skip to main |
skip to sidebar
THE CANADIAN POLITICAL LEADERS DEBATES 2008
A commentary on the Real Issues, the Red Herring Issues and
Side-Step Issues to be expected during the French Language debate on October 1rst and the English Language debate on October 2nd 2008.
By Victor Drummond ©
September 2008
Real Issues:-
Regardless of any bail-out package the American Congress may approve for “Main Street” to salvage “Wall Street” the world economy vis-à-vis the Canadian economy will dominate the Canadian Political Leaders debate in both official languages.
i.e:- Job Loss, Job Creation, International trade treaty re-negotiation etc.
Getting tough on youth crime is sure to make the top ten list.
Energy conservation. Initiating projects to replace fossil fuel energy sources by renewable energy sources. All leaders will subscribe to this issue but do not expect much in the way of a W5 on this item.
Then the topic of provincial equalization payments will take center stage – at some point -- with accusations flying back and forth regarding which provinces are being over compensated and which are being short-changed.
Municipal transfer payments – Infrastructure renewal etc.
In the mix will be the issue of recognizing Quebec as a nation within a nation.
To what extent self rule etc.
Red Herring Issues:-
Saving the world from global warming. According to scientific calculations Canada’s total contribution of green-house gas to the world total is approximately 2%. Go figure.
Our political leaders may make a lot of rhetorical comments on this issue but in reality there is nothing substantial that Canada alone can do to make any real difference.
The Carbon Tax. The theory of revenue neutral taxation sounds great but just does not work in this instance.
The cost of setting up -- and operating -- anything like a system that gives the taxpayer something for nothing would be horrendous and could never be kept in balance. This plan should be best classed as a Make Work project.
Side-Step Issues:-
Note:- A side-step Issue is a Real Issue that none of the Party Leaders want to deal with.
Although most – perhaps all – Canadian Political Parties subscribe to popular moral values such as honesty, decency, dependability, justice, fairness, equality and the like – when it comes to costing them votes and/or significant sums of money they can turn a blind eye to the most flagrant examples of a violation of one or more of these typical Canadian Values.
The matter of correcting unfair, unequal, abusive, taxation of thousands of Canadians allowed by a defect in the taxable benefit legislation is well known to every current Canadian Political Leader. To date not one leader has acknowledged the existence this outrageous violation of taxpayers RIGHTS.
Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxation, (CFET), has organized the submission of several versions of the “Question” –
As Canada’s next Prime Minister what would you do to correct this unjustified tax and compensate its current victims?
My bet being their question will not be presented – in any form -- during either of the Leadership debates. It will be lost in the shuffle of so-called higher priority issues.
What if I am wrong – for once? Then my sincere apology will be posted in my next article – constructed to be commensurate with the degree the question is presented intact.
Then if any of the top three party leaders claim no prior knowledge of this issue – they are at the very least undermining their party communications system and at most prevaricating.
Because this issue has been appealed by its victims numerous times -- to every party to form our government -- over the past seven years.
Side-Step Actions:-
(1) At least one party leader can claim to have partially addressed the issue -- of taxing phantom income -- by way of signing a “Tax Remission Order”, (TRO), to revoke this unjustified taxation of -- by my estimate --- 0.00001% of those honest hard working Canadians victimized by this insidious tax.
(2) This same leader can also claim to have upgraded the tax victims appeal process and appointed a toothless Tax Ombudsman to advise the Canada Revenue Agency to treat all such victimized appellants courteously.
Victims shouldn’t mind being told very politely to:-
“Pay up or else.”
(3) In order to facilitate a victim’s case being brought to the attention of a “Chief Appeals Officer” this same leader had a tax appeal form, or two, upgraded to make it easier for individual appellants to organize and submit their appeals.
The problem has not been solved – or even alleviated – by the foregoing three government actions.
As Journalist Don Cayo said on this topic in his article published in the Vancouver Sun last year:- “Change the law – don’t just mask the problem.”
When a flaw in an existing law becomes apparent by creating victims at a wholesale rate it is dishonest, unfair, and an insult to the intelligence of any normal person to pretend a one-at-a-time appeal process is any kind of corrective action.
Unless at least one leader – if elected Prime Minister -- commits to -- the very minimum -- extending the conditions of the SDL/JDSU – TRO – to every honest hard working Canadian -- taxed on phantom income – then they have all failed the people they portend to represent.
