 |
EnMasse This place is all that is left.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thwap Fulltime enMasse Member

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 3431 Location: Hamilton
|
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: Raising EI Premiums |
|
|
So, always incompetent finance minister Jim Flaherty is conceding deficits until 2015 'eh? And to mitigate these deficits, the fucking stupid asshole proposes to raise EI premiums!
The Harper government's plan for whittling down Ottawa's deficit by 2015 includes collecting billions of dollars more in payroll taxes than it pays out in Employment Insurance benefits over a three-year period.
This is stoking fears that overcollection of EI premiums, starting in Ottawa's 2012-13 fiscal year, could hinder employment growth by unduly burdening companies as they are trying to recover and grow.
This is obscene. Both the Liberals and their "conservative" alternative, whether Progressive Conservative or the dog's breakfast of closet-case Jesus freaks and greedheads that constitutes the various incarnations of stephen harper's gang of idiots, have built their careers on screwing over workers and rewarding the parasites in the financial sector and this is no different.
Once again, our problem with deficits and debts was caused by the creation of high interest rate monetarist recessions which broke inflation by breaking workers through unemployment. These recessions lowered government revenues while raising government expenses. To bridge the gap, governments were forced to borrow large amounts at a high rate of interest. Sickeningly, business and government elites blamed the victims for these deficits and said that unemployment was caused by the attraction of unemployment insurance benefits, general welfare assistance and other assorted programs. To wean workers off of these programs, governments slashed them under the rationalization of deficit reduction.
It was the Chrétien and Martin governments that first seized upon the Unemployment Insurance fund (renamed by Martin as "Employment Insurance" in the same silly way that death benefits are called "life insurance") as a cash cow. By hiking eligibility requirements and raising premiums the Liberals could collect money off of working people and use it to pay down the debt. While they were doing this, Martin cut income and corporate taxes which mainly benefited the wealthy. The wealthy, for the most part, "invested" their money in the farcical clusterfuck that is the North American financial sector, giving Canadians the worst possible outcomes. Insane financial products seeking to wring maximum earnings out of a stagnant, gasping, increasingly indebted consumer base. It was the attempt to square this circle that brought about the gigantic financial meltdown and subsequent recession in the United States and then the rest of the world.
Because of this recession, the harper government has been forced (under extreme duress) to go into deficit spending to keep the economy from going into a tailspin. The moronic Flaherty, having a 19th-Century grasp of economics wants to slam on the brakes as quickly as possible in the ignorant belief that we're headed for a crash caused by deficit-induced inflation and all sorts of other doomsday scenarios that just aren't true. (From the link:)
The net financial liabilities of all levels of government combined in Canada are projected to be just 27% of GDP this year, compared to an OECD average of 51%. Our net debt is down hugely from the peak of 71% in 1995. (See OECD Economic Outlook Annex Table 3.) General government net debt servicing costs stand at an extraordinarily low and indeed almost trivial level of 0.2% of GDP, compare to an OECD average of 1.7%. The fact of the matter is that we are in great fiscal shape, and can well afford to borrow more and invest much more now that times are tough and public investment is needed to sustain jobs and set the stage for a more productive future economy.
What is harper's miserable explanation for such ass-backwards behaviour?
But the Tories defend the measure as necessary to ensure the EI program breaks even, particularly given a current freeze on premiums that's keeping them artificially low right now.
...
The Harper government said it's merely trying to ensure that the EI program balances out over time. It wants to recoup shortfalls in EI collections that it expects will have built up over the next few years as a result of the recession – which has sent unemployment skyrocketing.
“We committed to freezing EI premiums as part of the economic action plan to help Canadians weather the recession,” said Chisholm Pothier, spokesman for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
“We are keeping that commitment and rates will remain frozen until 2011.”
