# Private Members Bill to Opt Out of Paying "Military Taxes"



## The Bread Guy (29 Nov 2011)

I'm not making this up - this from Hansard yesterday:


> Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP):  moved for leave to introduce Bill C-363, An Act respecting conscientious objection to the use of taxes for military purposes.
> 
> He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present this bill respecting conscientious objection to the use of taxes for military purposes. As an aside, I thank my colleague from New Westminster—Coquitlam for seconding this bill.  According to this bill, once an individual registers with the Minister of National Revenue as a conscientious objector, he or she may then request that a portion of taxes for military purposes be credited to a special conscientious objectors' account. This money would then be used for any non-military peace-building purposes.  I would like to congratulate my former colleague, Bill Siksay, for all his hard work in this area. Details of how this can be implemented are outlined in the bill.  I would also like to thank Anna Kirkpatrick and others from Conscience Canada who worked with me to fine-tune this bill.  Let us give peace a chance.
> 
> (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)


No bill text yet here.

*Usual Private Members Bill caveat*:  Miniscule chance of passing as law unless supported by the governing party.


----------



## PMedMoe (29 Nov 2011)

Fine.  I want to opt out of paying school/church taxes and the Ontario Health "Premium".   :


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Nov 2011)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Fine.  I want to opt out of paying school/*church* taxes and the Ontario Health "Premium".   :


What churches are supported by tax money?  If you're thinking of the Ontario Separate School board, unless you're Roman Catholic, your tax money goes to the public school board.


And don't forget, Health Care is free* in Canada   >


*"Free" does not imply "without cost", but rather "exempt from external authority".


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Nov 2011)

Can I opt out of any on my taxes going to support members of political parties I don't agree with?


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Nov 2011)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Can I opt out of any on my taxes going to support members of political parties I don't agree with?


Yes 

I can see it now.  You will get a list of federal departments, and will check off those departments you wish to support.  If you tick off "none of the above", then you get to continue to live in Canada with full benefits, but are exempt paying taxes.  


(I think that worked well for the Greeks, no?)   >


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

I want to opt out of paying taxes for welfare moms - the types that keep popping out kids from different daddies. I have no beefs with single parents who need a hand up, but I have no time for those with their hands out.


----------



## chrisf (29 Nov 2011)

How about the CBC?


----------



## GAP (29 Nov 2011)

> *"Free" does not imply "without cost", but rather "exempt from external authority".



Boy, have they taken that one, rode it hard, and put it up wet.....


----------



## GeorgeD (29 Nov 2011)

So if there is a Natural Disaster(fire, flood, snowstorm) or a terrorist attack, do we get to ignore the conscious objector and help everyone else?


----------



## Robert0288 (29 Nov 2011)

I wonder if there will be a registry of those conscious objectors so we know what services they are to be denied.


----------



## a_majoor (29 Nov 2011)

And after the huge boondoggle, there will be a movement to scrap the  Conscious Objectors Registry, and an equally vehement movement to save it.... >


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> And after the huge boondoggle, there will be a movement to scrap the  Conscious Objectors Registry, and an equally vehement movement to save it.... >



At a cost of 2 Billion dollars Mr. Bigglesworth.....

I sense a spiral happening here...... >

We need a Jedi smiley


----------



## Old Sweat (29 Nov 2011)

As I recall, somebody tried this back in the sixties or early seventies. It went nowhere then and is destined for the same fate this time round. You can bet your parade boots that the usual suspects will make a big thing of it. It will then fade away into oblivion.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (29 Nov 2011)

GD said:
			
		

> So if there is a Natural Disaster(fire, flood, snowstorm) or a terrorist attack, do we get to ignore the conscious objector and help everyone else?


HA, YES!!!
"I'm sorry Mr. Objector, but you didn't want to support the military so I can't pull you out from the rubble of your home."
I love it.

P.S. What a retarded bill, can I funnel some of my taxes to create an island of misfit politicians and just send them away?


----------



## dapaterson (29 Nov 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> HA, YES!!!
> "I'm sorry Mr. Objector, but you didn't want to support the military so I can't pull you out from the rubble of your home."
> I love it.
> 
> P.S. What a retarded bill, can I funnel some of my taxes to create _*an island of misfit politicians * _ and just send them away?