See you at the Federal Election Polls – O’Grady
Victor Drummond ©
FROM ONE FAMILY MAN TO ANOTHER
A commentary on the family relationship between the Person
Elected to be the leader of Canada and All Canadians.
By Victor Drummond ©
September 2008
Among the first 2008 election promotions issued -- by the three main federal political parties of Canada – are those video clips portraying the party leader as a down-to-earth, responsible, dependable, hard-working Family Man.
Stephen Harper – shown with his wife and children – dressed in ordinary everyday clothes and with the moderator telling the audience what a great husband and father he is.
Stephane Dion and Jack Layton also climbed on to the Family Man band-wagon – appearing in public with their wives – and letting everyone know they have the best interests of Canadians at heart.
All of the above are promising to lower taxes, provide the best child-care, provide more jobs, save the environment by supporting renewable energy projects etc.
Not one party leader has acknowledged the relief -- of thousands of innocent, hard-working Canadian Tax Payers – from the abuse and distress caused by a defective piece of Canadian Tax legislation.
Following is an excerpt from a recent message I received from one such victim.
============================================
Nortel is now trading at the equivalent of 30 cents per share and yet the government is still wanting to tax me on shares at a value of $104.
My nightmare has resumed, the pundits are saying Nortel is ripe for a take-over. If this happens does this mean that my shares are considered sold? Even though I don’t want to sell them? Even if I refuse to hand them over?
Can I just keep the certificate and claim “Hey, the law says the taxes are due when I sell – well I haven’t sold!”
Needless to say I am again loosing sleep and desperate with worry. At age 68 is this what my government really thinks is a good thing?
To add insult to injury, if I am forced to sell, if I do have to include close to $1 million (of fictitious income) in income this year, not only will I have a tax-debt of over $200k but I have nothing with which to pay this. Sell my house? Cash in $300k of my equity? And oh yes, the Ontario Government will ding me for $900 as a fair-health premium! As that is based on income.
CFET is my only hope!
==============================================
(Victim’s identity withheld by Vic Drummond)
When a federal party leader is elected to the office of Canada’s Prime Minister -- to represent all Canadians -- does he, or she, not have a duty/responsibility to serve and protect every Canadian from being victimized -- like this -- by their own government?
How many innocent, hard-working Canadians are -- too many -- to be allowed to be financially destroyed through taxation on income that never existed -- before our elected representatives say enough? I believe – one -- is one too many.
Yet there are thousands of Canadians -- who have been levied huge taxes on phantom income – and many are in situations as bad – or worse – than the person who wrote the above excerpt.
The above victim see’s the group:- “Canadians for Fair and Equalized Taxation”, (CFET), as their only hope for relief from this oppressive/abusive tax. Is that the way you see it also?
What about a voters protest? If enough ordinary Canadians decided to demand this tax atrocity be corrected – and notified their local candidate(s) in this coming federal election – what do you suppose would happen?
Wouldn’t the same people -- who vowed to boycott the Leader’s Election Debate if Elizabeth May were allowed to participate – suddenly recognize how unfair, and un-Canadian this tax fiasco is?
You can bet your last Loonie they would have their eyes opened in a flash.
If you are unfamiliar with this tax rip-off visit the CFET web page at:- http://www.cfet.ca
Follow the links to Sign our petition, and Signatures, and read the comments posted by those who signed the petition. Also follow the link to “Press” and read the articles published by several prominent Canadian Journalists.
The USA had a similar problem with their Alternative Minimum Tax, (AMT), and they are now in the process of rescinding taxes levied on phantom income. (Kerry/Lieberman Bill).
Also the USA has suspended their Internal Revenue Agency, (IRA) from collecting the taxes previously levied on AMT phantom income.
If you would like to show your support -- of abused fellow Canadians in this issue – kindly notify your local federal election candidate you want their commitment to support the objective of CFET for fair and equitable taxation.
CFET is a non-partisan, non-profit group and does not even have a membership fee.
Anyone may become a member and/or supporter by sending an e-mail to - inquiy@cfet.ca
Vic Drummond ©
A For Real FAMILY MAN.
Note:- If you wish to contact the tax victim -- who authored the excerpt quoted above -- send me an e-mail which I will forward on your behalf to the victim personally.
Ref:- vic.drummond@sympatico.ca
THEY’R OFF
A commentary on the miscues by Canadian
Political Leaders in the first week following
the Calling of the 2008 Federal Election.
By Victor Drummond ©
September 2008
In the days immediately prior to the dissolution of Canada’s 39th Parliament Canada’s political leaders were warned well in advance an election would be called this fall.
