溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell resigns! [打印本頁]

作者: ACC-HE 時間: 2010-11-3 10:55 標題: B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell resigns!

VICTORIA -- Premier Gordon Campbell announced this morning he is stepping down as premier.

"It's time for a new person to lead the province," Campbell said during a brief news conference in Vancouver.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Prem ... /3771490/story.html

作者: boss2007 時間: 2010-11-3 11:00

回復 1# ACC-HE

so the 15% income tax cut is gone too ?

作者: 布小熊 時間: 2010-11-3 11:02

Premier Gordon Campbell steps down
Resigned from post but not from party
http://www.news1130.com/news/loc ... campbell-steps-down

作者: raffaello 時間: 2010-11-3 11:03

Can they lower the HST rate now?

作者: ACC-HE 時間: 2010-11-3 11:08

no, harm has done, irreversible.

作者: ACC-HE 時間: 2010-11-3 11:12

回復 2# boss2007

... I don't think so.

作者: pkphilip 時間: 2010-11-3 11:14

HST recall doesn't happen until 2011.

Anyone can suggest next person up for premier? Anyone with the guts to make the hard calls? I doubt NDP or Carole take the job either.

Philip

作者: fibbi 時間: 2010-11-3 11:16

Hope it will do the party good... I don't want NDP...

作者: Look4chrisng 時間: 2010-11-3 11:20

Gordo is not so smart on this HST thing. If the 15%tax cut and the HST brought out at the same time. He will be a hero.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-11-3 11:24

It's good to see Gordo do this, and again, it shows that public pressure (and people power in general) is still something the regular citizen can rely on.

As a political leader, resigning was definitely the right move, but it is debatable the move came too late. Just as importantly, perhaps the Liberals didn't have to announce the reduction on personal income tax had Gordo resigned, but alas, the progression of tax breaks followed by his resignation is a logical course of action to take.

Now the question is, is the combined effect of huge tax break + Gordo resignation enough to pacify public anger on the Liberals and woo voters back to the Liberal camp?

-Lik

作者: ACC-HE 時間: 2010-11-3 11:28

the progression of tax breaks followed by his resignation is a logical course of action to take.
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 11:24

why?

作者: low_B 時間: 2010-11-3 11:36

Finally....

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 11:42

I guess this is a good move to pacify the peasants, and hopefully this means people will actually vote Liberal instead of NDP coming next election.

I have no doubt they can find someone much more politically smart than Campbell, pleasing the people and opposition by doing useless things, etc. I don't know if they can find anyone to replace him that is as efficient as he is, and will get as much work done... Hopefully I'm wrong on this one...

P.S. They couldn't possibly have pushed out HST and a 15% tax cut when they initially proposed HST. During the depth of the financial meltdown and recession, they were already worried about the fiscal health of the coming years. Only showed that at least they cared some what about fiscal responsibility... They are not NDP after all.

作者: 匿名 時間: 2010-11-3 11:47

個股市短期內會唔會受影響呢﹖

作者: 匿名 時間: 2010-11-3 11:47

回復 ACC-HE

so the 15% income tax cut is gone too ?
boss2007 發表於 2010-11-3 11:00

你就想~

作者: Look4chrisng 時間: 2010-11-3 11:52

回復 13# BiscottiGelato

Why not 15% tax cut and HST at the same time? Lib says HST is revenue neutral. Unless they lie about that too.

Don't be silly, Liberal or NDP is about fiscal responsibility for their friends and family.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:02

回復 BiscottiGelato

Why not 15% tax cut and HST at the same time? Lib says HST is revenue neutr ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2010-11-3 11:52

Check out the state of the coffer and state of the economy at the end of the NDP reign vs now. Not to mention we just spent tons on Olympics and also got through the toughest recession post-Depression. Putting Liberal and NDP in the same regard in terms of economy and fiscal responsibility is just plain wrong.

