×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

Steven Harper's "the white man's burden: white people consequently have an obligation to rule over." Are you are white man too? I really doubt it.

本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's recent devaluation and denigration of the Kyoto treaty is
further proof that is further proof that the Conservative Party of Canada is still largely dominated by
racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, patriarchal, Anglo Chauvinist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, redneck, gun toting, bible thumping, anti-Quebecois, anti-Francophone, slavishly pro-American, backwards, socially regressive, pickup truck driving, neanderthalic, redneck, trailor trash.

The true reason behind Stephen Harper slashing and burning of Canadian climate change program lies
with his record of being a climate change denier, and his labelling of the Kyoto treaty as "Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations" is a cheap ploy at populist nationalism and white privilege while being in total dereliction of global responsibilities.

Perhaps Stephen Harper secretly subscribes to Rudyard Kipling's White Man's Burden theory?.
I must admit that Stephen Harper seems too intelligent and well educated to be a petty racist and
Canadian nationalist, but these statements of his are most disconcerting indeed. Kipling's highly racist and white supremacist wordview presents a Eurocentric view of the world, in which non-European cultures are seen as childlike and demonic. This view proposes that white people consequently have an obligation to rule over, and encourage the cultural development of, people from other ethnic and cultural backgrounds until they can take their place in the world by fully adopting Western ways. The term "the white man's burden" shows the abject racist thinking of white statesman and can be taken as a metaphor for a condescending view of non-Western national culture and economic traditions, identified as a sense of white racial ascendancy which has been called "cultural imperialism". It also refers to a total dereliction of duty on the part of the plundering white man towards non-white peoples and the overall health and security of the planet.

Regardless, I think Stephen Harper's "Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of
wealth-producing nations" totally fails to address the fact that the so-called "weath-producing nations"
which are by and large white nations, have by and large acquired such wealth through enslavement of
non-white peoples, colonialism, imperialism, plunder, exploitation, and vicious racism and conquest.
I think Stephen Harper needs to educate himself on white guilt. White guilt refers to feelings of guilt said
to be experienced by some people of European descent when they consider present or past wrongs committed by their ancestors against natives of conquered and colonised lands. It is usually used with regard to White Americans and Black Americans.

In today's society, it is nearly universally accepted that in the past, white Europeans committed wrongs against non-whites in the form of economic exploitation through colonialism and political and legal systems designed to enforce racial segregation and racial discrimination. Many white people do not feel a sense of personal guilt over past oppression of other races, and resent being blamed for events they had nothing to do with. Others are often anxious to distance themselves from the actions of their ancestors and are said to feel a sense of collective guilt. Similarly it is said that descendants of oppressed people, some of whom have experienced modern day discrimination, sometimes expect whites, either collectively or individually, to feel and accept "white guilt".

Robert James (Auld Bob) Peffers.

Harper's letter dismisses Kyoto as 'socialist scheme' Last Updated: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 | 10:15 PM ET CBC News

Prime Minister Stephen Harper once called the Kyoto accord a
"socialist scheme" designed to suck money out of rich countries,
according to a letter leaked Tuesday by the Liberals.

The letter, posted on the federal Liberal party website, was apparently written by Harper in 2002, when he was leader of the nowdefunct Canadian Alliance party.

He was writing to party supporters, asking for money as he prepared to fight then-prime minister Jean Chrétien on the proposed Kyoto accord.

"We're gearing up now for the biggest struggle our party has faced
since you entrusted me with the leadership," Harper's letter says.

"I'm talking about the 'battle of Kyoto' - our campaign to block the
job-killing, economy-destroying Kyoto accord."

The accord is an international environmental pact that sets targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Canada officially ratified the accord Dec. 17, 2002, under Chrétien's Liberal government. Harper's Conservative government, which took power January 2006, has since been accused of ignoring the accord.

Harper's letter goes on to outline why he's against the agreement.

Accord based on 'contradictory' data: Harper

He writes that it's based on "tentative and contradictory scientific evidence" and it focuses on carbon dioxide, which is "essential to life."

He says Kyoto requires that Canada make significant cuts in emissions, while countries like Russia, India and China face less of a burden.