Hey!  Some of us grew up in Montreal, Mr Insensitive!


----------



## ballz (29 Nov 2011)

"I would also like to thank Anna Kirkpatrick and others from Conscience Canada who worked with me to* fine-tune *this bill."

Don't hand out those thank-you's too quick... :facepalm:


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (29 Nov 2011)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Hey!  Some of us grew up in Montreal, Mr Insensitive!


Nice one.  I was more thinking of an iceberg since it's an island that will eventually melt away and solve a few of our problems.


----------



## Robert0288 (29 Nov 2011)

But think of the poor polar bears with indigestion and the environmental damage by sending one of the country's largest producers of co2 emissions and general hot air into the arctic.


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Nov 2011)

Robert0288 said:
			
		

> But think of the poor polar bears with indigestion and the environmental damage by sending one of the country's largest producers of co2 emissions and general hot air into the arctic.



I think that the Polar Bears would do just fine:


----------



## Remius (29 Nov 2011)

Sure.  Don't pay the tax.  But if the military has to be called in for flooding, SAR or other just bill them after for services rendered.  I would also use CTV's formula for calculating costs for flights, fuel and manpower.


----------



## Journeyman (29 Nov 2011)

That's certainly going to wreak havoc with the equally useful NDP bill to create Cold War medals for the same people the NDP don't want to fund.


However, I'll jump on the dumb idea bandwagon too -- I want my funding withheld from CBC (except radio and North), any centre of higher learning that offers Feminist Studies, a MFA in puppetry, or Labour Studies (taught by $6-figure tenured prof's who've never seen a callus or blister from labour), and any monies/tax benefits that go to unions (the Depression and child labour abuse are past; you've overstayed your welcome).


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> That's certainly going to wreak havoc with the equally useful NDP bill to create Cold War medals for the same people the NDP don't want to fund.
> 
> 
> However, I'll jump on the dumb idea bandwagon too -- I want my funding withheld from CBC (except radio and North), any centre of higher learning that offers Feminist Studies, a MFA in puppetry, or Labour Studies (taught by $6-figure tenured prof's who've never seen a callus or blister from labour), and any monies/tax benefits that go to unions (the Depression and child labour abuse are past; you've overstayed your welcome).



Hey leave the puppetry out of this!! What did the puppets ever do to you?  

(Said it would spiral I did........)


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Nov 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Hey leave the puppetry out of this!! What did the puppets ever do to you?
> 
> (Said it would spiral I did........)


The world would, indeed, be a drabber place without puppeteers....
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/


----------



## Journeyman (29 Nov 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> The world would, indeed, be a drabber place without puppeteers....
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/


I thought it would be a link to "Being John Malkovich," in which John Cusak's character is a puppeteer who has to find a _real_ job.    ;D


...or the news story where the "99%'er" quit his job as a teacher to get a MFA in puppetry, but then couldn't find employment because the "1%'ers" were oppressing him.    :facepalm:


----------



## dapaterson (29 Nov 2011)

Avenue Q is another argument to preserve puppets - without that show, we'd never have learned that Everyone's a Little Bit Racist, or that The Internet is for Porn.


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

Speaking of puppetry - what was the name of that show that was the inspiration for Team America?

The Thunderbirds!!! They should have won an Emmy!!


----------



## Teflon (29 Nov 2011)

Puppets pay taxes?!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 Nov 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> P.S. What a retarded bill, can I funnel some of my taxes to create an island of misfit politicians and just send them away?



Well, yes: Hans Island is yours for the taking. Populating it with politicians should help our sovereignty claim  .


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (29 Nov 2011)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Well, yes: Hans Island is yours for the taking. Populating it with politicians should help our sovereignty claim  .


I approve of this idea, and those nice fluffy polar bears will have new playmates.


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> I approve of this idea, and those nice fluffy polar bears will have new playmates.



I agree - the Disney Lot will love this until they figure Polar Bears need to eat too.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Nov 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> And after the huge boondoggle, there will be a movement to scrap the  Conscious Objectors Registry, and an equally vehement movement to save it.... >




If it saves just one life...........


----------



## GeorgeD (29 Nov 2011)

What are the actual chances of something like this bill passing? And what kind of havoc could it cause for the federal budget if it were to succeed?


