Federal NDP leadership hopeful Brian Topp is trotting out a tax-the-rich promise on his run for the political roses, red roses, of course.
Topp says he wants his party to make high taxes for high-income earners a key plank in its next election campaign. He also says he would like to increase the GST rate when the economy improves.
Topp is convinced it's a winning tactic telling reporters, "I will be talking about income taxes and I think it's time for our party to step up to that plate and be pretty clear about that because then we'll have a mandate to act if we're elected."
That's a big if, but for now it's a political tactic that could help Topp in the NDP leadership race, though most pundits following the event say Topp is, and will stay, the frontrunner.
The bigger question though is, what's rich? Who would come under the rapacious eye of the NDP taxman if Topp became our next prime minister?
By way of background, in 2004, then NDP leader Jack Layton proposed an inheritance tax, which flopped, and he also called for higher taxes on the wealthy. When asked what constituted wealthy Layton figured about $80,000 a year. Wrong answer: in Ontario at the time it was easy for the average union factory worker - particularly in the car plants - to make in excess of that amount. Layton abandoned his tax-the-rich policies in subsequent elections.
From Layton's experience it would seem an increased income tax policy is a dangerous proposition to take to a campaign.
And Finance Minister Jim Flaherty raises a larger question, namely how much money will it raise?
In response to Topp's take on tagging the rich Flaherty called it a dreamy idea and said, "Most of the personal income tax paid in Canada is not paid by wealthy people. It's actually paid by middle-class people because they're the bulk of the population."
Flaherty continued saying, "If anyone thinks - in the United States, Europe or Canada you can tax the 1.0 per cent or .05 per cent and raise a lot of money it's nonsense."
Flaherty is correct, leaving Topp and the NDP policy wonks to figure out where wealthy begins. Clearly a $100,000 a year income - though to some a princely figure - is more the norm than the
exception for skilled trades.
And in B.C. we're experiencing a serious skilled trades shortage, a shortage soon to be exacerbated by the recent federal shipbuilding contract won by Seaspan Marine of Vancouver and Victoria.
It would not be in Brian Topp's best political interests to hit those in the high-paying trades sector with an income tax increase.
So let's look at a tax increase on those earning over $250,000 a year. This was one of Barack Obama's promises during his 2008 presidential campaign. Sounds good, except Canada wage earners in that category are not the ones we want to offend or drive away. These are our doctors, senior engineers, researchers, scientists and corporate managers. They're also highly mobile. And no matter what you think of the U.S. economy, that country has a rapacious appetite for those with professional skills. The U.S. has the same ageing population we have and at ten times our size a desperate need to replace thousands of
professional vacancies.
The Robin Hood approach of overtaxing the rich in the faint hope it will improve the lot of the poor doesn't work. Never has, never will.
NDP hopeful Brian Topp may think he's on some noble socialist campaign, but there's more to governing than
taking shots at the successful.
If he wants to improve Canada let him focus on better management ideas. He has to tell us what he would do to make our country a better place to live, to do business, to employ people, to work hard and command a higher salary.
Those are the policy issues that count.
Occupy whatever
Monday's Citizen had a good account of the Occupy Wall Street-style protest last Saturday at City Hall. It was an interesting event. As promised, it was unfocused and dealt with a number of ills ranging from multinational corporate greed to the unfairness of City Council's decision to approve the Haldi Road Northern Supportive Recovery Centre.
One of the more curious displays was at the B.C. Government and Service Employees Union tent. There I found a pamphlet titled Anarchism.
Anarchy in my Webster's is defined as absence of government. So doesn't it follow with the absence of government that there would an absence of government employees?
I can appreciate the BCGEU looking for a shorter workweek but promoting anarchy is really taking it to extremes.