Under Kyoto, Canada was required to reduce emissions by six per cent by 2012, while economies in transition, like Russia, were allowed to choose different base years.

"Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealthproducing
nations," Harper's letter reads.

He said the accord would cripple the oil and gas industries, which are essential to Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

He wrote in the letter that he would do everything he could to stop Chrétien from passing the Kyoto agreement.

"We will do everything we can to stop him there, but he might get it
passed with the help of the socialists in the NDP and the separatists in the BQ [Bloc Québécois]."

The Prime Minister's Office refused to comment about the letter on the record.

In recent weeks, Harper has spoken strongly about the environment, saying he will dramatically revamp his minority government's muchcriticized clean air act.

His comments come as public-opinion polls indicate the environment has become the number one issue among Canadians.

Liberal MP Mark Holland told the Canadian Press on Tuesday that the leaked letter shows that Harper isn't actually committed to climate change.

"Now, suddenly, because he has seen the polls and realized the
political opportunism of going green, the prime minister has launched a new campaign - that of trying to convince Canadians that he actually cares about the environment," Holland said.

"But no one is buying it."

The Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country, except the United States, Australia and Monaco.

With files from the Canadian Press

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/01/30/harper-kyoto.html更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / 支持保守党的理由
    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛偶是铁杆保守党支持者。为什么?因为我支持减税。说句老实话,谁减税我就支持谁,谁减税多我就支持谁。大家不是谈贪污腐败吗?不是谈政府乱花钱吗?其实很简单,咱不给钱,他还能贪污腐败吗?不给钱,他还能大手大脚吗?不给钱,政府也许就要破产,那很好啊。就让它破产好了。我们要那么多公共图书馆做啥?现在看什么都上网,图书馆的那些旧书我是从来不去看的。我们要那么贵的巴士做啥?国内满地的小公交不也运营得生气勃勃?价格不也比公营的低?我们要那么多的医疗做啥?就为了排队等死?有钱去美国看,没钱回中国看。说实话,我认为每年给政府的钱至少可以削减一半。剩下的一半支持支持市政建设。不够的话,那就再减,减到那些政客饭都吃不上,从此知道做人要诚实。
    政府提供的所有的服务,都是巨贵的服务。看看政府工作人员的工作效率和作风就知道了。能私营化,尽量私营化。有人问,为什么医疗私营化会失败?我告诉大家,那是因为医生工会把持了医疗的权利,形成了垄断。这个垄断也同样是通过政府权利对全社会施加的。倘若我们允许国内来的医生为我们华人看病,那么,医疗价格立马会变戏法一般地降下来。诚然,我们会遇到一些医疗服务品质上的问题。但是反问一句,加拿大医生的水平就很高吗?我看还不如国内的。所以,垄断体制内的医生,他们不思上进。体制外的医生,失去机会。这就是政府权利对老百姓进行剥削的很好的例子。我们的目标,就是尽量限制政府的权利,让政府越小越好,管得越少越好。这就是真正的保守主义。希望大家都来支持小政府大市场的保守主义。更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 偶也决定投保守党。理由?不是因为多么喜欢保守党,而是想教训以下小麦。
      • haha.. second you...不能让小卖成大多数政府
      • 这也是我这次坚决选保守党的理由。#3967719
    • 你认为他说减就能减? 我不相信, 这减那涨, 钱永远不够花.
      • 不用替那帮党棍操心 花完再说
      • 至少以前的夏利斯,现在的哈勃(都是保守党), 都说减就减了,只有小麦(自由党)说不加加了。
      • 其实就是,如果减了我的,涨了别人的,就是好政策。
        • 小哈总理就这么干的,减了GST,同时又涨了INCOME TAX。
          • 用计算器算算,GST 1%省多少,INCOMETAX 1%@涨多少:(36000-8000)x1%=$280,我发现就我来说,GST省的远多于$280/年(跟我花销有关,数字恕不公布),更不要说我还捞到$1200 UCCB所以我挺喜欢小哈的,当初没选他,明年给他补一票。
            • income tax 1%涨的多。GST省的 = 1% x 每年花销;income涨的 = 1% x (年收入 - 8000)。每年花销 < 最大花销 = 年收入* (1-税率) < 年收入-8000
              • 你是不仔细读报的人,或被利益集团误导。income tax rate是分段的,只是在less than 35500一段从15%涨到16%,你有8600个人免税额,所以只涨35500-8600的1%。当然,如果你年收入只有35500,涨收入税对你影响较大,大骂哈泼吧,我不跟风。
                • 这还只是交得最多情况,在这35500-8600里边,你还可以扣除配偶没工作免税额8000,交的CPP,EI,和条件符合的学费托儿费医药费。7扣8扣,这部分基数变小,乘以1%就没多交多少。
                  • 托儿费不受gst影响的,所以加减gst对它没影响。但是托儿费不是直接从taxable income中减掉的,托儿费有limitation去年是7000,如果你花了9000,剩下2000是要按照收入税率交税的。单就托儿费这一项,gst-1/income tax+1,你要多交钱。
                    其实你想想就明白了,你的taxable收入是一条河的主干,支出是支流,主河道上加1%和支流上减1%那个影响大?
                    • 托儿费是我记错了,它和RSP一样从边缘税率开始减,我的margin rate不在35500以下,这部分税率的增长不影响托儿费的减税/缴税。具体你的例子,那剩下的2000,前年缴税29%,去年也是29%,今年也是,没变。
                      什么是支流?对我来讲,35500-8600只是一个支流,35500以上的收入是主流,其税率没有变,总缴税影响不大。
                      • 你绝对是没搞明白,假如说年收入80k,托儿费10000,mortgage 10000, 个人所得税率20%,保守党gst-1,income tax+1后变成21%,简化一下我给你算一下。
                        taxable income: (80000 - 7000(托儿费上限) - 8000(你+你老婆个人免税额) × 2 )= 57000

