Christy to take your tax benefits

[maryjane48]

http://globalnews.ca/news/2422776/a-loo ... c-in-2016/

[the truth]

so, not tax break then..

[maryjane48]

well tax break federaly but in bc not so much

[the truth]

Christy,feel free to kiss me before you *removed* me

[Smurf]

But hey we have the lowest income-tax LOL.

[Veovis]

The fact that the Feds didn't give anything that was then taken by the province means we can just dislike them both.

Everything removed by the federal government will be no where near regained by any party under the new systems.

Basically we already were getting it from the Provincial gov and people were angry but so many like the fact that Justin is back there that they give it a pass.....it's weird.

[Rwede]

The fact that the Feds didn't give anything that was then taken by the province means we can just dislike them both.

Everything removed by the federal government will be no where near regained by any party under the new systems.

Basically we already were getting it from the Provincial gov and people were angry but so many like the fact that Justin is back there that they give it a pass.....it's weird.

No kidding.

An extra $1,000 in payroll taxes/year for most working stiffs, thanks to Justin. Plus an extra big tax hit from the loss of TFSA room for regular Joes trying to put a couple of dollars away so they can retire some day.

But hey, nothing to see here, Trustfund Justin is a saint.

[Ka-El]

But hey, nothing to see here, Trustfund Justin is a saint.

Too bad the Harper-Cons didn’t think about holding their own Party leadership to account.
Maybe they wouldn’t have been left to spend the next four years whining & crying.

[Veovis]

Too bad the Harper-Cons didn’t think about holding their own Party leadership to account.
Maybe they wouldn’t have been left to spend the next four years whining & crying.

Agreed, in fact if Harper had stepped down a large change in the last election may have happened, however could you clarify why that means the current PM has a free pass? Where do you draw the line for a favored political member or is their no line?

I really do never understand that of two politicians you could have them both commit a crime, yet one gets forgiven and the other not....should they not both be held to account for their actions.

[flamingfingers]

1. Who says the 'current PM has a free pass'?

2. Depends on the crime and whether it was committed for personal/political gain; whether it was planned and executed through subterfuge (Duffy case) and how many taxpayers/ordinary citizens were adversely affected (Bill C51, destroying environmental protection, oil-centric policy, etc) or whether it was a result of bad advice and acted upon without sober second thought..

[maryjane48]

removed. adds nothing to the discussion.

[Veovis]

1. Who says the 'current PM has a free pass'?

Strangely all the people, yourself included, that jump all over anyone that may question his actions. Isn't that simply what we should do as the people who elect them? Ask questions and demand accountability. The open and accountable new government has shown that isn't the case with certain changes already, but why is it wrong to question it?

All that seems to happen is if someone questions it, the defense is "HE"S NOT HARPER!", which simply isn't a defense but a free pass, and too many allowed that for Harper yet the people who didn't like Harper for actions defend similar actions under that argument? It's a sad faulty argument.

Harper gone isn't bad. But why questioning the new PM and the fact that he hasn't actually added any money but taken a bunch away from many, is only defended by "not Harper" is not an argument, nor a reason, but an excuse to not bother questioning government based on personal bias and not civic duty.

[maple leaf]

Strangely all the people, yourself included, that jump all over anyone that may question his actions. Isn't that simply what we should do as the people who elect them? Ask questions and demand accountability. The open and accountable new government has shown that isn't the case with certain changes already, but why is it wrong to question it?

All that seems to happen is if someone questions it, the defense is "HE"S NOT HARPER!", which simply isn't a defense but a free pass, and too many allowed that for Harper yet the people who didn't like Harper for actions defend similar actions under that argument? It's a sad faulty argument.

Harper gone isn't bad. But why questioning the new PM and the fact that he hasn't actually added any money but taken a bunch away from many, is only defended by "not Harper" is not an argument, nor a reason, but an excuse to not bother questioning government based on personal bias and not civic duty.

To bad that same logic isn't used on this forum when it comes to people pointing out the fallacies of the Christy Clark government.But instead one is jumped all over for bringing it up,when we should be asking questions and demanding accountability.
All that seems to happen is if someone questions ,the defence is ,well she is not the NDP,which simply is not a defence but a free pass.It is a sad faulty argument.
Etc Etc .