Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland hold copies of the federal budget as they pose for a photo before its tabling, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on April 16.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Budget for it
Re “A government with no priorities, no anchors, and when it comes to growth, no clue” (April 17): This government seems to have spread itself too thin with no focus on identifying and addressing the existential issues affecting our country.
Instead, I am treated to more meaningless tax measures which will likely further distort investment choices and push people to lazy assets to avoid triggering elevated rates on capital gains.
I believe the Primer Minister and his team are out of their depth. Time to change.
Gordon Capern Toronto
Has anyone in Ottawa ever read an economics textbook? How can we fight inflation, and provide any hope for our descendants’ futures, with a $39.8-billion budget deficit?
Do any rational people believe that paying $54.1-billion per year in interest on government debt is an attractive economic policy?
Don McMullin Hamilton
The Liberal budget is said to focus on progress and economic growth.
Canadians are now saddled with the largest debt in this country’s history. That is some growth.
Murray Edworthy Cochrane, Alta.
I found only two positive things in the budget.
First, the Liberals did not even attempt promises to curtail our ever-expanding civil service and find savings in redundant federal programs and spending.
Second, they didn’t give us their usual rosy projection of when we can expect to balance the budget.
Michael Gilman Toronto
Re “The budget’s tax changes on corporations and the wealthy are long overdue” (April 17): I almost choked on my dinner when reading this support for new tax increases.
I must ask, who would welcome a 33.3-per-cent increase in capital gains? The entrepreneurs who have retirement investments in a corporation or property?
There is no mention of root causes, such as high immigration with no plan and the effect on housing, education and health care. What about excessive deficit spending where the interest alone now exceeds federal health care contributions? Or the mismanagement in many areas (see ArriveCan) too long to include here?
As Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”
Colin Brown Toronto
I am not surprised that the Trudeau government is taxing a higher portion of capital gains as a money grab instead of practising fiscal restraint.
This not only penalizes businesses big and small that create jobs and keep the economy moving, it also penalizes parents who worked hard all their lives to build a nest egg. The irony, which seems lost on Justin Trudeau, is that many parents have to help their kids with this nest egg, and now he’s made it harder to do so.
We all lose in the end, and the Trudeau government will likely continue to be irresponsible, ineffective and delusional.
Joanne O’Hara Oakville, Ont.
The vilified 1 per cent are not merely isolated elites, but pivotal players in our societal fabric. Their contributions are not just essential; they are often life-sustaining.
The 1 per cent includes top surgeons, innovative entrepreneurs, high-level legal minds and tech gurus whose services are crucial. The skills, extensive education and exceptional talent required at this level are rare among Canadians.
Policies that focus on overtaxing and disparaging these individuals threaten to undermine not just their motivation, but also our country’s ability to attract and retain talent. This could jeopardize the quality of essential services we all rely on and, more broadly, Canada’s economic health.
Fiscal populism may seem appealing, but it harbours the potential degradation of our collective prosperity. Before butchering the top 1 per cent, one should consider the impact if they were to throw in the towel.
It’s a risk Canada cannot afford to take.
Philippe Labelle Montreal
Finally some sensible, upfront tax talk, complete with vision, supported with a little history and reasons why taxes are needed.
I hear not one politician brave enough to say, “We need tax revenue to pay for our public health, education and many support services for the underprivileged.” Instead they stand by the familiar austerity message of “no tax increases, no economic growth, no services for all.”
In 2014, Canadian doctor Danielle Martin said, “Somebody tax me please – I think our country is worth it.” We, as a collective of communities, youth, rich and poor, are worth it. Let’s relearn how to share our wealth.
Bill Priestman Stone Mills, Ont.
Fair pay
Re “Ottawa must regulate private nursing agencies, N.B. health network says” (April 16): It’s obvious to me that Canadian Health Labs has committed what amounts to gross overcharging for providing travel nurse services to several Canadian provinces.
CHL should be made to reimburse these provincial health authorities and publicly apologize for its actions. With the Canadian medical system already in a state of severe strain, we can ill afford to be using such companies.
A government audit of company finances would also be useful.
Roderick Hogg Caplin Cove-Southport, N.L.
Before New Brunswick and other provinces look to federal regulations to resolve complaints about travel nursing agencies such as Canadian Health Labs, they should look in the mirror. How could these admittedly exploitative contracts possibly have happened?
Sad as it may seem, large organizations such as provincial health agencies really only have one way to show employees that their services are valued: the size of their paycheques. Travel nursing agencies, whatever their other faults, offer nurses opportunities to feel quite a bit more valued.
As it turned out, many provincial health agencies discovered they needed nurses desperately, and were even willing to pay agencies considerably more to have them. As a result, nurses who did not leave the public system end up feeling even more unvalued.
Federal regulations will likely not help. Paying nurses adequate salaries might.
John Horman Waterloo, Ont.
Something off
Re “School boards missed a chance to make the eclipse a teachable moment” (April 15): While most of the concern is whether or not a “teachable moment” was missed, I think it’s another example of how the importance of school attendance is slowly being diminished.
If we keep cancelling classes on a whim for snowfall or an eclipse, or let teachers take students to curling matches, hockey games or ski days (when that is what weekends used to be for), can we reasonably expect our kids to take school attendance seriously?
John Arbuckle Ottawa
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com