we're punching ourselves.
ugh.
this is what they want. we walked right into it.
Wednesday, March 12, 2025
bizarrely, increasing consumption taxes might be popular in canada, right now.
but it's not a good policy and not an effective response, and it will just hurt low income canadians, while inflicting minimal harm on american capital. the real winner is the federal government, which gets a new revenue stream.
if they really wanted to fight back, they'd bring in export taxes, not so-called retaliatory tariffs.
at
10:10
that said, there's a relatively easy way to fix the regressive part of the tariff tax hike, and it's to send out tariff rebate checks, like they send out gst rebate checks.
it doesn't make it a good or effective policy, but it at least makes it less regressive, as a consumption tax increase.
at
09:50
broadly speaking, these retaliatory tariffs will have little effect on purchasing decisions by canadians and therefore have little effect on foreign suppliers. rather, they are just a means for the government to generate revenue, and are in a real sense an undoing of the gst decision in the 80s, which shifted import taxes to sales taxes. we're bringing back the tax importers used to pay before mulroney abolished it and converted it into a sales tax.
if that's what we're doing, can we cut the gst, then, too?
if it's just a revenue generating mechanism, which is what it is, it should be strenuously opposed as a cynical way to introduce a tax increase. why should canadians pay for this? let the americans pay for it. tax them, not us.
i'm not an economist. i have a math degree, some experience solving economics problems in calculus and algebra courses, a few economics themed math courses (third year linear programming was very economics focused, 4th year automata theory is a computer math course with applications in economics and linguistics, 4th year game theory had major applications in economics, i took a number of courses in differential equations from 2nd-5th year which are used in engineering and economics, etc), economics 101/102, a three year sociology of law degree and some experience reading policies, as a 44 year old. the number of math courses i took that were cross-referenced as economics courses, together with economics 101/102, would give me enough credits for a minor in economics, if i applied for it. that's it.
i would also have a minor in physics if i applied for it due to the number of math courses i took that were cross-referenced as physics courses, on top of the degrees in math, computer science and sociology of law. i am a little bit short on minors in music and english lit, but not by much. i have only taken a total of two history courses, both in greek history (classical and byzantine). then, there's a lot of topics where i have a credit or two - biology, chemistry, psychology, philosophy, etc.
so, it doesn't take much education or very deep reasoning to figure out that these supposed "retaliatory tariffs" will have no meaningful effect on american suppliers and are just a regressive tax increase on canadian consumers.
if you paid 30% more for florida sourced tropicana instead of mexican sourced walmart orange juice, you'll pay an extra 25%, too. etc. these aren't major price hikes per unit, it's a dollar per orange juice jug, or a couple of extra bucks for a 40 of whiskey. it's just a regressive, revenue generating consumption tax, and we're being suckered into it by politicians wrapping themselves in the flag to promote it.
at
09:34
see, this is why i didn't want ford talking to trump.
ford thinks that by lifting the export tax he's making progress towards a resolution that can benefit both sides.
in trump's mind, he just tricked the fatass dummy ford into removing the export tax, and then suckered him with a 25% tariff. and, basically, trump is right, that's exactly what he did. trump then defines that as being "smart" and "good negotiating". he "wins". further, he's proven that canada is weak and stupid and easy to take advantage of, so he will therefore continue to take advantage of canada in the future.
that's how america operates and has operated for 250 years.
if trump actually understood tariffs, he'd be dangerous.
but ford is a buffoon and he couldn't negotiate himself out of a parking ticket. he should at least send a trade negotiator. he won't, he'll go himself.
the feds need to lock him in a closet and tell him not to come out until they're done.
at
09:07
trudeau's government seemed to be intentionally exceedingly pro-muslim, and that seems to come from a personal interest in the religion from the man himself, who was famously photographed in blackface as an arab sheikh before he became prime minister and seems to view the aga kahn exceedingly fondly, perhaps as result of his mother having had an affair with him, as one of the dozens of women he was sleeping with as a young british aristocrat.
justin trudeau has a far greater resemblance to the aga kahn than he does to pierre trudeau.
google "young aga kahn".
margaret was in the right place at the right time. the public line is that she was friends with his sister. right.
this is going to have to be addressed and moderated one way or another. it would be helpful if carney can set that in motion, even if he doesn't last very long in office.
at
05:33
well, we have to have a reason to think we're not americans and for a lot of people, the government of the country at most levels as the primary example, that's lacking. if canada wants to have the same culture, follow the same ideology, use the same laws, etc as the americans, then why not just become american? an american citizenship card is a valuable item.
i don't want to support a canadian government if it just wants to be all about free markets. if carney and ford and smith want to work a room by pushing market theory and competition, they may find a muted response. those are american ideas. one of the basic differences between canada and the united states has been that canada is a more socialist country, more willing to use government to solve problems, and less interested in market economies. if you ask a canadian on the street to come up with a reason they don't want to be americans, besides a beer commercial, the first and last thing a lot of us will say is we don't want to lose our healthcare.
there's an opportunity to enforce this, but the governments we've elected recently aren't aligned with historical canadian values. it was nice to hear chretien talk on sunday, as he might have been the last truly canadian prime minister and, at 91, he might represent the end of a culture and be the last of his people, so to say. yoda, indeed. justin trudeau, mark carney, chrystia freeland, michael ignatieff, stephen harper, doug ford, danielle smith, etc have their differences, but they all share the characteristic that they are culturally american and have spent their entire political careers wanting canada to be america lite, either as some kind of california north or as some kind of more enlightened texas. that's not going to work with a lot of people, who are going to wonder what the point is.
if we remember that being canadian means using government, and use it to retreat from the reliance on market-based solutions we've seen dominate politics since the turn of the century, we might find more people want to remain canadian. if we keep copying america, we might find people think there's less purpose to it, and they may start to look at the positives of the alternative.
at
05:08
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)