Cannuck, that means nothing, any moron could run a surplus in Alberta. Alberta has oil money. Alberta running a surplus is like Saudi Arabia running a surplus, big deal. Anybody, yes even the Conservatives can run a surplus in Alberta.
Con deficits, no surprise.
- Thread starter Avro
- Start date
Cannuck, that means nothing, any moron could run a surplus in Alberta. Alberta has oil money. Alberta running a surplus is like Saudi Arabia running a surplus, big deal. Anybody, yes even the Conservatives can run a surplus in Alberta.
Ummm,
So if we reverse this logic then what?
Seems like the old circular logic conundrum.
Guilty because of who they are and not because of what they do.
Because lets face it when it comes to the Libs and the Cons both parties tend to say one thing and do another.
I think its a reflex that is born into all budding politicians.
They all seem about the same to me, it's just the uniforms that change from time to time.
Its like bitching at the ump when your home team is up to bat.
Your loyal to your tribe or your not.
Trex
Whayt you guys need to do is make up your fricking minds.
Harper introduced a perfectly responsible budget update in December, whereupon all the little lefties in opposition fell into a fit, threatening his gov't.
Sooooo, supposedly caving to the will of the people:roll:, as represented by the majority who voted Lib, NDP, or BQ, he is now co-operating and driving the bloody country to the poorhouse by shoveling cash off of the ship of state as quickly as possible.
Which is what you wanted.....isn't it?
If not, why didn't you vote Conservative?????
So are all of you (the ones bashing Harper, Bush, Republicans & Conservatives
both past and present) with your complaints stating that Canada should NOT post
a deficit no matter what is going on with the world economy which includes all of
our largest trading partners in the here and now, and for the immediate future?8O
both past and present) with your complaints stating that Canada should NOT post
a deficit no matter what is going on with the world economy which includes all of
our largest trading partners in the here and now, and for the immediate future?8O
I wouldn't argue that point. I simply pointed out that your farcical statement "I don’t know of any Conservative politician, in USA or Canada who has managed to have a surplus in recent memory" was...well...farcical. I could have also mentioned Saskatistan which was also in surplus territory despite having no more oil in the ground than they had under the Lorne Calvert or Roy Romanow governments.
What ideologues like yourself fail to understand is that "to deficit or not to deficit" has far more to with the public mood or appetite than the political leanings of the man or woman in office.
ok, I am all fed up now (had lunch).
I asked why, because I suspected that Avro's demand for an explanation had a personal motive rather than an objective one.
Anyway, does it really matter that Martin showed a surplus when he was finance minister? Or does it matter that he did it at the expense of seniors and students?
Does it matter that Harpy will show a deficit? Or does it matter if he is able to help Canada stay relatively stable?
Um, the comment about cons being intellectual cowards is just childish. It's like saying Germans are anti-Jew. Or The religious are anti-science.
I asked why, because I suspected that Avro's demand for an explanation had a personal motive rather than an objective one.
Anyway, does it really matter that Martin showed a surplus when he was finance minister? Or does it matter that he did it at the expense of seniors and students?
Does it matter that Harpy will show a deficit? Or does it matter if he is able to help Canada stay relatively stable?
Um, the comment about cons being intellectual cowards is just childish. It's like saying Germans are anti-Jew. Or The religious are anti-science.
Harper sold out his Conservative base because of his greed to hang onto power at all costs.
I have a feeling that the pre release of the deficit numbers is only a ruse to find out if Canadians really want this.
The Conservatives should reconsider and change their plan to dollar matched with province and municipality.
This means if the province and the municipality don’t want to invest then federal government should not have to.
I hope the towns of Oshawa, Oakville and Windsor putting up some of the auto bailout money because it’s these towns that will benefit the most.
If the Conservative party is to survive another election they have to stand firm on their core values and promises.
If the Conservatives insist on this budget with the large deficit then we will have to endure another election because I can’t see the Governor General opting for a coalition government.
When the government falls and the election is called then the Liberals will get their majority because when you think about it no one wants to elect a lying Conservative.
The last lying Conservative to fall was the one who tinkered with the National Energy Program and to make it worst he jumped off and let the woman go down with the ship.
When you think of it the Liberals has what it takes to lead a nation.
I have a feeling that the pre release of the deficit numbers is only a ruse to find out if Canadians really want this.
The Conservatives should reconsider and change their plan to dollar matched with province and municipality.
This means if the province and the municipality don’t want to invest then federal government should not have to.
