Christy, Christy, Christy

You know I don’t have a problem with the idea of the HST, taxes are taxes, its how they spend them that annoys me much, anyways, considering the province needs revenues for such things as education, job creation and such, raising revenue (while at the same time reducing the tax rate as apparently promised) seems like an idea that would work and one that would it seems be easy to explain and inform the public about.

That being said, I’m puzzled as to why Ms. Clark has decided to duck out of a debate with the NDP leader …

cknw.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLo … ID=1450527

I must admit that she’s not getting off to a particularly strong start as leader and with her frequent mis-steps of the last little while, may be making the task of the NDP a lot easier come the next election and I really didn’t think that was in the cards.

Whoever is advising the Premier, might want to remind her that if you want to be accountable, transparent and all the other buzz words of the Clark era thus far, it might help to actually do more than photo ops and such.

A debate even on the radio, on the merits of the HST surely would at least give her a chance to offer up some public comments that aren’t filtered through a dozen or so press hacks?

You don’t want to debate Christy. After all those years on the radio she can duck the issue, change the subject, toss red herrings, build straw men and even use ad hominem attacks with the best of them.
Which is what most of the unwashed masses think “wins” a debate these days.

maybe because this is a referendum for the ppl, it was started by a disgraced premier but still got it through to referendum, most ppl know the issues and where the parties stand, it is not an election, she does not have to debate anyone on it, Mr Dix is just trying to score points nothing more

She probably doesn’t want to answer confirming that the PST will now be paid on a great deal of goods and services that we never had to before if we keep the HST.

[quote=“CharlesMHays”] You know I don’t have a problem with the idea of the HST, taxes are taxes, its how they spend them that annoys me much …

That being said, I’m puzzled as to why Ms. Clark has decided to duck out of a debate with the NDP leader …

A debate even on the radio, on the merits of the HST surely would at least give her a chance to offer up some public comments that aren’t filtered through a dozen or so press hacks?[/quote]

Having listened to much hyperbole, I’ve also concluded that I don’t have a problem with the HST. I won’t be voting for a return to the PST/GST dual tax, higher total regime.

With HST, as with PST before it, the government is free to exempt particular items, eg junk food, smokes, haircuts etc, from the provincial portion of the tax in the same manner as groceries, gas, books etc are exempted at the till. Concerns should be focused on the exemptions not the tax that the exemptions are deducted from.

Low income people, many of whom are elderly, get higher rebates under HST than they did when there was just a GST rebate. I don’t see a commitment on the NDP’s web site to maintain those benefits. Instead, in their latest, rather bizarre media offering they complain about HST being charged on “pop, chips and pizza”, an injustice that they will presumably end some day.

The NDP does not seem to have much in the way of details to contribute to a debate. Their commentary is rather trite (and I voted for them last election and may well in future if they get their act together). It’s even weaker than Carole James’ simplistic “axe the tax” war cry of election battles largely forgotten.

As for a debate between Christy and the leader of the NDP, um what’s his name, oh yes Mr Dix, he seems to need Christy to get his message across a lot more than Christy needs Mr Dix. That is how I read his clarion call. His voice otherwise barely registers on this issue, but perhaps that’s because he really doesn’t have that much to say.

[quote=“BTravenn”]

[quote=“CharlesMHays”] You know I don’t have a problem with the idea of the HST, taxes are taxes, its how they spend them that annoys me much …

That being said, I’m puzzled as to why Ms. Clark has decided to duck out of a debate with the NDP leader …

A debate even on the radio, on the merits of the HST surely would at least give her a chance to offer up some public comments that aren’t filtered through a dozen or so press hacks?[/quote]

Having listened to much hyperbole, I’ve also concluded that I don’t have a problem with the HST. I won’t be voting for a return to the PST/GST dual tax, higher total regime.

With HST, as with PST before it, the government is free to exempt particular items, eg junk food, smokes, haircuts etc, from the provincial portion of the tax in the same manner as groceries, gas, books etc are exempted at the till. Concerns should be focused on the exemptions not the tax that the exemptions are deducted from.

Low income people, many of whom are elderly, get higher rebates under HST than they did when there was just a GST rebate. I don’t see a commitment on the NDP’s web site to maintain those benefits. Instead, in their latest, rather bizarre media offering they complain about HST being charged on “pop, chips and pizza”, an injustice that they will presumably end some day.

The NDP does not seem to have much in the way of details to contribute to a debate. Their commentary is rather trite (and I voted for them last election and may well in future if they get their act together). It’s even weaker than Carole James’ simplistic “axe the tax” war cry of election battles largely forgotten.

