Liberals DOUBLE DOWN on DEFICITS
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sit...da-by-prime-ministers-since-confederation.pdf
Table 2: Prime Ministers Assessed and Their Allotted Tenures
Prime Minister Allotted Tenure
Sir John A. Macdonald Tenure 1: 1867-1872
Tenure 2: 1878-1890
Alexander Mackenzie 1873-1877
Sir John Abbott 1891
Sir John Thompson 1892-1894
Sir Mackenzie Bowell 1895
Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1896-1911
Sir Robert Borden 1912-1919
Arthur Meighen 1920-1921
William Lyon Mackenzie King Tenure 1: 1922-1930
Tenure 2: 1936-1948
R.B. Bennett 1931-1935
Louis St. Laurent 1949-1956
John Diefenbaker 1957-1963
Lester B. Pearson 1963-1967
Pierre E. Trudeau Tenure 1: 1968-1978
Tenure 2: 1980-1984
Joe Clark 1979
Brian Mulroney 1985-1993
Jean Chretien 1994-2003
Paul Martin 2004-2005
Stephen Harper 2006-2015
Justin Trudeau 2015-2019
Figure 1: Federal Gross Debt, 1870-2019 (in 2017 $)
page 6
This is from another site
End
of
Fiscal
Year Net Debt
$Billions[2] (Adjusted for
inflation, 2017[3])
as % of
GDP GDP
$Billions[4] 1962 14.8 (121.4) 33.0% 44.9 1971 20.3 (126.1) 20.6% 98.4 1981 91.9 (240.2) 25.5% 360.5 1991 377.7 (592.0) 55.1% 685.4 1997 562.9 (811.1) 63.8% 882.7 2002 511.9 (664.2) 44.4% 1,152.9 2008 457.6 (515.3) 31.4% 1,453.6 2009 463.7 (495.1) 32.8% 1,413.3 2010 519.1 (579.5) 35.5% 1,458.8 2011 551.4 (599.19) 36.9% 1,495.7 2012 583.6 (626.4) 38.3% 1,576.8 2013 609.4 (645.5) [5] 37.4% 1,608.5 2014 611.9 (634.78) [6] 32.5% 1,649.2 2015 612.3 (627.21) [6] 31.0%
2016 616.0 (623.17) [7] 31.1%
Table 2: Prime Ministers Assessed and Their Allotted Tenures
Prime Minister Allotted Tenure
Sir John A. Macdonald Tenure 1: 1867-1872
Tenure 2: 1878-1890
Alexander Mackenzie 1873-1877
Sir John Abbott 1891
Sir John Thompson 1892-1894
Sir Mackenzie Bowell 1895
Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1896-1911
Sir Robert Borden 1912-1919
Arthur Meighen 1920-1921
William Lyon Mackenzie King Tenure 1: 1922-1930
Tenure 2: 1936-1948
R.B. Bennett 1931-1935
Louis St. Laurent 1949-1956
John Diefenbaker 1957-1963
Lester B. Pearson 1963-1967
Pierre E. Trudeau Tenure 1: 1968-1978
Tenure 2: 1980-1984
Joe Clark 1979
Brian Mulroney 1985-1993
Jean Chretien 1994-2003
Paul Martin 2004-2005
Stephen Harper 2006-2015
Justin Trudeau 2015-2019
Figure 1: Federal Gross Debt, 1870-2019 (in 2017 $)
page 6
This is from another site
End
of
Fiscal
Year Net Debt
$Billions[2] (Adjusted for
inflation, 2017[3])
as % of
GDP GDP
$Billions[4] 1962 14.8 (121.4) 33.0% 44.9 1971 20.3 (126.1) 20.6% 98.4 1981 91.9 (240.2) 25.5% 360.5 1991 377.7 (592.0) 55.1% 685.4 1997 562.9 (811.1) 63.8% 882.7 2002 511.9 (664.2) 44.4% 1,152.9 2008 457.6 (515.3) 31.4% 1,453.6 2009 463.7 (495.1) 32.8% 1,413.3 2010 519.1 (579.5) 35.5% 1,458.8 2011 551.4 (599.19) 36.9% 1,495.7 2012 583.6 (626.4) 38.3% 1,576.8 2013 609.4 (645.5) [5] 37.4% 1,608.5 2014 611.9 (634.78) [6] 32.5% 1,649.2 2015 612.3 (627.21) [6] 31.0%
2016 616.0 (623.17) [7] 31.1%
Put all this in a letter to the appropriate branches of the Gov't requesting this and then post the letter on the forum with their response confirming this or else KEEP YOUR F*****G TRAP SHUT!
You shouldn't include CPP it isn't taxpayer money, it's Employer/Employee money the only mistake is that the Gov. is in control of it and you will never, ever get all your money back, I do agree with a user fee for health care that would free up a lot of baby sitting weekends
You shouldn't include CPP it isn't taxpayer money, it's Employer/Employee money the only mistake is that the Gov. is in control of it and you will never, ever get all your money back, I do agree with a user fee for health care that would free up a lot of baby sitting weekends
Semantics.