                        保守党执政前:
                        收入税 57000 x 20% = 11400
                        可支配收入 80000 - 11400(收入税) - 10000(托儿费) - 10000(mortgage) = 48600

                        保守党执政后:
                        收入税 57000 x 21% = 11970
                        可支配收入 80000 - 11970(收入税) - 10000(托儿费) - 10000(mortgage) = 48030

                        假设你是月光族,挣多少花多少。
                        保守党执政前 你到手48600
                        *15% = 7290
                        总计你交税7290+11400 = 18690

                        保守党执政后 你到手48030
                        *14% = 6724.20
                        总计你交税6724.20+11970 = 18694.20
                        • 你在加拿大交过税吗?加拿大的税是这么算的吗?合着我将这么半天,鸡同鸭讲啊!真服了你了。(不过按你的逻辑,保守党上台,我只多交4块两毛钱的税,乐死我了)
                          • 我每年都自己报税。收入高的话,你收入中的36000多交了1%的收入税,你的支出中有一部分可以省1%GST,这一部分不包括托儿费,学费,房子贷款,房租。只包括买菜,饭店吃饭,电器家具,旅游,你这部分支出要是一年超过36000你就赚了。
                            • 一家只有一个人工作是这样,如果2个人都赚钱,就要一年花7万多才有赚。另外Universal Child Care的1200要算收入的,要交个人所得税。
                              • 即使交个人所得税也比4块两毛钱好的多吧。
                              • 不知你怎么算的帐,不管你几个人收入,你只要买个房子,买个车,甚至大件商品,就够赚了。
                                • 进来我告诉你
                                  先算你多交的税:
                                  你税前收入如果超过36000(具体数据不知道你自己查去),你这36000要多交1%的税。
                                  你老婆如果工作,她税前收入如果超过36000,她这36000也要多交1%的税。
                                  一共就是有7万多要交这额外的1%的税。

                                  再算你省下来的:
                                  你去饭馆撮一顿原来要交15%的税,现在只交14%,gst上省了1%。去买电器,买家具都可以省,买车也省了。买房没有省,买家出的价已经含税了,不管GST多少. 房贷,学费,托儿费,医药费,房租等等这些都跟GST无关,没有省。你把买菜钱,下馆子钱,去商店买家具电器的钱,买机票钱,买大件商品的钱,所有要charge你GST的消费都加在一起,看看有多少,如果达过7万就基本持平了,否则你就多交税了。

