Fiscal Record of Canadian Political Parties
andyt @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:46 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Derby, recessions don't start overnight. Of course they started going into deficit before the recession.
Yet your guy came out with "if we're going to have a recession, we would have had it by now. This is a good time to buy stocks."
DerbyX @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:47 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Lets be clear they were reported going into deficit before the recession hit and the economists were clear. Unnecessary & ill-advised tax cuts that did nothing to help.
In addition, those stimulus measures demanded were supposed to be paid for by the roll back of tax cuts like the corp tax and they signed off when it was some 30 billion less then what it ended up being.
In addition, those stimulus measures demanded were supposed to be paid for by the roll back of tax cuts like the corp tax and they signed off when it was some 30 billion less then what it ended up being.
Derby, recessions don't start overnight. Of course they started going into deficit before the recession.
Only Liberals like yourself consider tax cuts "unnecessary".
So the Liberals and NDP signed off on the stimulus package although they wanted it higher. So your argument that they signed off on a lower package is mute as they in fact, wanted more to be spent.
Yet Harper was the only person claiming it wasn't coming mere months before it hit. Fine financial insight there.
http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/gst/
$1:
In 2009, the federal government’s balance sheet went from showing a surplus of $9.597 billion to a deficit of $5.755 billion. Last year, the deficit was a record $55.6 billion. But how did we get here?
According to a November 2008 assessment by Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, the Tories’ decision to cut the GST, coupled with an increase in government spending caused the deficit—not the global economic crisis. By February 2011, the budget watchdog’s position was much the same: the deficit is structural, caused by policy not recession. The PBO also said that contrary to the federal government’s budget forecast of a surplus for 2015-16, a deficit of $10 billion would remain by mid-decade. “Sustained fiscal actions,” Page reported, are needed to “avoid excessive debt-to-GDP accumulation.”
We called Stephen Gordon, an economist at Laval University, to get his take. “Yes, the Conservatives caused the structural deficit,” he said, adding that cutting the GST was a mistake. “They basically blew $10 to $12 billion, and that’s the PBO’s estimate for the structural deficit in 2015. But at the time [when GST was cut in 2006 and 2008], we were taking those $10 to $15 billion surpluses for granted.”
According to a November 2008 assessment by Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, the Tories’ decision to cut the GST, coupled with an increase in government spending caused the deficit—not the global economic crisis. By February 2011, the budget watchdog’s position was much the same: the deficit is structural, caused by policy not recession. The PBO also said that contrary to the federal government’s budget forecast of a surplus for 2015-16, a deficit of $10 billion would remain by mid-decade. “Sustained fiscal actions,” Page reported, are needed to “avoid excessive debt-to-GDP accumulation.”
We called Stephen Gordon, an economist at Laval University, to get his take. “Yes, the Conservatives caused the structural deficit,” he said, adding that cutting the GST was a mistake. “They basically blew $10 to $12 billion, and that’s the PBO’s estimate for the structural deficit in 2015. But at the time [when GST was cut in 2006 and 2008], we were taking those $10 to $15 billion surpluses for granted.”
OnTheIce @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:51 am
andyt andyt:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Derby, recessions don't start overnight. Of course they started going into deficit before the recession.
Yet your guy came out with "if we're going to have a recession, we would have had it by now. This is a good time to buy stocks."
There's no doubt they kept denying the recession, I don't know why
![[huh]](./images/smilies/icon_scratch.gif "huh?"){kind=icon}
That point doesn't discount the fact that the recession is why we jumped in and spent our brains out.
Regardless of how much was spent or where it was spent, the argument from the Left wouldn't change.
OnTheIce @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:53 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Lets be clear they were reported going into deficit before the recession hit and the economists were clear. Unnecessary & ill-advised tax cuts that did nothing to help.
In addition, those stimulus measures demanded were supposed to be paid for by the roll back of tax cuts like the corp tax and they signed off when it was some 30 billion less then what it ended up being.
In addition, those stimulus measures demanded were supposed to be paid for by the roll back of tax cuts like the corp tax and they signed off when it was some 30 billion less then what it ended up being.
Derby, recessions don't start overnight. Of course they started going into deficit before the recession.
Only Liberals like yourself consider tax cuts "unnecessary".
So the Liberals and NDP signed off on the stimulus package although they wanted it higher. So your argument that they signed off on a lower package is mute as they in fact, wanted more to be spent.
Yet Harper was the only person claiming it wasn't coming mere months before it hit. Fine financial insight there.
http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/gst/
$1:
In 2009, the federal government’s balance sheet went from showing a surplus of $9.597 billion to a deficit of $5.755 billion. Last year, the deficit was a record $55.6 billion. But how did we get here?
