re. ignatieff, go for it if you think it helps. if you can find a bold-faced lie from an area at which he is a supposed expert (like harper is with constitutional law and politics), and that impacts the fundamental layout of our political system i would love to hear it.
as to your 3 points:
i am not opposed to profit. in fact i am involved with social enterprise profit in what i do for a living. that doesn't mean that all profit is good or that as a community we shouldn't think about the ways in which we re-distribute wealth. tax breaks on total profit (or on revenue, depending on how you slice it) are way too high up the chain to make a real difference. they can be too easily absorbed before the benifits reach those that really need it. i don't want to hamper competitiveness, but i don't give a rats ass about a business that isn't willing to take on it's share of social responsibility. profit is good, but it can't be the sole, or even the primary, motivator. if it is, it crushes everything that is vulnerable.
a $4k tax break for a new hire is very relevant. ask any very small business. it could (and probably should) be higher, but that's not the same argument as dismissing it. there is great value in exploring other options besides straight up corporate tax breaks. i applaud the creativity, if not the final number.
your last point is pretty vague. and i don't know how you could possibly vote tory if you really believe in funding groups and services that can't fund themselves. are you aware of what has happened with the united way over the last few years, as an example?