They all had oodles of time to develop a solid election platform and declare exactly what they would do for Canadians -- if elected.
So what have they declared so far?
First out of the gate was the Most Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada – with a video of a couple of ordinary citizens declaring Stephen knows where he stands, is a straight up guy and a regular good person.
This extremely non-committal video was quickly followed by another of Stephen in ordinary casual attire -- blue sweater and all – surrounded by his wife and children with the commentator informing the audience that Stephen is a devoted family man etc.
About this time other Canadian Political Party leaders climbed on the band wagon releasing videos portraying themselves as regular Canadians who love Canada and also have family values etc.
Still little to zero commitment to do anything solid for the average Canadian.
Then things began to jump the track. Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada, declared she intended to participate in all pre-election Party Leader debates. She would take the issue to the courts if necessary to achieve this end.
Other party leaders announced their positions on this issue with one or two saying it didn’t matter and a couple saying no-way. The debate authorities (media) said no as did Stephen Harper and Jack Layton. The latter political party leaders even went so far as to say -- if May were allowed to be a participant then they would boycott the debate.
(Major goof No. 1).
Not a very fair or well thought-out attitude to assume.
Being a high profile Canadian Elizabeth’s situation was given nation-wide media coverage and her supporters launched protest scenes which also received nation-wide coverage.
No doubt both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton were embarrassed by this turn of events but realizing a lot of votes were at stake they both did a prompt about face.
While the Elizabeth May fiasco was winding down the Conservative War Machine release a smear video depicting Stephane Dion as a loser with an Atlantic Puffin dropping poop on his shoulder as it flew past. (Major goof No. 2)
Who in their right mind would even imagine a smear tactic of this kind could be a plus credit to the author(s)?
Likely as part of the over-all Conservative Election strategy Stephen Harper then began to announce party policy on genuine issues. Issues that might actually benefit the average Canadian.
Promising to cut the diesel fuel excise tax by 50% -- if elected -- is a solid issue.
Promising to support the replacement of fossil fuel energy – as much as practical – by renewable energy sources – if elected – is a universal *issue.
*An item that is also on the USA Presidential Election agenda.
Promising to set a withdrawal date for Canadian troops -- serving in Afghanistan -- is an astute political manoeuvre but will not actually benefit average Canadians in the immediate future. This more of a good intention commitment.
Attacking the election platform commitments of the other federal Political Parties is standard procedure and it falls to the promoters of each party’s platform to defend and/or justify the benefit – if any – their policies would bring to the average Canadian.
Publicly attempting to discredit the father of a Canadian soldier killed on active duty in Afghanistan, however, can not be justified under any circumstances. (Major Goof No. 3)
There is another major issue – however -- deserving of highest priority attention by whatever party forms the next government.
An issue that has resulted in a very significant number of honest, hard-working Canadians being financially decimated and kept in a state of duress for over seven years.
An issue that is very similar to the unjustified taxation of many American citizens which the USA Congress is now in the process of correcting. (Kerry/Lieberman bill)
An issue that every Canadian Federal Party Leader has been made well aware of – but not one party leader even acknowledges exists.
An issue that not one Canadian party leader has committed to do anything to correct – if elected.
It is ironic that those who solicit our support – to be elected to represent all Canadians – will ignore defective legislation that unjustly causes financial ruin, distress, anxiety, and loss of hard earned financial security while presenting themselves to be ordinary Canadian family people.
Until our elected representatives recognize all Canadians are their family and are entitled to equal and fair treatment -- they are REALLY OFF.
If the issue of taxation of phantom income is not addressed during the Political Leaders Election Debates -- and -- if no party leader commits to correcting this atrocity – then I won’t waste my time voting for any of them.
A real family person would not allow this travesty of justice to continue.
If unfamiliar with the phantom income tax issue visit the web page of:- “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation”, (CFET) at http://www.cfet.ca and explore the links to “Press”, “Sign our Petition” --> “signatures” --> “Comments”.
Victor Drummond ©
WHAT DO YOU GET FOR YOUR MONEY
A commentary on the benefit of calling a federal election now.
By Victor Drummond ©
August 2008
A Federal election costs Canadian taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars -- and for many -- also time to actually go to the polls and vote.
So there should be at least one good reason -- for calling an election before the government has been defeated -- or their current four year term expires.
Our Prime Minister -- The Right honourable Stephen Harper -- has stated very recently -- he does not expect the Conservatives would win a majority government if an election were held now.