作者: 匿名 時間: 2010-11-3 12:07

好搞笑﹐歷史上最不受歡的省長

上次他醉駕被拉已經應該辭職啦﹐面皮幾丈厚

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:08

本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2010-11-3 12:09 編輯

After reading Gordon Campbell's statement. I think years later, after people get over their emotions on the HST fiasco, experts and critiques will rate Campbell as one of the greater premiers BC have ever had.

Who else would put their own head on the line to push out the HST, for the good of the province, at that time? Yes he 'lied', but he did what's better for the province at ultimately what is his own expense. Quoting his statement today:

"My goal is to return public attention to what is important to British Columbians - their jobs, their families and how government can best support them.

That is what the decision on the HST was all about. I hope that my announcement today will allow British Columbians to move forward and fully consider the HST and the alternative on their merits between now and September 2011."

I am not saying he's resigning solely because of this, but ultimately he is hanging his hat up so people will actually look at HST for what it is (business efficiency, Federal grants, cost in revoking the HST, etc). As politicians go, it's difficult to do better than that.

And this is before mentioning how his 2 terms have brought BC out from one of the poorest province fiscal-wise and economy-wise, to be among the best.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-11-3 12:14

the progression of tax breaks followed by his resignation is a logical course of action to take.
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 11:24

It is a logical course of progress when you think of it as what it is -- damage control. You try the smaller things first to see if that's enough to control the damage. And if the lighter measures aren't working (or working well enough), you adopt moves that are more drastic.

Why not 15% tax cut and HST at the same time? Lib says HST is revenue neutral. Unless they lie about that too.
Look4chrisng 發表於 2010-11-3 11:52

The 15% personal income tax cut is nothing more than an attempt to bribe the voters back into voting Liberals again at the next provincial election. When the HST was announced/adopted, the Liberals have been in office for too long and were too conceited to understand the consequences of pushing a tax increase (what the HST effective amounted to) through.

As I have said since day 1, the idea of the HST is not bad at all. However, the execution was completely flawed. Had the Liberals understood this at the time of the proposal, they could easily have pushed it through by announcing a 1 or 2% reduction in the PST portion of the HST. Something as small as that would have been enough to keep the majority sufficiently happy. They'll probably still grumble and stuff, but the backlash won't be anything nearly as bad as it is now.

-Lik

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:14

好搞笑﹐歷史上最不受歡的省長

上次他醉駕被拉已經應該辭職啦﹐面皮幾丈厚 ...
匿名發表於 2010-11-3 12:07

I rather have a premier that drinks and drives but can manage the province really well.

Than someone that would put the province in social, economical and fiscal turmoil.

This is the problem with democracy. People can't really tell what's good for themselves, and what's not. What effect does the premier have on the average BCer when he DUI? Nothing, there's no negative effect what so ever other than a bitter taste in people's mouth. In comparison, a premier that waste all the tax dollars on useless Ferries definately will make the average BCer worst off tho.

And this is why, albeit all that Clinton did back in his days, he will always be rated ahead of Bush and alike. Cuz who he sleeps with have nothing to do with how he manages the country.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:19

本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2010-11-3 12:20 編輯

It is a logical course of progress when you think of it as what it is -- damage control. You try th ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 12:14

That's why I say, Campbell and the gang is never politically smart. However the ultimate intent of pushing HST through is for the good of the province. People just can't take a bitter medicine that's good for them. I'd think that just spells shame on the citizen on not being able to recognize what's good for them and what's not, rather than shame on the government in trying to do good for the province but bad on their own popularity.

On the other hand, it's part of the HST agreement with the Federal gov't that they cannot change the tax rate for the first few years. Besides, at that time (depth of the recession), I don't think it's prudent for the province to push out a revenue negative move. I applaud their attempt in fiscal responsibility and in their courage to make a move at that time to push out something good for the province at their own political popularity's expense. I don't know if we will ever find a premier like that ever again.

