Just wondering, if a homeowner takes advantage of the new Property Tax Deferral program for families with children will they still be eligible for the homeowners grant?

If not, this is just a revenue ploy by the government. They get the homeowners grant plus interest.... May not be a wise choice for citizens.

Bend over everyone and be very silent as they stick it.

New Smart Meters and in Home Display will help to Conserve Energy , what a Bull, all you do spend Millions to install Meters you can read off Site, no more need for Meter Readers. Some of us don't have Natural Gas go by at the House , Oil , Hydro and Wood are your Choice. This Budget will screw us living outside the Banana Belt, it's all for the Lower Mainland again .

It's my understanding that they will still get the Home Owner Grant. But the FACT that ANY "group" of people has to "defer" paying their Property Taxes is evidence that the economic policies of the BC Liberals are failing.

And that they are certainly no improvement over those of the NDP regime they replaced.

What we have in BC today is NOT a government "of the people,by the people, FOR the people", but rather a government that acts in the supposed best interests of its FINANCIERS ~ and no, that is NOT you as "taxpayers", for the proposition of "deferment" is to ultimately make you pay MORE, as a taxpayer, not less.

Socredible: "But the FACT that ANY "group" of people has to "defer" paying their Property Taxes is evidence that the economic policies of the BC Liberals are failing."

I don't know. I see as more of an acknowledgement of the worldwide economic crisis, and that it has hit everybody either directly or indirectly. Remember, we don't operate in a bubble.

So if they can defer the taxes, than they better not be squawking about the reduced services.

Oh, they'll be squawking I'm sure... they always do.

$180 Million for an Integrated Case Management IT System?!

Is no one else shocked by this? That money could go DIRECTLY to those who NEED it, rather than some high-fluting computer tracking system. MORE WASTE.

I don't know if trying to help some of the drug addicts and bottom feeders are also not just more waste of money. Seems to me, they rolled their dice already, and wanted to get out of living anymore, so why spend the time and effort.

No, we don't "operate in a bubble", Mr. PG. There was a time when we might have been quite justified in making that claim, back when WAC Bennett was Premier, and BC's economy continued to grow apace while the national economy and those of other Provinces were hard hit by the recurring recessions of the 1960's. But Gordon Campbell is no WAC Bennett, not even a pale imitation of him.

And that was then, and this is now. And we can't repeat the conditions that caused our isolated decade of prosperity at that time in the same way we did then. And we'd be foolish to try.

But where the BC Socreds of that era were, if nothing else, "innovative" in their whole approach to government financing of the necessities of those times, the regimes we've had since then have fallen into the same type of mind-set which causes so much misery as a "financial" poverty consistantly and increasingly mis-represents a "physical" plenty.

Just look at some of the more glaring contradictions in Campbell's BC. A Government that has, despite it's original electioneering dictum that, "Tax cuts work!", (and they do, if we were ever given some !), has continually increased its tax take over the time it's been in office.

And is all set to wring more out of us via the HST and its ridiculous Carbon Tax.

All the while OVERALL Provincial debt has also increased. And increased exponentially ~ far faster than the growth of benefits that have come as a result of incurring this rise of debt.

A Government that's fond of telling us that it's run "just like any other business, we can't spend more than we take in." Not for long anyways, or we'll go "bankrupt".

But what it DOESN'T ever tell us is that NO "business" that attempts to "balance its budget" EVER recovers (from prices, the business equivalent of taxation) ALL its capital expenditure, on "capital assets" that will last many, many years before they'll need replacement, entirely in the SAME PERIOD OF TIME (i.e., the same fiscal year) that those expenditures were made. Which is the proposition contained in a Government's "balanced budget".

A business recovers those costs over many years, as per its depreciation schedules approximating the actual life of the assets.

But aside from that, each year's expenditure by Government, if it is spending our money in any ways wisely, brings an increase in intangible "capital values".

Things like better education, better techniques in medical care, improved communication, faster transportation, etc., etc. Things which would be represented in the Balance Sheet of any business as increases in "goodwill". Intangibles, yes, but not without value, and sometimes considerable value.

If we had a truly "business-like" Government, the first thing it would do is produce a Provincial Balance Sheet, showing the extent of TOTAL Provincial Assets, Liabilities, and the difference between them, which amounts to the Equity each and every one of us has in the going concern known as "British Columbia".

This won't be a 'negative' number, I assure you. The 'physical' Assets contained within British columbia far, far exceed the 'financial' Liabilities owed against them. And the former exceeds the latter, each year, even under the most conservative estimates of accounting.


Each year, if we are making a comparison to a private business, that Citizen's Equity is growing faster than it is being diminished. If it isn't, then we are "physically" going backwards. And short of having some great natural disaster, or a war where our Province is under attack and assets are actually being destroyed, we are certainly NOT "physically" going backwards on an overall, Provincial basis.

A proper Government Balance sheet would reveal that we are being 'robbed' blind through pernicious taxation. And that rather than our having to fork over more each year to continue to live in what (could be) "The Best Place on Earth", we should quite likely be getting a "dividend" back, to help us draw upon the wealth we continue to create. But, as I said before, Gordon Campbell, that pathetic copy-cat ideologue of the global flavour of the month, is no WAC Bennett.