Mark Carney's government is rolling out another GST rebate, presenting it as relief for families struggling with grocery costs. Liberal supporters are celebrating this as compassionate policy. On the surface, it sounds helpful. In practice, it's treating a symptom while ignoring the disease.
Here's the core issue: government spending created the inflationary pressure that made these handouts "necessary" in the first place. When you continuously spend beyond your means, you devalue the currency, drive up costs, and erode purchasing power. Handing out rebates funded by more spending doesn't solve the problem. It perpetuates the cycle.
The government spends recklessly, which contributes to inflation. Inflation makes essentials unaffordable. Carney's government responds with temporary relief funded by more spending, which feeds back into inflation. The cycle repeats, with each iteration creating more dependency on government intervention.
What would actual solutions look like? Reducing government spending would address the root cause rather than the symptoms. It would slow inflationary pressure and allow the economy to stabilize without requiring constant interventions.
There's also the question of the GST itself. As a consumption tax, it's inherently regressive. It takes a larger percentage of income from lower earners than higher earners. We functioned without it for decades. Eliminating it entirely would provide permanent relief rather than temporary rebates, and it would reduce the government's capacity to fund the kind of spending that creates these problems in the first place.
But structural solutions like these don't generate the same political appeal as handing out checks. Voters see immediate relief, even if it's temporary and counterproductive. Carney gets credit for "doing something," even when that something makes the underlying problem worse.
The question we should be asking isn't "how much relief can the government provide?" It's "why do we need this relief, and how do we address the actual cause?"
Until we confront the spending problem, these handouts will continue. They'll provide temporary relief while making the long-term situation worse. That's not compassion. That's kicking the problem down the road while making it bigger.
Real solutions require discipline and structural change. They require saying no to spending we can't afford, even when it's politically convenient. They require treating citizens as adults who can manage their own finances when the government isn't actively devaluing their earnings.
The alternative is what we have now: a cycle of dependence where the government creates problems, offers temporary fixes, and uses those fixes to justify its own expansion. Carney's approach isn't sustainable. It's just expensive theater with a predictable ending.
