Green Eco Fee "Tax", What is next "Support my Friends" Tax? Options

[Country Mamma]

Heh.....

I just heard on CFRA that Dolton and his Environment Minister have decided to listen the populace and repeal the new ECO FEES.

I have not been able to find a link to confirm on goggle etc.....heh....Dolton...

[Andy]

There's one now. Does'nt look like it's all of them being pulled, just the stupid ones. LOL!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politi...article1645400/

[Andy]

Yup, the government's cocked it up again. Now we have a triumph of democracy over common sense, thanks to the ever-present temptation to lie to us.

This is how I see the whole thing: there were two aspects to this story. First is the concept that we pay up-front for the cost of disposing of things. I like this concept. I don't like the idea that an old TV or Monitor has negative value. Things with negative value get dumped in the countryside to make a 'profit' (avoidance of the disposal fee). If I'm buying a $1,000 TV, I'll be happy to pay five bucks up front, to dispose of it later. Charge me, please! I want it to be free to dispose of stuff properly.

Second is the concept of hiding taxes as 'user fees'. Sorry, mate, but a tax is a tax. Pick an activity that should be paid for by taxes, spin off yet another quasi-government organisation and have it charge fees for something, and that's a tax. No getting away from it, and don't lie to us.

So we got screwed by our own democracy, thanks to the lying goverment. What should have been a sensible measure got the sheeple annoyed by the lies ("it's not a tax" lie). Hey, presto! The sheeple get upset, the government backs down, and we lose the progress. I bet the incorrect $3.00 on a bag of cement might have contributed to it, too, but that's water under the bridge now.

Democracy is a wonderful thing when you're in the majority; when you're not, it kinda sucks, but the fact is, it's the best there is. So when things go wrong, we just suck it up: and that's what I'm doing right now. If the people don't want it... then it has to go.

[Bob]

Yup, the government's cocked it up again. Now we have a triumph of democracy over common sense, thanks to the ever-present temptation to lie to us.

This is how I see the whole thing: there were two aspects to this story. First is the concept that we pay up-front for the cost of disposing of things. I like this concept. I don't like the idea that an old TV or Monitor has negative value. Things with negative value get dumped in the countryside to make a 'profit' (avoidance of the disposal fee). If I'm buying a $1,000 TV, I'll be happy to pay five bucks up front, to dispose of it later. Charge me, please! I want it to be free to dispose of stuff properly.

Second is the concept of hiding taxes as 'user fees'. Sorry, mate, but a tax is a tax. Pick an activity that should be paid for by taxes, spin off yet another quasi-government organisation and have it charge fees for something, and that's a tax. No getting away from it, and don't lie to us.

So we got screwed by our own democracy, thanks to the lying goverment. What should have been a sensible measure got the sheeple annoyed by the lies ("it's not a tax" lie). Hey, presto! The sheeple get upset, the government backs down, and we lose the progress. I bet the incorrect $3.00 on a bag of cement might have contributed to it, too, but that's water under the bridge now.

Democracy is a wonderful thing when you're in the majority; when you're not, it kinda sucks, but the fact is, it's the best there is. So when things go wrong, we just suck it up: and that's what I'm doing right now. If the people don't want it... then it has to go.

I think this fee or tax should've been implemented as a levy in the supply chain either at the point of import or when a finished good enters the distribution channel. IMHO if it had been done that way, importers and producers simply would've add the levy and passed it on to the end consumer. You and I and all of the other sheep would've been happy caused we wouldn't see "Eco Fee" on our bills of sale but the consumer of the goods will still end up footing the disposal cost. Of course there's still the small matter of additional HST on the extra cost, but what the hell, half a cup is better the none.

This post has been edited by Bob: Jul 20 2010, 09:01 PM

[Country Mamma]

from what I read it is only a 90 day reprieve to review it all, get better messaging and make the tax more consistent.

Now I can not find where I read that 90 day reprieve, but it was echoed by Lisa McLeod last night on the Padre's show last night.

So it is NOT gone, they just hope to package this menard in a more appetizing manner so it can be swallowed easier by the sheeple.

[Andy]

So it is NOT gone, they just hope to package this menard in a more appetizing manner so it can be swallowed easier by the sheeple.

Usually I can work out your typos, CM, but "menard" has me stumped. Is it a duck? A piece of poop? What?

Anyway, I can tell that in your cynicism you're expecting them to hide it better; but in fact I think the solution to this is to be more honest, and also to have the manufacturers include the fee in the sticker price: that would probably eliminate the 'cement' problem.

The price you see should be the price you pay. As a "Brit" I actually think that should extend to taxes too, but that's another thread.