I hope the towns of Oshawa, Oakville and Windsor putting up some of the auto bailout money because it’s these towns that will benefit the most.
If the Conservative party is to survive another election they have to stand firm on their core values and promises.
If the Conservatives insist on this budget with the large deficit then we will have to endure another election because I can’t see the Governor General opting for a coalition government.
When the government falls and the election is called then the Liberals will get their majority because when you think about it no one wants to elect a lying Conservative.
The last lying Conservative to fall was the one who tinkered with the National Energy Program and to make it worst he jumped off and let the woman go down with the ship.
When you think of it the Liberals has what it takes to lead a nation.
So what you are saying is that it was important for Fidel to stay in power at any cost, even by sacrificing sound economic principles.
If he really felt strongly about not running a huge deficit, he could have let the opposition take over. I doubt if the opposition government would have survived more than a few months. Then Fidel could go to the people as a man of principle, as somebody who puts sound fiscal management above politics.
But he clearly doesn’t, according to you. When it was a choice between losing office and running a huge deficit (which would put Mulroney to shame), he chose the latter. But then why not, borrow and spend sums up just about the entire economic policy of Conservatives.
Sounds like what Martin did when he bribed Layton to lend support.
It's a possibility.
Tough to say when they aren't leading it. I've heard Iggy say some pretty dense things, just as I've heard Harpy say dense things. In the past, some Linerals have done ok, some crappy.
So can you give us an idea of what it takes to lead Canada?
Myself, I would sooner have someone to govern the nation, but that's just me.
BS the Libeals have what it takes. If there is one person in this country I don't trust in the least it's Ignatieff. He is going to do all he can to topple Harper and only for his own selfish interests. The world is in a deficit. It is not the Conservative fault. Only those of you who cannot see past the Liberal Party would believe it's their fault. Not good thinking.
What ideologues like yourself fail to understand is that "to deficit or not to deficit" has far more to with the public mood or appetite than the political leanings of the man or woman in office.
That may be the conservative position, Cannuck. I take the position that deficit is always bad. Sometimes it may be necessary, it may be the lesser of two evils, but it is never good.
It is like family borrowing money (leaving aside the mortgage or education, there something concrete is achieved for borrowed money). If it is an emergency (such as somebody losing their job, or medical expenses in the case of Americans), it may be necessary to borrow to stave off the emergency. But that does not make borrowing good, borrowing is always bad.
In this case, borrowing may be the necessary evil. But Fidel gets the blame for frittering all the Liberal surplus away. If he had been running 10 or 15 billion $ surplus today, he may have got away with only a small amount of deficit (and not the deficit at which Mulroney would look with envy).
So I don’t agree with the Conservative position (that deficit is good or bad according to the mood of the people). In my opinion, deficit is always bad, though sometimes a necessary evil.
That may be the conservative position, Cannuck. I take the position that deficit is always bad. Sometimes it may be necessary, it may be the lesser of two evils, but it is never good.
It is like family borrowing money (leaving aside the mortgage or education, there something concrete is achieved for borrowed money). If it is an emergency (such as somebody losing their job, or medical expenses in the case of Americans), it may be necessary to borrow to stave off the emergency. But that does not make borrowing good, borrowing is always bad.
In this case, borrowing may be the necessary evil. But Fidel gets the blame for frittering all the Liberal surplus away. If he had been running 10 or 15 billion $ surplus today, he may have got away with only a small amount of deficit (and not the deficit at which Mulroney would look with envy).
So I don’t agree with the Conservative position (that deficit is good or bad according to the mood of the people). In my opinion, deficit is always bad, though sometimes a necessary evil.
The Liberal Party picked Dion over Ignatieff. My question is what do they know about Iggy that made them choose a dufus like Dion over him?
It is entirely the Conservatives’ fault. When Fidel came to power, his first action was to get rid of all the surplus, by giving tax cuts to the rich (in that he was following his idol, Bush, only he didn’t’ go as far as Bush, he didn’t incur any deficit). At the stroke of a pen, he wiped away all the surplus and started living from paycheck to paycheck (I think he ran into deficit for two months in 2008, but was back again in slight surplus).
Well, we all know what happens to a family who lives from paycheck to paycheck. Any unforeseen emergency and they are wiped out. Same thing is happening to Canada today, pretty soon we may be pining for the good old days of Mulroney, with ‘only’ 40 billion $ deficit.
Oh, I absolutely agree.
I am disgusted with Harper et al.
