With a majority, Tories can be more aggressive on deficit

[PoliticalNick]

I happen to think foreign aid is a good thing- I don't give much but I have sent a couple of bucks to Haiti. We've been damn lucky as far as natural disasters go (occasional flooding is probably the worst, and that isn't a problem unless you build below the high water mark) so we're overdue for major earthquake or Tsunami or Volcano and might welcome a little help ourselves. I'd rather help those suffering from bad luck than those suffering from "dropsy and heart fever". :lol:

It's not so much I disagree with helping people who suffer a catastrophic natural disaster, it is the aid sent for failing economies etc that I really don't like. On top of that there are many taxpayers that have trouble making ends meet at home and could benefit from keeping that money in their pockets. I would rather see a voluntary program where those that support the aid pay an extra little tax or into a fund administered by the red cross. I hate being forced into giving help to those I don't think deserve it or forcing those that can't afford it to help others when they need the help themselves.

Besides, it is the job of the government to mange our country, not be a charity group for other countries.

 

[Angstrom]

With a majority, Tories can be more aggressive on deficit

With a majority, Tories can do absolutly anything they wish.

That paired with there Aggressive nature, usually means they get booted out of parlament 4 years later.

 

[JLM]

It's not so much I disagree with helping people who suffer a catastrophic natural disaster, it is the aid sent for failing economies etc that I really don't like. On top of that there are many taxpayers that have trouble making ends meet at home and could benefit from keeping that money in their pockets. I would rather see a voluntary program where those that support the aid pay an extra little tax or into a fund administered by the red cross. I hate being forced into giving help to those I don't think deserve it or forcing those that can't afford it to help others when they need the help themselves.

Besides, it is the job of the government to mange our country, not be a charity group for other countries.

While I agree in principle I just can't turn a starving child away- emotions are sometimes stronger than reason.

 

[mentalfloss]

Some more flavouring..

Jobless rate, global uncertainty to test Conservative economic strategy


OTTAWA—The new Conservative government’s business-friendly economic strategy will be tested by uncertain global conditions and a stubbornly high jobless rate in Canada.

While Canada’s rebound from the recession is fully established, the outlook for the next few years is still tinged with unknowns. The impact of the sputtering recovery in the United States, instability in Europe and a high-valued loonie inhibiting exports could make for only modest expansion in the Canadian economy as 2011 goes along. In February, Canada’s output sank by 0.2 per cent, the worst monthly performance since May 2009.

Prospects for Canada are also complicated by expectations that spending by debt-burdened consumers could slow in 2011 and by the shut-off of the Conservatives’ two-year, $47 billion emergency stimulus program.

This could make it more difficult to reduce the number of Canadians unable to find jobs. Although job creation has picked up, the unemployment rate stands at 7.6 per cent, well above the pre-recession low of 6 per cent.

On the way to a majority election victory, Harper appears to have convinced much of the public that corporate income tax cuts and incentives for business are the essential tools for Canada’s prosperity. Besides phasing in corporate income tax cuts worth $14 billion by 2012, the Conservatives in recent years have provided a wide range of investment incentives for business, including easing taxes on small business and manufacturers. In all, tax cuts for business by the Conservatives total an estimated $60 billion by 2013.

Despite this, business investment in Canada has continued to trail other industrialized countries —to the point where both Flaherty and Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney have pointedly talked about the urgent need for more spending on machinery and equipment by companies.

But many are not convinced, with some Canadians saying the government would be smarter to tie tax incentives directly to company investments to ensure that corporations don’t just pocket the extra profits.

Speaking of corporate tax cuts, Canadian Association of Social Workers spokesperson Fred Phelps said it would be one thing “if corporations turned around and invested those funds into the economy.” But he said that hasn’t been happening in recent years. “What really has driven us out of the recession,” he said, “is spending by households and government, not business.”


Jobless rate, global uncertainty to test Conservative economic strategy - thestar.com

 

[Bar Sinister]

Given that the Conservatives are responsible for creating most of the deficit, perhaps it is time they did do something about it. However, if they are too aggressive in terms of cutting programs they don't like and continue to waste money on useless acquisitions like high-tech fighter planes they will alienate the five percent of voters they need to remain in power. We'll just have to wait and see on this one. I am betting that the Conservatives will receive a little bit of help through higher than expected tax revenues, however that will go out the window if they insist on continuing to cut taxes.

 

[damngrumpy]

Four billion would be a welcome change for this bunch. The have run double digit
deficits for some time. In fact they didn't even see a crisis coming until it was too
late. Many saw the writing on the wall months before. I believe we will see more
as well. The economy that everyone says is doing so well is hanging on by a thread.
Other countries are on life support and if we see the others or a few others go so will
we. I still believe we are going to hit the wall within the next 12 to 18 months and there
will be no special packages to save anyone, there is no more money to do that with.

As for what to cut, the first should be all tax breaks to corporations and they should not
be allowed to use the tax deferral system either. The CBC if they cut it or destroy it
there will be a serious backlash and they know it. Social Conservatives do want a say
after all, all the Evangelicals are the ones that got him elected, and now its time to pay
for the favours. The trouble is with these people, they don't know the difference
between rhetoric and real action. The Tories have a majority, but they have two halves
of a minority really. The fiscal and the social conservatives will soon be fighting each
other for the spoils. But wait, there is more, the NDP also have their problems of
east vs west and a few others. The Liberals will soon form a firing squad, unfortunately
it will be a circle shooting inward. My God we are in trouble Elizabeth May could turn
out to be the only sane person in the House.

 

[Angstrom]

Some more flavouring..

Jobless rate, global uncertainty to test Conservative economic strategy


OTTAWA—
But many are not convinced, with some Canadians saying the government would be smarter to tie tax incentives directly to company investments to ensure that corporations don’t just pocket the extra profits.

Speaking of corporate tax cuts, Canadian Association of Social Workers spokesperson Fred Phelps said it would be one thing “if corporations turned around and invested those funds into the economy.” But he said that hasn’t been happening in recent years. “What really has driven us out of the recession,” he said, “is spending by households and government, not business.”

In the next 4 years theres nothing any government can do to help with the job market. Its not a Economic problem. Its a Generation transition, when the job market is flooded with new fresh young adults.

Its simply Gen Y 20-30 years old is coming into the market and the baby boomers are not coming out until 2015-2020.

Tax cuts can help in some situation. But not this particular one. Its really just a matter of waiting it out.

 

[Chev]

“JLM said: While I agree in principle I just can't turn a starving child away- emotions are sometimes stronger than reason.”
Would it maybe not make more sense to sponsor a child in a third world country then? Check out agencies such as such as ‘World Vision, Child Fund and Feed the Children’. There’s probably more agencies. Research the charity. Verify that the charity specifically works with Third World countries, Go to the Better Business Bureau's website to see if the business practices of the agencies are honest, etc. etc.
Would that not be better than the feds sending money/aid to whatever country and not knowing whether the money/aid actually gets to the people who need it?

 

[PoliticalNick]

In the next 4 years theres nothing any government can do to help with the job market. Its not a Economic problem. Its a Generation transition, when the job market is flooded with new fresh young adults.

Its simply Gen Y 20-30 years old is coming into the market and the baby boomers are not coming out until 2015-2020.

Tax cuts can help in some situation. But not this particular one. Its really just a matter of waiting it out.

I can't agree. If the govt put proper economic policies in place we could at least ride out the rest of the economic problems that will continiue on a global scale for the next while probably bottoming out in early-mid 2012. The tax cuts should be to the citizenry which will help consumer spending, this increases demand and increased demand means there must be increased supply to keep up. That is what creates new jobs. I do agree with the earlier post about tying the corp tax cuts to reinvestment but would add that it must be capital investment and within Canada. As it stands right now with reduced consumer spending and a troubled economy these corps will simply put the extra money in a safe place, probably tax deffered, to help ride out the storm that has yet to pass.

 

[petros]

Our economy is going to double by 2015. If these jackasses can't balance the budget and pay off the bills by then It's time to shoot the works and do it right the second time around.

 

[weaselwords]

Yap all you want about the deficit it is not really the problem. Of course you cannot have negative budgets infinitum. The root of the problem is the Natuonal Debt @ 562.8B and more to the point the Foreign Debt takes up 254.3B of that total. This stuctural debt impedes greatly on Canada's development. What has to be done is a concerted effort to rid ourselves of foreign debt so that Canada controls its own destiny. I'm not so worried about the other 300B (approx) as it is Canadians owing Canadians. Howerver as long as the foreign debt hangs over our heads & the interest that accures as Canadians we are open to the vageries of the money markets & Foreign Governments

 

[JLM]

Yap all you want about the deficit it is not really the problem. Of course you cannot have negative budgets infinitum. The root of the problem is the Natuonal Debt @ 562.8B and more to the point the Foreign Debt takes up 254.3B of that total. This stuctural debt impedes greatly on Canada's development. What has to be done is a concerted effort to rid ourselves of foreign debt so that Canada controls its own destiny. I'm not so worried about the other 300B (approx) as it is Canadians owing Canadians. Howerver as long as the foreign debt hangs over our heads & the interest that accures as Canadians we are open to the vageries of the money markets & Foreign Governments

Yep, it's amazing how many people say it's not the debt that's the problem but the deficit. How the f...... can you separate the two? The interest on the debt helps contribute to the deficit. I have no problem with "Canadians owing Canadians"- the smart ones are earning interest and the dumb ones are paying it. :smile:

 

[cranky]

If i had to choose, i would say the deficit is more important as it speaks towards our existing spending habits. The debt could be viewed as a symptom of the problem.

Perhaps a good comparison....I told my nephew not to pay off his credit card until he is able to do it through good spending habits. If he refinances or uses a windfall to pay off his credit card, he will certainly run himself into credit card debt again

 

[Machjo]

I think foreign aid is a great place to start. Why we are shipping billions overseas when we have rising unemployment and falling standard of living in our own country is beyond me. I don't think replacing the aid with free trade is the fix that others might believe though. Free trade is rarely a benefit to the richer nation as it costs jobs and revenues at the same time. My personal opinion is closing the free trade deals we have would be a bigger benefit overall than adding new ones. Our main exports (oil, gas and grain) are going to be in demand no matter if there is free trade or not so why not take advantage of that and benefit ourselves.

Free trade does not have to hurt the richer partner as long as the country plans ahead. In Sweden for instance, the lack of a minimum wage allows workers to negotiate wage reductions if necessary. Codetermination legislation also ensures that in the event workers must negotiate their salaries down that management must also do the same.

This potential reduction in wages is not as bad as it might appear at first though. In free trade, the cost of goods and services generally drops lower than salaries and profits do owing to increased efficiencies. As a result, there is still a net benefit to the richer country overall or at least a break-even.

As for trade wars, let's remember that there are also many products Canada does not have. You can't drink gas after all, nor can you built a car out of gas alone.

 

[JLM]

Free trade does not have to hurt the richer partner as long as the country plans ahead. In Sweden for instance, the lack of a minimum wage allows workers to negotiate wage reductions if necessary. Codetermination legislation also ensures that in the event workers must negotiate their salaries down that management must also do the same.

This potential reduction in wages is not as bad as it might appear at first though. In free trade, the cost of goods and services generally drops lower than salaries and profits do owing to increased efficiencies. As a result, there is still a net benefit to the richer country overall or at least a break-even.

As for trade wars, let's remember that there are also many products Canada does not have. You can't drink gas after all, nor can you built a car out of gas alone.

Sounds like a sensible plan!

 

[Angstrom]

Our economy is going to double by 2015. If these jackasses can't balance the budget and pay off the bills by then It's time to shoot the works and do it right the second time around.

I would not go as far as double and Id say it will start to show by 2017-2020 though its only natural to expect growth.

Baby boomers will be Un-locking there retirement money, plus a market full of strong stable long term jobs will open up for Gen-Y, the two biggest generation will be peaking by 2025 at witch Pointe things will start to slowly cool off.

There is good times coming

Right now we are to many fighting for jobs on the market its really is driving job quality and wages down. If there is anything the government needs to do. Its some kind of law to protect vulnerable employees from greedy companys exploiting this trend.

Id like to add that Gen Y that have kids are very vulnerable right now.
There is a real need for assistance, thats being Ignored.
There is a big population of 1-7 years of age thats living in way below par conditions.
Due to our transitional situation. Finding real ways to help young family's definitely is something this government should do.

 

[petros]

Yep, it's amazing how many people say it's not the debt that's the problem but the deficit. How the f...... can you separate the two? The interest on the debt helps contribute to the deficit. I have no problem with "Canadians owing Canadians"- the smart ones are earning interest and the dumb ones are paying it. :smile:

It would be fine if we owed ourselves the money but we don't.

 

[Machjo]

I would not go as far as double and Id say it will start to show by 2017-2020 though its only natural to expect growth.

Baby boomers will be Un-locking there retirement money, plus a market full of strong stable long term jobs will open up for Gen-Y, the two biggest generation will be peaking by 2025 at witch Pointe things will start to slowly cool off.

There is good times coming

Right now we are to many fighting for jobs on the market its really is driving job quality and wages down. If there is anything the government needs to do. Its some kind of law to protect vulnerable employees from greedy companys exploiting this trend.

Id like to add that Gen Y that have kids are very vulnerable right now.
There is a real need for assistance, thats being Ignored.
There is a big population of 1-7 years of age thats living in way below par conditions.
Due to our transitional situation. Finding real ways to help young family's definitely is something this government should do.

I'm all for creating jobs, but you don't do that by introducing minimum wages to price workers out of the market.

As for protecting workers from exploitation, just introduce codetermination laws to ensure they have a voice on company boards. This won't guarantee them wage hikes, but will guarantee them the ability to ensure that if they must cut their wages, so will management.

This is why Swedish socialism has proven so successful: Unlike in Canada where the NDP promises everything to everyone, in Sweden the Social Democratic Party still has its feet firmly grounded in economic reality.

 

[Angstrom]

I'm all for creating jobs, but you don't do that by introducing minimum wages to price workers out of the market.

As for protecting workers from exploitation, just introduce codetermination laws to ensure they have a voice on company boards. This won't guarantee them wage hikes, but will guarantee them the ability to ensure that if they must cut their wages, so will management.

This is why Swedish socialism has proven so successful: Unlike in Canada where the NDP promises everything to everyone, in Sweden the Social Democratic Party still has its feet firmly grounded in economic reality.

I don't think we can create jobs no matter what we do, its not a problem of not having enough jobs. Its a problem of having to much work force in the job market, for our current consumer demand and Industry its like having 500 people wanting to shoot 1 duck.
This is because Gen Y and Gen baby boomer the 2 biggest generation on this planet are in the job market at the same time.

I Agree that part of our governments biggest failure is not recognizing unwanted side effects of Policies and laws they have adopted.
There really is a piece missing in our government, that takes a long hard look and analyzes things and possible unwanted outcome

The NDP is young, and if you hope to ever have a Swedish socialist government here in Canada your going to want to support them past there growing pains till it can figure this out.

 

[weaselwords]

The last number I heard as a deficit for 2010-11 fiscal was 38B. As mentioned previously the total debt is est. at 534B. The cost to cover that debt would be 5.34B per point & alot of it is old so use 16B @ 3 points or 21.4B @ 4 points to make it static. So what we are looking at is either 22B or 16.6B as a spending deficit. Where are the cutbacks coming in program spending?
We know there will be increased defense spending as well large increases in the criminal justice area.
Industry & Trade, Research & Development and Resource Development are scheduled to stay at current levels
This means wholesale incremental spending decreases in tha area of social programs & foreign aid.
So in the end those poorly equipped to handle the burden willl have it thrust on them.