@fixie guy: Those are from 2005 so I wonder where we stand now. Didn't Harper increase income taxes (or at least roll back a reduction) when he dropped the GST?

jesse Says:" In my opinion BC has some of the best doctors in the world…"

Tell me where they're hiding because I've dealt with a consistent series of cynical fuck-ups specializing in billable time.

Before getting too deep into why Canada's income tax is a problem, it might be useful seeing how it compares to other countries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Income_Taxes_By…

The notion Canada taxes income to death might just be a fantasy. But it would be a useful one for, say, a hypothetical prime minister with a political philosophy antithetical to Canada's social safety nets.

"This is just stupid. They do go elsewhere. "

Immigration and migration statistics disagree. In my opinion BC has some of the best doctors in the world, many who hung around in the '90s under the communists when they could have made mint moving to the US. From what I've seen of the general caliber of doctors, new and veteran, BC has been doing alright regardless of what party is in power.

@Renting: "Our income tax system is much more competitive now. Paul Martin lowered income taxes significantly as did Gordon Campbell especially for high income earners. The results speak for themselves. " Well we can argue partisan tax policies until we're blue in the face. I can see, however, a few things. First the government has a deficit they need to close. If housing turns out to be a severe drain on the province's economy in the coming years it may turn into a structural deficit. There needs to be some plan in place to resolve this. I don't know if I entirely buy reducing taxes will reduce a deficit through higher economic growth. Second there will be a shift towards supporting an older demographic who are starting to retire. Someone needs to fund their retirements because, on balance, they haven't… Read more »

@oneangryslav2: I can't because our tax system is to complex to give a simple answer. I can say that I believe in progressive taxes. Higher income earners should pay more than lower income earners. The problem is defining where that line should fairly be. As a general rule, lower is better IMO. But we also have to provide services and products through government. I believe in balanced budgets, so the real question to me is where do we draw the line on government services and spending. The tax structure should follow that question. There are all sorts of things that the government shouldn't be involved in. And there are all sorts of things were the government is not effectively involved. I think our first focus should be to create an effective and focussed bureaucracy. This is a task that will… Read more »

@frank:

We probably have too many doctors now!

Surely you jest.

Well Dave that ‘risk taking’ by the wealthy brought the US to it’s knees, and when the cards started falling they insisted on getting tax-payers money anyway to pay for their losses.

Oh, ok, here we go.

Progressive taxation and wealth redistribution: class warfare in a can. Just open and unleash!

@Dave: Hm. There are a few assumptions in the idea that higher taxes hinder the work of those that produce most: that the rich produce most; that private (as opposed to corporate) income is necessarily working stimulus in rich hands; and that if the currently rich leave that those who are slightly less rich won't jump into the void as entrepreneurs, etc. Taxation too high, of course, and you have an economy out of balance and limping – as with house prices now. So absolutely, there is a point at which too great an imbalance in the economy breaks things down, and that applies to taxes as well as to anything else. But it's not some magic about "the rich". If "the rich" bailed out and no one was left here but us chickens, there'd still be opportunities to be… Read more »

@Yalie:

And how do we measure production and value? IMO… the best way is dollar bills.

The market values housing as evident by the price of housing. That's dollar democracy at work. People get to vote with their pocket books.

So I am completely consistent with my position and my interests.

@frank:

I don't agree with your characterization but even if I did, it does not take away from my point of view. It doesn't follow that I believe in bailouts when risks turn sour. I don't.

In the case of the US financial crash, I think the Federal Reserve did the right thing. They and the government have an obligation to prevent systemic collapse.

Would you prefer that we wallow in a depression for a couple decades to prove your point?

We all need to get ourselves away from extreme position and be more pragmatic. The World and our finances are very very complex. We can't approach our problems with a single minded approach under the blanket of some 'ism'.