They should have stood their ground, especially as the opposition's main problem was being cut off public funds.....if the Libs had been given gov't with a coalition that de facto included the BQ, with Dion as PM??????
The coaltion would have worn blame for the economic mess.
as well, the coalition would have been blamed for tumbling the gov't simply because of Party greed for public money.
And Harper would have had the unofficial inclusion of the BQ as part of the gov't as a weapon come the next election............AND whatever disgusting bribes the Lib/NDP paid them for support...........
Can you say Conservative majority?
But Harper lost his nerve.
Unfortunately, we are a better nation with the confused, gutless CPC in power than we would be with a Lib/NDP coalition....
God Forbid Jack EVER get anywhere close to real power...OMG!
BTW:
Budget surplus
The amount by which government revenues exceed government spending.
Budget deficit
The amount by which government spending exceeds government revenues.
If a gov't spends more than what it brings in, but does it for the benefit of the country, what is wrong with it?
Our soaring deficit: Unavoidable, but necessary - Dec. 12, 2008
If the gov't has huge surplus but the country slides downhill, what good is the surplus?
Budget surplus
The amount by which government revenues exceed government spending.
Budget deficit
The amount by which government spending exceeds government revenues.
If a gov't spends more than what it brings in, but does it for the benefit of the country, what is wrong with it?
Our soaring deficit: Unavoidable, but necessary - Dec. 12, 2008
If the gov't has huge surplus but the country slides downhill, what good is the surplus?
I pretty much agree. However, I still think all this flap about the terms is a red herring and what IS important is what is done with the budget funds.
Apparently not as Liberal, NDP, Bloc, Party Kweebeckwaw, Democrats, Repulican and literally thousands upon thousands of municipal governments have run deficits at varying times. It's not a right left issue no matter how hard some ideologues want to make it one.
To begin with, it is not a Conservative opinion. It is my opinion. Secondly, I made no mention of the "morality" of deficits. I spoke of the public mood. Running up huge deficits during the 70's and 80's was not "good" for Canada. It was, however, supported by the majority of Canadians regardless of whether Trudeau, Clark, Turner or Mulroney was in office.
I understand your need to confuse the issue with misquotes though. It focuses attention away from your stated lack of historical understanding of the west and by extension, embarrassing Ontarians.
If a gov't spends more than what it brings in, but does it for the benefit of the country, what is wrong with it?
Our soaring deficit: Unavoidable, but necessary - Dec. 12, 2008
If the gov't has huge surplus but the country slides downhill, what good is the surplus?
Really? Then I suppose when Mulroney was running huge deficits it was benefiting the country (much as the huge deficit incurred by Bush benefited USA tremendously). Same way, I assume that Mike Harris running 6 billion $ deficit was benefiting Ontario immensely, but of course, the 10 billion $ plus surplus that Liberals were running was ruining Canada.
And if 6 billion $ deficit by Harris, 40 billion $ deficit by Mulroney was beneficial to Canada, imagine how much more beneficial the astronomical deficit incurred by Fidel will be. Why we may positively have a paradise in Canada.
Spoken like a true Conservative.
Our soaring deficit: Unavoidable, but necessary - Dec. 12, 2008
If the gov't has huge surplus but the country slides downhill, what good is the surplus?
Really? Then I suppose when Mulroney was running huge deficits it was benefiting the country (much as the huge deficit incurred by Bush benefited USA tremendously). Same way, I assume that Mike Harris running 6 billion $ deficit was benefiting Ontario immensely, but of course, the 10 billion $ plus surplus that Liberals were running was ruining Canada.
And if 6 billion $ deficit by Harris, 40 billion $ deficit by Mulroney was beneficial to Canada, imagine how much more beneficial the astronomical deficit incurred by Fidel will be. Why we may positively have a paradise in Canada.
Spoken like a true Conservative.
Sir Joe,
You and everyone like you needs to get over who in the past was or was not running a deficit or a surplus. Right now the governement must go into deficit. It's life and we all have to deal with it. Trashing government is a waste of time. Particularly past government and since Ignatieff hasn't even lived in this country for most of his life - why have so much confidence in him? Because he's a liberal? Some have suggested in the past weeks here that Harper and Ignatieff are almost identical in their thinking. Personally, some of Ignatieff's comments really scare me. We need to stay the course and get past the nightmare.
What difference does it make where he lived. His ideas are what count.
Having said that, there are some exceptions to the rule. We all know that living in Alberta makes one considerably smarter.