Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have listened to that speech and yet I am terribly disappointed in some of the content of the speech.
The hon. member for Durham and the hon. member opposite should listen more carefully and I would have enjoyed the whole speech.
It was when I began listening with great interest that I began to recognize that something did not make sense. There is a lot of stuff that does not make sense in that speech.
I think the suggestion was made somehow that people who cut taxes do not necessarily increase the employment of people. I would like to refer the member to some statistics that I have put together here with certain American states. In fact, there are about 10 of them that have increased taxes in the years between 1990 and 1995. During that time period we also have about the same number of states that have cut taxes. We have two groups here, one group that increased taxes and another group that decreased taxes.
It was very interesting to note that for the tax hikers over that 10 year period, the total revenue that the states collected was increased by 27%. They hiked their taxes in order to increase their revenue. They did by 27%. The tax cutters cut their taxes and their revenues increased 32.6%. That is very interesting. They cut their taxes but increased their total revenues.
Let us look at job creation. The tax hikers increased employment, percentage wise, zero. The tax cutters over that same five year period increased their employment by 10.8 percent. That is very significant. These are not numbers that I made up or that somebody manufactured for this speech. These are numbers that exist. The hon. member can find those numbers himself. They are very significant.
The member then suggested that when people get jobs all they do is spend the money, suggesting that somehow spending money is a bad thing. Mr. Speaker, I know you are a businessman and I know that much of the business you have done in your lifetime has been spending dollars that have come from other people. You, Mr. Speaker, have become a wealthy man because you invested that money.
The hon. member opposite has had exactly the same kind of experience. He has become wealthy because people spent their money. The suggestion that is being made here is that when people spend money is disappears. Investment money comes back.
How it is that tax hikers had no increase in jobs but the tax cutters had an increase in jobs? Let him explain to us that spending actually hurts the economy.