He also said he expects the result would be very similar to the minority government we currently have.
So why take the nation to the polls now – and spend hundreds of millions of dollars -- if there is little – or nothing -- to be gained?
Could it be that a Democratic Party win in the American Elections -- this coming November --
would alter the prospects of the Canadian Conservative Party -- getting even a minority government -- in a subsequent Canadian Federal Election?
Both the USA Democratic Party candidates -- Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama -- have declared they will review the NAFTA agreement with the objective of implementing a more protectionist American policy.
This action would impact directly -- and adversely -- upon the Canadian economy.
Now that Barack Obama has accepted the Democratic Party nomination -- to run for the office of President of the USA that little incident of a leaked confidential report -- by Canada, e.g. that Barack’s promise to the American voters to review the NAFTA agreement was merely political rhetoric –- takes on a life of its own.
Regardless of who -- in Canada -- leaked the confidential USA communiqué to the media -- the onus is now on Barack Obama – if elected president -- to prove he meant what he said regarding protecting the American economy.
Whichever Canadian Political Party happens to be in government -- when the President Barack Obama axe falls -- is going to become the scapegoat for the consequences of that leaked communiqué.
Our next federal election may then become unique in the respect that it is an election that no political party really wants to win.
Even if the American Republican Party Candidate – John McCain -- happens to become the next President of the USA it could be bad news for the Canadian government.
Because the American economy is in such a bad way – with no recovery in sight.
Canadian voters may glean a clue or two from the items selected -- by each Canadian Federal Party -- as planks in their pre-election platform.
For example -- if a party selects a non-issue – such as renewing the great lakes , i.e. anything beyond the ability of Canada to actually accomplish – or some non-committal, mealy mouthed statement such as – I love Canada so elect me etc. -- then you know they are not making a serious pitch to form Canada’s next government.
They do not wish to take the blame for anticipated problems in the Canadian economy.
So where does a campaign like that leave the Canadian voter?
What can anyone expect to gain by going to the polls under those conditions?
Even more confusing. If your preferred federal political party puts forward ridiculous campaign statements -- in an obvious effort to avoid being elected -- then who should you vote for?
In such an event it seems logical you should vote for one of the other federal party’s to help your favourite in their effort to avoid being elected.
In order to be confident the federal political party of your choice actually wants your support they must campaign on one or more real issues.
Issues that address the resolution of real abuse of all Canadians and will make it worth every voters time and money to go to the polls.
Issues that are actually within the power of our elected representatives to correct.
When I see any Canadian political party commit to restoring every Canadian’s RIGHT to fair Income Taxation – then I will know that party is serious in their effort to form Canada’s next government.
And even more important – they deserve to be elected as Canada’s ruling party.
It is VERY important to protect every Canadian’s RIGHT to fair, justified and equalized taxation in order to uphold Canada’s image on the world stage and deter creeping anarchy.
And when such a party is actually elected – with the majority they deserve – every Canadian will receive a huge dividend for their time and money.
Political expediency will be replaced by political decency and thousands of Canadians --victimized by extortionist-like taxable benefit legislation -- will have their money restored with tax overpayment interest and all related unpaid taxes/penalties revoked.
All Canadians of voting age should contact their Member of Parliament and demand to know if the candidate supports objectives of:- “Canadians for Fair and Equalized Taxation”, (CFET).
If unfamiliar with this very important issue – visit web page:- http://www.cfet.ca
Follow the links to their petition and signatures and read the comments left there by those who have been victimized by this insidious legislation.
See you at the next federal election voting polls – O’Grady.
Victor Drummond ©
BUT THE PATIENT DIED
The complete Oxymoron goes:-
“The Operation was a great Success.”
“But the Patient Died.”
A Commentary on current Canadian
Political Election Platforms.
By Victor Drummond ©
August 2008
The obviously contradictory aspects of the title theme were coined many years ago to give credit to someone who achieved a minor accomplishment at the expense of someone else.
A current example of such a situation is the scientific hullaballoo regarding the objective to save our planet from a theoretical fatal disaster claimed to be caused by man made release of carbon dioxide.
Fingers are pointed at the smokestacks of industrial developed nations – such as Canada, USA, Great Britain, Russia etc. – with the implication that these nations have it within their power to reverse the trend of global warming.
Supposing that all industrial action was totally halted in all of these nations. What do you think would happen?
Do you suppose the population of these countries would survive?
On what?
Do you suppose the earth would then begin to cool down?
