header image
The world according to David Graham

Topics

acva bili chpc columns committee conferences elections environment essays ethi faae foreign foss guelph hansard highways history indu internet leadership legal military money musings newsletter oggo pacp parlchmbr parlcmte politics presentations proc qp radio reform regs rnnr satire secu smem statements tran transit tributes tv unity

Recent entries

  1. Trump will win in 2020 (and keep an eye on 2024)
  2. January 17th, 2020
  3. January 16th, 2020
  4. January 15th, 2020
  5. January 14th, 2020
  6. January 13th, 2020
  7. January 12th, 2020
  8. January 11th, 2020
  9. January 10th, 2020
  10. January 9th, 2020
  11. January 8th, 2020
  12. January 7th, 2020
  13. January 6th, 2020
  14. January 5th, 2020
  15. January 4th, 2020
  16. January 3rd, 2020
  17. January 2nd, 2020
  18. January 1st, 2020
  19. December 31st, 2019
  20. December 30th, 2019
  21. December 29th, 2019
  22. December 28th, 2019
  23. December 27th, 2019
  24. December 26th, 2019
  25. December 24th, 2019
  26. December 6th, 2019
  27. A podcast with Michael Geist on technology and politics
  28. Next steps
  29. On what electoral reform reforms
  30. 2019 Fall campaign newsletter / infolettre campagne d'automne 2019
  31. older entries...

2016-11-14 17:28 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Economic prosperity, Government bills, Second reading, Tax relief,

Allègement fiscal, Deuxième lecture, Prospérité économique

Madam Speaker, to my friend and colleague from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, he may have finally convinced the member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, but for me taxes are not about spending people's money, but about sharing common costs.

It is not about being taxpayers, but about being citizenry. Elections are about deciding our priorities in broad strokes and what those common costs are. We exist as a legislative body to decide on those finer details, thus this budget.

Does my friend and colleague believe, as he has hinted, that tax cuts are the only possible way to grow the economy? If so, if we eliminated taxes altogether, would we then as a country become infinitely prosperous? It is simple calculus, according to his pitch. In a limit formula according to Conservatives, as taxes approach zero, prosperity is infinite. Does he really believe in trickle-down economics?

Madame la Présidente, mon ami et collègue d'Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock a peut-être fini par convaincre le député de Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, mais, pour moi, si l'on perçoit de l'impôt, ce n'est pas pour dépenser l'argent des autres, mais pour partager des coûts communs.

Nous ne sommes pas que des contribuables, mais aussi des citoyens. Aux élections, nous définissons les grandes lignes de nos priorités et les coûts communs. Puis, le corps législatif que nous formons en précise les détails, d'où le budget.

Est-ce que mon ami et collègue pense, comme il l'a laissé entendre, que la seule façon de créer de la croissance économique est de réduire l'impôt? Dans l'affirmative, si nous abolissions carrément l'impôt, est-ce que le pays deviendrait infiniment prospère? C'est une simple question de calcul, selon son discours. Selon une formule limite, à en croire les conservateurs, lorsque l'impôt approche de zéro, la prospérité est infinie. Croit-il vraiment à la théorie économique des effets de retombées?

Watch | HansardEcoutez | Hansard

Posted at 15:26 on November 14, 2016

This entry has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.

2016-11-14 13:28 House intervention / intervention en chambre | hansard parlchmbr tv |

2016-11-14 17:43 House intervention / intervention en chambre

(RSS) Website generating code and content © 2001-2020 David Graham <david@davidgraham.ca>, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Comments are © their respective authors.