Editor:
Forget about all government and "Fight HST" rhetoric or "propaganda" and just figure this out for yourself. This is definitely designed to convince people that the HST is a much better option. The HST, regardless of the now 12 per cent or the "promised" 10 per cent, is more attractive than the previous PST/GST at the combined 12 per cent, on less taxable items, as demonstrated by the following explanations. Furthermore, the previous PST/GST could be changed, if not by the current government, but could be changed by the next one, in order to pay for social services. So think about that.
Think about:
Job creation:
The government predicts that the HST will create many new jobs. Then "Fight HST" quote the fact that unemployment has actually worsened since the HST has been in effect. You must decide whether, without the HST, the job losses could have been "doubled". Neither camp can be sure of either, especially because of economic uncertainty created by the referendum controversy, the economic crunch in the U.S., one of our larger trading partners and the high value of the Canadian dollar. So you have to decide.
Prices for consumers:
The government predicts that the HST will create reductions in prices. Then "Fight HST" quote the fact that prices have actually increased. You must decide whether, without the HST, the prices may have been increased a lot more. Neither camp can be sure, especially because businesses change their prices depending on the demands of the purchasers, sales and the corresponding competition pressures - independent of the government or Fight HST. Do you really believe that the sales taxes that businesses paid, were not included in the prices you paid in the past? So you have to decide.
The low-income earners and seniors on fixed incomes will not suffer from the HST:
The government predicts that the HST will save money because of the rebates. Conversely, "Fight HST" deny that fact. You can calculate for yourself, but don't be misled by unique situations. The government - this one or the next - can adjust those disadvantages, if and where needed, Fight HST cannot. Unfortunately, many low income earners and seniors feel a loyalty to the Fight HST's efforts and may be inclined to vote "Yes" as a protest vote against the government. If the "Yes" side wins the referendum, it is not just you, who may lose money, but many other low income earners and seniors will lose money. So you have to decide.
Higher income earners will pay more consumption taxes with the HST:
Most people - consumers - working or already on pension have some investments - either through company or public (CPP, civil servants, unionized workers) or self regulated pension plans. Returns on investments for future or current pensioners are directly tied in to the success of Businesses. They are the same organizations that the Fight HST has been criticizing for shifting the taxes onto the consumers - the taxes that may have already been in the price, so you have been paying taxes on a tax.
Calculate for yourself, even a 1 per cent decrease in any investment portfolio - say from 8 per cent to 7 per cent or 3 per cent to 2 per cent - will decrease the investment gain by a greater amount than what the HST will cost you - that is on the previously PST exempt items only. If Businesses do not make sufficient profits - without the HST - there will be that much less for the dividends for consumers/pensioners/investors income. That is why, in spite of paying more taxes (HST) now, investors should get better returns now and in the future.
You must decide whether you want to either; pay more taxes now with HST - to pay for your social services and reduced debt - or; receive reduced income, now and in the future, from your investments or pensions - increased debt and still have to pay for your social services from a lower income, without the HST.
If you vote "Yes" to extinguish the HST, neither the government nor "Fight HST", can help you.
If you vote "No" to retain the HST, you will help yourself.
Keith Hand
