Wednesday’s letters: Others pay more to keep capital gains tax low

Article content

Re. “Capital gains tax increase nefarious, cynical,” Don Braid, June 15

Don Braid’s complaint that a capital gains tax robs the middle class of their ability to help their children is absurd. When did it become the responsibility of working taxpayers to subsidize his children’s inheritance? We note that investors would still have one-third of their income tax-exempt in addition to the benefits that investors receive from tax-free saving accounts and absence of an inheritance tax that exists in most other western democracies.

Article content

Taxation is a zero-sum game. If someone receives an exemption on part of their income, other taxpayers must pay more to make up the revenue loss. For example, the rate of tax on earned income is actually higher than it would need to be if capital gains were taxed like salaried income. Should someone struggling to support their family on a salary be forced to subsidize someone else’s gains in the stock market or real estate? (Primary residences are still exempt.)

Is it unfair to expect that these investors pay tax on two-thirds of their income rather than one-half as is currently the case?  Boy, don’t I wish I could pay tax on only half my pension so I could leave more money to my kids. Perhaps Don would be willing to pay more tax on his salary so that I could do so?

Norm Sexsmith, Edmonton

Transparency key for council, commission

Re. “Police commission calls for mediation as relationship with city council sours,” June 14

My concern was piqued upon reading the police commission’s letter to Edmonton city council. The letter, in a seemingly contradictory manner, reassured council members and citizens: Don’t worry your pretty heads about this year’s internal audit plan; we’ve got this.

Article content

Article content

This contradiction begs the question: did no member of the commission pause to consider during the drafting of this letter that isn’t public trust in public institutions fostered through transparency, debate and course corrections? Instead, we are told that the strained relationship with council is a primary reason for the police commission’s reluctance to share an overview of its internal operational audits.

This was further exacerbated by Coun. Paquette’s remarks in the June 14 Edmonton Journal article, suggesting that his council colleagues need to “grow up.” Any mediation must focus on public value, not just on improving relations. How might the Edmonton Police Commission and council work together to improve transparency, showing Edmontonians where they align and where they do not and increasing public trust?

Susan Coward, Edmonton

EPS must remain independent

The desire of city council to convert the Edmonton Police Service into a city department is repugnant to the rule of law which is the cornerstone of our democracy.

Instead, that is why we have the police commission, presently comprised of a medical doctor, an accountant, a social worker, a lawyer, a professor, a former CSIS agent, a military commander, a dentist and a business owner. The role of the commission is to oversee the police service on a common-sense and non-political basis.

Article content

All that one has to do is consider a situation where council can direct the Edmonton Police Service as it can with city departments — never! Accordingly, the province must make it clear to council that the Edmonton Police Service is independent of council.

Mel Binder, Edmonton 

Underfunding schools worse than phones

Re. “UCP to bar phones from classrooms,” June 18

You know what affects learning the most? Class size, class composition, and special-needs supports. But to fix that, Danielle Smith has to drag her government out of last place in Canada for per-pupil funding of public schools.

Grant Hoe, Calgary

Article content