According to a November 2008 assessment by Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, the Tories’ decision to cut the GST, coupled with an increase in government spending caused the deficit—not the global economic crisis. By February 2011, the budget watchdog’s position was much the same: the deficit is structural, caused by policy not recession. The PBO also said that contrary to the federal government’s budget forecast of a surplus for 2015-16, a deficit of $10 billion would remain by mid-decade. “Sustained fiscal actions,” Page reported, are needed to “avoid excessive debt-to-GDP accumulation.”
We called Stephen Gordon, an economist at Laval University, to get his take. “Yes, the Conservatives caused the structural deficit,” he said, adding that cutting the GST was a mistake. “They basically blew $10 to $12 billion, and that’s the PBO’s estimate for the structural deficit in 2015. But at the time [when GST was cut in 2006 and 2008], we were taking those $10 to $15 billion surpluses for granted.”
According to a November 2008 assessment by Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, the Tories’ decision to cut the GST, coupled with an increase in government spending caused the deficit—not the global economic crisis. By February 2011, the budget watchdog’s position was much the same: the deficit is structural, caused by policy not recession. The PBO also said that contrary to the federal government’s budget forecast of a surplus for 2015-16, a deficit of $10 billion would remain by mid-decade. “Sustained fiscal actions,” Page reported, are needed to “avoid excessive debt-to-GDP accumulation.”
We called Stephen Gordon, an economist at Laval University, to get his take. “Yes, the Conservatives caused the structural deficit,” he said, adding that cutting the GST was a mistake. “They basically blew $10 to $12 billion, and that’s the PBO’s estimate for the structural deficit in 2015. But at the time [when GST was cut in 2006 and 2008], we were taking those $10 to $15 billion surpluses for granted.”
Yes, I know.
However, that doesn't negate the fact that we went into a recession and that explains the massive amount of debt.
Lefties like you keep going on about the deficit and when pointed out why the money was spent, you keep posting this argument.
andyt @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:56 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
andyt andyt:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Derby, recessions don't start overnight. Of course they started going into deficit before the recession.
Yet your guy came out with "if we're going to have a recession, we would have had it by now. This is a good time to buy stocks."
There's no doubt they kept denying the recession, I don't know why
That point doesn't discount the fact that the recession is why we jumped in and spent our brains out.
Regardless of how much was spent or where it was spent, the argument from the Left wouldn't change.
I supported spending during the recession. I think all parties need to take responsibility for the deficit caused by this, because they all pushed for it. I don't think it was managed very well, and there was porkbarelling by the CPC tho. Not that I think the Libs would have done it better. Well not without Paul Martin, whos the guy we should all be bowing down to because of how well we're doing now. That is recognized internationally.
DerbyX @ Wed May 04, 2011 10:58 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Yes, I know.
However, that doesn't negate the fact that we went into a recession and that explains the massive amount of debt.
Lefties like you keep going on about the deficit and when pointed out why the money was spent, you keep posting this argument.
It is the difference between being 20 billion in deficit rather then 50. It is the difference between a temporary one and a structural one, one that was policy driven and not recession driven.
You cons claim you are all about fiscal spending but when it is so painfully explained to you that your guys are anything but you have nothing but excuses.
OnTheIce @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:06 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Yes, I know.
However, that doesn't negate the fact that we went into a recession and that explains the massive amount of debt.
Lefties like you keep going on about the deficit and when pointed out why the money was spent, you keep posting this argument.
It is the difference between being 20 billion in deficit rather then 50. It is the difference between a temporary one and a structural one, one that was policy driven and not recession driven.
You cons claim you are all about fiscal spending but when it is so painfully explained to you that your guys are anything but you have nothing but excuses.
There's no excuses, I don't deny that Harper ran up debt and put himself in a pickle by cutting various taxes. What's painful is lefties ignoring
However, in ways that the article is correct, it's incorrect as well.
Our debt will eliminated by mid-decade and will not be ~10 billion as projected.
DerbyX @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:16 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
There's no excuses, I don't deny that Harper ran up debt and put himself in a pickle by cutting various taxes. What's painful is lefties ignoring
However, in ways that the article is correct, it's incorrect as well.
Our debt will eliminated by mid-decade and will not be ~10 billion as projected.
As we keep trying to explain, we are not ignoring the recession. The non-partisan reports we have lay the blame on policy, not recession.
As for using Harpers numbers how can you justify that considering how wrong he has been?
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/285523
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... le1429339/
http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/02/15/pbo- ... l-deficit/
These are not partisan election claims. This is Harpers APPOINTED man saying this and so far he has been right and Harper has been wrong.