                                  就这么简单,还不明白可以跟“不多也”老兄探讨探讨,我估计他已经明白了。呵呵
                                  • 懒得跟你抬杠,对牛弹琴我还是算了吧。给你个报税小TIPS明年用吧省税:“学费,托儿费,医药费,房租“不省GST,但是省income tax,所以你那3万6其实不是3万6,其实远低于3万6。咳你一脑子糊涂账我也不跟你算了。
                                    • 不要人参攻击好不好?你告诉我你taxable income有没有高过36000?如果高过了36000,那么按照保守党的现行政策,你是不是多交了36000 x 1%的税?
                                      • 不是! 我上面写得清楚,下面更正了税率,翻开我得报税底稿,federal tax schedule 1是 [36,378-8,839-8,256(spouse amount)-1,910.70(CPP)-729(EI)-250(Employment anount)]*0.25%! 这个数字对我来说不大,明年这个数字翻番,也不大!
                                        • OMG,我真是受不了了。啊啊啊啊
                                          加拿大税率是分段的
                                          0-36378 一个税率x
                                          36379 - xxxx又一个税率y
                                          收入z<=36378的时候,税是z * x
                                          你收入z > 36378,你的税是36378 * x + (z - 36378)*y
                                          现在保守党把x加了a个百分率,你的税是不是涨了36378*a?
                                          • 你终于学了点皮毛,知道税率是分段的了,下一课:你听说过 tax credit 吗?
                                            • credit,哈哈,提到credit我要笑死了。可以报credit的有rent,propertytax,sales tax,怎么算得我记得清清楚楚,这几个数左加右加乘上10%减掉你"家庭收入",铁定小于0. 你不问问一年家庭收入3万以上,有谁拿到过credit了.
                                            • 那你承不承认,你一个人明年就要多交36xxx*0.5%的税?
                                              • 不!承!认!唉,你还是搞不清状况。
                                                • 0-36378 一个税率x;36379 - xxxxx又一个税率y。收入z小于等于36378的时候,税是z * x;收入z > 36378的时候,税是36378 * x + (z - 36378)*y;现在保守党把x加了a个百分率,收入大于36378的人,税涨了多少?是不是36378*a?
                                  • 原谅俺愚钝,举个容易算的例子吧。假如说一个人挣4万,他老婆挣4万。多交1%的税,他们一共比原先多付多少税?
                                    • 为什么要多交1%,给谁的?
                                      • 这不是他告诉我的吗,俺正请教ing #3971738
                                        • 你请教错了人。他是一个税盲。联邦保守党2006年和2007年分别增加最低档的收入税税率0.25%。加在一起也就0.5%,何来的1%?当然,我不反对他多交税款。
                                          • 让他按他的1%算,看看究竟保守党上台一般家庭是受惠了还是吃亏了。
                                            • 收入40k x 2,按照增加1%算的话,要花61748才能跟2005交的税持平。
                                              • 瞧你这帐算的。保守党上台后2006年联邦税+0.25%,(12689.68-12616.2) =73.48.相当于40000*2家庭净收入比保守党上台前总共就少了$73.48.
                                                而对于一个有一个6岁下孩子的这样的中低收入家庭来说,可以获得$1200.就算你交20%的税,你还能得九百多. 我这里还没算上TTC月票的退税,儿童健身用品的退税.

                                                家庭收入2x40k买车买家电家具是很正常的,你的意思这样的家庭只能拾破烂过日子?别逗了。
                                                • 我没有指点别人怎么过日子的习惯,就是有人捡东西的话,我也没有意见。就事论事,我们在说incometax+0.5/0.25,gst-1,到底作为个人是多缴还是少缴了税。大家先就这件事达成共识,别的有时间另算。
                                                  • 就事论事的讲,单从工资而不论其他对于这样的中低收入家庭来说,仅少了$73.48. 但按2006年的税率计算,按正常消费GST减的1%完全可以持平甚至稍赚。如果讲其他的补贴和福利算进来,稳赚。
                                                    • 对,去年是这样。今年呢,再加0.25,比2005多了255.48,可以持平吗?
                                                      • 从GST上,补不回来。但如果宏观的算,比如其他退税及福利,你还是赚。
                                                        • 有可能!论证的任务就交给你了。
                                                          • 1200-(13135.17-12616.2)=681.03
                                                            36379*15.50% + (41200-36378)*22% = 6699.585
                                                            36379*15.50% + (40000-36378)*22%=6435.585
                                                            6699.585+6435.585=13135.17
                                          • 也就0.5%?我算了一下,你进来看吧。
                                            2005年联邦税
                                            0 - 35595 15%
                                            35596 - 71189 22%
                                            家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                            35595 * 15% + (40000-35595)*22% = 6308.1
                                            6308.1 x 2 = 12616.2

