quote:

Originally posted by exstasie It is imperative that the government starts to spend some money to help get the economy moving.

ie. big infrastructure projects plz

One thing harper wont do that everyone else would have is blame it on Mike Harris LOL!

Seriously though, this sucks but i understand a small deficit as long as it rebounds when the economy does. If we are still running deficits 5 years from now when the economy is doing fine (im looking at you dalton mcguinty) then we will have issues.

Hey, at least he didnt pull an HW Bush or a mcguinty by saying "no new taxes" and then raising them at first chance . And i will give americans credit here, at least they voted HW bush out for lying.

quote:

Originally posted by smuncky ie. big infrastructure projects plz

Ask Bob Rae or Ontario's NDP how well that worked last time

quote:

Originally posted by smuncky ie. big infrastructure projects plz

quote:

Spend on public works: Dodge LONDON, Ont. � Canada should pull itself out of the global economic downturn by investing in public works, says David Dodge, the former governor of the Bank of Canada. http://www.reportonbusiness.com/ser...y/Business/home

^^^ absolutely. many are calling on the U.S. gov't to do the same instead of bailing out private corporations with taxpayer money.


I'm certainly not saying that Canada should not run a deficit...as spending is indeed a primary theory of how to escape from a recession.

the defense of "no one saw this coming" is hardly an excuse for Harper and I don't think he's even making that excuse. If he were to use that as an excuse (and maybe he will do so simply to satisfy an ingnorant public?), it's rather easy to shoot that down, isn't it?

Harper made his "no deficit" comment on election day in mid-Oct.

oil prices peaked in mid-July and have declined ever since. As of election day, oil was at about HALF it's peak in July...so the freefall was in full swing.

How could this NOT affect Canada? The entire Alberta oilsands industry hinges on the price of oil being relatively high. soooooooooo...if oil prices were falling and if Ontario was already crying, wouldn't that have suggested that that the entire country could be facing tough times?

The "credit crisis" has been going on for some time now and anyone who has at any time, including now, predicted with confidence that we are close to being "in the clear" is who I'll call an idealist, at best (others might say 'idiot' is more accurate, lol).

I think it's safe to say that the CPC knew damn well that it would quite likely have to run a deficit (as did the other party leaders). I'm simply enjoying the usually smug Stephen Harper having to suck it up and essentially admit that what he said was a load of crap stated for the CPC's own political benefit. No one wants to hear you might run a deficit when everyone else says they'll have a balanced budget.

The issue isn't that a deficit is going to be run...it's that balancing the books in the first place is what resulted in the need to now run a deficit. Maintaining a surplus could have provided the necessary cushion, so that a deficit wasn't required, no? Again, I'll refer back to my criticism of the CPC's cutting the GST as a poor move, with that money being better spent elsewhere, particularly being able to evaluate each year where to spend it. Previously, debt repayment, infrastructure/cities, etc. Now, that money would be there to do whatever is deemed necessary (still, infrastructure would be good).

Really, this is all about enjoying Harper's foot in his mouth, despite the action being necessary. Just like not taxing income trusts, right?

anyway, another article I read that was interesting, particularly the end:

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/541627

quote:

Bust takes Alberta by surprise Nov 23, 2008 04:30 AM Gillian Steward There's a tiny park in downtown Calgary that is a stark reminder of everything that went wrong in Alberta after the boom of the 1980s and seems to be happening all over again. The park is right next to the Bank of Montreal's 41-storey office tower. It was supposed to be the site of a second tower that was cancelled when the bank realized the boom was over and it wouldn't need all those offices in Western Canada after all. Twenty years later, the price of oil and gas has nosedived again and major projects are about to be cancelled or capped. Just last week, developers of what is slated to be the tallest building in Western Canada declared that they need $1.1 billion to keep the project going. There is already a square-block hole in the ground and a forest of girders and cranes on-site in the heart of downtown Calgary, but the future home of EnCana Corporation is desperately trying to arrange construction financing in a tight credit market. Building permits on five other large projects are set to expire because of inactivity. In some cases, the city has had to seal empty construction pits because the developers have pulled the plug. You would think that in a city, and a province, that has experienced more than a few booms and busts over the past 80 years some sort of common sense would have evolved about how to thrive over the long term in such an economy. But it seems both the private sector and the government are easily blinded by their wishful thinking: this boom will last forever and the money will keep rolling in, they keep telling themselves and everyone else. But it never does. So in the same week that the city's largest construction project was revealed to be in trouble, the finance minister and the premier announced more bad news. The provincial treasury's projected surplus for 2008-2009 dwindled from $8.5 billion to $2 billion because of declining oil and gas prices and will likely dwindle even further. Plans for new roads, schools and hospitals are now on hold. Premier Ed Stelmach also revealed that he is deferring a new royalty regime � which was have to added more than $1.4 billion a year to provincial coffers � because it's simply the wrong time to increase taxes and risk a further slowdown of the petroleum industry. No doubt he wishes former premier Ralph Klein had increased royalties years ago when the industry was awash in profits. None of this would really matter if the provincial government had actually prepared for the bust during the boom by saving some of its billions of dollars in bounty. But it didn't. Instead it spent billions on infrastructure when the cost of labour and materials was skyrocketing; at one point it issued $400 cheques to every man, woman and child in Alberta, a $1.4 billion giveaway; and it cut taxes or kept them low. Alberta still has The Heritage Savings Trust Fund established by former premier Peter Lougheed but it is only worth $15.8 billion. Norway, by contrast, has managed to squirrel away $350 billion since 1991. Stephen Harper's Conservatives have also managed to whittle away billion dollar surpluses. Perhaps they also thought the boom would last forever. Or perhaps all those Alberta Conservatives simply forgot about the famous bumper sticker from the 1980s that read: "Please God, let there be another oil boom. I promise not to piss it away this time." Gillian Steward is a Calgary writer and journalist, and former managing editor of the Calgary Herald. Her column appears every other week.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko After so many years of substantial surpluses, it feels terrible to see a deficit coming. But hey, the conservatives by mandate are supposed to run closer to the break even point, than other parties, which is what they were doing. Now that people are going to be paying less in taxes, and spending less, it only makes sense that our income statement would reflect that. Our banks are doing just fine, but our US auto sector is tanking, which is no surprise. I would be pretty upset if there is yet another bail out for the big three here in Canada, as they have been shooting them selves in the foot for decades, while just sucking up government cash. It is time to move Ontario to a information processing province. Continue to help grow resource industries in the provinces that can support them, and let Mexico produce America's cars. With one of the highest post secondary graduate rates in the Western world, Ontario should not be focusing on maintaining a manufacturing industry. If there are financial stimulus packages, I would really prefer them to sit down with each province, and territory to see where their strengths lie, in order to shore them up for an economic rebound, rather than trying to save ailing and broken sectors.

