Tax and Donations in a CP Campaign

Day 2,140, 05:35 • Published in Canada Canada • by SaraDroz

I advise all to read the enlightening debate in 'comments section' the CPs recent article "Charity Begins at Home, Justice Begins Next Door". The three main protagonists being CP candidate Acacia Mason, CP DMV3 and Foxfire. It seems that issues that haunted the past may be returning so let us address the issues raised honestly.

The Tax Problem - MU and MPP Funding

I am sure most if not all eCanadians welcome the 'tax holiday'. I have always supported the lowest possible tax limit and welcome any initiative to lower tax in general. However this raises problems; how do we pay for MPPs (which we now require due to CoT membership) and invest in MU infrastructure?

We are told by Acacia in his article "[AM4CP] On Taxation And MU's" that "At our current income rate, which we project to be just over $1600 cc/day, this government would have enough money to fund 5 MPP’s per month without a need for tax increases". There would obviously be some monthly shortfall on MPP renewal alone then without considering MU investment as set out in TheSmokes proposal for "The Canadian Civil Defense Act".

The obvious question then is how this potential shortfall should be funded - should the shortfall be funded by tax in the traditional manner or as DMV3 seems to imply by highlighting recent donations by voluntary means? In principle a question of minarchism (small State) versus anarcho capitalism (no State).


Voluntarism in an Election Campaign

First I would note that taxation can be considered 'voluntary' should Congress members be elected on the basis that they would support taxation to cover such shortfalls and the proposed 'Canadian Civil Defense Act'. Should a Congress election return a majority of representative known to support a tax then the community can be said to have agreed to pay the tax. This is the theoretical legitimacy of democracy as we understand it today. It is regrettable therefore that these issues were not raised prior to the Congressional elections.

I have nothing against voluntary donations - all donations to MU or to eCanada should be welcomed if they are made without hope of reward. There have been many such donations in the past that have not raised any suspicion. What does raise questions, and rightly so in my view, is when the issue is raised and a large 'donation' made and publicised by a CP candidate. Can we honestly be sure that this 'donation' is made without hope of reward? To reply to those might question the motives and timing of such a 'donation' and the publicity attached to the issue as 'trolling' and 'xenophobia' as DMV3 responds to Acacia ("He's a xenophobe and a troll, nothing more. I actually expected better from you though, Acacia") is NOT a reply to the issue. Were Chucky Norris or JFSPierre to return stand for CP while making such a 'donation' I would still question the integrity of such an action. It isn't that the CP is new to eCanada but the donation and the publicising of it during an election campaign that is questioned. We in eCanada are well used to electoral bribery with our own stolen tax money and have every reason to question the motives of this action. While admittedly 'donating' to the State is different to 'donating' to individuals prior to an election (the State doesn't vote) questioning the motives of such 'donations' is equally legitimate.

Summary

There will almost certainly be a tax shortfall next month if nothing radical changes. It is for the elected CP and Congress to decide whether this shortfall should be addressed with some minimal taxation method or by a system of voluntary donations. Both systems have pro's and cons. Should it be decided that the voluntary system is to be used (as DMV3 seems to prefer) Congress must also address the issue of 'political donations'. We ALL know that the motives for such 'donations' will be questioned - it would be naieve to think they won't or insist that they shouldn't be. To dismiss them as 'xenophobic' is not a reply to the question about the candidates motives. I and others have fought political corruption in eCanada for a long time. We have no wish to see it return. Therefore let Congress set guidelines about how donations may be judged. I have always and still do reject 'donations' from those standing for Office. That it is done while maintaining a 'tax holiday' policy doesn't make a rotten apple any fresher. When it comes to election day every eCanadian must judge whether DMV3 would have 'donated' 50,000 cc had he not been standing for CP. The CP is wrong: Both Charity and Justice Begin at Home.