作者: MSN04 時間: 2010-11-3 12:21

回復 19# BiscottiGelato

Totally agree with you.

No doubt the HST was a lie, but I don't mind if it is a good decision.

If you are working on a project, you change you decision a lot if there are better alternatives.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:25

On to the 15% tax cut. An income tax cut is usually regarded as some of the most efficient stimulus a gov't can give to the economy. I don't think we can blame the Lib for trying to salvage their popularity by giving this tax cut, only at a time when the province can actually afford this cut (we are ahead of the budget forecast for the next few years). Considering the stimulus effect on the economy and to fatten up the middle incomers' pocket. I don't see how the 15% tax cut is not a win-win move for everyone.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-11-3 12:41

On the other hand, it's part of the HST agreement with the Federal gov't that they cannot change the tax rate for the first few years. Besides, at that time (depth of the recession), I don't think it's prudent for the province to push out a revenue negative move. I applaud their attempt in fiscal responsibility and in their courage to make a move at that time to push out something good for the province at their own political popularity's expense. I don't know if we will ever find a premier like that ever again.
BiscottiGelato 發表於 2010-11-3 12:19

I would be quite surprised if the no provincial sale tax reduction clause could not be re-negotiated with the federal government to adopt some sort of change. After all, if the provincial government was only reducing the provincial portion of the tax, then that really isn't a matter for the federal government to meddle with. As a means to keep the public happy, certainly the federal government (and federal politicans) would understand the importance as well.

-Lik

作者: fm9610 時間: 2010-11-3 12:53

本帖最後由 fm9610 於 2010-11-3 12:55 編輯

On to the 15% tax cut. An income tax cut is usually regarded as some of the most efficient stimulus ...
BiscottiGelato 發表於 2010-11-3 12:25

The problem is you need very finance savvy guys to manage it. I am not sure CaroleJ and her team have the skill or the will. They just have too many union friends to favor

Now the CEO is gone, I hope the broad of directors can elect someone with the same caliber to lead. Personally, I hope we can get/beg Taylor to come down from the mountain. Otherwise wait for the takeover and the big unknown....

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-11-3 12:54

It's good to see Gordo do this, and again, it shows that public pressure (and people power in genera ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 11:24

我就話金寶再一次顯露佢之狂妄自大
接受唔倒被人批評
佢辭職係想話
我走咗睇你哋點死
我就印印腳咬糧

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:56

本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2010-11-3 12:57 編輯

I would be quite surprised if the no provincial sale tax reduction clause could not be re-negotiate ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 12:41

Again, revenue negative, fiscal ignorant moves at the depth of the recession and right after the Olympics... In a political viewpoint, it's probably worth a shot to renegotiate. In real terms (economy/fiscal/what comes out/into taxpayer's pockey), it's really not worth it to do a renegotiation. If you open it up for renegotiation, anything is fair game. The Fed might counter that they now want to cut the grant in half for all you know.

It's easy to be an armchair critic in retrospect. I highly doubt anyone in that position could've done any better for the long term benefit of the province.

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-11-3 12:57

回復 BiscottiGelato

Why not 15% tax cut and HST at the same time? Lib says HST is revenue neutr ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2010-11-3 11:52

If HST is revenue neutral the 15% tax cut will lead to a deficit

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 12:59

本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2010-11-3 13:03 編輯

If HST is revenue neutral the 15% tax cut will lead to a deficit
sheep 發表於 2010-11-3 12:57

But they are now ahead of their own budget forecast. So they have margin to play with on this.

More-over, income tax cuts is regarded as the most efficient form of stimulus. Much better than stimulus spendings, quantitative easings, etc. You never know if the net benefit in business stimulus might result in more tax receipt down the road.

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-11-3 13:10

回復 30# BiscottiGelato

I think they have tabled a deficit budget and even as you say they are ahead of their own budget forecast, so they have margin to play with on this, but tax cut means less revenue. May be at the end of the fiscal year, the numbers changes, who knows?