The problem is that while he's frozen premiums he hasn't expanded eligibility. Furthermore, the damned "fund" (which doesn't exist as premiums go into general government revenues and the Supreme Court has ruled that the government doesn't have to pay it back) had been in surplus since 1995 and all the way to 2008! All that time over half of unemployed workers (including two out of three women workers) have been facing rising average levels of unemployment and receiving no benefits, ... all part of the process of stagnation and desperation upon which the parasitical financial sector demanded maximum returns from. So, in response to a recession caused by the collapse of the economy due to the implosion of a financial sector bubble built on the backs of indebted, underpaid, overtaxed consumers, fuckhead Flaherty grudgingly embraces deficit spending but hopes to curtail it as soon as possible by raising taxes on that same consumer base that's been gasping for breath for over the past two decades.
A better option would be to raise income taxes on the wealthiest and the corporations. Our business world had at least a decade of low taxation, stagnant wages and a cheap currency (making our exports attractive and keeping imports artificially expensive) and they did little to raise productivity. Our wealthy, as I said, for the most part, "invested" their money in Bay Street and Wall Street snake-oil. They have more money than they know what to do with and the REAL ECONOMY could use it. _________________ I thought she was going to marry that snooty rich guy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vundo Draxon Leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1409
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Manufacturing budget surpluses out of excessive EI premiums? Paul Martin ought to take them to court for patent infringement.
| Quote: | | Our wealthy, as I said, for the most part, "invested" their money in Bay Street and Wall Street snake-oil. They have more money than they know what to do with and the REAL ECONOMY could use it. |
So the wealthy have pissed away all of their money on snake oil which has now evaporated, and at the same time have so much money they don't know what to do with it? Sorry, I don't quite understand how that works. And after we've taken all their money and it runs out, what then?
The way I see it, the problem is simple and the solution is to do the opposite. The problem was that people pretended that without any tangible reasons the economy can continue exponential growth forever (burying all of our debts and problems under the miracles of growth). The solution is to stop pretending that all of the debt we're racking up will disappear under the weight of the magical inflation that results from the unlimited and perpetual growth of the economy based upon ever more exotic economic fantasies and ponzi schemes. The only difficult part is finding a way to disabuse people of the notion that either governments or free markets can create something from nothing if we only just believe it fervently enough. This is a necessary first step before any real changes can come about, but I have a bad feeling that it's not going to happen until the shit really hits the fan (by which point it will be too late). _________________ If you can read this, you've already lost the game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hephaestion Deeply Shallow

Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 24243 Location: Where the Wild Things Are...
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vundo Draxon wrote: | | Manufacturing budget surpluses out of excessive EI premiums? Paul Martin ought to take them to court for patent infringement. |
*snerk* Good line.
| Vundo Draxon wrote: | | Quote: | | Our wealthy, as I said, for the most part, "invested" their money in Bay Street and Wall Street snake-oil. They have more money than they know what to do with and the REAL ECONOMY could use it. |
So the wealthy have pissed away all of their money on snake oil which has now evaporated, and at the same time have so much money they don't know what to do with it? Sorry, I don't quite understand how that works. And after we've taken all their money and it runs out, what then? |
a) He didn't say they lost ALL their money -- they are wealthy, so they'll still have gobs left over.
b) We haven't come CLOSE to "taking all their money"
c) The ones who have been MOST guilty of pissing away money on moonbeams and chimeras -- the "financial institutions" -- have had great shwacks of the money replaced already, handed to them on a silver platter by the US and Canadian governments. While the workers are basically told to go pound sand.
| Quote: | | The way I see it, the problem is simple and the solution is to do the opposite. The problem was that people pretended that without any tangible reasons the economy can continue exponential growth forever (burying all of our debts and problems under the miracles of growth). |
And the *worst* offenders in this regard were the Finance Department, followed closely by the banks, investment houses and Big Media, all of whom worked hard to convince John and Jane Q. Public of the same thing -- after all, we can't have "consumer confidence" slipping, eh? That's what this whole fukkin' House of Cards is built on, ever since they allowed Big Business to ship all the manufacturing jobs off to cheap labour areas like China and India.
| Quote: | | The solution is to stop pretending that all of the debt we're racking up will disappear under the weight of the magical inflation that results from the unlimited and perpetual growth of the economy based upon ever more exotic economic fantasies and ponzi schemes. |
As I said, the most delusional in this regard are found in government and the financial services sector. And if they are not deluded themselves, then they have been busy cynically stoking the delusions of others.
