Editor, The Times:
Well, well, the silly season is upon us again!
This is being made ever sillier by the Fraser Institute's report on schools – yeah, the same old 'private good, public bad' rubbish that those far-right parasites have been spouting for years.
Tell me something, is there anyone who takes anything by the Fraser Institute seriously?
Stephen Hume pointed out in a very daring column that 20 per cent of the 50-some-odd employees at the Fraser Institute are in the top 10 per cent of Canada's wage earners – and they work for an organization that have charitable status. In other words, both the Fraser Institute and anyone who donates to them, gets to pay no taxes on those donation. In other words, the taxpayers of Canada pick up the tab.
What Stephen Hume zeroed in on was a report for the Fraser Institute that came out with the idea roughly parallel to one of failed U.S. presidential candidate Mitt 'Rob Big Bird' Romney. This idea holds that minimum age earners should pay more taxes. Everyone except the top one to five per cent should pay more.
Fortunately, during the last U.S. election, the American electorate was a million 'American idiots' short, so the lesser of two evils, Barak Obama, was re-elected. Big Bird is safe for now.
However, this side of the line, with Harper's new-cons and, closer to home, the Campbell-Clark solidly re-elected (five seats more, no less), the idea that Big Bird should be robbed blind has a certain legitimacy.
One can be sure that the money will roll into to Fraser Institute – the donors will get a good tax break and the same time next year another Fraser Institute report on schools will be bandied about.
Private good, public bad! What else do you expect?
Dennis Peacock
Clearwater, B.C.