----------



## Haletown (29 Nov 2011)

Teflon said:
			
		

> Puppets pay taxes?!



I hope NDP supporters pay taxes.


----------



## Navalsnpr (29 Nov 2011)

What's next, an act for the conscientious objection of paying income tax??!!


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Nov 2011)

GD said:
			
		

> What are the actual chances of something like this bill passing? And what kind of havoc could it cause for the federal budget if it were to succeed?


My read of the chances, from the original post:


			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> .... *Usual Private Members Bill caveat*:  Miniscule chance of passing as law unless supported by the governing party.


What are the chances of governing party support?  My :2c: - slim, gusting to none (think snowball in hell).


----------



## Tuna (29 Nov 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> What churches are supported by tax money?  If you're thinking of the Ontario Separate School board, unless you're Roman Catholic, your tax money goes to the public school board.
> 
> 
> And don't forget, Health Care is free* in Canada   >
> ...



I think most provinces have provisions in place for catholic schools (basically full time churches) and sometimes religious institutions also get discounted (subsidized depending on how you look at it) land


----------



## PJGary (29 Nov 2011)

Haletown said:
			
		

> I hope NDP supporters pay taxes.



Thank you for making my day just a lil' bit brighter!


----------



## cupper (29 Nov 2011)

I vote for the differed tax dollars go to more research funding for programs like this:

http://Forums.Army.ca/forums/threads/103504.0.html    ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Nov 2011)

cupper said:
			
		

> I vote for the differed tax dollars go to more research funding for programs like this:
> 
> http://Forums.Army.ca/forums/threads/103504.0.html    ;D



Hear hear!!
My good man you are a genius!!!!


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Nov 2011)

Tuna said:
			
		

> I think most provinces have provisions in place for catholic schools (basically full time churches) and sometimes religious institutions also get discounted (subsidized depending on how you look at it) land


Yes, I know about Ontario, as an example, in that the funding for the separate school board comes from the province's coffers based on the number of Roman Catholics.  It's essentially a separate (pun intended) pot of money.  So, non-catholics aren't supporting the separate school boards and the Catholics aren't supporting the public school board.  (All things being equal, anyway).  
Churches get all sorts of tax breaks, yes,  but they dont' _receive_ tax payer money from the government, with some exceptions, I suppose, for government grants that go to many non-profit organisations.


----------



## dale622 (29 Nov 2011)

Just when I thought I had heard everything from the NDP. They go and say something like this. I'll just shake my head and ignore them as usual.


----------



## Pusser (29 Nov 2011)

Actually, this wouldn't be hard at all to implement.  The Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) has 33 million little boxes, one for each taxpayer (really).  Whenever you pay your taxes, the money that YOU pay goes into YOUR box.  Each time the government spends money, somebody has to go through each box and take out that taxpayer's share.  Simple really, although it does take a lot of people to manage this (that's why there are so many civil servants).  All they would have to do is paint each conscientious objector's box a different colour (e.g. pinko or perhaps orange) to make sure that when it's a military expenditure, the collector would be able to identify which boxes to skip over.  Of course this means that the collector will need to take more money from each of the other boxes, but hey what's a little inconvenience when it comes to democracy?

Speaking of puppetry, don't forget these guys:  http://www.puppetryofthepenis.com//url]


----------



## Pusser (29 Nov 2011)

What's really sad is that tax dollars were wasted in order to produce this drivel.  What possible difference would this make to the bigger picture?  So we don't use the taxes from a bunch of conscientious objectors.  If this insanity were to actually be implemented, it would simply mean that the other taxpayers would each pay more out of their taxes for the defence budget, while the conscientious objectors would pay more out of theirs to cover the other programs.  The net difference would be zero - no change in taxes paid - no change in program budgets.  However, it would require increased funding to implement and manage this scheme, which would be a colossal waste.


----------



## cupper (29 Nov 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> What's really sad is that tax dollars were wasted in order to produce this drivel.



At least YOUR tax payer dollars are producing something. MINE just seem to be flushed down the proverbial toilet while each side just bitches over how they aren't going to agree on anything.

Kinda make me want to move back north.


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Nov 2011)

No problem, as long as they allow me to own and operate any weapons I please.


----------



## cupper (29 Nov 2011)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> No problem, as long as they allow me to own and operate any weapons I please.



