Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Culture wars at the cineplex | Main | Libertarian Party candidate: “I think we can make our streets a lot safer if we decide to legalize [marijuana]” »

Friday, October 03, 2008

Stephen Harper promises to expand the welfare state to unburden Canadians from personal responsibility and difficult choices: EI changes

Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised on Thursday to give self-employed Canadians the opportunity to access employment, maternity and parental benefits through the Employment Insurance program.

“Self-employed Canadians -- and those who one day hope to be -- shouldn’t have to choose between starting a family and starting a business because of government policy,” said Harper.  “They should be able to pursue their dreams -- both as entrepreneurs and as parents.”

First, why shouldn’t they have to choose between starting a family and starting a business? Should all of life’s options be available to everyone at all times regardless of lifestyle choices or personal priorities? Young female entrepreneurs who choose to have children, for example, may have to give something up for family life. That’s just the reality of their choice. In Harper’s magical kingdom of big government, I guess tough choices are unnecessary. We can have it all, and the government will make sure of it.

Harper is presumably troubled by the idea that self-employed Canadians are forced to rely on savings and private insurance and not on a federal government program to provide security and stability for their families. Entrepreneurs don’t pay into the Employment Insurance program and are, therefore, not eligible for benefits. This laissez-faire situation will not stand if the Harper Conservatives are re-elected.

“We will lift this barrier and give equal opportunity to the nearly one million Canadian women who are self-employed,” Harper said after meeting with the self-employed owners of an Ottawa salon and day spa. “To help provide security for all those who are self-employed -- and particularly women -- a re-elected Conservative Government will permit self-employed Canadians to access maternity and parental Employment Insurance benefits.”

According to Harper’s plan, self-employed entrepreneurs would be required to opt-in to EI premiums at least six months prior to making a claim. That means any of the almost 900,000 female entrepreneurs who plan on having children could begin paying EI premiums after becoming pregnant in order to then benefit from 50 weeks of paid leave, after which they could return to being reliant on personal savings and private insurance until they decide to do it all again -- or six months before selling or shutting down their business. Does this sound sustainable?

And how would this be enforced? When entrepreneurs take time away from their businesses, their businesses still make money -- at least the good ones do. So if you don’t draw a salary from your business -- a business that is still generating and accruing profits -- are you unemployed?

In an email, the Conservatives are calling this plan “another practical, meaningful and affordable tax savings measure that is good for both entrepreneurs and the Canadian economy.” How is this a tax savings exactly? They are bringing more Canadians into a program that, if not self-financing, could cost taxpayers. I don’t get it.

I’m sure there are answers to these questions, but I only have time for questions right now.

The policy to expand the government program does have its supporters, though:

That’s quite a list, although I didn’t notice any free market think tanks (Fraser Institute) or taxpayer advocacy groups (Canadian Taxpayers Federation) on the roll call. (I’ll ask these groups for their thoughts and get back to you.)

Posted by Matthew Johnston on October 3, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e20105352ad713970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Stephen Harper promises to expand the welfare state to unburden Canadians from personal responsibility and difficult choices: EI changes:

Comments

More "help" from the government? Just what we need. I'm surprised to hear that Mr. Harper thinks Canadians should have the ability to both raise a family and start a business. I live in what was recently the hottest economy on the planet and my business was so burdened with government compliance and taxation that I was forced to make that very choice. I chose my family.
I have closed a business that on any given day employed (directly or indirectly) 20 to 30 people.
Reason? I simply couldn't find enough time in the day to actually do all the work required to pay everyone, pay myself, comply comply comply and still have even an hour or so in the evenings to say hi to my family. So I took a regular job.
It pays less and the taxes are higher, but my family gets to see me more.
So you see, the "last" thing we need is "more" god damned government help.
They need to get the hell out of private enterprise...imagine how many people actually would start businesses that contribute to the economy...instead of the government.

Posted by: JC | 2008-10-03 11:09:54 AM

Welcome to Harper's liberal-lite vote buying scheme. Power over principle - he can smell it!

So where are the Libertarians on these issues? Oh I forgot, they are still reinforcing their image of wooing NDP outcasts and Cortez Island pot smokers rather than the trying to appeal to the potentially large and growing number of disenfranchised fiscal conservatives.

Posted by: John Chittick | 2008-10-03 11:47:20 AM

So where are the Libertarians on these issues? Oh I forgot, they are still reinforcing their image of wooing NDP outcasts and Cortez Island pot smokers rather than the trying to appeal to the potentially large and growing number of disenfranchised fiscal conservatives.

Posted by: John Chittick | 3-Oct-08 11:47:20 AM


I'm a card carrying Libertarian...and I have to agree. Lets maybe focus on something other than the right to get stoned for a while.

Posted by: JC | 2008-10-03 11:51:14 AM

This is nonsense - give the small businesses outright tax breaks/write-offs/less compliance paperwork and they will figure things out themselves.

This is creating another level of dependency on gov't in the guise of "helping". Just another plank to pander for votes where the recipients have to do/pay little to reap rewards.... and we still have another 10 days to hear about more "helping".

Posted by: Calgary Clippper | 2008-10-03 11:56:28 AM

It's posts like this one that make me wonder what the hell some people mean when they say things like "I think Canadians are generally conservative". Clearly, if "conservative" means "in favour of small government", they are not. How else can you explain that all three (or four... or five... depending how you count) of the major federal parties are promising more spending, not less. If Canadians really did not like big government there would be an easy path to a majority win available for a party offering not only to make no expansion in spending, but to make serious cuts.

There are a lot of people who I count as fiscal-liberals-in-denial. These are people who cheer when a politician says he will cut spending, but if that politician names exactly what he will cut, they boo. They want government to spend less without actually cutting spending on any particular thing. Bush knew this. McCain knows this. This is why both in running for office talked a lot about cuts in general, but when asked to name names on what they would cut would hedge or just say "wasteful spending" or "trim the fat". McCain talks about cutting earmarks, but no one wants to cut the earmarks their own guy swings for the local district, just the other guy's pork.

People like government spending. You can say all you want about it being bad for the general prosperity of the economy or wrong on principled libertarian grounds, but people still like spending and will vote for it. Whenever they are presented with candidates who really will cut things and name names (like libertarian candidates do) they pass on them. Harper is merely giving the people what they want: Spend, spend, and spend.

Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-10-03 12:10:32 PM

Fact Check,

Agreed. Completely, 100% agreed.

That's why I don't hold out much hope for the attainment of libertarian land any time soon.

Terrence

Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2008-10-03 12:25:56 PM

That's why I don't hold out much hope for the attainment of libertarian land any time soon.

Terrence

Posted by: Terrence Watson | 3-Oct-08 12:25:56 PM


That may be so Terrence, But as Jimmy Stewart said:

Liberty is too important to live in text books.

So I'll keep telling people about it. :)

Posted by: JC | 2008-10-03 12:30:11 PM

Terrence,

Your reply made me think of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wywKqmuR3aI

Enjoy!

Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-10-03 12:32:45 PM

Enjoy!

Posted by: Fact Check | 3-Oct-08 12:32:45 PM
That's cute FC...

Here's another angle / point of view. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo

Don't forget to vote!

Posted by: JC | 2008-10-03 12:40:44 PM

Haha... Ah, man, Bowie always hits the spot.

David Bowie for Emperor of the World in 2008!

Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2008-10-03 12:59:55 PM


The comments to this entry are closed.