As for a debate between Christy and the leader of the NDP, um what’s his name, oh yes Mr Dix, he seems to need Christy to get his message across a lot more than Christy needs Mr Dix. That is how I read his clarion call. His voice otherwise barely registers on this issue, but perhaps that’s because he really doesn’t have that much to say.[/quote]

Yes, you probably have figured out the Dix approach, gaining a bit of name recognition for someone with little of same in the province at the moment. Still, the Premier seems to have drifted a bit from her days of re entry into politics, after turning off the CKNW microphone.

Rather than engage the people with debate and discussion, of late we’ve received not much more than photo ops usually in a Canucks sweater until that of course became the poor fashion choice of the spring and summer.

I’m not one of those that see her as some kind of devil waiting to lead the province to ruin, preferring to actually wait until both leaders and their parties outline their piece of ground at election time.

But I’d feel better about her “leadership” role, if she would occasionally step out of that bubble that they’ve put around her and wade into debate issues from time to time. Best way to make your opponent look like someone locked into his/her party’s rigid ideology is to discuss an issue and make your case.

In the case of the HST debate, I think if the Libs actually explain the positives and the negatives of the tax and then make their case for keeping it, then the population probably will understand it better.

I’m still baffled as to how anyone might find the advice of Bill Vander Zalm of any legitimate value, he having long ago used up his quota of good will in the province, the folks that are travelling with him on this Anti HST crusade must occasionally wonder if they’re on the right side of the debate don’t you think?

[quote=“CharlesMHays”]

I’m still baffled as to how anyone might find the advice of Bill Vander Zalm of any legitimate value, he having long ago used up his quota of good will in the province, the folks that are travelling with him on this Anti HST crusade must occasionally wonder if they’re on the right side of the debate don’t you think?[/quote]

I too find it rather ironic that WillyZalm has a measure of credibility in the eyes of BC voters. Interesting times ahead. :smile:

For the same reason that people find it odd that Vander Zalm has some measure of credibility, I find it equally odd that the Liberals have any credibility.

I wrote this a couple of weeks ago on a different thread and I didn’t get an answer and I have been reading thread upon thread about the HST on other sites and I haven’t found an answer.

"Leaving aside the scummy way in which it was introduced. Leaving aside the lack of trust many have for the government that is proposing the tax and whether or not we believe them when they say it is good for us. Leaving aside all the misinformation and manipulation that has come out of the government regarding the referendum e.g. "it is fixed - believe us when we say that the % will go down. Let’s leave all of that aside. (And as you can see, I admit it will be very hard for me to do so),

Could we get arguments for and against the shift of $2B per year from corporations to consumers."

From the pro-HST side we know that business will win. We are told that families will win. The poor will win. The old will win. And it is a revenue neutral tax shift so the government doesn’t win or lose. So if everybody is winning, who is losing?

So again, I just don’t trust anybody. Therefore start over.

Come up with a tax program that is actually fair and understandable for everybody. And remember, the HST is not something that will disappear. It is not a golden egg that has to be taken now before somebody else does. It can be revisited.

And I am still convinced that this is just as much an issue of democracy as it is a tax issue. Governments should not be allowed to get elected through lies and misinformation. They should not be allowed to get away with lies and misinformation by adding more misinformation and changing the details (maybe 10% in three years) so we end up with people not even sure what they are voting on.

Christy Clark doesn’t want to debate the issue because she wants to keep her options open. I will start another thread to explain.

Granma had a saying about teaching others a lesson by cutting off your own nose.
As a consumer I will vote NO as there is no way the former items that were PST exempt will return and there is a 90% chance the HST reduction to 10% will go ahead.
As a business owner, I expended a lot of effort and money to convert to HST. It is easier to handle than 2 taxes. I refuse to reverse everything once again at my expense.
Forget about debate Mr Dix you’ll get slaughtered, in over a year your party has come up with no viable options or alternatives. It’s clear the NDP opposes the HST strictly because the Liberals implemented it.

[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]Granma had a saying about teaching others a lesson by cutting off your own nose.
As a consumer I will vote NO as there is no way the former items that were PST exempt will return and there is a 90% chance the HST reduction to 10% will go ahead.
As a business owner, I expended a lot of effort and money to convert to HST. It is easier to handle than 2 taxes. I refuse to reverse everything once again at my expense.
Forget about debate Mr Dix you’ll get slaughtered, in over a year your party has come up with no viable options or alternatives. It’s clear the NDP opposes the HST strictly because the Liberals implemented it.[/quote]

Ah Herbie, once again, you so eloquently make a good case.

The No side of this goofy referendum (you know a better question and one less likely to cause massive confusion might have been "Do you wish to keep the HST, Yes or No, this “No really means yes to keep the thing” voting question is just making it harder than it needs to be.

Anyways, Herbie you should volunteer your services to the Yes, no make that the No er, (you know what I mean) side, they could use your common sense explanations…

[quote=“CharlesMHays”]
Yes, you probably have figured out the Dix approach, gaining a bit of name recognition for someone with little of same in the province at the moment.

