New 3% Tax Increase on Non-Needed Items

A new 3 % tax  for non-essential  items

**( Non-essential Items, is any item, that isn't required for a human being to live in order to survive ).**   ( Human beings need a place to live, that is warm and dry,  clean water, and healthy food in order to survive and live. )

A 3 % tax on items that we don't need to live  as well as making Cannabis Legal , on top of an extra 3% tax increase on non-essential items could create millions and potentially billions of extra tax revenue dollars that could be used on infrastructure, as well as  creating grants and incentives towards renewable energy system that could be used for creating jobs, training, education, house and building adaptions of solar, wind ect that could be sold back to the energy grid when generating more power then a house or building is using at that time.This could also make the energy system more secure against power outages, if a community could generate enough solar and wind power in a town or city to keep needed services running during a catastrophic power outage from the main power grid, to needed services, while the main grid is being repaired. 

That being said I would support a 3% new tax increase on non-essential items to create a poverty reduction strategy /  Living Wage System as well as, Investing in grants and incentives for environmentally safe,  renewable, sustainable, alternative green energy for households to large scale operations as well as education and training. 

A: Infrustructure  

1.   Investing in grants and incentives for environmentally safe,  renewable, sustainable, alternative green energy for  households to large scale operations as well as education and training.

2.  New infrastructure towards a healthier living,

  • Creating exercise parks with Outdoor Fitness Equipment geared for kids to adults connected with bicycle and walk paths.

B: A Poverty Reduction Strategy / Living Wage System for a single person living below the poverty level $0. - $17,500 a year.

1. Implement a Poverty Reduction Strategy  / Living Wage System A Poverty Reduction Strategy / Living Wage System for a single person living below the poverty level $0. - $17,500 a year..

2. Implement a min level of rent and rent increases based on people living below the poverty level. $0. - $17,500.

3. Allow a person making a wage below the poverty level, $0. - $17,500 to access  programs, education and training that are offered to people on  Social Services, EI, Disabilities, and other back to work programs.

  • A person may need training and education for employment, that they are interested in but can't access the same programs offered to people on Social Services, EI, Disabilities, and other back to work programs, because they are not on or don't qualify for Social Services, EI, Disabilities, and other back to work programs.

4. Create more Subsidized Housing for people that are living below the poverty line  that are  working and making a wage less then the poverty level.  $0. - $17,500.

        • Most Subsidized Housing is geared towards Minority Groups, People on Disabilities, Seniors, and Families, but very few Subsidized Housing Places have available suites or rooms for the working poor.

5. Implement a wage buffer for people on Social Services, EI, and Disabilities that allows people to make a wage  to cover the cost of living while on the system.

  • If you get a job, you are deducted any assistance from Social Services, EI, and Disabilities. Since  Social Services, EI, and Disabilities does not cover the cost of living. People should be able to make a wage equal to the poverty level  $0. - $17,500, and not be punished and deducted for their effort to live in poverty, while struggling to get out of poverty. From what I know if you make any money , when you claim it on your Social Assistance  stub, you get deducted dollar for dollar. which currently is $600  for a single person.
  • Example 1 , If a person on Disabilities was receiving $1000 dollars a month from Social Assistance , the person on Disabilities should be able to make an extra $625 per month before getting deducted anything.
  • Example 2 , If a  single employable person receiving $1000 a month from  Social Assistance , they should be able to make $250 ( including up to $250 from an EI claim ) before being deducted. EI should allow a person to make $250 over a $1000 claim without being deducted. That being said a person receiving $1250 from a EI claim would not receive Income Assistance from Social Assistance but still be able to access the Social Assistance Programs for getting back to work.

6. Increase the available amount of money a person can have in their bank account from $1500 to  $17,500  that doesn't make them ineligible for Social Assistance  Programs ,

        •  If you have more then  $1500 in your bank account and assets you are denied Social Assistance . Social Assistance Programs should be accessible for people that have $0. - $17,500 in their savings . Although not be eligible for Income Assistance if an individual has  $1500 to $17,500 in their  savings, but  be able to access programs, training, and employer incentives from Social Assistance and other back to work programs.    

7. Add basic non-cosmetic dentist, eye, and hearing care coverage  to the health care system that covers people making below the poverty level $0. - $17,500.

        •  People on Social Assistance and Disability have some coverage but people working below the poverty line have near 0% coverage, unless it's an emergency situation . Basic non-comedic dentist,  eye, and hearing care coverage should be apart of the health care system for people living below the poverty level $0. - $17,500.  ( this would create more jobs for people in the health care field ).