And if it did would there be anyone left alive to appreciate the change?
In such a scenario it would be a classic case of:- The operation was a success. But the patient died.
When it comes to producing CO2 gases and releasing them into the atmosphere – why haven’t the carbonated beverage manufacturer’s come under fire?
With all the CO2 beverages consumed every day this source must be significant.
So when it comes to Canadian Federal Political Party’s preparing their election platforms how much importance should the voting population place on the actions promised?
What about the proposed Carbon Tax Plan.
If you were a major shareholder -- of a Canadian based corporation -- faced with tax penalties for producing “excess CO2” – what actions would you consider?
(1) pay the tax and pass the cost on to your customers?
OR
(2) relocate to a country that has lower labour and tax expense – to remain competitive on the world
markets?
A political party that selects a project -- such as saving the environment from pollution, and/or saving the planet from global warming -- i.e. any objective that requires full international co-operation to become even partially effective – is offering Canadian voters a “Red Herring” program.
Any voter who bites on such an election promise is being reeled in -- hook-line-and-sinker.
Election platforms must be constructed on planks that are home grown and any related objectives well within the Canadian Governments power to deliver.
Before our government offers to play on the international – world -- stage they should assure our own citizens are not being legally abused.
Every Canadian Federal Political Party is now well aware of the insidious, abusive fall-out from our defective taxable benefit legislation.
But not one has publicly acknowledged this atrocious situation as a local financial environmental disaster badly in need of corrective action.
As a Canadian voter are you satisfied with your government – present and/or future – that sits by silently and allows thousands of your countrymen to be legally robbed of money they never had?
If you doubt that such things are happening in Canada – visit the “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation”, (CFET), website:- http://www.cfet.ca
Follow the links:- “Our Petition”, -- “signatures” and read the comments left by hundreds of Canadians victimized by this defective legislation.
While there is still time – contact your Member of Parliament – and tell him, or her, you demand a commitment this home grown atrocity be addressed by them -- and their party -- or no vote.
All that is necessary for evil to prevail – is for good people to do nothing.
See you at the coming federal election polls – O’Grady.
Victor Drummond ©
FOR EVIL TO PREVAIL
A commentary on why it is necessary and
when is the time for good people to act.
One of the truest statements ever coined is the adage:- “All that is necessary for Evil to Prevail is for Good People to Do Nothing”.
Evil, like Beauty is often in the eye, (mind), of the beholder.
To people with the attitude -- “The World owes me everything I want.” – to steal, or abuse others is not evil in their mind. It is their birthright.
They see it as their right to take from the weaker people around them based purely upon the fact that being bigger and stronger they can do evil with impunity.
“I do it because I can” is their motto.
When such people lack conduct moderating influences -- such as a moral code, an ethical code or respect for decency -- they blossom into thieves, con-men, rapists, pedophiles, abusive partners and/or abusive parents.
Those that are savvy enough to conceal their true personality -- for a while – may appear to be decent, respectable and even likable people. They might even be elected into public office
When, however, they are faced with a situation where decency, compassion and/or fairness is required they lack the mental/personal qualities to respond appropriately.
Instead of searching out the defect -- causing the innocent victims distress and correcting the flaw -- they merely give voice to some lame excuse for doing precisely nothing.
An statement such as:- “I have been doing this for a long time so it is OK”, is offered as justification. An excuse that is nothing more than an insult to a person’s intelligence.
A do nothing policy – on the part of a sufficient number of good people -- will automatically result in detrimental laws, and undesirable social policies and practices being implemented.
Immediately a deficient or adverse practice – anything that abuses even one Canadian citizen -- becomes apparent it also becomes imperative for good Canadians to take action.
A prime example of a chronic adverse policy – supported by the government of Canada – is the taxation of citizens on money they never saw.
Taxes that – in many cases – totally wiped out years of prudent savings and forced innocent, honest, hard-working people to go from affluence to becoming debtors.
Every Canadian has a right to Fair and Equitable tax treatment by their own government.
Immediately that right has been denied it is time for good Canadians to take action.
Failure to do so is amounts inviting authorities to continue to violate every Canadian’s rights.
Many such victimized Canadians have submitted appeals – for justice and fair treatment -- to their Member of Parliament, (MP), and appeals have also been made to all levels of Canadian authority -- for justice – without success so far.
All that is necessary for this kind of evil to continue is for good people to do nothing.
