Are you in favour of extingushing the HST?

[tiger_handheld]

Yes or No

Vote. Voting ends August 5th.

For your reading pleasure:


http://www.revscene.net/forums/vanco...revisited.html

http://www.revscene.net/forums/vanco...t-us-more.html

http://www.revscene.net/forums/vanco...uly-1st-4.html

[krazynuck]

is the decrease to 10% confirmed though as I thought it is just proposed??

The one thing that is sad to see is the vandalism to the signs....(pro and against)

I saw on the news about the signs on the island be changed as well as the signs on the way to UBC i see have black writing on them

[xpl0sive]

fuck HST. and if it gets "extinguished" they better get rid of the SST as well. I am tired of paying 12% on used cars bought from Private Parties

[tiger_handheld]

Originally Posted by krazynuck

is the decrease to 10% confirmed though as I thought it is just proposed??

The one thing that is sad to see is the vandalism to the signs....(pro and against)

I saw on the news about the signs on the island be changed as well as the signs on the way to UBC i see have black writing on them

It's official. The Feds "made it the law"

[taylor192]

If you're a low income earner, you want the HST gone cause it is costing you more.

If you're a mid-high income earner, you want the HST to stay cause once its gone, income tax will have to rise to offset the $1.6B we'll have to give back to the feds.

[q0192837465]

My mom has a business so HST benefits us. So yay for HST.

[xxxrsxxx]

The issue that I have is that Falcon mentioned that if PST/GST is brought back, he is not going to guarantee that previously PST exempt products will remain that way. Thus if he removes those exemptions, we're just back at paying 12% again.....

[Tegra_Devil]

doesnt the HST not go down to 10% until 2013 or something like that if voted in?

[gars]

Originally Posted by taylor192

If you're a low income earner, you want the HST gone cause it is costing you more.

If you're a mid-high income earner, you want the HST to stay cause once its gone, income tax will have to rise to offset the $1.6B we'll have to give back to the feds.

That's only temporary though. I guess for a low income earner - you can only really look at the short term. But HST's benefits won't really show up until a few years down the road.

[DsZ24]

I wouldn't mind the hst if all the companies that are benifitting from it will pass their savings along to the consumer. Dunno if that'll happen tho.

[Culverin]

If it is a free market and very competitive, then yes, eventually those savings will trickle down. But if it's a company where there are a lot of fat cats and benefits (ie. government, crown corporations), then probably not so much.

[JF.]

So what's the pros/cons between the hst and the gst/pst? Beside the percentage.
Posted via RS Mobile

[SFUguy]

it's a class war

bourgeoisie wants all the burden on the proletariat.

wake up people.

[toyota86]

imo voting either option sucks. people still end up paying more tax compared to pre hst.

if hst does get extinguished and the gst and pst sytem is reinstated. like someone said earlier, the goverment pretty much made it clear that the exemptions under the old system will not come back if the gst and pst is brought back. so, what that means is that everything might still end up being tax gst and pst combined at 12%. This whole exercise ends up being a vote on what to name our 12% tax.

if hst stays, well obviously big businesses benefit. poor people pay more tax. no more exemptions. trickle down effect is a troll concept. the reduction to 10% is a few years away and there are no guarantees how long it will remain at 10%.

either way, the average citizen still loses because tax payer are going to get the bill for the goverment to do studies and research, implement the hst, the cost of making this referendum happen, all the logistics, manpower, and all other associated costs.

those sneaky bastards.

[iEatClams]

Originally Posted by Culverin

If it is a free market and very competitive, then yes, eventually those savings will trickle down. But if it's a company where there are a lot of fat cats and benefits (ie. government, crown corporations), then probably not so much.

Actually, its more the big companies that prevent corporations.

Take, for example Loblaws, which owns:
Extra Foods, No Frills, Superstore, T & T. etc.

you're really shopping at the same store since it's not an actual competitor.

Or Best Buy and Futureshop. Same owners.

We need to prevent oligopolies or monopolistic behaviours.

