Previous  1  2  3  Next

What happened to Chong?

   

How is that relevant to whether a defecit is "fiscally responsibile?" Is JTs 28.5Bn defecit with over 300Bn of revenue is irresponsible, then what would you call Harpers $55Bn defecit when he had only $218Bn revenue? That's not partisan.

But more to the point, its funny how the recession only excuses Harpers defecits but not the defecits McGuintys or Wynne ran at the same time. That's pretty partisan of YOU. I didn't know Conservatives were uniquely exempt from their own standards.

I say again- defecits don't matter except in the very extreme situations like Greece. Even they wealthiest and most successful businesses have debt at any point in time, that's where they get their investment capital. UK has had debt for over 300 years. US has had debt practically since the civil war. Im sure Donald Trumps credit card has never had a zero balance, it probably gets used dozens of times a day. Government debt is not "like a mortgage", something to be paid off once and for all, as soon as possible. People who say that don't understand the subject.

   

Stimulus.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report- ... /?page=all

And some say it worked.

   

It kept the auto industry on this side of the border from collapsing, as did Obama's stimulus for the American side, both of which prevented the 2008 recession cascading into a continent-wide depression. Which was something Central Canadians forgot all about, having their hides saved due to the largesse of the rest of the country, when Alberta collapsed and the dominant mood was (and still is) "not a damn penny of tax money for the oil industry!".

   

Not to mention the fact that originally there was to be no stimulus spending. Stimulus spending happend because Harper was pressured by the Grits and Dippers to spend all that money.

   

That speech does sound like Harper-lite. The idea that JT doesn't have Canadian values is not a compelling story. I think O'Toole would have been an even better contrast with JT. Then again, I thought Garneau would have been better than Trudeau so what do I know.

   

This one doesn't give you much in the way of facts:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew- ... 81?cmp=rss

but I think it does portend where the personal attacks will be directed when they begin, and they will come.

The CBC drools a bit over what they call his "Social Conservatism." They'll be at him for that soon.

   

Just funny to see partisans like you talk about situations without any context as it helps solidify your point.

Paint the entire picture, not just the parts you want people to see.



Your character is truly starting to show.

Did I say anything about the deficits under McGuinty or are you just trying to put words in my mouth?

Also, I've voted Liberal, NDP and Conservative in the past. I don't label myself, as you do, as anti-anything. Disagreeing with Liberal policies and mistakes doesn't make someone Conservative by default.

Deficits during the time of recession aren't an excuse. They are a reality and a necessity for all governments.

   

   

Thankfully your boy and his puppet master have shown a considerable amount of fiscal restaint since his election.

Speaking of Greece. By the time Scheer gets a chance to govern this country we'll have already given away so much money between Africa, the Middle East and Liberal handouts that we'll be begging Mexico for financial assistance and comparing Harpers's first deficit to Trudeau's is like comparing apples to Oranges. But, with that aside the fact remains that Trudeau is poised to increase deficit spending by 15% from what the Conservatives did while trying to use the "economy" as an excuse for his spendthrift ways as this article points out.

http://business.financialpost.com/fp-co ... p-deficits

But the best part of this whole argument is that Trudeau's painted himself into a corner. If he doesn't spend the money he doesn't have for the things he's claimed he would, he becomes a liar who promised the world to everyone and never intended to deliver or, if he spends like he said he would, he's going to run up our national debt by a staggering amount.


So, you can keep lecturing me about how evil Harper was but, in the end it's the Canadian population that looses and our great grand children will be paying for an unfettered run of Federal Gov't largess since PET's time.

   

Damned feminism.

   

How's his French?

   

I have no issues (and actually give kudos) with the deficits Harper had deficits in 2008, 2009, and 2010 (call it $100 billion or so), but the rest is on him and the Conservatives.

If they hadn't slashed revenues (corporate taxes, GST, etc) so much, then most of those following deficits may not have happened, or at least would have been smaller.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/multimedia/canad ... -1.3042571

Don't forget that his 2015 surplus only happened because he clawed back more than $2 billion from government departments, including DND - without that, 2015 would have been a deficit too.

   

Ooh Fraser Institute alert. Anyway as I've already said, Justin's massively missed target in his first budget is a rank amateur screwup and now rumour has it he will try to hit the reset button soon and prorogue / cabinet shuffle to get on track with a completely revised agenda. We will see

Harper wasn't evil, he was just a continuation of Chretien/Martin so-called "centrist" fiscal policy, combined with outright contempt for the environment

   

Agreed.

The problem now, those structural deficits were never fixed.





That's how budgets work. If I decide to reduce my Rogers bill and my gas usage during the month to balance my budget, that's how I get it done.

Reducing budgets of departments is common, in private and public life and is part of keeping budgets in the red.

   

Previous  1  2  3  Next