At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.
At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.
American politicians, along with retired Canadian generals and Ottawa think tanks who receive funding from the arms industry, have used that to hammer Canada as a failure on defence.
Defence Minister Bill Blair has recounted how hard it is to try to convince cabinet as well as Canadians about the need to meet the two per cent commitment because “nobody knows what that means.”
Add to that mix the current fiscal environment and ongoing concerns from Canadians who have been struggling financially. Directing tens of billions of tax dollars into more tanks, submarines and fighter jets isn’t a top priority among Canadian families.
We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We don’t need more taxes. We could tax away the entirety of the wealth of our richest citizens and it’d only cover our federal+provincial deficits for 2-3 decades at most.
Something structural with our spending needs to change.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We don’t need more taxes. We could tax away the entirety of the wealth of our richest citizens and it’d only cover our federal+provincial deficits for 2-3 decades at most.
Something structural with our spending needs to change.
The people downvoting you like paying high taxes and having a government that wastes billions of dollars apparently.
but also, tax the rich, we can have both more money and better use of it