New posts

New federal budget.

May 3, 2006, 12:22 p.m.
Posts: 2658
Joined: July 6, 2003

But before you decide to have children(s), would one not take this into account?

If both parrents work = more money being earned = more tax revenue for the governemnt.

Originally posted by Purecanadianhoney
I don't see how hard it would be to scrape out the head of your cock once in a while.

May 3, 2006, 12:32 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

If both parrents work = more money being earned = more tax revenue for the governemnt.

Yup.

http://buysell.nsmb.com/showproduct.php?product=20017
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaru72/

May 3, 2006, 9:26 p.m.
Posts: 18059
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

you guys do realize that this $100 childcare benefit is only up to kids that are 6 years old, and you are taxed on it if your income is over $10G? considering that i spent over $5G on childcare last year, and my youngest is almost 7, there's no benefit to me whatsoever. i think the govy should have focused more on providing funding for daycare (subsidized). all this does is make them look good on paper.

May 3, 2006, 9:46 p.m.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Nov. 21, 2002

Any details on income taxes? Cause that's where it's killing us all.

You're 15.

May 4, 2006, 2:35 a.m.
Posts: 11
Joined: Nov. 20, 2005

you guys do realize that this $100 childcare benefit is only up to kids that are 6 years old, and you are taxed on it if your income is over $10G? considering that i spent over $5G on childcare last year, and my youngest is almost 7, there's no benefit to me whatsoever. i think the govy should have focused more on providing funding for daycare (subsidized). all this does is make them look good on paper.

That's good enough for them.

May 4, 2006, 3:22 a.m.
Posts: 33283
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

you guys do realize that this $100 childcare benefit is only up to kids that are 6 years old, and you are taxed on it if your income is over $10G? considering that i spent over $5G on childcare last year, and my youngest is almost 7, there's no benefit to me whatsoever. i think the govy should have focused more on providing funding for daycare (subsidized). all this does is make them look good on paper.

Exactly. Even the childcare people don't like the change.

Increase taxes on smokes and booze because they're a burden on the health care system, but don't do anything about twinkies and pork fat.

They should cut income taxes so people will have more money, and they will have a choice on where that money is spent. They should drop GST for essential goods, such as food and medication, and make the GST more of a luxury tax.

Anyone know if they discussed transfer payments to the provinces?

It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.
- Josiah Stamp

Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race.
- H.G. Wells

May 4, 2006, 6:23 a.m.
Posts: 328
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

even if I was lucky enough to stay home (I say that but I wouldn't actually want to stay home -I like my career)

puts on flame retardent suit

people that prefer their career over their kids probably shouldn't be having kids.

I'm not a human in real life, I just play one on the internet. 

May 4, 2006, 7:57 a.m.
Posts: 2658
Joined: July 6, 2003

puts on flame retardent suit

people that prefer their career over their kids probably shouldn't be having kids.

I CANT AFFORD TO STAY AT HOME!

Originally posted by Purecanadianhoney
I don't see how hard it would be to scrape out the head of your cock once in a while.

May 4, 2006, 8:20 a.m.
Posts: 3019
Joined: Jan. 28, 2003

puts on flame retardent suit

people that prefer their career over their kids probably shouldn't be having kids.

But they need to keep up to the Jones'

May 4, 2006, 8:29 a.m.
Posts: 9747
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

You've fallen for the Conservative lies that the two can't exist in harmony.

The fact of the matter is that you should have the choice to keep your kids at home, or place them in a daycare. You're lucky in that you can survive on one income while raising a family, most can't. You're lucky if you have a social support network of family and friends that can take care of your kids if needed, not everybody has that.

This isn't about valuing the parents that stay at home to raise their kids, it's about not providing options.

Why not provide daycare for thoe who need/choose it, and provide a tax credit for the value of said daycare to parents who choose to raise their kids at the peril of their careers?

$100 a month is a cheap buy-off to create dissonance in the electorate so that the real issue isn't addressed.

Theres only so much cash to go around and I pay enough tax as it is so if more money is spent on childcare Id like to have it in my jeans. I like the idea that I can take the money and decide whats best for MY kids. As for being able to have one parent stay at home, that is a choice we make that comes with sacrifices (If I lived farther out of town id be on a fucking farm)

Really though I fundamentaly dont like the goverment getting ther red taped missmanaged hands into anything. I dont feel the federal goverment does a real effecient job at spending my money

May 4, 2006, 8:33 a.m.
Posts: 9747
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

But they need to keep up to the Jones'

Id say most two income parents are doing it out of nessesity not luxury.

although im sure this applies to some.

May 4, 2006, 8:40 a.m.
Posts: 3840
Joined: March 10, 2006

I think bringing children into our society has reached a point where potential parents need to evaluate not just teh social aspects, but also the financial aspects as well. I would not have a child unless I was confident that I could provide that child the necessary support regardless of any help from outside sources. This is a position I currently evaluate.

When I hear people complain about about the child tax benefit that really bothers me as a result. Here the gov't is providing a free benefit for people having a child. Futhermore it equally benefits all parents, whether they stay at home or use daycare. I can't honestly think of a more reasonable way to assist parents. Those who make the sacrifice to stay home deserve just as much support as those who work do. Scoffing at free money becuase it "isn't enough to do anything with" is a attitude I cannot relate too.

May 4, 2006, 9:02 a.m.
Posts: 1
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

But they need to keep up to the Jones'

V10
Demo 9
Heckler
Yeti ASX
Orange Patriot
Uzzi

May 4, 2006, 9:04 a.m.
Posts: 3019
Joined: Jan. 28, 2003

V10
Demo 9
Heckler
Yeti ASX
Orange Patriot
Uzzi

So?? BTW, thanks for keeping track on bikes I've owned in the past.

May 4, 2006, 10:01 a.m.
Posts: 4128
Joined: April 9, 2005

the problem with bringing up children badly only comes out in the long term, far too long for any gov to worry about seriously - unless voters make an effort to judge them for it and let them know they think it's important.

these kids will grow up and they environment will shape them and their behaviour in turn affects us all. That's why it's a worthy tax spend for everyone, even the completely selfish.

same goes for many or social and environemntal issues. the 1 % GST saving could be better spent on a whole range of policies, that would ultimately yield a cost saving - less social workers, police, environmental damage, recovery, pollution related illnesses and so on…it's fine to think with your wallet, but don't be stupid about it, look at the long term

Forum jump: