Canada's Debt, A Liberal Legacy

[darkbeaver]

yes, the 2008-09 thing was harper's fault. yes.

yes of course. :lol:

When GDP slumps it's the economy when GDP swells it's the Harper Conservatives. You have it both ways.

They should just monetarize it over a period of a few years. No sovereign nation should incur debt from private sources.. and should borrow from other National Banks only to facilitate trade on a equitable and reciprocal basis (self cancelling). Essentially governments should use the credit facility of its own currency to invest in infrastructure and development. And progressive taxation for all expenditures that relate to redistribution of wealth.

It is a fundemental necessity of a sovereign nation without which there is no sovereignty. How that came to be is a subject that gets zero attention here or much of anywhere else for that matter.

 

[AnnaG]

Surplus can be simply a bit of paperwork. You want surplus, simply add a whole bunch of possibles and a huge "miscellaneous" to the budget so when you come in under budget, you show a surplus. Some folks call it "cooking the books".
The other way to have surplus is to steal from EI, cut seniors programs, and drop a large percentage of your transfer payments to the provinces for health and education.

Debt is a whole different ballgame. The largest blame for our debt goes to (flashy trumpeting fanfare intro) the Gliberals!

Now go ahead and whine that Cons always say it's the Liberals fault. I have news for you, they are partially right and your whining about the Cons won't change that.

Starting at 1956/1957 and going to 2000/2001, here's our debt picture: http://pushinback.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/feddebt.gif
Diefenbaker from 1957 till 1963 shows very little change.
The next 5 years were Pearson's and again, a small rise but mostly very little change.
About 1974 there was a relatively sharp rise. Guess who? Yup, Pierre from 1968 till 1979.
Joe Who got in for a handful of months and not much happened to that sharp rise.
And then Pierre got back in again in 1980 and stayed for another 4 years or so; the rise in debt pretty much stayed constant and the interest on it more or less plateaued after Pierre left.
We got a coffee break when Turner got in the door, headed through the house, and scooted out the back door kind of like Joe did. Not much change in the rate of rise in debt.
Then in 1984, Bullroney got in for 9 years and the rate of rise still didn't change much.
We got another brief interlude in 1993 when Campbell got in.
And then Mr. Proofistheproof himself got in and for 3 years the rise continued. It plateaued about 1997/1998 and then started dropping. That's likely the only obvious good thing aPAULing Martin did when he was FinMin or PriMin.
Then we get Harpy or Mr. Transparent or Mr. Personality (depending on my mood), as I like to call him. hehe
He started his stint in 2006 and the debt continued to drop for a bit and then rise again. Then about 2 years ago started to drop again. So economically it looks as if Harpy isn't the evil gremlin you Glibs think and blaming him for the entire national debt is simply inane.

It sure looks to me as if Mr. Turdeau started the debt snowball rolling and accumulating.

 

[darkbeaver]

So the debt is associated with liberal social progress. Mr Trudeau sold the nation to the international bankers.

STEERING THE REVOLUTION

Posted on January 29, 2014
http://mohawknationnews.com/blog/2014/01/29/steering-the-revolution/#respond



MNN. Jan. 29, 2014. Canada and the true globalists are trying to steal the agenda through “Idle No More Inc.”. When Idle No More incorporated, it became registered as a sub-corporation within the rules of the Corporation of Canada. Idle No More Inc. is not grassroots, grassroots don’t have millions of dollars to set up dozens of workshops all over the country at the same time. The globalists remain in charge. “Idle No More Inc.”

It’s time to take these bankers’ money machine away. Until then nothing will change. Pierre Elliott Trudeau put Canada into debt slavery with the international bankers. In 1974 he fraudulently gave power to the private banks to print the money at interest. For the first time in Canadian history Canadians had to learn the meaning of “deficit”. Every child at birth owes $85,000 to the banksters, the Crown. [Look on internet for each person’s share of the national deficit]. The plan is no one will ever get out of debt.
Today Trudeau’s son, Justin, is seeking to become the CEO of the Corporation of Canada. He should be fixing what his father broke. When the money machine is taken away, then the bankers will be charged with fraud and theft and put in jail, as they were in Iceland. “Iceland Revolution”. The debt is fiction. It does not exist. No one owes them one cent.
Now is the time for the band and tribal council grid over our lands and resources that serves Canada to be dissolved. Without these corporate Injuns, Canada has to deal directly with their true landlords.
For our fellow victims [Canadian citizens] of the broken British/Canadian corruption system, the solution is for each community to form a self-sufficient council to take care of each other through the provisions of the Guswentha/Two Row Wampum under the Kaianerehkowa, the law of this land.
Grassroots, anyone?

Pete Seeger. Two Row Wampum supporter. Pete Seeger, 1919-2014 said: “Songs are funny things. They can slip across borders. proliferate in prisons, penetrate hard shells. I always believed that the right song at the right moment could change history”. Pete Seeger. “Turn,

 

[Cannuck]

If I was a conservative that is what I would say too.

