Minutia first: you strike a medal, not a monument; and High Noon was a Gary Cooper movie, not John Wayne.
Signed,
Your friendly neighbourhood pedant.
But seriously, getting rid of the DST was a good idea for all the reasons you note, plus one more:
Income beats consumption as a tax base for individuals, because income is a better gauge for how much individuals benefit from government (i.e. why we pay tax in the first place). Sure, consumption may be more economically efficient but that's not the point - efficiency isn't the critical criteria.
The benefit corporations receive though, isn't best measured by their income, and certainly not their revenue (like the DST), but by how much they invest, in both capital and labour, in CANADA. Taxing both labour and capital instead of income puts the onus on management to ensure that they are both invested productively. Yes, that will no doubt reduce prices for each, but prices will only retreat until the ROI reaches a point that makes it worthwhile to invest. The result will be that efficient corporations (and industries) will attract more investment, which is what you want for a productive economy.
As far as reducing wages, that can be mitigated by a partial basic income, which would also negate the need for minimum wages. The best part is that all this can be done without actually increasing the tax take overall (both corporate and individual). A major overhaul of the individual tax/welfare system, augmented by the basic income replacing provincial transfers would be sufficient. If the provincial transfer idea seems out of left field, consider that the basic income provides a federal transfer where it's needed most on a far more granular (i.e. accurate) level than provincial government transfers. And best of all, integrating it with the individual tax system (treating it as a negative tax) provides a mechanism for people earning their way out of needing it, without further intervention by government.
You can argue the point of an excise tax for products where the tax can be directed to paying for the cost some government product (fuel and highways, tobacco/alcohol and health) or just because it's in a general social interest to reduce usage (oil), but the DST has no such rationale.
I don't understand what we gained through this, other than Trump promising to put together a trade deal. And Trump's promises aren't worth the TruthSocial tweets he writes them in.
Every single trade deal the US signs with us is simply a way to have US companies penetrate and plunder the country, while shielding them from any government oversight.
Now, Carney might believe that he literally has no choice at the moment because of how vulnerable Canada is to US economic pressure like tariffs and sanctions. I dont know that I agree fully, but that's plausible, and to that end I agree with the above.
But what this must then mean, is that the Libs start creating the financial, bureaucratic and physical infrastructure to build an independent economy, so that when the US comes to blackmail us again, we don't have to roll over.
The problem is I don't see any of this happening. I don't see the creation of independent communication networks or dealing with the corporate chokehold telecom companies have, I don't see a large expansion of the Bank of Canada to bring more capital control into the government to break the grip of the banks (which we'll need anyway to deal with the housing crisis), I don't see plans to nationalize key industries (very slowly, obviously), raw materials, energy, telecommunications, infrastructure etc.
Without this in place, Canada will always be susceptible to corporate takeover, because it will continuously be reliant on foreign capital investment and corporations due to allowing private entities to fleece huge amounts of our GDP and whisk it away offshore, while then demanding deals if we want it back.
But, this is all dependent on where Carney's allegiances lie. Given his track record so far, I think we can safely say that it is not with working Canadians.
I think he sees the potential of CORPORATIONS. Not really the people who he governs. Spend less; Invest more. Spend less on what. Invest where? Private entities v. public benefits. Trickle down is and always has been a con. Wealth redistribution upward. He's educated but absolutely isn't the smartest guy ever.
I really wish we had more political imagination in Canada.
We should be demanding way more that just the DST. Ford threatening to withhold power from the US is a good example. We could also be seeking to secure our resources, like we do with Dairy. Extending these protections to other industries would put more bargaining chips on the table.
But just like Obama, we ask for what we reasonably can achieve and get beaten back to one hair’s side of OK. From my personal perspective this whole negotiation feels like the rich and powerful fighting about their levels of wealth and power. None of seems to give a shit about the welfare of working people.
If everything is up for negotiation, let’s start by asking for a Canada that takes care of people before corporations.
I agree. It’s a drag that the DST had to be cancelled but what can you do? It’s impossible to negotiate with someone who has left the room. I wonder how the other countries such as France have managed.