                                            2006年联邦税
                                            0 - 36378 15.25%
                                            36379 - 72756 22%
                                            家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                            36379*15.25% + (40000-36378)*22% = 6344.84
                                            6344.84 x 2 = 12689.68

                                            今年联邦税(假定一切不变,只加0.25%)
                                            0 - 36378 15.25%+0.25%
                                            36379 - 72756 22%
                                            家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                            36379*15.50% + (40000-36378)*22% = 6435.84
                                            6435.84 x 2 = 12871.68

                                            去年,如果你消费(12689.68-12616.2) / 1%(gst) = 7348, 你没多交,持平。
                                            今年income tax再加0.25%,花(12871.68-12616.2) / 1%(gst) = 25548, 你就持平了,否则你就多交了。家庭收入2x40k一年花25k买菜,下馆子,买家具电器车可能性多大?
                                            按照income tax加1%的话,你吃亏老了。
                                            • 按照你的标准,年收入40kx2的家庭, 如果年消费超过25k,就赚了. 如果年消费低于25k,就亏了. 这样家庭净收入怎么也得6万块吧, 如果假设全部消费掉.为了证明哈帕政府多收了他家的税,他们必须消费低于25k的GST商品和高于35k的免GST商品. 问题是你到哪里去找35k免GST的商品啊?
                                              • 支出里面的大头房租,房贷,孩子托儿费,学费,都是没有gst的,光是房贷和托儿费就过2万。真正要交gst的商品不多,我前面提到过,你没看。就是汽油,理论上讲是应该得到好处的,但是油价有没有因为gst-1而降下来。
                                                • 你最好不要考虑托儿费,孩子交托儿费,那么每年给1200块退税吧. 计入这1200块,无论如何都赚了吧. 学费也别考虑,这么低收入进私校并不普遍. 你能够找出的例子就是净年收入6万,交3万5房贷及杂费的,难度挺大的,因为银行那关你就过不去. 租房也凑不出你这个数.
                                                  • 你举的这个例子比较极端,挣多少花多少的在华人中还是少数。没花完的余钱用来投资或者存起来,或者用来付mortage,就拿不到gst了。学费包括大人上学的费用,华人上学的也挺多;还有孩子上大学的费用。
                                                    • 你要是找那种光存钱不花钱的例子, 我觉得消费税减到0,你都会觉得政府收你的税多了. 事实上,大多数人存不下钱,也就是大多数人都从减税中获益.你喜欢的话可以看统计数据. 我相信哈帕减税的时候一定参考了人口统计,当然就单个家庭来讲,感觉不同应该是正常的.
                                              • I am not sure if I won or lose. this year end of Sept, one of credit card balance was 27K. Should I believe I was saving this year?
                                            • 看来你睡了一觉还没醒过来。现给一个报税表看看。别光看第一行,文件不大,把两页都看全了
                                              本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛现在来算算:

                                              2005年联邦税
                                              0 - 35595 15%
                                              35596 - 71189 22%
                                              家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                              35595 * 15% + (40000-35595)*22% = 6308.1
                                              6308.1 x 2 = 12616.2