Conservatives, like the Republicans south of the border stopped being fiscally conservative years ago. They have abandoned those ideals in favour of social conservatism. That is why a truly fiscal conservative like myself have little value for Harper and his supporters. They simply value their socially conservative agenda over fiscal responsibility. Even the socialist Obama has managed to significantly reduce the U.S. deficit and the so-cons are quite upset about it.

 

[tay]

So did taxes. Up under Libs, down under Cons.

Libs also lowered Corporate taxes......


Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, Canadian study finds

Corporate income tax cuts have lead to slower economic growth, a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) has found – a finding that flies in the face of claims by both Liberal and Conservative governments in the last three decades that corporate tax reductions contributed to faster economic growth.

The study, by Unifor economist and CCPA research associate Jordan Brennan, examined the relationship between the Canadian corporate tax regime and various dimensions of growth and finds there is no empirical or statistically significant relationship between corporate tax cuts and growth.

“Corporate income tax cuts could go down as one of the great Canadian public policy blunders of recent times,” Brennan said. “The problem is the facts stubbornly refuse to support the notion that corporate tax cuts accelerate growth.”

According to the study, the level of business investment since 1980 has hovered around a historic low, despite several rounds of cuts to corporate income taxes, while employment growth has been anaemic among large firms and the business sector, and the GDP per capita has grown at its slowest rate since the Depression-laden 1930s.

“In short, corporate tax reductions happened alongside under-investment, a job crisis, and deep stagnation,” says Brennan. “Far from spawning higher levels of business investment and GDP growth, corporate income tax reform has indirectly fostered slower growth.”

The study aims to build an argument for why a moderate degree of stagnation is desirable from a business standpoint.

The hoarding of corporate cash, which is generally recognized as having a depressing effect on growth, is closely associated with the increased corporate and national income share of large firms, the author argues.

“By reducing corporate income tax rates, Canadian governments contributed to the increased income position of large firms,” Brennan says. “Instead of investing their increased earnings into growth-expanding industrial projects, Canada’s corporate sector—especially its largest firms—has stockpiled cash. This ‘dead money’ is one ingredient in the heightened stagnation of recent times.”

Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, study finds | ThinkPol

 

[Curious Cdn]

Conservatives, like the Republicans south of the border stopped being fiscally conservative years ago. They have abandoned those ideals in favour of social conservatism. That is why a truly fiscal conservative like myself have little value for Harper and his supporters. They simply value their socially conservative agenda over fiscal responsibility. Even the socialist Obama has managed to significantly reduce the U.S. deficit and the so-cons are quite upset about it.

I would say that one of the reasons for the shift was after the effect that tight money had on both Canada and the US during the Great Depression led by Conservatives on both sides of the border. Making money scarce and hard to get deepened the crisis immensely. There is a general recognition now that Keynsianism works IF you run deficits during downturns ONLY and pay them right off during good times ... which virtually no one ever does.

 

[taxslave]

Libs also lowered Corporate taxes......


Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, Canadian study finds

Corporate income tax cuts have lead to slower economic growth, a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) has found – a finding that flies in the face of claims by both Liberal and Conservative governments in the last three decades that corporate tax reductions contributed to faster economic growth.

The study, by Unifor economist and CCPA research associate Jordan Brennan, examined the relationship between the Canadian corporate tax regime and various dimensions of growth and finds there is no empirical or statistically significant relationship between corporate tax cuts and growth.

“Corporate income tax cuts could go down as one of the great Canadian public policy blunders of recent times,” Brennan said. “The problem is the facts stubbornly refuse to support the notion that corporate tax cuts accelerate growth.”

According to the study, the level of business investment since 1980 has hovered around a historic low, despite several rounds of cuts to corporate income taxes, while employment growth has been anaemic among large firms and the business sector, and the GDP per capita has grown at its slowest rate since the Depression-laden 1930s.

“In short, corporate tax reductions happened alongside under-investment, a job crisis, and deep stagnation,” says Brennan. “Far from spawning higher levels of business investment and GDP growth, corporate income tax reform has indirectly fostered slower growth.”

The study aims to build an argument for why a moderate degree of stagnation is desirable from a business standpoint.

The hoarding of corporate cash, which is generally recognized as having a depressing effect on growth, is closely associated with the increased corporate and national income share of large firms, the author argues.

“By reducing corporate income tax rates, Canadian governments contributed to the increased income position of large firms,” Brennan says. “Instead of investing their increased earnings into growth-expanding industrial projects, Canada’s corporate sector—especially its largest firms—has stockpiled cash. This ‘dead money’ is one ingredient in the heightened stagnation of recent times.”

Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, study finds | ThinkPol

Coming from a leftard freeloader group that finding is not surprising. Meaning it has no basis in reality.

 

[pgs]

Libs also lowered Corporate taxes......


Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, Canadian study finds

Corporate income tax cuts have lead to slower economic growth, a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) has found – a finding that flies in the face of claims by both Liberal and Conservative governments in the last three decades that corporate tax reductions contributed to faster economic growth.

The study, by Unifor economist and CCPA research associate Jordan Brennan, examined the relationship between the Canadian corporate tax regime and various dimensions of growth and finds there is no empirical or statistically significant relationship between corporate tax cuts and growth.