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2010-11-3 14:01

回復 22# BiscottiGelato

I have no problem with the HST as long as the provincial economy is
on track. I don't think I need to spend much more after the implementation
of HST other than dining out.
I lived through Dave Barett and Clark's regime, now the nightmare is
making a come back

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 14:01

tax cut means less revenue on the short term. Different story on the long run. HK have such low tax, can't say they have sucky revenues.

作者: 匿名 時間: 2010-11-3 14:09

回復 BiscottiGelato

I have no problem with the HST as long as the provincial economy is
on tra ...
somewhereintime 發表於 2010-11-3 14:01

我同你一樣﹐無 HST 咪又係有其他 TAX。。。根本無分別﹐若無 HST 加薪俸稅更衰﹐而家 HST 收投資項目 12%﹐我覺得係好的進展﹐起碼那些超有米的人要嘔番少少出黎先。。。

我唔明點解呢度﹐同香港都係﹐向超有錢的人無咩辦法﹖點解﹖睇見超有錢的那些人怎樣花費﹐就覺得﹐他們出多一個崩﹐一個零頭﹐好過窮人捱一世啦。。。

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2010-11-3 14:16

I used to work for a super rich businessman ,
his wife says: Only poor people pay tax,
we can always defer tax as long as we can retain
CA at our service.
He sold a Hotel and made $8 million profit,
got divorce and filed bankruptcy. His wife opened
another hotel and they are still living happy together

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2010-11-3 15:33

Nice Move Gordon, RIP...

作者: news 時間: 2010-11-3 15:43

it always the rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer

作者: Prelude 時間: 2010-11-3 17:09

From the radio, they were discussing the 15% income tax cut.
They were saying the 15% is not really 15%, it's just a marketing term to get attention.
They were saying only the lowest income bracket get that 15% tax cut, after all the calculation, those low bracket people pay $20/month less compare to before.

Middle and higher class doesn't get any benefit. So the 15% income tax cut for the people who barely need to pay income tax to begin with.

I am not saying this is a bad thing, because it helps the poorer people by ~$20/month, but the NUMBER 15% is a way to get the biggest attention with the lowest cost. There is no right or wrong here. This is just for your information.

Btw, that's what I heard on the ratio, you can verify it yourself.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 17:23

回復 38# Prelude

Initially they said it amounts to some $600 a year, up to $75k of income?

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-3 17:30

我同你一樣﹐無 HST 咪又係有其他 TAX。。。根本無分別﹐若無 HST 加薪俸稅更衰﹐而家 HST 收投資項目 12 ...
匿名發表於 2010-11-3 14:09

You guys always criticize the rich, and demand less tax, more benefit, etc to the poor. It sounds good, but it doesn't work as well.

Giving tax breaks to the rich, and giving tax breaks to investments encourages people to make more money, and to invest more. Productivity and investments are what drives the economy, makes the country strong and in the end, everybody on average will benefit.

Giving tax breaks and social welfare to the poor discourages people to work, reduces productivity and in the end country becomes weaker and the economy just goes down the drain.

Obviously you have to balance it out so that the poor won't starve too badly or something, and it's easier said than done when achieving that balance. Not to mention that different people define 'fair' differently... But to think that taxing the rich to death so that the poor can just not pay anything just counters natural selection, and are systems that destines to fail. This is why socialist system always fails (NDP, pre-80s CCP, etc).

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-11-3 20:39

If you think socialist systems always fail, obviously you have no understanding of how European countries, esp those in northern Europe (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, etc.) function.

-Lik

作者: MSN04 時間: 2010-11-3 21:07

回復 41# Lik

hmm... not sure about other countries, but for this province, socialism will likely fail

(quality of the people??)

