Here come the deficits


Avro
No Party Affiliation
#1
Just like I said, and I was mocked for it by the con defense league. The Tories will go into deficit and abandon their non intervention ideology.

So now that they have promised deficits do the cons here now flip from the flop to defend Tory actions or do they slink away like the hypocrites they are.

We shall see.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#2
In a recent topic, the finance minister was publically speculating on selling off federal assets to avoid having a deficit. This was after we were assured that there would be no deficit. One of the assets mentioned was the CN Tower. I don't think these ass-holes have a mandate to sell off federal assets.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro View Post

Just like I said, and I was mocked for it by the con defense league. The Tories will go into deficit and abandon their non intervention ideology.

So now that they have promised deficits do the cons here now flip from the flop to defend Tory actions or do they slink away like the hypocrites they are.

We shall see.

They will do like they always do. Deny, and ignore any questions.
 
scratch
#4
Standard Operating Procedure.
 
Socrates the Greek
#5
Attachment 931
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro View Post

Just like I said, and I was mocked for it by the con defense league. The Tories will go into deficit and abandon their non intervention ideology.

So now that they have promised deficits do the cons here now flip from the flop to defend Tory actions or do they slink away like the hypocrites they are.

We shall see.

Jim looks like he is about to tell Harper to get lost. Harper is on control mode, we can see that in Jim's face..


[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Peter/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-5.jpg[/IMG]
Last edited by Socrates the Greek; Feb 9th, 2009 at 03:30 PM..
 
Risus
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

In a recent topic, the finance minister was publically speculating on selling off federal assets to avoid having a deficit. This was after we were assured that there would be no deficit. One of the assets mentioned was the CN Tower. I don't think these ass-holes have a mandate to sell off federal assets.

Which would you rather have? A deficit or the CN Tower??? You libs will never be satisfied...
 
scratch
#7
Well Risus, sell the CN Tower, sell our half of Niagara Falls, reduce our ocean limit from 200 to 20 miles.....hell just give it all away.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Risus View Post

Which would you rather have? A deficit or the CN Tower??? You libs will never be satisfied...

Do you honestly think those are the only choices? How about the government spending only the money they have, not what they would like to have and having no deficits?
Did you even know that the first thirty billion dollars of tax revenue every year goes to pay the interest on Mulroney's debt. If Harper runs a deficit, he is adding to it.
 
Risus
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by scratch View Post

Well Risus, sell the CN Tower, sell our half of Niagara Falls, reduce our ocean limit from 200 to 20 miles.....hell just give it all away.

that sounds like something the liberals would do....
 
scratch
#10
Risus,

To each his own.
 
Avro
No Party Affiliation
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Risus View Post

Which would you rather have? A deficit or the CN Tower??? You libs will never be satisfied...

I'd rather have common sense, sell the the CN tower in a poor real estate market?

No sense

What happens when you run out of things to sell?

The same yahoos that are in Ottawa now sold the 407 in Ontario for 3 billion it is now worth 18 billion and it's costs for use have gone up 500%...wise con business sense.

F U tax payers.

I thought cons with half a brain would show up but all they had was Risus.
 
SirJosephPorter
No Party Affiliation
#12
Do you honestly think those are the only choices? How about the government spending only the money they have, not what they would like to have and having no deficits?

Juan, quite right, those arenít the only choices.

Just like I said, and I was mocked for it by the con defense league. The Tories will go into deficit and abandon their non intervention ideology.


Avro, was there ever any doubt? There is a long standing love affair between conservatives and budget deficit, whether it is Reagan, Bush in USA or Mulroney, Harper here in Canada.

Harper inherited 10 billion $ surplus. As soon as he came to power, he frittered away most of it by giving tax cuts, mostly to the rich. Now that there is an economic downturn, he will borrow like a drunken sailor; like there is no tomorrow and we will be in deep hole in no time.

Paul Martin made a very good point the other day. He did not accept the excuse that since there is an economic downturn; the government has no choice but to go into deficit.

His point was that the government should have anticipated the economic downturn. Harper should have been ready for the unexpected and shod have kept a healthy surplus for just such times.

Liberals encountered many crises like this, there was 9/11, the dot com meltdown, 2001-2002 recession etc. But Liberals did not go into deficit, they kept running surplus, because there were ready for the unexpected. That is sound economic management.

