By NORMAN FREED - Coupon clippers get tax cuts, wage-earners soaked for arms Thursday, February 19, Fin- ance Minister Douglas Abbott brought down the federal budget for the fiscal year 1953-54. This diabolical budget mirrors the an- ti-Canadian, suicidal national pol- icy pursued by. the St. Laurent government. Just as government domestic and foreign policy in general expresses the sinister aims of the U.S. and Canadian corporations, and disregards the real interests of the people, so the, budget—the financial policy of the government—subordinates Canadian national interests to the greedy monopolists. As Tim Buck, LPP’ national leader, de- clared in his statement on the budget, Abbott followed the maxim: to him that hath we shall give more; from. him that hath not we shall take away. Ever since this present pre- election. session of parliament opened, the Liberal politicians have been ‘promising relief to the hard-pressed taxpayers. The awaited relief did come, not for the working people, the farmers or the middle class people, but for the corporations. At a time when the corporations enjoy the greatest profits in history, Ab- bott decided to give them a gift of $186 million. He also decided that the foreign and domestic coupon clippers need relief, so he handed them an additional $20 million. This is not all the relief Ab- bott handed out to the rich. The 5% percent reduction in income tax in 1953 and 11 percent in 1954 will also result in giving millions to those with high in- comes. For example, a single taxpayer earning $1,200 a year will save $1 in 1953 and $3 in 1954, while -a single taxpayer with an_§in- come of $30,000 a year will save $1,036 in 1953 and $1,681 in 1954. A married taxpayer, no depend- . ents, earning $2,250 will save $1.50 in 1953 and $3.50 in 1954, while a married taxpayer with an income of $400,000 will save $26,736 in 1953 and $44,296 in 1954. A married taxpayer, two de- pendents, eligible for family al- Jowances, earning $2,400 will save $1 in 1953 and $2 in 1954, while a taxpayer with an income of: $400,000 will save ‘$26,713 in” 1958 and $44,257 in 1954. - These examples prove beyond doubt that the reduction in in- © come tax will bring no relief to those earning up to $5,000 a year, but will save millions for those in the high income brackets. It is obvious that the St. Laurent government decided that on the eve of an, election it has to strengthen and consolidate its ties with big business both do- mestic and foreign, and make it abundantly clear to them that the Liberal party will give them more than they could expect from the Tories or Social Credit. e > Abbott believes he can buy votes from the little people for four cents a pack (the reduction on cigarettes), but in order to buy the solid support and con- fidence of the big shots he must pay millions. This is the real meaning of his budget. He ac- complished this by taking money from your pocket and mine to fill the pockets of those whose pockets already bulge with enor- mous profits. To cover up this snare and the sinister character of the budget. as a rich man’s budget Abbott conceded four cents on a pack of cigarettes and $2.50 on radio licenses, a total of about $16 mil- lion, compared with $136 million to the corporations and $20 mil- lion to the coupon clippers. Tim Buck declared in his statement on the budget: “There ’ history. x * * calls “equality of sacrifice.” x ments for war ($2,000,795,000). ($7,055,510,000). A rich man's budget T= corporations received. a gift of $136 million from the , federal budget brought down by Finance Minister Douglas Abbott—this at a\time when their profits are the highest in, The 5% percent reduction in income tax for 1953 will mean a saving of $1 for\a single taxpayer earning $1,200 and a saving of $1,036 for those with a $30,000 income. A married taxpayer, no dependents, earning $2,250 will save $1.50, those with a $200,000 income will save $11,877. x A married taxpayer, two dependents, earning $2,400 will save $1, those with a $400,000 income will save $26,713. : * Abbott conceded four cents on a package of cigarettes, $2.50 on radio licence; a total of about $16 million compared to $136 million to corporations and an additional $20 million to the foreign and domestic coupon clippers. * Abbott will take away this year from Canadians the huge sum of $4,404,976,235, an increase of about $30 million ($29,239,052) as compared to the last fiscal year. mean over $300 a year for every man, woman and child, $1,200 for the average Canadian family. * * i About half of this crushing burden will be spent on arma- The made-in-the-USA war drive will cost every Canadian man, woman and child over $150 this cyear, $600 for the average Canadian family. About 50 cents of every tax dol- lar will be spent for war and one cent for people’s health. * * * In 1947 the government spent on national defense $219 million; in 1953-54. over $2 billion—a ten-fold increase. x : x From 1947 to 1954 the government will have spent on the drive for war the staggering sum of over seven billion dollars Over a billion a year, sufficient to have financed a health insurance plan since 1947. : : * * * This is what Abbott : * It will * . * is rejoicing on Bay and St. James*streets and down on Wall Street over Abbott’s rich man’s war budget.” In the last. few days, all the reactionary papers in the U.S., including the Wall Street journals, found great sat- isfaction and delight in Abbott’s budget. Of course, the Yankee monopolists who have a strangle- hold on our economy stand to gain millions from the tax re- ductions, have good cause to be « jubilant. Conversely, the majority of the Canadian .people who will gain nothing and lose much of their hard-earned money have good cause to condemn the budget as a diabolical snare to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. & ; Some people may draw the conclusion from the daily papers that the government is going to spend less this year as compared to last year. This is not correct. The facts are that the govern- ment proposes to spend the stag- ering sum of about $4% bil- lion, an increase of about $30 million over last year. It will mean an expenditure of over $300 a year for every man, wo- man and child, $1,200 for the average Canadian family. About half of this’ crushing: burden, over $2 billion, will be spent for armaments. It will cost every man, woman and ‘child over $150 this year to finance the U.S.