The manufacturers (or importers) should be allowed to add a sticker for the Canadian market which explains is thus: "Free eco-disposal included". "When you purchase this product you contribute to the facilities necessary to dispose of it in an eco-friendly manner." That way they get to add a 'selling point' in return for the fee charged.

[Ayrporte]

Andy
Seeing you are in favour of point of sale taxes then why would you not be in favour of paying your"eco fee" when you get rid of the product??
Not when you purchase it

[Andy]

Seeing {as} you are in favour of point of sale taxes...

That seems an odd opinion to attribute to me; when did I say that? I have no real opinion on whether taxes should be on income or expenditure, frankly mathematically it makes little difference. Is it a twisted version of "taxes should be included in the sticker price" which I did say?

... then why would you not be in favour of paying your"eco fee" when you get rid of the product?? Not when you purchase it

I explained that in post #23. I don't like things to have negative value because people will just leave them on the sidewalk.

[DavidinWC]

Today, I heard the Provincial Minister on CFRA say that the Province would need to pay out $5 Million from General Revenue to cover the lost revenue from the ECO-TAX for the next 90days while they review the process. That would be ~ $20 Million/Year for all of the newly introduced ECO-TAXES.
That would seem to indicate two things,
1) that the newly introduced ECO-TAX (added on July 1 of this year) would only bring in $5 Million for the next 90 days.
*** This is an "out and out lie"!! The revenue (ECO-TAX) from Concrete (and concrete products) alone - would be far greater than $5 Million during that time. Just the fees from 150 new houses (Cement Basements and Foundations) in that period would bring in that much money!! ...
The revenue from things like cement Sidewalks, Bridges, Paving Stones, and Road Medians would bring in far more than $5 million during that period of time!
*** Of course, we can't Audit the Stewardship Org - so we will never know how much they are really getting for everything.

2) that the money would have to come from existing programs -( no doubt Health care and Education)
*** This is the usual line we get... "we'll have to cut the money from existing programs" - so we will back off the heat on the Government.
*** We find out that the "program" has already stashed ~ $73 Million in "investments" - why can't they use that!!! I guess they are saving that for a "Rainy Day"!
*** Since this Stewardship Program is at "Arms Length", I guess that means that they can also contribute to Political Parties...such as the Provincial Liberals! Follow the Money!

We need a complete Provincial Inquiry into this whole Damn Affair!! Call in the Police - because something "stinks to high heaven!!"

[Andy]

Well, I hate to welcome you to the forum this way, Mr David in WC, but on both counts, you're totally wrong. Your outrage seems to be based on the eco fee on concrete, but there's no eco fee on cement, I'm 95% sure it was a mistake; check out my earlier post.

Secondly, the stewardship program has a liability, for products out 'in the field' that have not been disposed of yet; therefore it is appropriate that there should be funds in investments waiting to discharge that liability. If they had NO money, then that would be a scandal because you would ask where it had gone, and if the taxpayer was going to be on the hook for the clean-up as usual.

Outrage is a useful tool, and we could use more of it to sort out bad things; but it's just embarrassing to see it unleashed where it's not warranted.

[Lou]

from what I read it is only a 90 day reprieve to review it all, get better messaging and make the tax more consistent.

Now I can not find where I read that 90 day reprieve, but it was echoed by Lisa McLeod last night on the Padre's show last night.

From the Ont. Gov. website

The McGuinty government has listened to consumers concerns about eco fees. As a result, it will work with businesses and Stewardship Ontario over the next 90 days to develop a new system that works for consumers and works to protect our landfills and waterways from dangerous materials.

http://www.news.ontario.ca/ene/en/2010/07/...n-eco-fees.html

What that news release doesn't tell you is that McGuinty will rip 5 million bucks out of general revenue, i.e., from the taxes we have remitted, and gift it to Stewardship Ontario for their operations.

There’s also every reason to suspect Gerretsen’s announcement the province is going to retool the program over the next 90 days, is mainly cosmetic.

First, Ontario taxpayers will still pick up the cost of running the program during that time — up to $5 million.

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editoria...0/14773476.html

So it is NOT gone, they just hope to package this menard in a more appetizing manner so it can be swallowed easier by the sheeple.

You're right CM. But don't forget. McGuinty warned us that strong medicine will be required to fix Ontario's economy. Get ready for round 2 of the fight against eco taxes. In one way or another, he will try to have us pay off the deficit with schemes disguised as environmental protection.

[Bob]

Get ready for round 2 of the fight against eco taxes. In one way or another, he will try to have us pay off the deficit with schemes disguised as environmental protection.