Well, at least the American public got their consolation prize in advance in the form of an Obama phone.
That deal worked out super extra gooder for the USA
That deal worked out super extra gooder for the USA
Uhm, not quite. In the first four years of the Chretien government Canada was in recession. Chretien ran big deficits for those first four years. Then, as the world economy improved and money started flooding into federal coffers - in no small measure from the GST he had campaigned against, and because he slashed health care, education and social safety funding FAR worse than Harper, he was able to start building surpluses.
This is misleading. The Harper budget deficits were as follows:
2007-8 +9.6b
2008-9 -5.8b start of recession
2009-10 -33.4b start of incentive funding
2010-11 -55.6b height of incentive funding
2011-12 -26.3b deficit cut in half as incentive funding is slowed
2012-13 -18.4b
2013-14 --5.2b
2014-15 balance
So we can see Harper dealing with a terrible recession through incentive spending, but let's not forget the three opposition parties were not exactly opposed to this. In fact, they absolutely insisted on it, to the point of forming an agreement to end his minority government so they could take over and deliver the incentive spending they said we desperately needed. And their only complaint was that there wasn't enough of it.
Here's what's more mitigating. Trudeau the elder took over with virtually no debt. He doubled spending in his first term in office, and then doubled it again in his second. Clearly it would have been ah, politically difficult, to also double taxes, so he just borrowed the money. Then came a recession. Did he stop borrowing? Of course not! You can't suddenly slash your budget deeply as a recession hits! So he kept borrowing, only now he was borrowing at double digit rates. The debt exploded, and the payments took more of the budget, which required more borrowing.
Then Mulroney took over. His choices were sub-optimal. He could either slash the spending in a terrible stagflation recession, or continue to borrow money. He cut somewhat, as he could, but also had to borrow money. Again, under double digit interest rates. The important thing to remember is that he managed to get the operating budget down to the point where, if it weren't for all that debt, he would have had a balanced budget.
Why did he have all that debt? Because of Trudeau the elder.
Now we have Trudeau the younger, who learned from papa that if you give people lots of stuff but don't make them pay for it, they'll vote for you. What he failed to learn from papa is that this is okay until you hit a bad recession and interest rates rise. Then it bites you on the ass.
And btw, I loathed Trudeau the elder, Mulroney, and Chretien (I tolerated Harper), so I believe I'm being somewhat unbiased.
The Liberal in charge of the infrastructure plan crossed the floor to keep his job under Harper.
Oil has levelled out. If it drops again the debt to GDP cushion goes out the window.
This chart shows he didn't do anything but increase out debt by $30B
Why worry about the debt when we give away billion as interest we shouldn't be paying to anybody.
Just the interest on government debt now equals $7,000 a year for a Canadian family of four: Fraser Institute | Financial Post
In 2016/17, interest payments on the federal debt will total $25 billion, which is more than Ottawa plans to spend on transfers to Canadian families in the form of child benefits ($22 billion). It’s also equivalent to the federal government’s planned budgetary deficit ($25 billion). Put differently, in the absence of federal interest payments, Ottawa could wipe out its deficit this year, despite its marked increase in program spending.
But Canadians, of course, are not only responsible for servicing federal debt; they have to service provincial and local government debt, too. When we add up all the interest payments of the various governments across the country (federal, provincial and local), the total in 2015/16 is $63 billion — approximately equal to the $64 billion Canada spent on public primary and secondary education in 2013/14, the latest year of available data.
Perhaps most telling of all, if we were to distribute the total annual cost of servicing Canada’s government debt equally, each Canadian’s share would be $1,752. That’s more than $7,000 for a family of four. Clearly, there’s a cost to government debt.
From the parts that is there could you tell who ran up the debt?? We quit printing our own money in 1974 and that is right about where the dept skyrockets. Must be just a coincident eh??
Canada’s federal debt | qualicuminstitute.ca
Canada's $614,307,000,000.00 Debt Solution - Federal Politics - Political Forums
This was essentially a criminal act, there was never any referendum of Canadian taxpayers that agreed to let the government start borrowing money from banks and investors. Approximately 70% of the 600+ Billion dollar federal debt is from compounding interest. If they had just printed the money from the Bank of Canada we would only have a 200 billion dollar excess currency in circulation instead of this monsterous 600 billion debt that is compounding and threatening to destroy our civilization.
Seems like our Government, and their closest friends, is our most dangerous enemy.
Typical response from a blow hard!
You shouldn't include CPP it isn't taxpayer money, it's Employer/Employee money the only mistake is that the Gov. is in control of it and you will never, ever get all your money back, I do agree with a user fee for health care that would free up a lot of baby sitting weekends
I guess I missed that, but it's all a moot point anyway, as he's still years from being eligible from collecting any pensions by which time he'll have no intention of turning any of them down. Like Sleepy says best not to respond to his bull shit!