Budget 2019: Justin runs up your credit card

[crookedmember]

This sort of tax credit will be welcomed by many parents of all income levels who home-school or pay to put their children in private schools, so it seems to me to be a worthwhile investment. As a tax credit, it seems to me it would be most beneficial to those with the lowest incomes, who make the most sacrifices to put their children's education ahead of other spending choices. Perhaps someone would be good enough to correct me on this if I'm wrong? It seems pretty clear that since it's a tax credit, folk will not be "collecting it" as suggested above.

Many of us prefer this sort of direct investment in Canadian families to the hopelessly opaque carbon tax policy we're currently funding thanks to JT.

Tax credits benefit high income families because they pay more taxes and at a higher marginal rate than the "ordinary Canadians" who are "struggling" as Andy puts it.

An average family with a few kids earning $50K or $60K simply doesn't pay enough federal tax to benefit from tax credits.

What it comes down to is everyone subsidizing private schools for the wealthy.

It's another tax cut for the wealthy, which as Harper showed us, it the only kind the Cons know how to do.

[rustled]

Another misguided non sense from "I have no plan" Scheer. I think this article pretty well sums up what's wrong with Dimples plan;

Government support for independent schools should come from the provinces, not the feds

https://theprovince.com/opinion/op-ed/g ... t-the-feds

Although, Dimple's family would benefit the most from his plan How about that? Funny how these things work.

Interesting piece. Thanks for sharing the link.

Are you suggesting here that Scheer's family would benefit more from the tax credit more than JT's? I'm not sure we could make that assumption. It seems to me, though, that if we're going to base government policy on whether one party leader benefits more than the other, or whether any party leader benefits more than the average Canadian, we'd have a lot of difficulty implementing any programs at all.

It does seem to me JT's family is far less negatively impacted by the carbon tax than any family I know.

[rustled]

This sort of tax credit will be welcomed by many parents of all income levels who home-school or pay to put their children in private schools, so it seems to me to be a worthwhile investment. As a tax credit, it seems to me it would be most beneficial to those with the lowest incomes, who make the most sacrifices to put their children's education ahead of other spending choices. Perhaps someone would be good enough to correct me on this if I'm wrong? It seems pretty clear that since it's a tax credit, folk will not be "collecting it" as suggested above.

Many of us prefer this sort of direct investment in Canadian families to the hopelessly opaque carbon tax policy we're currently funding thanks to JT.

Tax credits benefit high income families because they pay more taxes and at a higher marginal rate than the "ordinary Canadians" who are "struggling" as Andy puts it.

An average family with a few kids earning $50K or $60K simply doesn't pay enough federal tax to benefit from tax credits.

What it comes down to is everyone subsidizing private schools for the wealthy.

It's another tax cut for the wealthy, which as Harper showed us, it the only kind the Cons know how to do.

You might want to read the story floppi provided a link to.

Although independent schools are often stereotyped as elite institutions for “the rich,” the facts tell a different story. According to recent research, the vast majority of Canadian independent schools are not stereotypically elite prep schools, and a recent study from B.C. suggests that (at least in this province) average incomes for families relying on “non-elite” independent schools are almost identical to families that rely on government-run public schools.

Subsequently, public assistance for independent schools helps families of varied economic profiles, not just the rich, by making more options available to families who otherwise couldn’t afford independent education.

Given these facts, there is a strong case for government support for independent schools. Which brings us back to Scheer, whose plan to provide this support via a federal tax deduction is misguided. And here’s why:

It seems to me we should all be honest in our discussions, rather than repeating misinformation intended to manipulate.


When JT provides a tax credit, how does it impact ordinary Canadians? Is it more beneficial to the rich, or to the poor?

[floppi]

Another misguided non sense from "I have no plan" Scheer. I think this article pretty well sums up what's wrong with Dimples plan;

Government support for independent schools should come from the provinces, not the feds

https://theprovince.com/opinion/op-ed/g ... t-the-feds

Although, Dimple's family would benefit the most from his plan How about that? Funny how these things work.

Interesting piece. Thanks for sharing the link.

Are you suggesting here that Scheer's family would benefit more from the tax credit more than JT's? I'm not sure we could make that assumption. It seems to me, though, that if we're going to base government policy on whether one party leader benefits more than the other, or whether any party leader benefits more than the average Canadian, we'd have a lot of difficulty implementing any programs at all.

It does seem to me JT's family is far less negatively impacted by the carbon tax than any family I know.

Well the math would go like this

Scheer = 5 kids X $4,000/kid = $20.000/year

JT = 3 kids X $4,000/kid = $12,000/year

Yep so Scheer's family would get $8,000 more per year than JT's family.

[crookedmember]

Subsequently, public assistance for independent schools helps families of varied economic profiles, not just the rich, by making more options available to families who otherwise couldn’t afford independent education.