I’m still baffled as to how anyone might find the advice of Bill Vander Zalm of any legitimate value, he having long ago used up his quota of good will in the province, the folks that are travelling with him on this Anti HST crusade must occasionally wonder if they’re on the right side of the debate don’t you think?[/quote]

I didn’t particularly like Zalm as premier and I didn’t vote for his party, but Fantasy Gardens was long ago and Lilly has probably long since retired her headbands. I don’t know that anyone has particularly followed Zalm’s advice. He has not said anything about Campbell’s mishandling of the HST issue that others have not said. The difference is that he communicated the dissatisfaction far more effectively, particularly compared to Carole James and the NDP.

From a cold start, sitting in his arm chair, with no party organization behind him, Zalm mobilized a populist campaign that brought about Campbell’s premature demise and huge back peddling by the government. Partisan politics aside, as a former premier Zalm is quite simply a more experienced, more capable politican than anyone currently in the opposition.

James, in contrast, conceded that the HST is here to stay, probably because she new that if the NDP ever formed a government she would need the cash. Perhaps that reflects her integrity, say compared to Chretian, who campaigned against GST then once in government conveniently decided that it was a better tax than what preceded it.

As for Dix, good for him for having won a race between a number of lame dogs whose names few people can even recall, but he has done nothing worth talking about to make his mark. Why should Christy accommodate Dix’s inexperience and lack of gravitas by handing him the mic and telling him to pay attention to the ‘on air’ sign?

A more interesting debate would be between two strong communicators like Christy and Zalm.

I think that the other reason for Christy not debating Dix, other than that he has relegated himself to near obscurity, is that it is not in the government’s interests to frame the referendum as Liberals v NDP, which is no doubt what the NDP would like, considering that they were outperformed by Zalm. Why should Christy hand the NDP ownership the issue?

Rather than treating this as a partisan issue, the government is far better off presenting the referendum as an issue about tax policy, in the hope of winning over swing voters and NDP voters that have grown weary of or moved beyond the same old drum beat of rhetoric from the tail end of the Campbell era.

Small businesses are winners for the reasons Herbpopnecker has alluded to. Exporters are winners because they will be more competitive in world markets. That will also benefit their workers. Low income people and seniors are winners because of HST rebates. The losers are disproportionately heavy consumers of “pop, chips and pizza” and smokers, many of whom already are or will be a burden on our public health care system.

If I were a businessman, as Herbie is, I would certainly understand his reason for voting to keep the HST.

I am not sure about his reasons as a consumer. He doesn’t trust the Liberals, but he is willing to believe their promise of dropping the tax to 10% in three years.

And he clearly doesn’t trust the government when he assumes that the previously exempt PST items will continue to be taxed at 12%. What bothers me in this scenario is that we are expected to accept the government’s veiled threat that you better do as we dictate or we will screw you even more.

If that is what this government stands for then all the more reason to say No - er Yes on the ballot.

And by the way, I can see some value in consumer type taxes. I have no problem with taxes - steep taxes - on high end products that only the well off can afford. And I certainly see value in taxing things - steeply - that we don’t want people using - like junk food, or pollutants or whatever. At the same time there should be exemptions on items that we see as beneficial or worth doing - like carrots or exercise equipment or energy savers.

There is a lot that needs to be done to find a tax system that is fair and worth keeping and one that is not at risk every time there is a change of government.

Call me naive, call me illogical, this is my one chance to tell the government - future governments as well - to smarten the hell up. Don’t play with the electorate. Get a tax system that is fair and quit making stuff up behind closed doors or on the fly.

[quote=“BTravenn”]

Small businesses are winners for the reasons Herbpopnecker has alluded to. Exporters are winners because they will be more competitive in world markets. That will also benefit their workers. Low income people and seniors are winners because of HST rebates. The losers are disproportionately heavy consumers of “pop, chips and pizza” and smokers, many of whom already are or will be a burden on our public health care system.[/quote]

If only that were the case. I think there are far more previously exempt items than just pop and chips.

[quote=“DWhite”]

Call me naive, call me illogical, this is my one chance to tell the government - future governments as well - to smarten the hell up. Don’t play with the electorate. Get a tax system that is fair and quit making stuff up behind closed doors or on the fly.[/quote]

Agreed. I hope the HST and the Liberals are extinguished in the near future.