The kicker is that when it turns out years later that Harper is wrong you won't acknowledge it. You'll find some reason why its not his fault.
OnTheIce @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:25 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
There's no excuses, I don't deny that Harper ran up debt and put himself in a pickle by cutting various taxes. What's painful is lefties ignoring
However, in ways that the article is correct, it's incorrect as well.
Our debt will eliminated by mid-decade and will not be ~10 billion as projected.
As we keep trying to explain, we are not ignoring the recession. The non-partisan reports we have lay the blame on policy, not recession.
As for using Harpers numbers how can you justify that considering how wrong he has been?
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/285523
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... le1429339/
http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/02/15/pbo- ... l-deficit/
These are not partisan election claims. This is Harpers APPOINTED man saying this and so far he has been right and Harper has been wrong.
The kicker is that when it turns out years later that Harper is wrong you won't acknowledge it. You'll find some reason why its not his fault.
Yes, you lefties consistently leave out the recession factor in regards to our deficit. You don't separate your argument, you lump all the deficit in as one and blame it on Harpers mismanagement of taxes. Yea, he fucked up on reducing some of the taxes....we know that, but let's not lump all the shit in 1 pile.
As for the deficit, all parties seemed confident that could get back out of debt in the same amount of time (while increasing spending, no doubt).
I don't know why you keep coming at me about denying things and not acknowledging it. I'm able to acknowledge that he'd made mistakes, I've done so in this topic and before. You continue to ignore that as well.
In the end, you're not someone who should point fingers at anyone looking to dodge blame for a party I support. You're an expert at it yourself.
DerbyX @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:28 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Yes, you lefties consistently leave out the recession factor in regards to our deficit. You don't separate your argument, you lump all the deficit in as one and blame it on Harpers mismanagement of taxes. Yea, he fucked up on reducing some of the taxes....we know that, but let's not lump all the shit in 1 pile.
As for the deficit, all parties seemed confident that could get back out of debt in the same amount of time (while increasing spending, no doubt).
I don't know why you keep coming at me about denying things and not acknowledging it. I'm able to acknowledge that he'd made mistakes, I've done so in this topic and before. You continue to ignore that as well.
In the end, you're not someone who should point fingers at anyone looking to dodge blame for a party I support. You're an expert at it yourself.
No we don't. We keep pointing to the reports that deficit was policy based and not recession based. We aren't claiming we would have run surpluses are we? We are claiming we would have run far lower deficits.
IN addition, where have you claimed his tax cuts were mistakes? Seems to me you took me to task for saying just that.
Lemmy @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:33 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Our debt will eliminated by mid-decade and will not be ~10 billion as projected.
Surely you're confusing "debt" and "deficit". If our debt is eliminated in my lifetime, I'll eat my shoe.
OnTheIce @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:40 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
No we don't. We keep pointing to the reports that deficit was policy based and not recession based. We aren't claiming we would have run surpluses are we? We are claiming we would have run far lower deficits.
IN addition, where have you claimed his tax cuts were mistakes? Seems to me you took me to task for saying just that.
Besides you, I have never heard another person speak of the deficit that way. It's almost always referred to ask our "debt" without the mention of either tax cuts or stimulus being a factor.
Check your PM's.
DerbyX @ Wed May 04, 2011 11:52 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
DerbyX DerbyX:
No we don't. We keep pointing to the reports that deficit was policy based and not recession based. We aren't claiming we would have run surpluses are we? We are claiming we would have run far lower deficits.
IN addition, where have you claimed his tax cuts were mistakes? Seems to me you took me to task for saying just that.
Besides you, I have never heard another person speak of the deficit that way. It's almost always referred to ask our "debt" without the mention of either tax cuts or stimulus being a factor.
Check your PM's.
It is our "debt" in that the 560 billion debt belongs to all. When have I claimed otherwise?
I say Harpers "deficit" is his because he is in power. It certainly his when his policies are what made it worse. You are more the happy giving the full deficit Chretien faced for the first few years he was in power despite it being economy based as well.
Proculation @ Wed May 04, 2011 1:23 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_o ... d_Policies
It would be a good read for you andy.
Zipperfish @ Wed May 04, 2011 1:28 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Translation: If I torture the data long enough I can make it confess to anything.
Not at all. I'm not the one making any claims here, just trying to figure out the basis on which someone else is making a claim. But nice attempt.
Translation: Zipperfish is right and I was a fool to ever argue with him. I tip my hat to his insightful and inciteful repartee, and readily, once again, admit defeat at the hands of a superior opponent.
I was just "taking the piss", as the Brits say, with the original comment Lemmy. Sorry if that didn't come across.
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")