The History of modern Canada is the history of caving to American ways influence and interference...neoliberalism...Diefenbaker didn’t want nukes so the Kennedy administration interfered to see he was defeated....Canadian votes at the UN cave to America supporting Israel's genocide of the Palestinians. The best way to distinguish ourselves as Canadians is to support international laws rather than the law breaking Americans.
I have followed your work probably from the get go. If not here then elsewhere but I am a free subscriber. You should be paid considering the quaity of work you put out. I have an "outside the box" idea, if you haven't already thought of it. I can't become a paid subscriber but might be able to pay for individual articles. If the platform allows it could be a good way to expand your audience to potential full-time subscribers and earn through nickel and diming. Just a thought. I will continue to enjoy your work regardless.
I guess it is not politically plausible for the PM or any politician to tell Canadians the honest truth: Without Canada rescinding the DST, relaxing banking ownership and regulation rules, and eliminating supply-management with dairy, poultry and eggs there will be no new trade deal with the current US administration.
The question should be "What do we want in return, to make it worth our while?" More energy corridors, more car manufacturing, no duties on anything made in Canada, including aluminum, softwood lumber, etc??
But Carney didn't give us this explanation. It was purely a concession to an ad hoc demand. It screams if weakness. We should have just ignored Trump's complaint and brought up a stronger retaliation. You only embolden a bully this way.
See the difference in how Shienbaum maintains her composure against Trump and Mexico doesn't face half the wrath.
A pledge to Trump is only worth as much as a Trump pledge.
It’s just a stalling tactic to allow focus to be maintained on trade talks.
Will it actually be rescinded?
I’d guess only if the trade talks result in enormously larger wins for Canada.
Even CRA has just said that they won’t process refunds on previously paid DST until after legislation recinds the tax (no sooner than mid September).
Don’t get sucked into US media-driven drama.
💪💪🇨🇦
Minutia first: you strike a medal, not a monument; and High Noon was a Gary Cooper movie, not John Wayne.
Signed,
Your friendly neighbourhood pedant.
But seriously, getting rid of the DST was a good idea for all the reasons you note, plus one more:
Income beats consumption as a tax base for individuals, because income is a better gauge for how much individuals benefit from government (i.e. why we pay tax in the first place). Sure, consumption may be more economically efficient but that's not the point - efficiency isn't the critical criteria.
The benefit corporations receive though, isn't best measured by their income, and certainly not their revenue (like the DST), but by how much they invest, in both capital and labour, in CANADA. Taxing both labour and capital instead of income puts the onus on management to ensure that they are both invested productively. Yes, that will no doubt reduce prices for each, but prices will only retreat until the ROI reaches a point that makes it worthwhile to invest. The result will be that efficient corporations (and industries) will attract more investment, which is what you want for a productive economy.
As far as reducing wages, that can be mitigated by a partial basic income, which would also negate the need for minimum wages. The best part is that all this can be done without actually increasing the tax take overall (both corporate and individual). A major overhaul of the individual tax/welfare system, augmented by the basic income replacing provincial transfers would be sufficient. If the provincial transfer idea seems out of left field, consider that the basic income provides a federal transfer where it's needed most on a far more granular (i.e. accurate) level than provincial government transfers. And best of all, integrating it with the individual tax system (treating it as a negative tax) provides a mechanism for people earning their way out of needing it, without further intervention by government.
You can argue the point of an excise tax for products where the tax can be directed to paying for the cost some government product (fuel and highways, tobacco/alcohol and health) or just because it's in a general social interest to reduce usage (oil), but the DST has no such rationale.
It was just plain bad tax policy.
I don't understand what we gained through this, other than Trump promising to put together a trade deal. And Trump's promises aren't worth the TruthSocial tweets he writes them in.
Every single trade deal the US signs with us is simply a way to have US companies penetrate and plunder the country, while shielding them from any government oversight.
Now, Carney might believe that he literally has no choice at the moment because of how vulnerable Canada is to US economic pressure like tariffs and sanctions. I dont know that I agree fully, but that's plausible, and to that end I agree with the above.
