Always Wrong: The Fraser Institute

It's that time of year again. The Fraser Institute has released its inflated "Look How Bad We Are Taxed" report.

Canadians spent more on taxes than basic necessities in 2025: Study

The 42% of income going to taxes figure is not what a typical Canadian family actually pays.

This so-called average family? It's a hypothetical construct which includes unattached individuals, and assigns it not only personal income, sales, property and payroll taxes, but also corporate taxes, import duties and resource revenues, even though much of those burdens falls unevenly on shareholders, workers, consumers and foreigners.

It also treats taxes paid directly by employers—such as the employer portions of CPP and EI—as costs borne by families on the theory that they reduce wages. Fraser assumes that employer payroll taxes ultimately come out of workers’ wages, so it adds them to the family’s tax bill. 

We all know that corporations are begging to pay us more, and to charge less for their products and services, instead of increasing profits, right? Right? 🙄🙄

If payroll taxes and corporate tax rates were reduced, we'd never see a penny of it.

It also counts CPP and EI payments without recognizing their associated benefits.

The tax burden portioned to the average also includes capital gains paid on the sale of secondary properties—hardly a typical family experience.

I do not know what the correct percentage is. I do know that year after year, Fraser produces an inflated one.

What we pay in taxes is a topic worthy of discussion and debate. It does not need to be exaggerated to be so.

Harper's Buy American deal is a betrayal!

In exchange for less than two weeks access to America's stimulus money, Harper has surrendered the ability of Canadian provinces and municipalities to prefer Canadian suppliers... FOREVER.

There is such reciprocity here. American states do not have to drop their current level of preferential buying.

Why did Harper do this? There is only one explanation: to get positive headlines, and ongoing bragging rights. Harper hopes he will brag louder than those who rightly criticize him.

You only have to think about what the headlines would say had he not reached a deal. "HARPER FAILS TO BREAK BUY AMERICA BLOCKADE" and the like. With the "Harper Government" way down in the polls, battered by Harper's partisan prorogation and his utter contempt of Parliament and the rule of law, more negative news is something this government is not prepared to have.

Harper sees that it is far better to sellout his country than to see his grip on power further erode.

Harper's partisan prorogation has made this deal even more possible. With Parliament closed, Harper doesn't have to ratify the agreement before it. There's no debate, no questions, and no criticisms on the Hansard record. We only get a few canon shots via the media.

I can imagine the mess Harper would have if Parliament were open. Instead, we get a PR roll out claiming this is a great deal, followed with some contrary reporting, quotes and comments print showing us that this is a lousy deal. I wonder which headlines win?

Well, Harper's tactical moves certainly have failed before; however, with this being framed as simply a "bad deal" and not as a sellout engineered to get good press, the resulting dialogue is not beyond what the public expects, and I doubt will get much negative traction. The typical headline OPPOSITION CRITICIZES GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT is not going to capture people's attention.

Advantage: Harper.

-----
Links:
Jane Taber Ottawa hails Buy American deal
Thomas Walkom Sold a bill of goods on `Buy American'

The Galloping Beaver Bye bye "Buy Local' - Hello "Buy North American"

Kevin Page on the many inadequacies of Harper's 'made in China' economic update

From The Star:

Kevin Page, the independent parliamentary budget officer, agreed that the latest government report card is weak because it's hard to tell if the projects being funded have actually begun or if the money is being dispersed.

In the United States, the administration has provided specific details on which projects have been started and how much money is actually being spent under President Barack Obama's $787 billion (U.S.) stimulus plan, Page said.

"We still don't really see that in any significant way in the fourth quarter report" here, he said. "It's very weak in terms of, is this having a measurable impact on economic output and jobs?"

"When you read it, you don't really get that sense as to whether it's working or not," Page said of the government's 168-page analysis of the economic action program.

Based on discussions with cities, Ottawa's infrastructure money appears to have gone out too slowly this year to have much positive effect in 2009, Page said.

"Our own sense is that a lot of that (money) will be flowing in 2010, it didn't flow in 2009," he said in an interview.

If massive infrastructure spending had made it into people's pockets this year, the economy would have shown better growth in the July-through-September period, Page said.

The economy grew at an anemic annual rate of 0.4 per cent in the third quarter, Statistics Canada said.

Just a dog and pony show, in other words.

I'm reminded that the opposition parties thought that, subject to controls, the municipalities in Canada should really have figured out where to spend the stimulus cash. But that would have taken the glory away from Harper. Harper chose instead to take credit and issue huge partisan cheques and massive partisan advertising  at the expense of delivering a timely stimulus to the economy. We know where Harper's priorities lay: with himself.

I'm sure Page isn't long for his job.

Journalist disses Canada and I agree

Monbiot:

Canada's image lies in tatters. It is now to climate what Japan is to whaling

The tar barons have held the nation to ransom. This thuggish petro-state is today the only obstacle to a deal in Copenhagen

Sadly, I can only agree:

After giving the finger to Kyoto, Canada then set out to prevent the other nations striking a successor agreement. At the end of 2007, it singlehandedly blocked a Commonwealth resolution to support binding targets for industrialised nations. After the climate talks in Poland in December 2008, it won the Fossil of the Year award, presented by environmental groups to the country that had done most to disrupt the talks. The climate change performance index, which assesses the efforts of the world's 60 richest nations, was published in the same month. Saudi Arabia came 60th. Canada came 59th.

Harper did this, without ever having a majority government.

It should never have been this easy.

In the WTF category: Polar bear cannibalism due to melting Arctic?

You know, there's only one of 19 polar bear populations verified to be climbing, most of the rest stable or declining.

A quick primer on polar bear ecology: It's backwards from you'd expect. They gain weight in winter, lose weight in summer. Why? Because their main diet is seal. They hunt them on the ice during the winter. Less ice, less opportunity to hunt.More global warming = less ice = less polar bears.

Now, it seems that desperate polar bears are eating their young around Hudson's Bay.

Nothing to see here folks...

Harper's Global Warming poison pill

Stephen Harper says he won't reduce our emissions unless China and India agree to do far more. Well it is true that China and India are turning into massive emitters of greenhouse gases, the so-called 'First-World' is the primary cause of global warming to date, and if we aren't doing enough to stop it, why should they? This is the disingenuous position Harper takes: We didn't do anything to solve the problem we caused, now we won't do anything unless you agree to solve our problem.

Of course, the response is predictable, expected and wanted by Harper: they are balking.

The elite Harper works for will be untouched by global warming's worst, having the money and influence to pick and chose where it is best to live and work.

Harper is playing chicken with our children's future, but he's likely to be dead before the worst hits.

Just a thought

State-sponsored torture is state-sponsored terrorism.