| Quote: | | The only difficult part is finding a way to disabuse people of the notion that either governments or free markets can create something from nothing if we only just believe it fervently enough. |
Tell that to the currency traders and banking houses -- they've been making out like bandits, creating "wealth" out of thin air for generations now.
| Quote: | | This is a necessary first step before any real changes can come about, but I have a bad feeling that it's not going to happen until the shit really hits the fan (by which point it will be too late). |
No, no... that's what it needs, is for the shit to hit the fan. The entire system is corrupt, and in order to fix it, it needs to be torn down and the rubble cleared away. Anything else is just a short-term plastering-over of the cracks, while the structure itself remains a House of Cards. _________________ "The dignity of an animal is measured by his capacity to revolt in the face of oppression." -- Mikhail Bakunin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vundo Draxon Leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1409
|
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hephaestion wrote: |
a) He didn't say they lost ALL their money -- they are wealthy, so they'll still have gobs left over.
b) We haven't come CLOSE to "taking all their money" |
If they didn't piss away all that much, and they've remained quite wealthy, how do we come to the conclusion that they're mostly backwards idiots? I don't completely disagree with your statements there, I just don't think they can simultaneously be both devious schemers and morons who don't know what they're doing.
And while "the rich" still have wealth today, it won't always be that way. There will come a day when we can't rely on extracting wealth from them to fix our problems, and that day will come a lot sooner if we make it a matter of policy to promote perpetual taxation as the cure to all the economy's ills.
| Hephaestion wrote: |
c) The ones who have been MOST guilty of pissing away money on moonbeams and chimeras -- the "financial institutions" -- have had great shwacks of the money replaced already, handed to them on a silver platter by the US and Canadian governments. While the workers are basically told to go pound sand. |
You're right, throwing money at failing corporations is a stupid policy. I wish we had a government that would do less of that, but the composition of the House of Commons prevents that. Remember when it was the biggest scandal in the world when it appeared that the government wasn't ready to ship out the huge sacks of cash to failing corporations?
| Hephaestion wrote: |
And the *worst* offenders in this regard were the Finance Department, followed closely by the banks, investment houses and Big Media, all of whom worked hard to convince John and Jane Q. Public of the same thing -- after all, we can't have "consumer confidence" slipping, eh? That's what this whole fukkin' House of Cards is built on, ever since they allowed Big Business to ship all the manufacturing jobs off to cheap labour areas like China and India. |
Yep, and the same bullshit is still being fed to us by every major political party and media outlet. I know that I'm treading awfully close to the line between mainstream discourse and the land of libertarian looneys, but I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that anyone in mainstream politics/media is really prepared to deal with the truth.
| Hephaestion wrote: |
Tell that to the currency traders and banking houses -- they've been making out like bandits, creating "wealth" out of thin air for generations now. |
They're certainly part of the problem, but so are they who would believe that confiscating that imaginary wealth is going to make it any more real or useful.
| Hephaestion wrote: | | No, no... that's what it needs, is for the shit to hit the fan. The entire system is corrupt, and in order to fix it, it needs to be torn down and the rubble cleared away. Anything else is just a short-term plastering-over of the cracks, while the structure itself remains a House of Cards. |
There is a lot of unfortunate truth in this statement. The problem I have with the complete destruction of the current system is that I would like to have a non-zero chance of surviving the restructuring. _________________ If you can read this, you've already lost the game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DSquared aka Aristotleded24
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 4122 Location: Winnipeg
|
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vundo Draxon wrote: | | And while "the rich" still have wealth today, it won't always be that way. There will come a day when we can't rely on extracting wealth from them to fix our problems, and that day will come a lot sooner if we make it a matter of policy to promote perpetual taxation as the cure to all the economy's ills. |
The real issue is distribution of wealth. If it was more evenly distributed, especially at the bottom, then people have money to spend and the economy will hum along rather nicely. Prior to the 1970s, the rich paid well over half their income in taxes (and still enjoyed life) and the economy still generally hummed along. Overall performance after the '70s hasn't matched what it was post-WW2. _________________ This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|