Ottawa predicts 4 years of deficits

Name one left of centre social policy initiative introduced by the Chretien government in the 1990's.

Except that, prior to Trudeau's tenure, there was no deficit. Pearson was an excellent Liberal Prime Minister who is widely admired today by all sides. Why didn't he run his government on a deficit. Why was it necessary for Trudeau to do so?

Well, that Maclean's article may or may not exist. How convienent that you're able to cite some phantom article by Maclean's that ostensibly claims Mulroney ran some bad economic programs.

Hey, 3 years ago I saw an article in the New York Times that proved Paul Martin was a Pedophile. I can't cite that article mind you, but I'll just throw it out there and see if it sticks.

Nice try. Do you come from the Bill O'Reilly school of Journalism or the Rush Limbaugh one?

Name one social program initiated by Pierre Trudeau still in existance today.

DerbyX DerbyX:

On a positive note we are still winning the premiership and have advaced in the champions league. likely the only chance I have of any team I support winning anything.

Ah well.

We're going to crush Real!

YNWA!

The Liberals would not have run a deficit. If you believe they would have (and I means all conservative supporters of all stripes) then by all means step aside and let the Liberals form the govt so we can be sure.

The Liberals would most certainly run a deficit in today's economy because the rise in government spending that Canada has had since 2003 is directly proportional to the skyrocketing price of oil.

The price of oil has dropped dramatically since July.

It's a bit harder to bring down government spending so quickly.

DerbyX DerbyX:

The Liberals would not have run a deficit. If you believe they would have (and I means all conservative supporters of all stripes) then by all means step aside and let the Liberals form the govt so we can be sure.

I would normally start off with a preamble that argues you make some good points about the benefit of income tax cuts vs consumption tax cuts, but you don't seem capable of acknowledging it when someone enters into reasonable discussion with you so I'll just cut to the partisan stuff you enjoy so much.

The Liberals would most certainly run a deficit in today's economy because the rise in government spending that Canada has had since 2003 is directly proportional to the skyrocketing price of oil.

The price of oil has dropped dramatically since July.

It's a bit harder to bring down government spending so quickly.

You always think its just about programs. I might mention the gun registry. Thats certainly not right wing thinking.

I will mention SSM. Thats exactly what I mean by progressive (note the term progressive because many "righties" here do support it).

Pro-abortion? Yep.

Its absoluetly amazing though the range of arguments arrayed against the Libs. Here you are saying they were essentially a right of centre party in policy while others say they are stalinist socilaists. Now before you freak out again i just want to point that out just so you can understand the arguments I have come up against.

Name one social program initiated by Pierre Trudeau still in existance today.

So what? Name one piece of equpiment purchased for the Canadian military in WW1 still in use today (besides the sea kings).

That they have been supplanted or eliminated is irrelevant. He provided what was wanted and needed at the time.

I disagree that economist say running a balanced budget is bad during a recession. What they say is that running a deficit isn't an awful proposition. Subtle but distinct difference.

"The real underlying question now is not whether the federal government should run a deficit but how large the planning deficit for 2009/10 should be," says Marc Lee, CCPA Senior Economist. "The federal government has a lead role to play in cushioning the impact of a recession, both through federal programs and in partnership with the provinces."

To that end, the report outlines a six-point fiscal stimulus package that recommends strengthening the EI program and other income support measures, launching a major federal-provincial green infrastructure program, creating a green manufacturing fund, and preventing home foreclosures.

"Government policy should be to prevent a large increase in unemployment while strengthening EI and other supports to assist families and communities," says Lee. "A danger is that Canada will be too timid or will revert to less effective measures like tax cuts. Spending and infrastructure investments are better targeted and deliver a stronger fiscal stimulus than would further tax cuts, which are more likely to go to higher-income families who may save rather than spend the proceeds."

The CCPA argues that Canada needs to do its fair share of a coordinated global effort to fight the coming recession, so it must be bold. It notes that Canada is well-positioned to do so and this also offers an opportunity to retrofit the country’s crumbling infrastructure for a green economy.

I believe it was M. Mulroney that instituted the GST, in place of a manufacturing tax, was it not? Good business sense, making our companies more competitive while trying to balance the books as much as possible.

Though it was an extremely unpopular move since, as I'm told, people don't like to know they're being taxed..

Given that virtually every hard core con is saying our economy is fine and reports that consumer spending is exceeding last year I ask you this:

What reason does Harper have for running a massive deficit when things aren't anywhere near as bad as they should be to warrant a 30 billion dollar deficit?

As for the GST cut, all tax cuts are stimulative, just like all government spending is stimulative. The question is not whether or not the tax cut/government spending is stimulative. The question is by how much and whether it is desirable.