Canada’s renewed spending binge

[Locutus]

Taxes and fees will go up, and our debt will too, as campaign promises get fulfilled

With the federal budget officially in deficit, a new Alberta tax to fund spending and provincial calls for more health care funding, a trend is underway: a renewed public spending binge in wake of a slowing economy.


We saw this in earlier years. As shown in the graph nearby, public spending accounted for a bit more than one-third of the economy in the early 1970s. The steady increase, particularly in social, health and education spending, raised public spending to over 50 per cent of GDP by the early 1990s. With retrenchment after reaching public debt levels of over 100 per cent of GDP in 1995, government spending returned to roughly two fifths of the economy and has been fairly flat since 1999, except for a brief period from 2009-2011 after the 2008 global financial crisis.

Despite federal and provincial prudence since the 1990s, Canadian governments continue to absorb a large share of an economy funded by taxes and fees paid by a plodding private economy. Along with the United States (general government outlays are 38 per cent of GDP), Canada is at the lower end of the current spending binge among G7 countries. Nonetheless, there are other countries that have kept to smaller governments that are closer to a third of GDP, including Australia, Korea and Switzerland with lower tax levels as well.


mo


Jack M. Mintz: Canada’s renewed spending binge | Financial Post

 

[B00Mer]

If Liberals are good for anything, it's Tax and Spend.

 

[MHz]

Let's check out your fact finding mission Bloomer. One would almost think you are trying to pull a fast one, typical Con.

First, let's look at Canada's political history, listing Prime Ministers and their political party affiliation:


1980 to 1984 - Pierre Trudeau (Liberal)
1984 to 1984 - John Turner (Liberal)
1984 to 1993 - Brian Mulroney (Progressive Conservative)
1993 to 2003 - Jean Chretien (Liberal)
2003 to 2006 - Paul Martin (Liberal)
2006 to 2011 - Stephen Harper (Conservative - minority)
2011 to present - Stephen Harper (Conservative - majority)

Let's open by looking at a chart showing Canada's fiscal history since 1986 - 1987:

527 to 523 in 13 years for the liberals.

523 to 672 in 6 years for the conservatives. Mulroney <280 to 523 in 9 years

 

[pgs]

Let's check out your fact finding mission Bloomer. One would almost think you are trying to pull a fast one, typical Con.

First, let's look at Canada's political history, listing Prime Ministers and their political party affiliation:


1980 to 1984 - Pierre Trudeau (Liberal)
1984 to 1984 - John Turner (Liberal)
1984 to 1993 - Brian Mulroney (Progressive Conservative)
1993 to 2003 - Jean Chretien (Liberal)
2003 to 2006 - Paul Martin (Liberal)
2006 to 2011 - Stephen Harper (Conservative - minority)
2011 to present - Stephen Harper (Conservative - majority)

Let's open by looking at a chart showing Canada's fiscal history since 1986 - 1987:

527 to 523 in 13 years for the liberals.

523 to 672 in 6 years for the conservatives. Mulroney <280 to 523 in 9 years

What does the political party have to do with Locutus post ? I saw no reference to party politics whatsoever .

 

[Cannuck]

Too bad the Harperites couldn't have got off their social conservative kick and been a little more fiscally conservative. We wouldn't be dealing with Trudeau now.

 

[davesmom]

Canadians as a whole can take the blame for the rising debt and deficits. We are enjoying social programs and benefits provided by government (both Federal and Provincial) that are really dispensable. We don't need many of the programs, subsidies and grants; we just WANT them because they make us more comfortable.
There is not the funds to maintain our elaborate social programs but the public is not willing to cut back on nonessentials. Therefore, to keep up the status quo, government has to keep borrowing.
We need our health care, educational and justice systems and assistance programs to a degree. The feel-good programs could be done without. Cases in point- seniors demanding funding for their senior centers, programs to teach young mothers how to care for their babies, promotion of the French language throughout Canada, just some examples of places where money is spent unnecessarily. Nice to have such conveniences and luxuries but we could survive very well without them, much better than we will be able to cope with rising debt and deficits.
We should be paying attention to the fate of other countries around the world who are in deep financial trouble due to excessive socialist programs. Greece, Portugal, Ireland, to name a few. Massive debt always catches up with the populace eventually and the results are not pretty!