Given these facts, there is a strong case for government support for independent schools. Which brings us back to Scheer, whose plan to provide this support via a federal tax deduction is misguided. And here’s why:

removed

Trudeau did not make the CCB a tax credit for a reason. Tax credits mainly benefit the wealthy.

[rustled]

Interesting piece. Thanks for sharing the link.

Are you suggesting here that Scheer's family would benefit more from the tax credit more than JT's? I'm not sure we could make that assumption. It seems to me, though, that if we're going to base government policy on whether one party leader benefits more than the other, or whether any party leader benefits more than the average Canadian, we'd have a lot of difficulty implementing any programs at all.

It does seem to me JT's family is far less negatively impacted by the carbon tax than any family I know.

Well the math would go like this

Scheer = 5 kids X $4,000/kid = $20.000/year

JT = 3 kids X $4,000/kid = $12,000/year

Yep so Scheer's family would get $8,000 more per year than JT's family.

That's not how tax credits work.

[crookedmember]

Well the math would go like this

Scheer = 5 kids X $4,000/kid = $20.000/year

JT = 3 kids X $4,000/kid = $12,000/year

Yep so Scheer's family would get $8,000 more per year than JT's family.

That's not how tax credits work.

Actually, at Trudeau's and Andy's income levels, that's exactly how tax credits work.

It's the middle class and lower that would get zip.

[rustled]

Subsequently, public assistance for independent schools helps families of varied economic profiles, not just the rich, by making more options available to families who otherwise couldn’t afford independent education.

Given these facts, there is a strong case for government support for independent schools. Which brings us back to Scheer, whose plan to provide this support via a federal tax deduction is misguided. And here’s why:

This is not about assisting independent and religious schools.

It's about a Con gov't assisting the rich with tax credits to send their kids to independent schools.

If the Cons wanted to assist independent schools and make it easier for lower income families to send their kids to independent schools, they would give cash directly to the schools with the stipulation that it be used to reduce tuition for lower income families.

Instead, the Cons want to use tax credits to reduce tuition for the rich, while doing diddly for the people who actually need help.

Trudeau did not make the CCB a tax credit for a reason. Tax credits mainly benefit the wealthy.

Bear in mind it wasn't Scheer who presented this as a plan to assist independent and religious schools. He presented it as presented as assisting the families that make different choices, including home schooling.

I'll mull over your suggestion about the better way to do this (give the $ directly to the schools) as I go about my day, but it seems to me it would be a very hard sell. (And rather complicated, I'd think. Schools use a means test? Clawed back if the family's situation changes, or boot the kids? Plenty to consider.) Your suggestion also leaves out the growing number of parents who home school.

So again, when JT does initiate a tax credit, we should know these tax credits are always of most benefit to the wealthy?

[crookedmember]

Bear in mind it wasn't Scheer who presented this as a plan to assist independent and religious schools. He presented it as presented as assisting the families that make different choices, including home schooling.

I'll mull over your suggestion about the better way to do this (give the $ directly to the schools) as I go about my day, but it seems to me it would be a very hard sell. (And rather complicated, I'd think. Schools use a means test? Clawed back if the family's situation changes, or boot the kids? Plenty to consider.) Your suggestion also leaves out the growing number of parents who home school.

So again, when JT does initiate a tax credit, we should know these tax credits are always of most benefit to the wealthy?

Little Andy presented it as a plan to benefit the wealthy. Perhaps he's so out of touch, he thinks every family receives a $22,000 cheque each month from the government and a free mansion to live in. I dunno.

If he wanted to help lower income families send their kids to independent schools, there are ways outside the tax system to do that. An example is the Canada Child Benefit.

Instead, he wants a tax credit that benefits himself, and forces the middle class to pay for it.

I am not aware of any tax credits proposed by Justin Trudeau.

[floppi]

removed

[Catsumi]

This topic is JUSTIN RUNS UP YOUR CREDIT CARD

Some are intent on taking it elsewhere. The next to do so will be Q-bound with NO pre-warning.

[Omnitheo]

*removed*

I think it's important to understand how debt under the current government has resulted in net benefits to our country and it's economy. Something quite different from the result of debt incurred by the previous government. And also a strategy which previously put us on track to reducing debt as it did with the government under Martin.

[floppi]

[Merry]

I agree that there are times when debt can be used to help a Country get through some challenging economic times, such as the Great Recession in 2007 for example. But there is NO excuse for running up unnecessary debt when the economy is performing well (as Trudeau has done),

Governments buying votes by running up debt to pay for taxpayer funded goodies is nothing new. But history proves that doing so will always end badly. It took us years to dig ourselves out from all the unnecessary debt that Trudeau’s daddy ran up. Years of austerity that would not have been necessary had past Governments been a little more fiscally prudent.

[Gone_Fishin]

Well aren't we special? Trudeau is stiffing us in BC for up to an extra 15¢ per litre of gas with his new secret fuel tax. And the source is a former Liberal MP!!!