                                              接着算,有点耐心
                                              300:Basic personal amount $8648
                                              308:CPP or QPP contribution: (40,000(年薪)-3,500)*4.95%=$1806.75
                                              怎么算的?见
                                              http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/isp/cpp/contribrates.shtml
                                              312:Employment Insurance Premium: 39,000*1.95=$760.50
                                              怎么算的?见
                                              http://www.fin.gc.ca/news05/05-075e.html
                                              就先算到这吧
                                              335: Add lines 300 to 326 and 332=11215.25
                                              338: Multiply the amount on line 335 by 15% 注意是15% = 1682.2875
                                              350: 假设你没有捐款,Total federal non-refundable tax credit: =1682.2875
                                              line 11: 你前边算的“税”6308.1
                                              line 12: 我算的credit 1682.2875
                                              429:Basic federal tax: line 11 minus line 12 = 6308.1-1682.2875=4625.81
                                              这才是你真要交的 Net federal tax in 2005
                                              2人 9251.62

                                              2006年联邦税
                                              0 - 36378 15.25%
                                              36379 - 72756 22%
                                              家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                              36379*15.25% + (40000-36378)*22% = 6344.84
                                              6344.84 x 2 = 12689.68

                                              同理,但是数据有变
                                              300:Basic personal amount $8839
                                              308:CPP or QPP contribution: (40,000(年薪)-3,500)*4.95%=$1806.75
                                              312:Employment Insurance Premium: 39,000*1.87=$729.30
                                              这个rate哈破政府给减了,见
                                              http://www.fin.gc.ca/news05/05-075e.html#backgrounder
                                              363: Canada employment amount: $250
                                              这个是哈破政府增加的,为了鼓励工作的人,有收入就有
                                              OK
                                              335: Add lines 300 to 326 and 332=11625.05
                                              338: Multiply the amount on line 335 by 15.25% 注意是15.25% = 1772.82
                                              350: 假设你没有捐款,Total federal non-refundable tax credit: =1772.82
                                              line 11: 你前边算的“税”12689.68
                                              line 12: 我算的credit 1772.82
                                              429:Basic federal tax: line 11 minus line 12 = 6344.84-1772.82 = 4572.02
                                              这才是你真要交的 Net federal tax in 2006
                                              2人 9144.04

                                              今年联邦税(假定一切不变,只加0.25%)
                                              0 - 36378 15.25%+0.25%
                                              36379 - 72756 22%
                                              家庭年收入40000 x 2
                                              36379*15.50% + (40000-36378)*22% = 6435.84
                                              6435.84 x 2 = 12871.68

                                              你必须算credit

                                              300:Basic personal amount $8839
                                              308:CPP or QPP contribution: (40,000(年薪)-3,500)*4.95%=$1806.75
                                              312:Employment Insurance Premium: 40,000*1.80=$720.00
                                              这个rate哈破政府又减了一点,见
                                              http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/faq/faq_general.shtml#premium
                                              363: Canada employment amount: $250
                                              这个是哈破政府增加的,还有
                                              OK
                                              335: Add lines 300 to 326 and 332=11615.75
                                              338: Multiply the amount on line 335 by 15.5% 注意是15.5% = 1800.44
                                              350: 假设你没有捐款,Total federal non-refundable tax credit: =1800.44
                                              line 11: 你前边算的“税”6435.84
                                              line 12: 我算的credit 1800.44
                                              429:Basic federal tax: line 11 minus line 12 = 6435.84-1800.44= 4635.4
                                              这才是你真要交的 Net federal tax in 2007
                                              2人 9270.8