Edit : Sorry - prevent competition , not corporations

[chunk_stir]

Originally Posted by toyota86

if hst stays, well obviously big businesses benefit. poor people pay more tax. no more exemptions. trickle down effect is a troll concept.

the statement: "poor people pay more tax." is a bit misleading and short-sighted I think. Technically, EVERYONE is paying more tax. The HST doesn't "pick on" any income level because it's a consumer-tax. In fact, because it's a consumer tax, those who spend more will actually pay more tax. Certainly, those with tighter budgets will feel the increased tax more at the immediate change. But how much more? If a household lives off of $1000/mo (ie. for food, restaurants, entertainment, gas, etc) and now has to pay 5% more on that entire $1000, that is only $50 more a month.. It is unlikely that the entire amount will now be taxed 12% vs 7% before.

So if a higher-income household spends $5000 a month, they are paying 5x more tax in the form of HST than the household that spends $1000/mo.

As for trickle-down effect...
The HST does make business accounting a lot more efficient (and hence operations), and technically, that should bring better selection/better pricing fro the end-consumer. To what degree that ends up benefitting the end-user is to be determined.

[crazyazn]

In theory, HST would be better...but realistically it's unlikely the benefits businesses receive will trickle down to the average consumer.

[xpl0sive]

Originally Posted by crazyazn

In theory, HST would be better...but realistically it's unlikely the benefits businesses receive will trickle down to the average consumer.

communism works in theory as well. HST is a cash grab plain and simple. now the government is making it seem like the people are the bad guys trying to get rid of the HST. saying things like it will cost us more in the end and so on... The only reason it will cost us more is because the government brought in the HST without ever getting a public opinion about it. if this was to happen in europe, entire cities would shut down in protest... but here in Canada, we just bend over and take it...

[toyota86]

Originally Posted by chunk_stir

the statement: "poor people pay more tax." is a bit misleading and short-sighted I think. Technically, EVERYONE is paying more tax. The HST doesn't "pick on" any income level because it's a consumer-tax. In fact, because it's a consumer tax, those who spend more will actually pay more tax. Certainly, those with tighter budgets will feel the increased tax more at the immediate change. But how much more? If a household lives off of $1000/mo (ie. for food, restaurants, entertainment, gas, etc) and now has to pay 5% more on that entire $1000, that is only $50 more a month.. It is unlikely that the entire amount will now be taxed 12% vs 7% before.

So if a higher-income household spends $5000 a month, they are paying 5x more tax in the form of HST than the household that spends $1000/mo.

As for trickle-down effect...
The HST does make business accounting a lot more efficient (and hence operations), and technically, that should bring better selection/better pricing fro the end-consumer. To what degree that ends up benefitting the end-user is to be determined.

sorry you are right. EVERYONE pays more tax. my original point is that they shouldn't messed with the old system that worked. the 10% reduction should have been alongside the hst when it was first introduced and not used as a trump card to get votes now. having the 10% right from the start would have made the transition smoother and less people would have been opposed of it. the extinguish hst movement wouldn't have the traction it does now. pov from a simpleton.

[Prolowtone]

Even if the HST was introduced at 10% you are still paying more for alot of things. People would have still been against it especially if they had a damn vote on it in the first place. I agree however that they should have left the old system in place.

[RRxtar]

the province needs to bring in a certain amount of money. whether they do that jointly thru HST, soley thru PST, or thru income tax increases, they are going to get it.

going thru the hastle of overturning the HST is not going to save you a penny outside of the short term. infact, it may cost more even straight from the get go.

[ImportPsycho]

Originally Posted by tiger_handheld

It's official. The Feds "made it the law"

anti-hst ppl make it sound like there are lot of things that can happen from now to 2013 which would make 10% HST not happen
so i don't know what to belieave...

[darkfroggy]

Yes, because getting rid of the HST means that you'll pay less taxes... *cough cough*.

The government will ALWAYS find a way to raise more money. They can do this through a myriad of ways such as raising transit prices, environmental taxes, income taxes, etc.

Getting rid of the HST will creates more headaches than it solves, since the government will have to do tons of paperwork and backtracking.

[crazyazn]

Seriously, why the fuck are they letting people vote NOW when they didn't let people do it when they brought in the HST?

We are in a lose-lose situation...we are the losers regardless if it's GST+PST or HST.

I don't know what they are trying to accomplish with this vote It seems like a total waste of money to me

[Nightwalker]

I sent in my ballot. Keep the HST.