Only as long as you don't require a permit from the US Dept. of Energy, I'm all in support of your Second Amendment rights. ;D


----------



## opp550 (30 Nov 2011)

Pass the bill by all means. 

While we take note who wants to be a conscientious objector and not have their taxes go to the DND, we should note their addresses.

Then we should tell whatever group that would ever dream of invading/occupying Canada that if they invade any of their houses, and do not invade/harm/attack anyone else, the CF won't intervene. 

I am pretty sure most of them will realize militaries are useful after all after that.


----------



## ReneeClaude (30 Nov 2011)

Can I be a conscientious objector and choose for my taxes no to go to the reserve housing funds? Especially in light of the below?

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/pm-asks-what-happened-to-90m-spent-on-housing-at-ontario-reserve-134735958.html


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Nov 2011)

AirForceMonkey said:
			
		

> Can I be a conscientious objector and choose for my taxes no to go to the reserve housing funds? Especially in light of the below?
> 
> http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/pm-asks-what-happened-to-90m-spent-on-housing-at-ontario-reserve-134735958.html



Watch the cries of "racism" and other such nonsense be trotted out by the various cheifs.


----------



## GAP (30 Nov 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Watch the cries of "racism" and other such nonsense be trotted out by the various cheifs.(as they cash their overinflated  cheques)


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Dec 2011)

OK folks, now we have a bit more of a bone to chew on - proposed text of the bill attached.  Come & get it!  ;D


----------



## Swingline1984 (2 Dec 2011)

Well at least we now know for sure that this isn't a "Ministry of Peace" à la George Orwell.   :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## AJFitzpatrick (2 Dec 2011)

Just as a discussion item would any one care to offer a % of defence expenditure that goes to Search and Rescue? -- genuinely curious


----------



## Duckie (2 Dec 2011)

STOP! STOP! STOP!

I'm scheming right now... the document references money used by the "Canadian Armed Forces". Since we're just the Canadian Forces, maybe we could not say _anything _and keep collecting the money, all the while assuring him that not one penny has been sent to the Canadian Armed Forces!


----------



## Occam (2 Dec 2011)

Duckie said:
			
		

> STOP! STOP! STOP!
> 
> I'm scheming right now... the document references money used by the "Canadian Armed Forces". Since we're just the Canadian Forces, maybe we could not say _anything _and keep collecting the money, all the while assuring him that not one penny has been sent to the Canadian Armed Forces!



Psssst....NDA section 14:

_14. The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces._


----------



## Duckie (2 Dec 2011)

Boo-erns


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Dec 2011)

Swingline1984 said:
			
		

> Well at least we now know for sure that this isn't a "Ministry of Peace" à la George Orwell.   :Tin-Foil-Hat:


Close (same MP) but wrong thread - try here:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/103588.0.html


----------



## DBA (3 Dec 2011)

I guess the NDP doesn't want to invade or do an intervention in Darfur anymore. Or participate in any future UN peacekeeping missions.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (5 Dec 2011)

Just another example of how the NDP has zero grasp on how international politics works.  Not to mention how the world at large actually functions too.


----------



## camouflauge (8 Dec 2011)

what if there is a natural disaster or a terrorist attack occur, do we get to help everyone else?


----------



## CountDC (9 Dec 2011)

Interesting.  I just read an article yesterday where this couple had their home burn down while firefighters watched.  The reason was they didn't pay the $75 yearly fee for Fire Department services.  there was another gentleman had the same happen to him before that for the same reason.  Don't pay then no service unless there is a life at risk.  The firefighters were there just to keep the fire from spreading.

Seems to me we should be able to do the same for these folks, especially as it won't change our dollars (unless the whole country joins them).  Record their info and when a natural disaster strikes with the military called in we bypass them.  Perhaps give them a business card with the number for the local NDP'er on it so they can call them for help.


----------



## Nemo888 (11 Dec 2011)

Why not just let these hippy granola crunchers live in their little bubble of smugness. The pitiful amount of taxes diverted is probably not even worth worrying about. Let them put a check mark in a little box and feel completely free of responsibility. Mennonites, who I find pretty cool, actually need this. Let them not have to live with the moral ambiguity of real life. I have big shoulders and chose this job knowing I wouldn't always be popular.


----------