-organized drive to war, $600 for the average family. This expenditure will largely go to- wards the building of jets, bomb- ers, tanks, and other weapons for war. crease the profits of the corpo- rations. ; Yes, the drive to war is ve profitable for big ie ee The’ Liberal government has spent the colossal sum of over seven billion dollars ($7,055,510,- 000) since 1947. The 1953 in- crease compared to 1947 is ten- fold ‘ The following table shows the imensity of the war drive in dol- lars taken from you and me by the St. Laurent government in the last seven years: _ War Expenditures USAT AGS eit oe $219 million 1948-49 268” 1949-50 Bea 1950-51 . 782 1951-52 1400“ W95ISS Te Ha 2,001,785,000 _ Lika eee Ra 2,000,795,000 The Labor-Progressive party will expose this rich man’s budg- et as an attack on the living standards of our people ahd as a betrayal of the real national interest. of our country. In the election campaign now developing the LPP acndidates wili put forward the people’s al- ternative to Abbott’s budget. A real People’s parliament and government could revamp the budget to reduce ‘taxes on those least able to carry the pre- sent burdens; cut down the over two billions now being spent for war to the 1947 level—$219 mil- lion, adequate for national de- fense; make the budget serve the people’s needs for social welfare, Canadian independence and peace. In contrast to the rich man’s budget devised by Abbott for the Liberal government, the LPP. advances the people’s alter- native budget. — this page). (See tables on A people's budget A PEOPLE’S budget would reduce the crushing tax burden on the majority of Canadians and greatly increase social security: * x x Peace and international agreement on armaments would reduce national defense expenditures to the level spent in 1947 —$219 million, a saving this year of $1,721,795,000. * ' x * Instead of a gift of $136 million to corporations and $20 thillion to the coupon clippers, the corporation tax and the tax on dividends of foreign and domestic monopolists should be increased to provide an additional income of at least $300 million. , ie * x * the people: ~ ance by 50 percent. Re = \ — by 50 percent. A tax on capital gain and excess profits of over 5 percent would realize about $300 million. * * The savings on war expenditures, income from corporation taxes, dividends, capital gain and 100 percent excess profits taxes would amount to about $2,300,000,000. * * * 5d This would make it possible to revamp the budget to give National health insurance. . Raise family allowances, and unemployment insur- A low rental housing program. $60 a month old-age pensions. Educational and recreational facilities. Raise the exemptions to $2,000 for single people and to $3,000 for married people. | Reduce income taxes for those earning up to $5,000 This is the kind of a budget the Canadian people need and want from their federal government. . This will further in-~ -THIRTY-FOOT HISTORY OF SAILING, Seaman paints mural for West Coast Seamen's hall Jce KOCSIS, 29, of 2224 Larch Street, Vancouver, is a work- ing seaman whose hobby is painting. One of these days he hopes to leave the sea and devote all his time to art. Last week Kocsis completed his first mural—a 30-foot history of sailing which runs the length of the new recreation room at the West Coast Seamen’s Union, 10 Powell Street. The mural depicts a Viking ship under sail; Fiji islanders in a war canoe; a sailor beirig lash- ed with a cat o’ nine tails on a British navy vessel of a bygone era; a Chinese junk; a landing by Captain Cook on a South Sea island; two old salts sitting near a quayside Sailors Rest watching a “steam and sail job” enter har- bor; and a modern freighter fol- lowing a channel in inland wat- ers. r “Making a living with paint and brushes is no easy job,” confessed Kocsis. “I started sail- ing in the merchant marine at SSSH- NOT A WORD HEG A SENSITIVE LAD/ (x caantlls the beginning of the Second World War and soon began paint- ing as a hobby: I guess I’ve left samples of my work on every ship I ever sailed on. Then about three years ago I came’ ashore here, started studying commercial art under DVA at .the Academy of Art, and later did commercial poster work and some silk screen jobs.” Members of the West Coasti Seamen’s Union like Joe Kocsis’ mural and are proud of their new union hall. They are mak- ing voluntary: donations of ar- ticles and labor to furnish the new recreation room, which al- ready has a small library, sev- eral comfortable chairs and dav- enports, and a radio. One union member with a turn for carpen- try is building a ping-pong table Kocsis, after completing the mural for the union, shipped out on a coastal run, but said before he left: “I hope soon to come ashore permanently and make a living painting murals.” Cartoon by Grossick : Grassick cartoon from Maclean’s. PACIFIC TRIBUNE — MARCH 6, 1953 — PAGE 4 '