作者: fm9610 時間: 2010-11-3 21:34

If you think socialist systems always fail, obviously you have no understanding of how European coun ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 20:39

Yes. but I have no intention of paying the income tax of those countries. Sweden has the highest in the world at 59%

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-4 00:31

If you think socialist systems always fail, obviously you have no understanding of how European coun ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 20:39

Definately not among the strongest economies in the world, are they? The countries you mentioned still have a largely capitalistic backbone with a socialistic tendency. For true socialism, you have to look at Mao and Soviet regimes.

Anyways, the more socialist a country is, the more likely a country is to fail (and everybody dies poor). The more capitalist a country is, the more likely there's large rich/poor disparity. Do note that some people are deservedly poor because they sit on their hands with their asses and does nothing and expect hand-outs. The challenge with capitalism is not to enrich the poor, but to establish a fair system such that ones that are more productive and more insightful to end up to be rich, instead of just allowing the rich continue to be the rich.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-11-4 00:54

Does it really matter whether a country is an economic powerhouse when the the same country consistently ranks among the highest in terms of quality of life general contentment among its citizens/residents? For that matter, what is the purpose of a government? If you ask me, my answer is that a successful government, a good government is one where its citizens enjoys a high quality of life.

People keep looking only at the the numeric figure of the tax rate, but totally ignore the benefits that citizens receive in return. In Germany, for example, university and post secondary training is free. In North America and in HK nowadays, how many students are not burdened with huge post secondary education debts?

-Lik

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-11-4 01:03

Definately not among the strongest economies in the world, are they? The countries you mentioned s ...
BiscottiGelato 發表於 2010-11-4 00:31

i take that back as I didn't do my research. It does seem that Norway and Sweden not only have some of the highest quality of living in the world, but also some of the highest GDP per Capita in the world. They are regarded as a capitialist welfare state. Citizens do receive a lot in terms of education and health, which helps make sure everyone maximizes their potential for success. In return they are taxed heavily.

Not knowing about other details like minimum wage policies, union control and power structures, etc. I don't know if the success of these countries are due to their welfare, or due to other reasons. More-over, a heavy tax and high welfare structure does not simply mean that they are a socialist society with state controlled wealth distribution and free food for those who sit on their asses. Weather they are a good model applicable to every place every where, it's yet to be seen.

作者: fibbi 時間: 2010-11-4 09:32

Well, just wanna comment that....Sweden people...they have lots of holiday (much more than NA)... Once every few month when I need to communicating with Swedish (for my job), they are on holiday...

作者: amgolfer 時間: 2010-11-4 12:39

那些不欣賞左派理念的選民, 如因金寶爾下台而在下次大選時重新考慮自由黨. 則他的犧牲對本省長遠利益而言, 亦不失為好事.

至於那些憎恨HST而夢想NDP上台會有所改變對選民, 請留意到目前為止, 即使反HST情緒如此高漲, NDP對HST的取態還是非常璦昧, 不敢告訴選民如他們上台便會如何如何...

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-11-4 12:51

NDP對HST的取態還是非常璦昧, 不敢告訴選民如他們上台便會如何如何...amgolfer 發表於 2010-11-4 12:39

佢哋都話係既定事實
就算佢哋上台
HST都會繼續

作者: 匿名 時間: 2010-11-4 13:40

佢哋都話係既定事實
就算佢哋上台
HST都會繼續
sheep 發表於 2010-11-4 12:51

就算他們可以答應取消又如何呢﹖咪又係有其他稅﹖總之大家不要被愚弄了才好。。。

反而我覺得自由黨的 TFSA 設計幾好﹐還有收緊房貸的三招﹐我都幾欣賞﹐雖然兩個黨都係有唔好的地方。

作者: peter236 時間: 2010-11-4 14:23

If you think socialist systems always fail, obviously you have no understanding of how European coun ...
Lik 發表於 2010-11-3 20:39

That is why all these European countries are going bankrupt. Norway is better, since it has a lot of oil.

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://www.loyaukee.com/forum/)