Friday, 22 March 2013

Budget 2013: A nation of lemony snitches

When Scott and I first got together, his ex-wife was pissed.
She was so pissed that she made an anonymous call to the Canadian Blood Services to rat Scott out for being a promiscuous gay intravenous drug-user (her words).  He was hauled before the Medical Officer of Health to answer to these ridiculous allegations. In the meantime, he was told he could not give platelets, which he did every two weeks, contributions that saved many children and adults suffering from cancer.
Another nasty acquaintance of mine called the then Revenue Canada to say that someone who had spurned him had cheated on his taxes. That person went through auditor-hell. This snitch didn't make a cent off his call, but he did exact revenge on someone who was only guilty of preferring the company of another.
It's one thing to call Crime Stoppers when you believe someone has committed a crime. It's another thing to be a tax snitch. Add to that a 15 percent commission and, well, people like Scott could make a better living ratting people out than selling cars. I wonder if the snitch money is tax-free. Will there be a new line on the income tax form for them? Is it considered self-employed income?
The federal government's approach to tax collection is mean, petty and stupid.
It appeals to the lowest common denominator -- say, a tradesman who is jealous of a competitor, an aggrieved employee, an ex-spouse caught in a custody battle, or just some schmo who wants to make a little extra cash at the expense of another.
This is the most un-Canadian proposal ever. In no way does it appeal to one's decency or good nature.
Meanwhile, the government is making snacks out of Canada Revenue Agency employees who will soon be getting their pink slips. What gives?
Why would the government replace people trained in the art of detecting non-compliance with rank amateurs who surely are in it for their own personal gain? Why not replace the guards in the prisons with other prisoners?
The other thing that gauls me about this budget is the whole baby clothes and hockey thing. We're going to take the tariffs off baby clothes, hockey gear and golf clubs. To do what? To make it cheaper for girls to have babies, thus allowing them to stay at home and not get any of those "skilled jobs" the ones listed in the budget, jobs that do not resemble jobs women would want to do?
Do we need cheaper golf clubs? Or more hockey players?
Does this also mean that people who make sports gear here in Canada will now have more competition from the Taiwanese or Chinese?
I'm thinking of making a call to CRA about Harper's taxes.
But that would be a slimy act of revenge.
Who's coming with?

No comments:

Post a Comment