Federal budget cuts ahead for Canada: $2B in cuts, $1B in savings.

[yllus]

International Machine Consortium: Can you keep your idiotic blanket statements out of my thread, please? Nobody cares what you think of "Conservatives". We're discussing a specific party and specific policies.

That said, the attacks have begun: Spending cut 'mean-spirited'

OTTAWA - Opposition MPs ganged up on the Conservative government yesterday over a new slew of spending cuts worth $1 billion, charging it had heartlessly targeted the most vulnerable in society with its "trimming-the-fat" exercise. "Never have Canadians seen such mean-spirited cuts when Ottawa is swimming in money," Liberal MP John McCallum declared in the midst of a raucous question period dominated by verbal sparring over the spending cuts at a time when the government admits it is running a $13.2-billion budget surplus.

In a rare show of unity, Liberal, NDP and Bloc MPs rose in the Commons and denounced the ruling Conservatives as being everything from arrogant to vindictive.

*sigh* Because that surplus money just grew on trees, right guys? It's not like you're overtaxing us or anything. You shouldn't have any surplus - ever. (Outside of a little war chest in case things go really bad.)

 

[Stunt]

Agreed. A good rule of thumb:

Surplus = Overtaxed
Deficit = Overspending

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Stunt
Agreed. A good rule of thumb:

Surplus = Overtaxed
Deficit = Overspending

That would be a great rule of thumb if you started with a debt of 0 - I'd rather see a number of years of double-digit surpluises paying off debt before further major tax cuts.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Stunt
Agreed. A good rule of thumb:

Surplus = Overtaxed
Deficit = Overspending

That would be a great rule of thumb if you started with a debt of 0 - I'd rather see a number of years of double-digit surpluises paying off debt before further major tax cuts.

a) Our debt levels are better than most 1st world nations. If we spend too much on debt reduction we could be sacrificing growth and future wealth.
b) Most of the 1st world nations (Europe for example) have deficits equal to or more than US and EU's debt levels are much higher than ours.
c) Canada is taxed far more than other nations, we are no longer competitive. We are long overdue for significant tax cuts; surpluses for a decade in Ottawa, provices finally balancing their books and debt relative to GDP down at very low levels.

 

[Scouzer]

http://www.bankintroductions.com/canada.html

Not sure how I found this article, but I found it interesting.

Its a few years old, but its worth a 'hm'...

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
Yea, there are Canadians in Afghanistan. Re: Conservatives, U.S. "Conservatives have run up the deficit and poured money into failed wars. The idea that "Conservatives" are inherently superior when it comes to budgeting, I beg to differ. Clinton, described by many "Conservatives" as a Liberal, did a FAR better job of managing the economy than wacknut Bush. Things were good then. They are sh!t now (in the U.S.) Glad to hear things are looking up in Canada, if they truly are. I find Stunt's analysis to be very biased in favor of "Conservatism" in economics even in the face of powerful opposing arguments.

a) American Republicans are not anywhere close to Canadian conservatives. You label Republicans conservatives, meanwhile they do not cut spending and have an aggressive foreign policy. Don't just jump into a conversation with no knowledge beyond your own country.

b) My comments are based on what I deem as facts; you know financial reports, economic data, trends, logic and reason. I am the only one actually backing up my statements with solid information. I don't know where you are getting "powerful opposing arguments" from.

c) Try to stay on topic, this is not a place for your "Conservatism" rants.

They label THEMSELVES Conservatives....

I know there are plenty of Canadians that disagree with you and they appear to have "solid information".

I'll ignore your girlish outburst.

Originally posted by: yllus
International Machine Consortium: Can you keep your idiotic blanket statements out of my thread, please? Nobody cares what you think of "Conservatives". We're discussing a specific party and specific policies.

That said, the attacks have begun: Spending cut 'mean-spirited'

OTTAWA - Opposition MPs ganged up on the Conservative government yesterday over a new slew of spending cuts worth $1 billion, charging it had heartlessly targeted the most vulnerable in society with its "trimming-the-fat" exercise. "Never have Canadians seen such mean-spirited cuts when Ottawa is swimming in money," Liberal MP John McCallum declared in the midst of a raucous question period dominated by verbal sparring over the spending cuts at a time when the government admits it is running a $13.2-billion budget surplus.