What approach would you propose for paying off the deficit?

[digitalman]

What approach would you propose for paying off the deficit?

Very good question.

Bring public service employee salaries more in line with those of the private sector, no more cash gifts to cricket clubs and the like, have controls in place to make sure welfare goes to those who really need it, no more e-health scandals and no more expensive, redundant gun registries; i.e. it is time government (and that means ALL political parties) be more HONEST with the electorate as well as being more TRUSTING of the electorate thus avoiding opening up new expensive ministries to monitor and regulate more and more aspects of our lives. Eliminate corporate socialism; businesses should be able to remain in business or not; based upon public demand for their services and/or products rather than government handouts.

I don't think these few suggestions would just magically eliminate the deficit and outstanding debt, but it would be a step in the right direction. Maybe some others have other ideas.

[Lou]

What approach would you propose for paying off the deficit?

Dump McGuinty and his Merry Band of Spenders and Boondoglers.

[Lou]

Very good question.

Bring public service employee salaries more in line with those of the private sector, no more cash gifts to cricket clubs and the like, have controls in place to make sure welfare goes to those who really need it, no more e-health scandals and no more expensive, redundant gun registries; i.e. it is time government (and that means ALL political parties) be more HONEST with the electorate as well as being more TRUSTING of the electorate thus avoiding opening up new expensive ministries to monitor and regulate more and more aspects of our lives. Eliminate corporate socialism; businesses should be able to remain in business or not; based upon public demand for their services and/or products rather than government handouts.

Very good suggestions digitalman, all of which I agree with. You'll find some of your ideas in the following.

Cut Wasteful Government

Introduce a mandatory Sunset Review process that forces all ministries, agencies, boards, and commissions to justify their existence and continued value to the public.

The public should know if they are getting value for the money spent by government agencies like the LHINs, who have diverted almost $200 million from front line health care.

This process will force government to pursue savings, higher quality service delivery and free up resources for job creation.
----
Stop Corporate Welfare

Politicians and bureaucrats should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the marketplace. Billions of dollars in corporate handouts – including sweetheart deals for Korea based Samsung and a French videogame company – reward companies who hire the best lobbyists.

Instead, government should lower the overall tax and regulatory burdens to allow all businesses to succeed on a level playing field.
---
Cap Spending

Public sector collective agreements must reflect the ability of the private sector to pay. A wage freeze should be imposed on senior government administrators, non-unionized employees and MPPs.

The Premier should immediately enter into negotiations with the public sector union leadership with the goal of working towards a wage freeze or similar savings through more efficient service delivery until the economy and provincial finances recover.
Spending should be capped at the 2010-11 estimate provided in the 2009 budget.

http://10for2010.ca/bring-public-sector-ag...e-with-reality/

Then we have McGuinty, cruising along with no particular plan in mind, because, you know, he says ordinary Ontarians are not really interested in the province's economy.

The premier refused to say what options the government would consider to balance the budget in the years to come, saying it's only the media that is pushing for details on what austerity measures loom – not ordinary Ontarians.
---
"How Dalton McGuinty and Dwight Duncan could come with a straight face, announce a $25 billion deficit and no plan whatsoever to get us out of this mess is an absolute failure in leadership," said Hudak, warning Ontarians to expect tax hikes, not spending cuts.

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/715614

That was 9 months ago. Then came the eco tax. Then came a new tax on goods and services not previously affected. Looks like Timmy was right.

As I said to Bob, time to dump McGuinty.

[Country Mamma]

What approach would you propose for paying off the deficit?

Cut programs, especially new ones like all day day care disguised as full day kindergarten? Stop lining the pockets of their cronies and make foundations such as this bogus group accountable where our stolen funds are going?

Stop signing contracts with Korea to produce wind power or solar power at 87 in stead of the 8 cents ? Stop building wind farms, stop with blighting our landscape with solar farms?

Review salaries and make bonuses actually ONLY be paid out based on performance?

review departments for redundancy and stream line systems for ease of the public instead of for the maximum # of employees in individual manager's mini empires?

Clean up corruption in his civil service ranks? E health, Lotteries?

Get rid of the Ontario human rights commission or change it's mandate back to what it was intended for?

Legalize Pot in Ontario? Think of all the savings in Opp et all

Allow two tier health care so less people suffer and their condition worsens while waiting for delayed universal health medical care? A lot of money is leaving this country for reasonable care, It shouldn't be illegal to keep our money here.

I don't know, thats just off the top of my head in one minute....

[Lou]

Digitalman and CM. The forum's economic think tank. Way to go!!!

I would add privatize the LCBO.