time out use the list of recipients of the Guaranteed Income supplement and the National Child Tax Credit (2004). Nothing could go wrong with that, right? I mean, its not like old people die or anything. How many could have passed away between April 2004 and whenever we start throwing the money out the windows? And poor people own their own homes too! Maybe not has much as the middle class, who incidentally pay the bulk of taxes (and for heat) and might actually need the rebate, but this definitely makes us look more compassionate. Yep, how can anyone come out against old and poor people?
If there is anything that illustrates the Liberals desire to buy the next election, I think we have exhibit 1 right here – a program that is designed to provide a good headline, some superficially good optics, but which will in actuality be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars, completely ineffectual, and completely mis-targeted. I can hardly wait to read the Auditor Generals examination of this.
Exhibit # 2 would be the recently announced “balanced” approach to unexpected surpluses. Here, the Libs are promising to divide up any ‘unexpected’ budgetary surpluses (over a $3 billion contingency fund) equally amongst debt relief (good), tax refunds (stupid) and new spending (even more stupid).
Again, here the Liberals are attempting to dress something that at best is gimmicky, and at worst as incredibly stupid, up as a “balanced” approach. Say we’ve been over-taxed by $9 billion (which is what a surplus is after all – over-taxation, based on what the government has said its needs are – you know, that Budget they put out every year) – so Paul & the gang would then pay off $2 billion of debt (nothing wrong with that – clearing up more of the debt monster is always a good thing), would cut $2 billion worth of cheques to the working stiffs who filed a tax return – say around $100 bucks each (whoopee! I can hardly contain my enthusiasm), and then, oh well, we can surely find something to spend the other $2 billion on – we’ve nothing particular in mind, but there is always some group out there that needs to be bought off, and an extra $2 bil would surely come in handy!
So – instead of doing something for the middle class like, say cutting taxes, they have come up with another gimmick that lets them portray themselves as helping the little guy, while at the same time keeping some lefty street cred by promising to still spend, spend, spend. Only in Lieberal land would this be considered “balanced”. I mean, just look at it – we are supposed to clap with glee that in this balanced approach they are going to return money to the taxpayer – personally, I would much prefer that they just let me keep more of my own money (you know – but not taking so goddamn much from each and every paycheque), rather than taking the money, washing it through the vast government mill, and then sending a few pennies my way. Just think – in order to return $1 back to Joe taxpayer, how much do they have to collect? $5? $10? That money then sluices itself through the government mill, sticking to the bureaucracy here or there, until finally, some government machine spits out a cheque for a buck to you….and you, through your taxes still end up paying the postage. Why not just cut taxes and leave more of the money in our pockets in the first place??
I am sane enough to realize that this will never happen – the Liberals are far to comfortable with taking and spending, and lowering the tax burden is far, far from their thoughts…so instead, we get a useless gimmick that makes it look like they are willing to give back to the people…
The real joke here is that, no matter what this legislation says, the chances of an “unexpected” surplus seeing the light of day are somewhere between slim and none. Any surplus money will be spent loooong before this legislation will be designed to kick in…especially if Captain Jack & the Dippers maintain their “support” for a minority Lib government.
Welcome one and all to vote buying 2005.
I don’t know about you, but I’m still not sold…
First we have the announcement that since the last home heating rebate program was such a boondoggle, well, we’ll just try again. The last time out they flushed $1.5 billion down the loo, so this time they have scaled things back a tad and will only wave bye-bye to $500 million of yours and my hard earned tax dollars. Oh, but not to worry! Since the Auditor General lambasted the previous program for cutting cheques to dead people, prisoners, and thousands of people who have their heating costs included in their rent, (since they used the list of recipients of the GST credit to concoct their target list) those crafty Liberals will this time out use the list of recipients of the Guaranteed Income supplement and the National Child Tax Credit (2004). Nothing could go wrong with that, right? I mean, its not like old people die or anything. How many could have passed away between April 2004 and whenever we start throwing the money out the windows? And poor people own their own homes too! Maybe not has much as the middle class, who incidentally pay the bulk of taxes (and for heat) and might actually need the rebate, but this definitely makes us look more compassionate. Yep, how can anyone come out against old and poor people?
If there is anything that illustrates the Liberals desire to buy the next election, I think we have exhibit 1 right here – a program that is designed to provide a good headline, some superficially good optics, but which will in actuality be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars, completely ineffectual, and completely mis-targeted. I can hardly wait to read the Auditor Generals examination of this.
Exhibit # 2 would be the recently announced “balanced” approach to unexpected surpluses. Here, the Libs are promising to divide up any ‘unexpected’ budgetary surpluses (over a $3 billion contingency fund) equally amongst debt relief (good), tax refunds (stupid) and new spending (even more stupid).
Again, here the Liberals are attempting to dress something that at best is gimmicky, and at worst as incredibly stupid, up as a “balanced” approach. Say we’ve been over-taxed by $9 billion (which is what a surplus is after all – over-taxation, based on what the government has said its needs are – you know, that Budget they put out every year) – so Paul & the gang would then pay off $2 billion of debt (nothing wrong with that – clearing up more of the debt monster is always a good thing), would cut $2 billion worth of cheques to the working stiffs who filed a tax return – say around $100 bucks each (whoopee! I can hardly contain my enthusiasm), and then, oh well, we can surely find something to spend the other $2 billion on – we’ve nothing particular in mind, but there is always some group out there that needs to be bought off, and an extra $2 bil would surely come in handy!
So – instead of doing something for the middle class like, say cutting taxes, they have come up with another gimmick that lets them portray themselves as helping the little guy, while at the same time keeping some lefty street cred by promising to still spend, spend, spend. Only in Lieberal land would this be considered “balanced”. I mean, just look at it – we are supposed to clap with glee that in this balanced approach they are going to return money to the taxpayer – personally, I would much prefer that they just let me keep more of my own money (you know – but not taking so goddamn much from each and every paycheque), rather than taking the money, washing it through the vast government mill, and then sending a few pennies my way. Just think – in order to return $1 back to Joe taxpayer, how much do they have to collect? $5? $10? That money then sluices itself through the government mill, sticking to the bureaucracy here or there, until finally, some government machine spits out a cheque for a buck to you….and you, through your taxes still end up paying the postage. Why not just cut taxes and leave more of the money in our pockets in the first place??
I am sane enough to realize that this will never happen – the Liberals are far to comfortable with taking and spending, and lowering the tax burden is far, far from their thoughts…so instead, we get a useless gimmick that makes it look like they are willing to give back to the people…
The real joke here is that, no matter what this legislation says, the chances of an “unexpected” surplus seeing the light of day are somewhere between slim and none. Any surplus money will be spent loooong before this legislation will be designed to kick in…especially if Captain Jack & the Dippers maintain their “support” for a minority Lib government.
Welcome one and all to vote buying 2005.
I don’t know about you, but I’m still not sold…
posted by Steve at
6:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home