Harper basically followed Bush (whom he holds in awe), if only partly. As soon as Bush came to power one of this first acts was to give huge tax cuts to the rich and run a huge deficit. Harper gave tax cuts to the rich, but he did not run a deficit. However, he did fritter away all the surplus, leaving absolutely no room for unforeseen downturns.

If Harper now runs a huge deficit, Canada will be paying for another generation for the misdeeds of the conservatives.
 
Trex
#13
Here come the deficits


Could be, but really so what.

Forecasts are for a balanced budget this year and if they economy really tanks worldwide a small Canadian deficit next year.
And that's probably how it should be.
If the economy sucks that bad the government probably should prime the pump a tad.

To rant about the Government of the day having to post a small structural deficit when the worldwide banking system is tanking doesn't really make much sense.
Its not like any politician Lib or Con could have predicted this greed inspired American spawned meltdown.

Chances are that Iggy is going to get the nod for the Lib's.
And that dude is about as right wing and Americanized as they come while still sitting as a Lib.
Does anyone really think he would do things much differently than Harper given a fiscal problem?
I think Iggy and Harper are actually pretty close on their respective worldview and philosophy.
Harpo's probably more of a social conservative but fiscally I figure peas in a pod.

Now Bob Rae is a whole nuther can of worms entirely.
Slight deficits don't begin to cover what Bob is capable of.

But hopefully that issue will never occur.

Trex
 
SirJosephPorter
No Party Affiliation
#14
What happens when you run out of things to sell?

Avro, that is exactly what happened here in Ontario. Mike Harris kept on selling and selling government assets, he sold (or rather, gifted) the highway 407 to his buddies (Ontarians are still cursing him for it).

Eventually he ran out of things to sell and ended up running a huge deficit (about which the Tories lied just before the campaign, they claimed the deficit was 2 billion $, when McGuinty opened up the books, it turned out to be 6 billion $).
 
Avro
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Trex View Post

Here come the deficits


Could be, but really so what.

Forecasts are for a balanced budget this year and if they economy really tanks worldwide a small Canadian deficit next year.
And that's probably how it should be.
If the economy sucks that bad the government probably should prime the pump a tad.

To rant about the Government of the day having to post a small structural deficit when the worldwide banking system is tanking doesn't really make much sense.
Its not like any politician Lib or Con could have predicted this greed inspired American spawned meltdown.

Chances are that Iggy is going to get the nod for the Lib's.
And that dude is about as right wing and Americanized as they come while still sitting as a Lib.
Does anyone really think he would do things much differently than Harper given a fiscal problem?
I think Iggy and Harper are actually pretty close on their respective worldview and philosophy.
Harpo's probably more of a social conservative but fiscally I figure peas in a pod.

Now Bob Rae is a whole nuther can of worms entirely.
Slight deficits don't begin to cover what Bob is capable of.

But hopefully that issue will never occur.

Trex

Or how about the Mulrony years or the current Bush years?

The Libs fixed the mess under Cretien and Martin, where is the con praise for that?

All depends on who's idealogical flag you fly.

Sure Bob Rae ran deficits but he also pumped billions into infrastructure to create jobs, the very thing cons are about to do.....are they just as bad as Bob?

Answer while I laugh in your face.

I love how this all has turned only to watch cons fumble and stumble over their own hypocrisy.
 
Scott Free
Free Thinker
#16
This is an outrage! A countries finances are not like an individuals. The government must spend to stave off recession. The government becoming stingy guarantees a depression. Harper would like to sell off our assets because he is a neocon not for any good reason. If a government goes into debt it needs only to grow its GDP to get out. Even a huge deficit is very manageable so long as the economy grows. The only way out of a financial crisis is to create jobs and that requires some government spending. Harper is a criminal and obviously intends to sodomize Canada as long as he can. Canada for sale: cheap.
Last edited by Scott Free; Nov 17th, 2008 at 05:17 AM..
 
scratch
#17
Well SF,

We can only thank the insensitivity of Harpo & Co. towards Canada's people.
 
Scott Free
Free Thinker
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by scratch View Post

Well SF,

We can only thank the insensitivity of Harpo & Co. towards Canada's people.

