Raise the Hammer

Mr.Meister, here are the public account numbers from Ontario...

Year Total Rev's Total Exp's Surplus
1990-91 42,892 45,921 (3029)
1991-92 40,753 51,683 (10930)
1992-93 41,807 54,235 (12428)
1993-94 43,674 54,876 (11202)
1994-95 46,039 56,168 (10129)
1995-96 49,473 58,273 (8800) * Mike Harris takes over
1996-97 49,450 56,355 (6905)
1997-98 52,518 56,484 (3966)
1998-99 55,786 57,788 (2002)
1999-00 62,931 61,909 1002
2000-01 63,824 61,940 1884
2001-02 63,886 63,442 444
2002-03 66,391 65,907 484

...as you can see, when Mike Harris took over, the deficit began its downward trajectory. Furthermore, your point about tax cuts leading to lost revenue is completely incorrect. From 1995 to 2000, revenues jumped by 36.6% or an annualized rate of 6.45%. Bob Rae, who raised taxes, saw his tax revenues grow a whopping 7.34%, or an annualized rate of 1.8%.

I am sure you are a nice caring person and your heart sounds like it is in the right place, but that is no excuse for being wrong. If you truly want to help people, it isn't enough to care, you actually have to produce results. I am sure you have heard the saying the road to hell is paved with good intentions, well I these numbers are a great example of this.

That is why I argue for smaller government, not because I hate poor people, but because I believe that smaller government produces better outcomes for these same people. My efforts are focused on helping Hamilton get back to a time when we actually produced good paying jobs, not whether I "look" like a nice person.

If this still doesn't answer your question, I really don't think anything I say will. You are locked to the idea that government is the only saviour for poor people and therefore anything that works against government programs obviously dooms the poor to misery. I don't believe this, will never believe this and I will not answer a question that forces me to agree with that premise.