                                              2007年与2005年相比
                                              9270.8 - 9251.62
                                              你自己算把更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
                                              • 我简化了credit这部分,如果加上credit这部分的话,差距小多了,只有几十块。你说的对。
                                              • 差点被忽悠。谢谢 :O
                        • 保守党上台后还有每月100给6岁下孩子的补助=1200,如果假设你的算法是正确的,加上后他还是受惠了。
                        • 你在哪国交的税?
              • 你怎么报的税?income tax被提高了0.5%,而不是1%!
                • 分两年,今年+0.5,明年再+0.5,然后不动。所以讨论的是明年报税的情况。还没有提到,小哈许诺3年内(2005年许诺5年内)GST再降1%
                  • 分两次,2006年度的税+0.25%,2007年度的税再+0.25%
                    • OOPS! 查了一下,真是你说得那样,那么以上我的大白乎数据统统折半。被这样误导:先是自由党从16%减到15%,反保派笼统说小哈上台会把它涨回去,长多少故意不说,我又被自由党粉丝骗了,羞愧中。。。
            • 你怎么算的? 你一年花10,000, 就是每个月花833元, 省1%, 一年省了100元GST, 问题是你一年能花多少需要交GST的钱, 10,000已经不少了.income tax 可不同, 1%就不得了,你要会算tax return 就知道了.
              • (#3969736@0) 你一年只消费1万,那我只能鼓励你:别灰心,好日子在前头,继续努力吧。
                • 买衣服,包,吃饭之类的, 1万不少了, 在加上各种帐单上的要交GST的, 2万也才省200块. 当然你要花个5,6万的, 俺没法比., 相信大多数人也没法比,富豪买个包就1万,相信也不在乎省的那俩钱.
                  • 房子,车子,汽油等商品的交易也是要交GST的。
          • 问题不在于是不是这么干,而在于选他之前你知不知道他要这么干?自由党最大的问题就是描绘的前景比共产主义还要美好,上台后实施的政策比资本主义还要万恶。
    • 除了一点这次把小麦赶下台是对的,其他基本胡说八道。
    • 公共医疗还是要的,不能头疼脑热的就回中国吧,机票也出不起啊?我对这儿的医疗还是挺满意的,一年四季偶尔感冒上风头疼脑热的就没花过钱。上次回国拉肚子/感冒花了我3百多块。
      可能生了大病动个手术什么的,有钱还是国内快。
      • 兄弟,知不知道全世界都没有药可以治感冒的?所有的药都只是减轻症状。
    • 大家在选择朋友的时候,是考虑给我恩惠多的人当作朋友,还是考虑这个人的人品是否好啊
      • right on! how about a lier that took a lot of your money ? I paid extra thousands of dolloars in the last few years...hurting....
    • 我觉得baalinca同学就别算了.保守党的纲领就是低税收小政府,几十年没变过.不可能和大家玩数字游戏,给你假降税真加税的. 本来就是少数派政府,玩这种骗人的花样等于自投死路.他们根本就不敢.
      • 不多也算得对,加上non-fundable credit的话,只多交了几十块
    • 真理实在是越辩越明呀。保守党,选定了。
      • Steven Harper's "the white man's burden: white people consequently have an obligation to rule over." Are you are white man too? I really doubt it.
        本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's recent devaluation and denigration of the Kyoto treaty is
        further proof that is further proof that the Conservative Party of Canada is still largely dominated by
        racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, patriarchal, Anglo Chauvinist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, redneck, gun toting, bible thumping, anti-Quebecois, anti-Francophone, slavishly pro-American, backwards, socially regressive, pickup truck driving, neanderthalic, redneck, trailor trash.

        The true reason behind Stephen Harper slashing and burning of Canadian climate change program lies
        with his record of being a climate change denier, and his labelling of the Kyoto treaty as "Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations" is a cheap ploy at populist nationalism and white privilege while being in total dereliction of global responsibilities.

        Perhaps Stephen Harper secretly subscribes to Rudyard Kipling's White Man's Burden theory?.
        I must admit that Stephen Harper seems too intelligent and well educated to be a petty racist and
        Canadian nationalist, but these statements of his are most disconcerting indeed. Kipling's highly racist and white supremacist wordview presents a Eurocentric view of the world, in which non-European cultures are seen as childlike and demonic. This view proposes that white people consequently have an obligation to rule over, and encourage the cultural development of, people from other ethnic and cultural backgrounds until they can take their place in the world by fully adopting Western ways. The term "the white man's burden" shows the abject racist thinking of white statesman and can be taken as a metaphor for a condescending view of non-Western national culture and economic traditions, identified as a sense of white racial ascendancy which has been called "cultural imperialism". It also refers to a total dereliction of duty on the part of the plundering white man towards non-white peoples and the overall health and security of the planet.

        Regardless, I think Stephen Harper's "Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of
        wealth-producing nations" totally fails to address the fact that the so-called "weath-producing nations"
        which are by and large white nations, have by and large acquired such wealth through enslavement of
        non-white peoples, colonialism, imperialism, plunder, exploitation, and vicious racism and conquest.
        I think Stephen Harper needs to educate himself on white guilt. White guilt refers to feelings of guilt said
        to be experienced by some people of European descent when they consider present or past wrongs committed by their ancestors against natives of conquered and colonised lands. It is usually used with regard to White Americans and Black Americans.