I heard him today on the radio talking about how he had a mandate from the Canadian people! He didn't win anywhere near enough popularity to "have a mandate." Anyone in his position that would claim such a thing obviously has a secret agenda. I should think selling off bits of Canada to his friends is just a small part of it.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Scott Free View Post

This is an outrage! A countries finances are not like an individuals. The government must spend to stave off recession. The government becoming stingy guarantees a depression. Harper would like to sell off our assets because he is a neocon not for any good reason. If a government goes into debt it needs only to grow its GDP to get out. Even a huge deficit is very manageable so long as the economy grows. The only way out of a financial crisis is to create jobs and that requires some government spending. Harper is a criminal and obviously intends to sodomize Canada as long as he can. Canada for sale: cheap.

I agree partially.....

My question is: Why is the gov't into real estate in the first place? Outside of the necessary gov't buildings........of which the CN Tower is not one.......it is beyond the scope of their accepted role in society........and is an invitation to corruption and cronyism.

I don't like deficit.....nor does the Harper gov't. But once you are in recession and have cut the idiot wastes of money (such as Arts programs), expendature is necessary to create jobs and provide a safety net for the people......advantage can be gained by using these expenditures to rebuild and improve infrastructure.

Things change. Sometimes policies have to follow events. We elect a gov't, not a platform.

If you want to see a disaster in the making, take a look at RB Bennett, who refused to spend to help the people during the dirty thirties........and came close to fermenting a perfectly justifiable rebellion.

BTW, I can't stand Mulroney.......but he left the Liberals two things that were invaluable in defeating the deficit.........NAFTA and the GST. It ain't hard to get out of debt when your revenues are sky-rocketing, thanks to your predessesor.
 
Tonington
#20
We're an export economy...where is the money going to be spent to address that other countries aren't buying our resources in this global recession?

Maybe spend some money on infrastructure. That's about it. Anything else is tossing dollars down the toilet.

ETA: I see Colpy agrees. Putting money into those failing automakers is a losing gamble...unless you add some strings to that purse.
 
Avro
No Party Affiliation
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Scott Free View Post

I heard him today on the radio talking about how he had a mandate from the Canadian people! He didn't win anywhere near enough popularity to "have a mandate." Anyone in his position that would claim such a thing obviously has a secret agenda. I should think selling off bits of Canada to his friends is just a small part of it.

Well the con defense league will now say he doesn't have a mandate to keep a simple promise like not running deficits or the even lamer excuse of "we didn't see this economic crisis coming" BS. They had the nerve to slam Dion on fears of deficit spending when they themselves are now going to do just that. Perhaps after they sell the CN tower in a poor real estate market they will start selling off our parks as well.

It's Mike Harris all over again, you know, the guy that benefited from the Rae policies and still couldn't balance the books in good economic times as government spending ballooned out of control as it is under Harper while cons still prance around thinking Tories are good money managers.

Morons
 
Zzarchov
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Risus View Post

Which would you rather have? A deficit or the CN Tower??? You libs will never be satisfied...


If you have to sell things its still a deficit.

Its like saying "I live within my means, to make rent this month I sold my car, im responsible"


They won't have a lack of cash, they will still have a deficit. Instead of lowering their Cash Account on the books they just lower another Asset instead. They will sell it at under value too by abusing the "original purchase value" its recorded at.

Its akin to selling off the entirity of the Prairies and North for $545,704 CAD and claiming you balanced the books by making profit.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#23
The CN Tower is not entirely real estate. It's primary function is a telecommunications center. That it is a popular tourist destination is merely a bonus. Now the dopey conservatives want to sell it off and the communications clients will have to go begging to whoever buys it. I don't believe Harper has a mandate to sell off government assets. The Tower is an important piece of infrastructure that should not be sold. If Harper wants to avoid deficits he should take back some of the corporate tax cut gifts he gave away to his friends. It is not Canada's fault that Harper might find himself in a deficit, it is Harper's fault. Harper inherited a 10 billion dollar surplus.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#24
The Canadian electorate once gave the conservatives a very clear picture of what they thought of deficit financing of government. The P.C.s went from a majority to just a seat or two in parliament. I think they can do that again if Harper starts dealing in deficits. We just have to remember that the first 30 billion dollars of taxes collected every year goes to pay off the interest on Mulroney's debt.
 