If justice continues to be denied -- by our current political leaders – then all good Canadians should join in a grass-roots protest to demand this atrocity be corrected – or a fresh slate of Federal Candidates should be elected to form our next government.
If you believe this unjust and unfair policy must be rectified then please inform your MP
that you support the objective of the group, “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation”, (CFET) and refer him, or her, to visit the:- http://www.cfet.ca web pages.
Visit the CFET web page personally and read the petition comments. Ask your family, relatives and friends to join you in this movement.
See you at the voting polls for the next federal election – O’Grady
Victor Drummond ©
TAX ON A WHITE ELEPHANT
A comparison between the conferring of a perk
to an employee and the real benefit conveyed.
By Victor Drummond ©
August 2008
What it means to possess a white elephant:- receiving a gift of a white elephant from a monarch was both a blessing and a curse: a blessing because the animal was sacred and a sign of the monarch's favour, and a curse because the animal had to be kept and could not be put to practical use to offset the cost of maintaining it.
To levy a tax on the recipient of a “White Elephant” based upon the Fair Market Value of a White Elephant gift would then really put the icing on the cake.
The owner of a White Elephant has an obligation to be grateful to the donor while becoming burdened with a sacred beast that requires food, shelter and daily sanitary maintenance but can not be used to perform useful labour.
You wouldn’t expect there would be even one Canadian caught in such a predicament.
There are, however thousands of honest, hard-working Canadians placed in exactly that kind of situation.
What was intended -- by their employer – to be a financial reward for above average performance – was converted to a punishing liability by way of flawed legislation that taxed opportunity rather than reality and then blocked the victim from realizing direct corrective action.
Victimized Canadians did not actually receive a living animal as a gift from a benevolent monarch.
What they did receive was a perk from an appreciative employer who fully intended the item offered to be a reward.
So by what mischief did an intended reward become a financially destructive curse?
The transition began with a piece of defective legislation which provided the Canada Revenue Agency, (CRA), a basis for taxing the employer’s reward immediately it was delivered to the employee.
There was no real problem if the recipient sold -- or converted -- the received gift at the time it was delivered. In which case the tax levied was offset by the real, sale/conversion, value of the gift.
A big problem arose, however, when the recipient failed to sell, or convert the gift, at time of delivery and the exchange value of the gift declined while still in possession of the employee.
In the latter case the gift was well on its way to becoming a “White Elephant”.
The gift recipient was levied taxes on the estimated value of the gift at time of delivery.
Legislation that produced this result also split the characteristic of the gift into two mutually exclusive classifications, i.e. (1) A taxable benefit and (2) A Capital equity.
It was ruled that any tax levied on the gift at time of delivery, (a taxable benefit), could not be offset by any loss suffered when the gift was later sold, (a Capital equity transaction). In other words the tax levied on the gift at the time of delivery became a sacred “White Elephant”.
To compound the problem victims were allowed to defer payment of taxes imposed on the reward -- that was now a curse -- with the added liability of having the tax deferment cancelled should the employer go out of business, or the recipient disposed of the gift, or the recipient moved out of Canada.
For the thousands of Canadians who ended up in this situation their employer’s reward has been totally converted to the greatest “White Elephant” in modern history.
Can anyone justify the imposing of a horrendous tax on strictly potential -- but unrealized gain?
Can anyone justify imposing a tax that equals – and often exceeds – the victims total real income for the taxation year?
Can anyone justify the dual classification -- of the same reward -- that only serves to prevent the “White Elephant” victim from recouping any part of the taxable benefit taxes levied?
Can anyone justify the levying of horrendous taxes based upon a one-sided unproven assumption?
If anyone wishes to challenge -- one or more of the foregoing questions -- feel free to post your comment(s) to this article.
On the other hand – if you feel -- as I do -- that taxes are only justified where real income is present – then make your support of “Canadians for Fair and Equalized Taxation”, (CFET), be known.
Visit http://cfet.ca Sign the petition – Identify your support by using the inquiry@cfet.ca link and even become a member of this rapidly growing group.
CFET has no membership fees and is non-partisan. They are strictly a group dedicated to restore the basic rights of all Canadians to Fair/Equitable treatment.
Contact your Member of Parliament and express your support of the CFET “Fair Tax” Objective.
Ask your family, relatives and friends to follow your example.
When common sense -- and the obligation to defend the right of “All honest, hard-working Canadians” fails to inspire our elected representatives to take appropriate corrective action – grass roots protest may just be the means to obtain justice.
See you at the next federal election voting polls O’Grady.
Victor Drummond ©