8. Combine Social Services, EI, Disabilities and other back to work programs into a Poverty Reduction Strategy / Living Wage System.

 

In conclusion,

People have disposable income to buy non-essential items,  people living below the poverty line have a lot less disposable income. Creating a poverty reduction strategy / Living Wage System is going to cost money to keep going. It should  act as a bounce back net, supporting system  to catch people from slipping through the cracks and  giving people not only support but a bounce back initiative to make more then a living wage to have more disposable income that they spend on non-essential items that get taxed and supports the system that gave them the bounce back initiative . Everyone rich and poor shares the responsibility to support the Living Wage System through a new 3% non-essential items tax  by purchasing non-essential items, every one gets taxed equally.

So many programs get cut because of not having enough tax dollars to support the programs , so its time that we create a new tax dedicated to supporting  an ongoing program that supports itself by making sure the tax dollars spent to make it work are also regenerated back into the system to keep it working.  In this case a +/- 3%  new tax increase on non-essential items to create a Poverty Reduction Strategy  /  Living Wage System  within the cost of living that maintains a guarantees a +/- 3% tax goes to keep it running . During times of lower unemployment and more people making more then the poverty wage  people would have more disposable income to spend on non-essential items and could generate a tax surplus which could be used to create more programs, grants and incentives.

From what I've noticed in the last 30 years based on my experience of living below the poverty line, it's going to get a lot worse. As the poverty line increases the population living in poverty will increase as well, without a Poverty Reduction Strategy / Living Wage System. 

Reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Mike Springfield
    commented 2017-05-02 11:56:16 -0700
    Quote " we hear the Government doesn’t have enough programs for services and therefore they have to cut those non-profitable services from our system "
    Edit " We hear the Government doesn’t have enough MONEY for non-profitable programs for services and therefore they have to cut those non-profitable services from our system " Yet non-profitable services is something that is needed for the general population, if raising taxes gives us those non-profitable services, then raise the taxes,
    OR CUT THE CORPORATE WELFARE SYSTEM !!! And put OUR TAX DOLLARS back into the hands of the general populations needs FIRST !!!
  • Mike Springfield
    commented 2017-05-02 11:36:03 -0700
    The fact is at some point or some where we are going to pay more money for something like,
    What British Columbians will pay more for in 2017
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-taxes-2017-1.3903691 .
    People don’t like hearing about raising taxes to pay for things like better education, better health care or infrastructure, but that’s why we pay taxes . We pay taxes for things we need or needs to be fixed, upgraded, built or for extra services that people need that may not be profitable but are needed for the support of the population .
    I would much rather have a government spend our tax dollars on the general population then,
    Canadians pay hefty $684B bill in business subsidies over 30 years, study shows
    http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/canadians-pay-hefty-684b-bill-in-business-subsidies-over-20-years-study-shows
    BC’s Massive Tax Giveaway to the Rich
    https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2017/02/17/BC-Tax-Giveaway-to-the-Rich/
    I would much rather have my taxes spent on the general population needs then the needs of the Corporations , I think the Green Party understands the mismanagement of where our taxes are going and who is benefiting. I am not benefiting the way I need yet the Corporations are doing quite well on BC and Canada’s Corporate Welfare System . Don’t think for a moment that taxes won’t be raised or prices of things wont go up no matter who gets voted into power , the question is do you want someone that is voted in power for the general population benefit or the Corporations benefit .
    I hear about cuts to programs and support services because we don’t have enough money but yet Corporations Welfare System is doing just fine , but we don’t hear about that . we hear the Government doesn’t have enough programs for services and therefore they have to cut those non-profitable services from our system . Non-Profitable services is something that is needed for the general population if raising taxes gives us those non-profitable services then raise the taxes OR CUT THE CORPORATE WELFARE SYSTEM !!! And put OUR TAX DOLLARS back into the hands of the general populations needs FIRST !!!
  • Faver Dod
    commented 2017-05-02 09:03:43 -0700
    I hate to say this, but this 3% tax idea is the sort of thing that gives the Green party a bad rep as not being a viable party in the eyes of BC voters. Your other ideas around social assistance are well thought out though.
  • Cathy Fortin
    commented 2017-03-16 15:32:12 -0700
    I think a 3% tax on non-essentials is a fantastic idea! Not only will it generate income but this tax would make people more aware of the wasteful ways we need to grow away from.
  • Cathy Fortin
    tagged this with Important 2017-03-16 15:32:11 -0700
  • Mike Springfield
    published this page in Make a suggestion 2017-03-15 22:12:17 -0700
Donate Get Involved