Tonington
#25
Here's a thought...I don't mind paying an extra penny for my coffee, like I did three years ago. Making future generations pay for my penny with interest though...not cool.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

The CN Tower is not entirely real estate. It's primary function is a telecommunications center. That it is a popular tourist destination is merely a bonus. Now the dopey conservatives want to sell it off and the communications clients will have to go begging to whoever buys it. I don't believe Harper has a mandate to sell off government assets. The Tower is an important piece of infrastructure that should not be sold. If Harper wants to avoid deficits he should take back some of the corporate tax cut gifts he gave away to his friends. It is not Canada's fault that Harper might find himself in a deficit, it is Harper's fault. Harper inherited a 10 billion dollar surplus.

Good point about the CN Tower.....I just hadn't considered its practical use.

Re-introducing corporate taxes while the economy is shrinking......and they are considering huge bailouts.....just doesn't make sense.

Ah.....Harper was elected on a policy of cutting the GST, which he did. He was also elected on a policy of increased military expenditure......which he did. And he has not approached deficit until the world economy tanked.....not his fault. That is obvious when you see every industrialized nation in the same hole.....Canada much less so than others.

In my own defense, I'd rather have kept the GST and paid down debt.........but I wasn't elected.
 
SirJosephPorter
No Party Affiliation
#27
And he has not approached deficit until the world economy tanked.....not his fault.

Sorry Colpy, entirely Harperís fault. Liberals had plenty of unforeseen disasters to cope with. There was 9/11, followed by the dot com crash. Then we had the 2001-2002 recession (the first Bush recession), when the stock market tanked, went from 11,000 to 7000.

However, liberals ran surplus through all that, because of prudent fiscal management. Because of his tax cuts mainly for the rich (GST cut benefits the rich disproportionately, income tax cut benefits all the population equally), Harper frittered away all the surplus and was essentially living from paycheck to paycheck.

Well, we all know what happens to a family which lives on paycheck to paycheck. Any unforeseen disaster and the family is in big trouble. The same thing happened here. The fact that Harper finds himself running a deficit denotes the lack of foresight, the lack of proper planning on his part.

Unforeseen disasters, unforeseen recessions are quite commonplace in the field of economy, a prudent politician makes allowances for the unforeseen, and does not start whining the moment something unforeseen happens.

So yes, entirely Harperís fault.
 
Zzarchov
#28
I'd agree about the "unforseen" bit.

Its part of first year economics course about the unforseen. Preparing for unforseen occurrances is the whole point of someone managing the economy.


If Harper wasn't prepared for a disaster then what the hell good is he? Anyone can manage the obvious, its managing the obvious while preparing for emergencies and disasters.

Its like hiring police but only having them deal with forseeable and predicatable problems and washing their hands of dealing with Emergencies.
 
GreenFish66
#29
Here come the deficits ..Here come the Bail outs!...Hope it all pays off for the ones who need it most!..The people!..Keep bailing out the criminals ..at the expense of the victums. That's the economic model we seem to be running off..Nowadays..!
Last edited by GreenFish66; Nov 17th, 2008 at 04:20 PM..Reason: corrections
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Good point about the CN Tower.....I just hadn't considered its practical use.

Re-introducing corporate taxes while the economy is shrinking......and they are considering huge bailouts.....just doesn't make sense.

Ah.....Harper was elected on a policy of cutting the GST, which he did. He was also elected on a policy of increased military expenditure......which he did. And he has not approached deficit until the world economy tanked.....not his fault. That is obvious when you see every industrialized nation in the same hole.....Canada much less so than others.

In my own defense, I'd rather have kept the GST and paid down debt.........but I wasn't elected.

Well, the fifty billion in corporate tax cuts was a bailout of sorts wasn't it?. The world economic meltdown was predicted for a long time. It shouldn't have been a surprise. Harper piddled away a ten billion dollar surplus and there was no excuse for that.
Canada is a resource based economy so we should be doing better than most.
Putting back the GST reduction would probably make Harper some brownie points and also help stave off a deficit.
 

Similar Threads

108
Con deficits, no surprise.
by Avro | Jan 28th, 2009
32
Running Deficits
by elevennevele | Aug 19th, 2008