But what this must then mean, is that the Libs start creating the financial, bureaucratic and physical infrastructure to build an independent economy, so that when the US comes to blackmail us again, we don't have to roll over.
The problem is I don't see any of this happening. I don't see the creation of independent communication networks or dealing with the corporate chokehold telecom companies have, I don't see a large expansion of the Bank of Canada to bring more capital control into the government to break the grip of the banks (which we'll need anyway to deal with the housing crisis), I don't see plans to nationalize key industries (very slowly, obviously), raw materials, energy, telecommunications, infrastructure etc.
Without this in place, Canada will always be susceptible to corporate takeover, because it will continuously be reliant on foreign capital investment and corporations due to allowing private entities to fleece huge amounts of our GDP and whisk it away offshore, while then demanding deals if we want it back.
But, this is all dependent on where Carney's allegiances lie. Given his track record so far, I think we can safely say that it is not with working Canadians.
You make many good points ... until the last one.
We have yet to see where Carney's allegiances lie.
Of course any PM is constrained by our captains of industry, and Carney is a creature of capitalism, obviously.
But I suspect Carney has bigger ideas than most of our leaders.
More Norway, less vassal.
He seems ambitious, with a strong understanding of Canada's potential.
And he keeps talking about economic opportunity, good jobs, and keeping more benefits for Canadians.
Let's see what he's got.
I think he sees the potential of CORPORATIONS. Not really the people who he governs. Spend less; Invest more. Spend less on what. Invest where? Private entities v. public benefits. Trickle down is and always has been a con. Wealth redistribution upward. He's educated but absolutely isn't the smartest guy ever.
I really wish we had more political imagination in Canada.
We should be demanding way more that just the DST. Ford threatening to withhold power from the US is a good example. We could also be seeking to secure our resources, like we do with Dairy. Extending these protections to other industries would put more bargaining chips on the table.
But just like Obama, we ask for what we reasonably can achieve and get beaten back to one hair’s side of OK. From my personal perspective this whole negotiation feels like the rich and powerful fighting about their levels of wealth and power. None of seems to give a shit about the welfare of working people.
If everything is up for negotiation, let’s start by asking for a Canada that takes care of people before corporations.
They’re asking in New York, what’s stopping us?
Yes, they are asking in NYC, but will they get it? So far Mamdani has not won the Mayorship. We will see in November.
No I think this was a bad call and the PM should have hung tough.
With the EU and NATO and the UK folding like pixie sticks perhaps the pressure was just too much?
We need a social media project analagous to what the CBC was in the 30s.
I agree. It’s a drag that the DST had to be cancelled but what can you do? It’s impossible to negotiate with someone who has left the room. I wonder how the other countries such as France have managed.
The History of modern Canada is the history of caving to American ways influence and interference...neoliberalism...Diefenbaker didn’t want nukes so the Kennedy administration interfered to see he was defeated....Canadian votes at the UN cave to America supporting Israel's genocide of the Palestinians. The best way to distinguish ourselves as Canadians is to support international laws rather than the law breaking Americans.
I have followed your work probably from the get go. If not here then elsewhere but I am a free subscriber. You should be paid considering the quaity of work you put out. I have an "outside the box" idea, if you haven't already thought of it. I can't become a paid subscriber but might be able to pay for individual articles. If the platform allows it could be a good way to expand your audience to potential full-time subscribers and earn through nickel and diming. Just a thought. I will continue to enjoy your work regardless.
I guess it is not politically plausible for the PM or any politician to tell Canadians the honest truth: Without Canada rescinding the DST, relaxing banking ownership and regulation rules, and eliminating supply-management with dairy, poultry and eggs there will be no new trade deal with the current US administration.
The question should be "What do we want in return, to make it worth our while?" More energy corridors, more car manufacturing, no duties on anything made in Canada, including aluminum, softwood lumber, etc??
But Carney didn't give us this explanation. It was purely a concession to an ad hoc demand. It screams if weakness. We should have just ignored Trump's complaint and brought up a stronger retaliation. You only embolden a bully this way.
See the difference in how Shienbaum maintains her composure against Trump and Mexico doesn't face half the wrath.