Castanet

Liberals accused of diabetes tax grab with apparent benefit clawback


By The Canadian Press - October 22, 2017


OTTAWA — Health groups joined forces today with the Conservative opposition to accuse the Liberal government of trying to raise tax revenue on the backs of vulnerable diabetics.

Diabetes Canada was among the groups that joined Conservative politicians to publicly denounce what they say is a clawback of a long−standing disability tax credit to help them manage their disease.

Conservative finance critic Pierre Poilievre says it is one more example of a Liberal government unfairly targeting hardworking middle class people it claims to support.

Kimberley Hanson of Diabetes Canada says thousands of claimants who had previously been given the $1,500 annual benefit have been rejected in recent months, while government officials have for the most part rebuffed their concerns.

snip

The Canada Revenue Agency was also recently forced to withdraw a notice that targeted employee discounts after it caused an uproar.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/liber ... -clawback/

First limiting wreaths, now this.

OK Gone_Fishin' this time I won't doubt it. I just won't. Because it just keeps coming. From Bill Monreau to this.

Unfrikkenin' believable.

As I have said before on other threads, this government is at war with its own citizens.

Duck, run, hide.

They are relentless.

ALL governments put things out there, some quite ridiculous to see what floats or sinks. The bigger the uproar the more distant the PM claims to be to it.
This one is stupid.

Catsumi wrote:As I have said before on other threads, this government is at war with its own citizens.

Duck, run, hide.

They are relentless.

got to pay for all the refugees coming to canada somehow

Just a stupid stupid move. The optics of this are absolutely brutal and in reality someone in government thought this would be a good idea.

Every once and a while a sitting government makes an absolutely bonehead move and this is a bad one.

The Conservatives did it with Veteran Affairs too once upon a time.

The switcharoo will happen very soon if not by the end of the week and the fact that the Diabetes foundations had to make this public AFTER attempting to do it professionally shows the lack of communication between such groups and government.

Good work to those that put a light on this event otherwise it would have gone unnoticed.

Disgusting, with a capital "D."

Trudeau is attacking the most vulnerable people, like a bully taking lunch money, in order to satisfy his lust for a globalist agenda.

He MUST be stopped.

I think scandal weary Canadians have had it up to the teeth with this sorry excuse for a PM and his henchmen, and are more than ready to see JT only in the rearview mirror.

Mentioned this a couple of weeks ago that he could only win if he had outside (Russian) help. My surmise is fairly accurate.

I can understand this for Type 2 diabetics and that's the way it should be in most instances since it is often a consequence of lifestyle choices that the rest of us shouldn't be funding, but this is grossly unfair to those with Type 1.

Catsumi wrote:I think scandal weary Canadians have had it up to the teeth with this sorry excuse for a PM and his henchmen, and are more than ready to see JT only in the rearview mirror.

Mentioned this a couple of weeks ago that he could only win if he had outside (Russian) help. My surmise is fairly accurate.

exactly. It is in the Russian's interests to have a weak Canadian government run by a brainless airhead, so naturally, the Russians would want to see a continued Liberal/Trudeau majority like they enjoyed back in the 1970s with Justin's pro-communist evil arrogant dad. So expect Russian collusion with the Liberals to keep the Airhead in power in Canada.

Keith Duhaime wrote:I can understand this for Type 2 diabetics and that's the way it should be in most instances since it is often a consequence of lifestyle choices that the rest of us shouldn't be funding, but this is grossly unfair to those with Type 1.

Though I agree some would eat garbage & regardless of income, I'd say alot eat poorly simply because it's cheaper especially with kids.
Not everyone can afford fresh salads, lean proteins etc.

Keith Duhaime wrote:I can understand this for Type 2 diabetics and that's the way it should be in most instances since it is often a consequence of lifestyle choices that the rest of us shouldn't be funding, but this is grossly unfair to those with Type 1.

If we are looking at "consequences of lifestyle choices that the rest of us should not be funding" be careful that you are not butting out your cigarette and taking your 6th alcoholic drink while making this declaration. Of course right after eating a red meat dinner 7 days a week.

If you would prefer, Big Brother can go over your spending habits by pouring over all your debit and credit card purchases and see what you've been buying and more importantly, what you have not been buying to see what will be grossly unfair to fund in case of YOUR illness.

Be very careful what slippery slope you are willing to descend down upon.

jimmy4321 wrote: Though I agree some would eat garbage & regardless of income, I'd say alot eat poorly simply because it's cheaper especially with kids.
Not everyone can afford fresh salads, lean proteins etc.

That's a lame excuse. Food is still incredibly cheap by historical standards, only ~10% of household income. Your grandmother at the end of WWII would typically be paying ~25% of household income. And before you start using children as an excuse, remember that daddy and mommy should have thought about the cost of food before having them.

Queen K wrote:If we are looking at "consequences of lifestyle choices that the rest of us should not be funding" be careful that you are not butting out your cigarette and taking your 6th alcoholic drink while making this declaration. Of course right after eating a red meat dinner 7 days a week.

If you would prefer, Big Brother can go over your spending habits by pouring over all your debit and credit card purchases and see what you've been buying and more importantly, what you have not been buying to see what will be grossly unfair to fund in case of YOUR illness.

Be very careful what slippery slope you are willing to descend down upon.

I didn't sleep through the Participaction ad about the 60 year old Swede versus the 30 year old Canadian that taxpayers footed the bill for. Hence I have never smoked anything and cut my drinking off long before the 6th serving, and then there is the gym at least 4 to 5 times per week to boot. So bring on your Big Brother boogeyman. Seriously, why wouldn't we want fair cost allocation instead of the socialistic policy that currently exist? It's only by containing externalities that a decision maker begins to realize the benefit of making more responsible choices, And don't come back and try to convince me some people don't know better. We spent good dollars as taxpayers over and above Participaction too to make sure they were informed.

This has nothing to do with the Participaction Ad, and the Swede wasn't has healthy as he seemed and I just lost a good friend to a heart attack who was a vegetarian/athlete type.

All I'm saying is that once society agrees to download the costs of healthcare on to the individual due to spending habits, then prepare to have ALL spending habits analyzed for cost/benefit purposes.