Seismic Activity Reported In Sutton Courtenay, Oxfordshire, England

In one of the best examples of doublespeak I have encountered in a long time, Ontario Finance Minister had this to say about wage freezes and bargaining rights yesterday:

“Bargaining in good faith is not only the right choice to make, the Supreme Court of Canada requires it,” the finance minister said, emphasizing the goal is “not about demonizing teachers or nurses.”

“Where agreements cannot be reached that are consistent with the government’s plan to balance the budget . . . we are prepared to propose necessary administrative and legislative measures to protect the public from service disruptions — and also to protect jobs for teachers, education staff, and health-care workers,” he said.

High-placed Liberals insist that seismic disturbances detected in Sutton Courtney, Oxfordshire, the burial site of George Orwell, at the time of Duncan's announcement are mere coincidences.

The Occupy Movement: More Wisdom From Star Readers

I wrote the other day that I normally refrain from excerpting large chunks of text from other sources, but here I go again, this time a reproduction of letters from perceptive Toronto Star readers on why we should be thankful for the Occupy Movement. I was especially struck by B Byron's reminder of the federal government’s plan to drop the corporate tax rate from the already low 18 per cent to 15 per cent in the new year, putting an additional $10 billion to $11.5 billion of public revenue back into corporate pockets.

Then, of course, there is the 2% cut in provincial corporate taxes coming in January from Dwight Duncan, whose government will block a private member's bill that would remove the provincial portion of the HST. Said Dalton McGuinty yesterday: Where are we going to get the $350 million? (the amount that would be lost were the bill to become law.)

The answer to that question seems pretty obvious to me and countless others.

In any event, here are the letters:

Re: Campaign must adapt or fade away, Editorial Nov. 22

Concerned that the Occupy movement is unfocused? “It’s time for them to move out of St. James Park and put a finer point on their concerns.”

Actually, they are focused. Their focus is to get the attention of the 99 per cent. Their focus is to prod that majority to flesh out the myriad issues that remain unaddressed by the growing economic divide.

Their job of Occupation is not done. It is not done until we get busy and do our job. It is our job to fix the democratic system; our job to fuel a peaceful, non-violent, creative revolution; our job to build an economic system that works for all people of this planet earth.

A revolution not distracted by a minor temporary inconvenience in St. James Park; but, fuelled by the idealism, compassion, creativity and courage demonstrated there. We owe the Occupiers nothing but gratitude.

The Rev. Philip Cable, Barrie

I would love more than anything to believe the Occupy Toronto movement has made a difference. However, in the same issue of the Star, we read that the Liberal government will go ahead with further corporate tax cuts along with massive program cuts; the Ford administration is looking to eliminate well-paid city employees in favour of a cheap, insecure workforce; not to mention the federal government’s plan to drop the corporate tax rate from the already low 18 per cent to 15 per cent in the new year, putting an additional $10 billion to $11.5 billion of public revenue back into corporate pockets.

Occupy Toronto is the gentlest and most articulate of warnings. What will it take for governments to listen?

G. Byron, Toronto

People should commend the courage and persistence of the Occupiers, most of whom are young people in their 20s across Canada and in many cities of the world. They bring attention to issues of economic inequality, poverty and how the actions of corporations and banks have failed many worldwide.

Political parties in the most recent Canadian elections, which often claimed to be supporting the average person or average family, are noticeably absent from the locations of the Occupiers, who are addressing the tough issues that should be discussed by governments.

How shameful that the government response to these youth is annoyance, eviction and the threat of violence. These youth deserve support for speaking up about issues that most people with power would rather not discuss.

Diane Sullivan, Toronto

Andrea Horwath, Tim Hudak: Unlikely Allies

“Outrageous proposals for new spending and reckless tax giveaways like these are unacceptable.” So says Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, in high dudgeon over the intention of NDP leader Andrea Horwath, and supported by Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak, to introduce a private member's bill to remove the provincial portion of the HST from home heating bills.

According to Duncan, the proposal would cut provincial revenues by nearly $350 million a year and that raising corporate taxes — as the NDP would like to do — is no answer to lost revenue.

Hmm... as I have mentioned before, the key to critical thinking is to have access to an extensive array of information and a willingness to digest and incorporate that information into one's worldview. Here is some information that is vital in assessing Duncan's denunciation:

Despite the fact that Ontario faces a very large deficit and debt, the following tax regimen attends to the business world:

Ontario Corporate Income Tax Rates, 2010 - 2013


General Corporate Income Tax Rate
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 18 16.5 15
Provincial 14 12 11.5 11 10
Combined 32 30 28.5 28 26.5 26 25

Corporate Income Tax Rate for Income from Manufacturing and Processing*
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 18 16.5 15
Provincial 12 10
Combined 30 28 26.5 25
* Also applies to income from farming, mining, logging and fishing

Small Business Corporate Income Tax Rate*
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 11
Provincial 5.5 4.5
Combined 16.5 15.5

You will note in the above chart, taken from the Ontario government's website, that despite Duncan's denunciation of a measure that would benefit untold numbers of ordinary citizens, he is more than willing to cut provincial revenues by as much as 2% to benefit the corporate world.

Oh, I know it would be easy to justify this ongoing and seemingly ineluctable drive to subsidize business as the price of remaining a competitive regime that is attractive to corporate entities, but the problem with that reasoning is that Ontario, as is Canada as a whole, is already very competitive in its rates vis a vis the United States, and offers singular advantages over the latter jurisdiction in terms of infrastructure, an educated workforce, and basic healthcare for all. According to KPMG's 2010 Competitive Alternatives study of international business costs confirmed it again in 2010: Canadian business costs are once again the lowest in the G7.

Perhaps one of the most telling and, from my perspective, damning detail is this one:

Ontario’s corporate income tax rate (provincial and federal combined) is lower than that of any U.S. state, Japan or France and will drop to 10% by 2013.

So, it seems to me that we have a real obligation to critically assess and, when warranted, challenge this government in all of its assertions. To do anything less is to allow a corporate-driven and influenced elected body to make a mockery of democratic principles.

A Tax on Financial Transactions

The Globe and Mail has an online story reporting Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan's adamant opposition to any consideration of a tax on financial transactions at the G20. Although the article doesn't provide details, most of what I have read about such a measure would involve the following: 0.1 per cent tax on transactions of stocks and bonds and 0.01 per cent on derivatives.

While the advocates of unfettered capitalism are always reluctant to share, given the preferential tax treatment capital gains and dividends receive, such a measure would hardly be punitive, and would contribute substantially to efforts to relieve the grinding poverty in which much of the world lives. In the West, the revenues from the tax could be used for many purposes, including better funding for healthcare, climate change adaptation and costs, etc.

However, just as with proposals to combat climate change, I suspect that nothing will come of the G20 discussion for the same reason, namely that without universal application of such a tax, it would be unfair and counterproductive, or so we are told.

Clearly the North American powers-that-be have not been paying attention to the the needs of the people, as recently reflected in the Occupy Movement.