Quebec's budget 2007

[SiG_22_Qc]

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/217608

But even as Charest challenge the opposition parties with his budget– financed mostly by federal funds to pay off the so-called fiscal imbalance – he also provided some concessions

http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/govrel/news.cfm?story=58503

Should we scrap it?
http://www.vigile.net/article1014.html

The constitution allows the province of quebec to give tax cuts with *the richer canadian provinces money*. It's constitutional.

It's an outrage, i jumped off my chair when i heard Charest saying to the opposition he doesnt owe apologize to the *Canada-Anglais* for giving tax cuts to quebecers.

Which i personnally think he bought his elections with federal money.

How quebec's budget is ran right now, i think it's outrageous to give tax cut with federal money, this is pathetic.

Charest in parlament said to the opposition:
Je suis très fier de ces baisses d'impot et contrairement a l'opposition, je ne ferai pas d'excuses au Canada-Anglais.

Translated would be: I'm very proud of those tax cuts and contrary to the opposition i wont apologize to the *Canada-English*.

PQ wants to put the money in the services.
Liberals wants to give tax cut
ADQ wants to balance the budget and pay off the debts.

The province of quebec might go in election again this summer yay!!

 

[Yrys]

The province of quebec might go in election again this summer yay!!

I fail to see the happy news in that...

 

[observor 69]

I fail to see the happy news in that...

Wasting the money on tax cuts in a province starving for revenue, not happy news.
Holding another election so soon, not happy news.
Taking the $900 plus and investing it in health care, education and infrastructure, that would be happy news.

 

[a_majoor]

If each level of government was held to their jurisdictional responsibilities, rather than chasing after everything under the sun, then so called "Fiscal imbalance" would not even exist, and government spending (and taxes) would probably be an order of magnitude lower than it is today, while essential government services (protection, justice and defence) could be run more efficiently (less competition for time, attention and resources) and still have much higher levels of funding even with lower overall government spending.

Something to think about next time you pay for someone else's "free" lunch.

 

[Osotogari]

If this is wrong then I stand to be corrected but in order to qualify for the equalization payments a province must not have been in a position to contribute to equalization.  I can understand if there are some jurisdictions with poor economic conditions that require economic assistance, but the whole equalization thing is a big scam.  It seems to me that in reality there are two conditions that seem to qualify a province for transfer payments:

1.  The continuous election of socialists and the inevitable economic fallout that follows
2.  Social program spending and other spending so there is absolutely nothing available for equalization contributions

As an Alberta taxpayer, I'm tired of this.  Again, I don't mind helping people in need but if you're going to elect socialists and/or have excessive social programs (taxpayer-subsidized $7/day daycare being a good example) then you should reap what you've sown on your own.  I hope we get a premier in Alberta who tries to opt out of the transfer system for just one year so the rest of the country wakes up.

I hope Quebec enjoys their tax cut, it was paid for by the rest (meaning BC, Alberta, and Ontario) of Canada. 
Can someone from outside la moins belle province make tax deductible contributions to the PQ?

 

[FredDaHead]

If this is wrong then I stand to be corrected but in order to qualify for the equalization payments a province must not have been in a position to contribute to equalization.  I can understand if there are some jurisdictions with poor economic conditions that require economic assistance, but the whole equalization thing is a big scam.  It seems to me that in reality there are two conditions that seem to qualify a province for transfer payments:

1.  The continuous election of socialists and the inevitable economic fallout that follows
2.  Social program spending and other spending so there is absolutely nothing available for equalization contributions

As an Alberta taxpayer, I'm tired of this.  Again, I don't mind helping people in need but if you're going to elect socialists and/or have excessive social programs (taxpayer-subsidized $7/day daycare being a good example) then you should reap what you've sown on your own.  I hope we get a premier in Alberta who tries to opt out of the transfer system for just one year so the rest of the country wakes up.

Boo-fricking-hoo, cry me a river, sunshine, 'cause I'm SO touched by the sadness of your situation. Soooo terrible. If you don't like what democratically elected governments do in Canada, why don't you try moving to Cuba or North Korea? I'm sure THEY'll listen to you.

I hope Quebec enjoys their tax cut, it was paid for by the rest (meaning BC, Alberta, and Ontario) of Canada. 
Can someone from outside la moins belle province make tax deductible contributions to the PQ?

According to polls, a whole lot of Quebecois didn't want the tax cuts--the Lieberals just don't like democracy. Besides, they're far from the socialist PQ--special laws and other anti-union and anti-welfare actions aren't exactly "socialist." The ADQ is also not socialist--they want fiscal responsability, which is generally not what socialists *coughPQcough* like.

Besides, did you really have to insult everyone in the province because we're stuck with a minority government where part of the opposition won't stand up and execute the will of the people, and the government just ignores everyone? Maybe I should call you a dumb redneck, just because I don't like the high-and-mighty attitude of a lot of Albertans?

 

[Osotogari]

Boo-fricking-hoo, cry me a river, sunshine, 'cause I'm SO touched by the sadness of your situation. Soooo terrible. If you don't like what democratically elected governments do in Canada, why don't you try moving to Cuba or North Korea? I'm sure THEY'll listen to you.

Wasn't Trudeau tight with Castro? 

I have rarely liked what the democratically elected eastern Lieberals or Lyin' Brian before them have done but I'm not leaving.  I feel it would be letting down those members of my family who won the battles at the Plains of Abraham and Batoche and a few other ones since.  I am, however, getting tired of getting ripped off.  The whole tax cut thing by Charest is just the latest.  You want big social programs, huge bureaucracies, and bloated public sector unions?  Fine.  Grow a set and do it on your own dime and I'm sure the rest of the country will have no problem helping out if the economy turns sour. 

I don't mind helping Quebecois, or any other Canadian, offest economic downturns.  What I resent is the transfer payment system being used as a "national unity" or some other political measure.  With Quebec's economic potential with manufacturing, agriculture, and hydroelectric power, there's no reason Quebec should receive any transfer payments, much less be the single largest recipient  http://www.fin.gc.ca/access/fedprove.html. 

high-and-mighty attitude of a lot of Albertans

Over the last thirty years, Alberta has kicked in approximately $135 billion MORE than it's received from the feds.  I think we've earned the right to comment on this issue.   

Maybe I should call you a dumb redneck

I'm a long-serving infantry NCO with a strong attachment to where I live and a low tolerance for bullshit.  I work hard at two demanding  skilled jobs.  If that makes me a redneck, then I'll make sure it's included on my tombstone.

 

 

[nihilpavor]

Being the most highly taxed citizens in the country, Quebecers can do whatever they want to do with the money received. The elected parliament owns that right.

Always keep one thing in mind when talking about the fiscal imbalance too: it appeared right after the referendum and it wasn't a coincidence. It was one of the means taken by Chretien to keep the province of Quebec poor in order to fully control it's destiny. It kept the government of Quebec always begging for its money. That and the sponsorship scandal were parts of the same plan by those lovely eastern liberals.

I mean you're right, the per equation shouldn't be used as a national unity tool in a political way, the country's constitution needs a serious re-write, to lay the plan on who does what and who pays for it. But of course some can of worms shouldn't be opened until everybody calms down and learn to talk and negotiate with each other (in every part of the country).

 

[observor 69]

Quebec...highest debt in Canada
              highest taxes in Canada

Charest's decision with the $700 million from Harper, ....give a tax cut ???

Opposition demands  money  be spent on health care, education and infrastructure.