        In today's society, it is nearly universally accepted that in the past, white Europeans committed wrongs against non-whites in the form of economic exploitation through colonialism and political and legal systems designed to enforce racial segregation and racial discrimination. Many white people do not feel a sense of personal guilt over past oppression of other races, and resent being blamed for events they had nothing to do with. Others are often anxious to distance themselves from the actions of their ancestors and are said to feel a sense of collective guilt. Similarly it is said that descendants of oppressed people, some of whom have experienced modern day discrimination, sometimes expect whites, either collectively or individually, to feel and accept "white guilt".

        Robert James (Auld Bob) Peffers.

        Harper's letter dismisses Kyoto as 'socialist scheme' Last Updated: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 | 10:15 PM ET CBC News

        Prime Minister Stephen Harper once called the Kyoto accord a
        "socialist scheme" designed to suck money out of rich countries,
        according to a letter leaked Tuesday by the Liberals.

        The letter, posted on the federal Liberal party website, was apparently written by Harper in 2002, when he was leader of the nowdefunct Canadian Alliance party.

        He was writing to party supporters, asking for money as he prepared to fight then-prime minister Jean Chrétien on the proposed Kyoto accord.

        "We're gearing up now for the biggest struggle our party has faced
        since you entrusted me with the leadership," Harper's letter says.

        "I'm talking about the 'battle of Kyoto' - our campaign to block the
        job-killing, economy-destroying Kyoto accord."

        The accord is an international environmental pact that sets targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

        Canada officially ratified the accord Dec. 17, 2002, under Chrétien's Liberal government. Harper's Conservative government, which took power January 2006, has since been accused of ignoring the accord.

        Harper's letter goes on to outline why he's against the agreement.

        Accord based on 'contradictory' data: Harper

        He writes that it's based on "tentative and contradictory scientific evidence" and it focuses on carbon dioxide, which is "essential to life."

        He says Kyoto requires that Canada make significant cuts in emissions, while countries like Russia, India and China face less of a burden.

        Under Kyoto, Canada was required to reduce emissions by six per cent by 2012, while economies in transition, like Russia, were allowed to choose different base years.

        "Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealthproducing
        nations," Harper's letter reads.

        He said the accord would cripple the oil and gas industries, which are essential to Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

        He wrote in the letter that he would do everything he could to stop Chrétien from passing the Kyoto agreement.

        "We will do everything we can to stop him there, but he might get it
        passed with the help of the socialists in the NDP and the separatists in the BQ [Bloc Québécois]."

        The Prime Minister's Office refused to comment about the letter on the record.

        In recent weeks, Harper has spoken strongly about the environment, saying he will dramatically revamp his minority government's muchcriticized clean air act.

        His comments come as public-opinion polls indicate the environment has become the number one issue among Canadians.

        Liberal MP Mark Holland told the Canadian Press on Tuesday that the leaked letter shows that Harper isn't actually committed to climate change.

        "Now, suddenly, because he has seen the polls and realized the
        political opportunism of going green, the prime minister has launched a new campaign - that of trying to convince Canadians that he actually cares about the environment," Holland said.

        "But no one is buying it."

        The Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country, except the United States, Australia and Monaco.

        With files from the Canadian Press

        http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/01/30/harper-kyoto.html更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 为什么华人对减税这么感兴趣?加国华人平均收入低於加国平均收入线,平均纳税也会低于平均值,减税肯定对富人有利。这么说吧,家里两个senior工程师的肯定赚了,2个mid不赔不赚,2个junior算上选举后当选党找补回来的,肯定是亏。
      • 就是,一帮弱势群体,还想玩保守主义。
      • 有正当职业的中国人可不在此类。“加国华人平均收入低於加国平均收入线,平均纳税也会低于平均值”:因为在唐人街和餐馆打工的很多华人基本不交税。
        • 多伦多去年平均家庭收入差不多是9万加元(8万6千多)。