[quote=“hitest”]

[quote=“DWhite”]

Call me naive, call me illogical, this is my one chance to tell the government - future governments as well - to smarten the hell up. Don’t play with the electorate. Get a tax system that is fair and quit making stuff up behind closed doors or on the fly.[/quote]

Agreed. I hope the HST and the Liberals are extinguished in the near future.[/quote]

Well, to be honest, and based on past precedent. I’m not totally sold on the idea that the NDP is any better equipped to provide such a revolution in the tax collection world :smile:

[quote=“DWhite”]

[quote=“BTravenn”]
… The losers are disproportionately heavy consumers of “pop, chips and pizza” and smokers, many of whom already are or will be a burden on our public health care system.[/quote]

If only that were the case. I think there are far more previously exempt items than just pop and chips.[/quote]

It is the case. Junk food and smokes are huge volume items, and you agree that they should be taxed:

Carrots and other groceries are HST exempt. Energy savers should not be exempted to encourage people to switch; they should be mandatory. Besides exercise equipment, which I don’t think low income recipients of HST rebates are worried about, which previously exempt items are you concerned about or do you think would offset the cut from 12% HST > 11% > 10%? Why not list them off?

By the way, the feds have already approved the cuts by Order in Council 2011-0614, subject only the outcome of the referendum:

2011-0614	2011-06-09			FIN

Act Excise Tax Act
Subject British Columbia HST Regulations
Precis BRITISH COLUMBIA HST REGULATIONS, in order to formalize and give legal force to the reductions in the rate of the provincial component of the HST in British Columbia announced by the Government of British Columbia on May 25, 2011, which would reduce the rate of the provincial component of the HST from 7 per cent to 6 per cent, effective July 1, 2012, and from 6 per cent to 5 per cent, effective July 1, 2014, subject to the result of the referendum conducted under British Columbia’s HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) Referendum Regulation.

That’s where I think that your argument stumbles, particularly among those of us who don’t particularly like or trust the Liberals but are not that fond of the NDP either (even if we end up voting for them). Zalm’s protest campaign effectively succeeded. The referendum shouldn’t be some kind of rearguard action to express further distain for the government.

The referendum should be about taxes. Other reasons aside, like those that Herbpopnecker has cited, 10% HST is a better deal than going back to 12% PST/GST. I voted ‘No’.

Christy is only slightly less dangerous than her master Scrambell, and only because of the she is so easy to see. This is getting ridiculous. We have lost our railway, our rivers, possibly our beautiful ocean and land to oil greedy off shore friends of corrupt government. Why is this is being debated ? Throw them out!!! .I can only hope we collectively Wake up for our children.

Here we go again.
The referendum has S.F.A. to do with past, present or future behaviours of politicians from any party.
It has to do with a tax.
Do you want to pay one tax of 12and hope it goes down to 10% as promised? Or do you want to pay two taxes of 12% with no promises of any reductions on anything?
It WILL NOT GO BACK to what things were before.

[quote=“BTravenn”]

Carrots and other groceries are HST exempt. Energy savers should not be exempted to encourage people to switch; they should be mandatory. Besides exercise equipment, which I don’t think low income recipients of HST rebates are worried about, which previously exempt items are you concerned about or do you think would offset the cut from 12% HST > 11% > 10%? Why not list them off?

The referendum should be about taxes. Other reasons aside, like those that Herbpopnecker has cited, 10% HST is a better deal than going back to 12% PST/GST. I voted ‘No’.[/quote]

First of all I know that carrots are HST exempt. My point is that I believe that some things should be taxed (chips and pop) while others shouldn’t (carrots).

And we can debate all day about what things should be taxed and what shouldn’t.

You can find a list of all the previous tax exempt items here (although I suspect you already know this and were just testing me).fighthst.com/hit-list/

The HST is a tax shift from corporations to consumers. All of these previous items that were tax exempt are now taxed so that corporations don’t pay as much as they did. Nobody seems to be debating whether that shift is right or fair or good or bad, but the fact remains that it is a shift.

Consumers are to pay more. They can nickel and dime us through increased admission fees, non-prescription drugs, haircuts restaurant meals, parking, vitamins, school supplies and a variety of other things that we won’t really notice on a daily basis but will add up over a year. And then there are the bigger items that occur less frequently like appliance/electronic repairs or landscaping or reroofing, or real estate fees or funerals.

Along the way, the people are paying so that big business doesn’t.

And we are told that we will benefit, this by a government that has lied to us before and I can’t trust now. They say the poor and seniors will get a larger rebate and they may well, but they too have to pay higher HST costs on their everyday items.

And then they confuse the issue by changing numbers so that we are now not voting on the tax shift but on whether we want 10% on everything or 12% on some although as you and Herbie are pointing out we will be screwed either way as they won’t exempt anything.

Fear and confusion and divisiveness. Great way to push through tax policy.

The Liberals are pathological liars. Does anyone really believe their claim that the HST was not on their radar prior to the election? Rubbish. There many reasons why I will be voting to extinguish the Liberals in the next election such as an under funded education system, long wait times in health care, and an Olympic-sized debt.
I voted yes to extinguish the HST.