“Corporate income tax cuts could go down as one of the great Canadian public policy blunders of recent times,” Brennan said. “The problem is the facts stubbornly refuse to support the notion that corporate tax cuts accelerate growth.”

According to the study, the level of business investment since 1980 has hovered around a historic low, despite several rounds of cuts to corporate income taxes, while employment growth has been anaemic among large firms and the business sector, and the GDP per capita has grown at its slowest rate since the Depression-laden 1930s.

“In short, corporate tax reductions happened alongside under-investment, a job crisis, and deep stagnation,” says Brennan. “Far from spawning higher levels of business investment and GDP growth, corporate income tax reform has indirectly fostered slower growth.”

The study aims to build an argument for why a moderate degree of stagnation is desirable from a business standpoint.

The hoarding of corporate cash, which is generally recognized as having a depressing effect on growth, is closely associated with the increased corporate and national income share of large firms, the author argues.

“By reducing corporate income tax rates, Canadian governments contributed to the increased income position of large firms,” Brennan says. “Instead of investing their increased earnings into growth-expanding industrial projects, Canada’s corporate sector—especially its largest firms—has stockpiled cash. This ‘dead money’ is one ingredient in the heightened stagnation of recent times.”

Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, study finds | ThinkPol

So the study shows exactly what Unifor wanted the study to show .
You remember the saying . figures lie and liars figure .

 

[davesmom]

Any government that want to reduce the debt would have to cut social programs. If they did that they wouldn't be 'the government' much longer! The people wouldn't stand for it.
We are a nation of spoiled brats wanting to have everything but not understanding that 'everything' costs more than we can afford.
PET started us off down the path of debt which led to deficit which led to more debt and more deficit. It's a snowball rolling down a hill getting bigger and bigger with every roll and the people won't give up a single luxury to stop it.
So what are we complaining about?
The Liberals are all for spending. They were voted in by voter who knew their intentions to increase the deficit again and deluded themselves to think that it would be beneficial by creating jobs. Truth is, no one ever got out of debt by borrowing. That is a fantasy dreamed up by politicians.

 

[Jinentonix]

The problem is, once upon a time corporate tax cuts did help the economy. Since then however, investor protection laws have completely screwed things up. Publicly traded companies must now do everything in their power to maintain or increase ROIs to their investors. That means corporate tax cuts land right in investors' pockets.

 

[MHz]

Here is why the national debt is where it is, you all bought the lie, hook, line and sinker. You should be clued in by the 2:00 minute mark.

 

[petros]

Libs also lowered Corporate taxes......


Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, Canadian study finds

Corporate income tax cuts have lead to slower economic growth, a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) has found – a finding that flies in the face of claims by both Liberal and Conservative governments in the last three decades that corporate tax reductions contributed to faster economic growth.

The study, by Unifor economist and CCPA research associate Jordan Brennan, examined the relationship between the Canadian corporate tax regime and various dimensions of growth and finds there is no empirical or statistically significant relationship between corporate tax cuts and growth.

“Corporate income tax cuts could go down as one of the great Canadian public policy blunders of recent times,” Brennan said. “The problem is the facts stubbornly refuse to support the notion that corporate tax cuts accelerate growth.”

According to the study, the level of business investment since 1980 has hovered around a historic low, despite several rounds of cuts to corporate income taxes, while employment growth has been anaemic among large firms and the business sector, and the GDP per capita has grown at its slowest rate since the Depression-laden 1930s.

“In short, corporate tax reductions happened alongside under-investment, a job crisis, and deep stagnation,” says Brennan. “Far from spawning higher levels of business investment and GDP growth, corporate income tax reform has indirectly fostered slower growth.”

The study aims to build an argument for why a moderate degree of stagnation is desirable from a business standpoint.

The hoarding of corporate cash, which is generally recognized as having a depressing effect on growth, is closely associated with the increased corporate and national income share of large firms, the author argues.

“By reducing corporate income tax rates, Canadian governments contributed to the increased income position of large firms,” Brennan says. “Instead of investing their increased earnings into growth-expanding industrial projects, Canada’s corporate sector—especially its largest firms—has stockpiled cash. This ‘dead money’ is one ingredient in the heightened stagnation of recent times.”

Corporate tax cuts contributed to slower economic growth, study finds | ThinkPol

In the 1980s what was the interest rate? How old were you in oh, say 1982?

 

[mentalfloss]

I think all governments hold responsibility for the state of the economy but what should also be under scrutiny is the debt to GDP ratio.

 

[Locutus]

September 7, 2015 The press and the Liberals would have you believe that the Conservatives are responsible for the Debt and the Country's largest deficit.

It all sounds believable until you look carefully at the last forty or so years and adjust for inflation. Here is a chart showing who was in power going back to 1957:

path to deficit enlightenment here kids:

Dave's Insight, an on-line opinion page

*bump because it's a nice bitch-slap to the entitled ones.

and because, metrics.

 

[petros]

How much debt has Justin added in just a couple of weeks?