In a rare show of unity, Liberal, NDP and Bloc MPs rose in the Commons and denounced the ruling Conservatives as being everything from arrogant to vindictive.

*sigh* Because that surplus money just grew on trees, right guys? It's not like you're overtaxing us or anything. You shouldn't have any surplus - ever. (Outside of a little war chest in case things go really bad.)

If we were going to keep idotic statements out of here where would you go?
Yes, I can see this is a sizzling hot topic. I know I am breathlessly waiting for you and Stunt to continue the droning.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
Wah wah wah

If you want space for your childish, emotional reactions to the word "conservative", there are plenty of other threads in here where you can join in on that particular circle jerk. I guess this would be a sizzling hot topic in your eyes if we tied things back to "wacknut Bush", but I think we'll have to make do without the flash n' sizzle and rely on plain old-fashioned actual policy. :roll:

A Toronto Star editorial said today to use the surplus to aid the working poor:

To start, Harper will have enough money to introduce an earned-income supplement for the working poor as a first step toward alleviating their poverty. Such a top-up for low-wage workers could be delivered like the Conservatives' new child-care benefit, which gives every family with children under 6 a cheque for $100 a month.

In addition, Ottawa could also stop taking money from the working poor by raising the minimum threshold at which income taxes now kick in.

Such measures would do a lot for the 650,000 workers who do not make enough money to provide themselves or their families a decent living.

Other actions taken Monday by Flaherty and Treasury Board President John Baird raise serious concerns that helping the poor is not a priority for the Harper government. Despite Ottawa's massive surplus, Flaherty and Baird also announced a slew of spending cuts that will save the government $1 billion over the next two years, with another $1 billion still to be found in "tighter management" of government operations.

Hmm...raising that minimum threshold isn't the worst idea, but I can see that erasing a lot of tax revenue very quickly so as to make the raise in the threshold minimal and result in a nearly pointless measure (akin to those rebate cheques). Better a carefully managed trim on spending coupled with forthcoming tax cuts, IMO.

Treasury Board president John Baird got a chuckle out of me last night with this one:

"We have uncovered numerous examples of waste and duplication," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said.

The ministers said they expect criticisms, especially from the Liberals. But Baird said the Liberals "could never say no to a bad idea."

lol. I'm glad we pulled off a change of the guard on Ottawa. Hopefully Ignatieff becomes Liberal leader and starts righting that particular boat so as to give us two intelligent leaders. Though I'm more than a little perversely interested to see what happens in Ontario particularly if Rae pulls off a win.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: desy
He did and its needed, but we weren't in the Mid East like we are now and a lot of rust out of basic military infastructure over the last 15 yrs that wasn't being kept up with, now requires a large cash infusion.

Did you go to the Middle East for a vacation? There aren't any Canadian troops in the Middle East unless you guys plan to help in Lebanon.

Are you kidding me?

2300 troops in Afghanistan.

That's not really Middle East

You are splitting hairs with this comment.
Some include in the ME, some don't. Given the current state of affairs and demographic, it's not out of the question to classify the nation as Middle Eastern.

Not to be mean but anybody that thinks Afghanistan is in the Middle East must be using a map produced by Homer Simpson.

Afghanistan is Central Asia. It's a predominantly Muslim country but no Arabs live there.

The current state of affairs in Afghanistan resembles Iraq b/c the US chose to invade/attack both countries without a plan for how to 'win'. Both countries have fragile 'democracies' largely dependent on foreign troops to maintain the semblance of control. Yet both countries clearly have tenuous grips at best as they teeter towards collapse.


Anyway, it was good of the Liberals to sign up for Afghanistan. It's a shame that it's likely a no-win situation . . . in the absence of some dramatic turn of events. But still good news for the Canadian budget. My point is that its foolish to waste it on upgrading the military if you plan nothing better than dumping it into the Afghan theater.

 

[Scouzer]

Upgrading the miltiary if you plan nothing better than Afganistan is a waste...right...

The whole point of the military is to be prepared for what we don't see on the horizon...

So our boys are getting new equipment and experience in Afghanistan which will better prepare for them for what the future undoubtedly holds.

Short sighted Liberal policies FTL.