Last Wednesday’s editorial provides a refreshing contrast to some of the poor reasoning, failed humour and undisguised impoliteness that have recently entered the local press with regard to the HST referendum.
Your reminder to ‘think carefully’ is an often-needed but rarely heeded warning in politics.
No one will suggest that the tax’s introduction was handled well. But displeasure at the way our leaders acted should not interfere with making a sound decision about the HST. The tax should be considered on its own merit, not that of politicians.
Aside from the payments from the federal government, the new tax is simpler, less expensive to administer and more in keeping with other taxes around the world. Economists and accountants (not to mention some of our best politicians) support the tax.
The main argument against the tax seems to be that it favours businesses rather than individuals — illogical when we consider that businesses consist of individuals, and all taxes, ultimately, are paid by the people.
In fact, the one reasonable objection to a 10-per-cent HST comes from Opposition leader Adrian Dix. Mr. Dix supports more taxes and opposes the HST because, in his opinion, the government is a better keeper (and spender) of our money than we are.
Obviously, no government can invent a tax system that will please everyone. Many of my fellow British Columbians prefer our old taxes, and I respect their choice.
But to me, the most sensible option was to send in my ballot marked ‘No’ to extinguishing the HST.