IMO, If the automotive manufacturing sector is to survive in North America (Canada/US) it will require a complete overhaul. For one, give the north American consumer a fuel efficient, quality vehicle which doesn't fall to pieces before the warranties up. Second, It would also be nice if the UAW/CAW would play fair and grant the manufacturers the ability to innovate their entire production process. Why should a vehicle be shipped between cnd/us 5-7 times before its fully assembled?

Take this Ford Assembly plant in Brazil for example which manufactures 5 different vehicles, on the same production line. Perhaps a reorg under chapter 11 would give the manufactures the leverage needed to negotiate a better contract with the UAW/CAW to make something like this happen. Otherwise I can't see the 3 na auto makers operating in Na in the near future.

Fords most advanced assembly plant

Are the opposition parties for real? They just lost an election, and they are beating the drums again over the new proposed budgets.

Fuck, each one of them needs a swift kick to the head.

Harper never should have cut any taxes.

^^^ what did the GST cut remove in revenue...14 billion? yeah, that would go a long way now, wouldn't it.

dumb move.

by giving it back, it's given back permananently. if it had been kept and spent (debt repayment, public works, whatever), those funds could be allocated each year according to need. so this year, for example, it could be put towards stimulating the economy.

cutting a consumption tax = short-sighted vote grab.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko Are the opposition parties for real? They just lost an election, and they are beating the drums again over the new proposed budgets. Fuck, each one of them needs a swift kick to the head.

Harper wants to revoke the public funding the parties receive for each vote they get, under the guise of being fiscally responsible. In reality, it handcuffs the opposition.

as an NDP spokesperson mentioned this week, the CPC will tell you that since it won the election, it stands to lose the most (as it won the most votse). but in essence, it's fucking over the opposition most because THE CPC IS IN POWER and has UNLIMITED access to public money. who controls the ministries and gov't coffers. THE CPC! how best to stay in power? financially cripple the opposition! lol

and if Keynesian economics tells us that spending (i.e. public works) is the way out of a recession, then why are we just getting an "economic update" from the CPC and not a mini-budget with some stimulus measures?

I certainly don't get it. perhaps someone could explain it to me.

so Flaherty says this 'fiscal update' will be a confidence measure. Fucking CPC...same old tactics.

Dion says the Liberals will join the Bloc and NDP in voting against the measure, meaning the gov't could be toppled.

isn't this a time when the parties should be working together?

this is a clear jab at the opposition. $25 million is a pittance in the overall budget (opposition parties point to it being a pittance in just the INCREASE in spending by the CPC since it took office).

so why do this now? just to hurt the opposition?

I can't see this game of chicken going as far as toppling the gov't. While all parties would be to blame, the CPC should just pull the measure. Ultimately it's their call and ultimately this is aimed to hurt the opposition, so of course the opposition won't support it. How convenient that it comes at a time when the Liberals are about to engage in a leadership campaign.

How would Harper justify ANOTHER $300 million election, all because of not backing off of ~$25 million measure?

this shouldn't be news and shouldn't be happening...

i fully agree with the comments made with respect to never having reduced taxes and the imminent need for infrastructure development.
infrastructure would go along way because it would put canada in a better position to grow faster and more efficiently once recessionary impacts wear off and consumer confidence is restored. my only issue is the fact that historically, government funded projects tend to go way overbudget and never manage to get finished by the original deadline.

i, for one, want to see these government projects conducted by non-government bodies (i.e. private sector. this would promote the growth of jobs that are paid the market rate of pay rather than establishing a new government work force that would be poorly managed and grossly overpaid. the private sector is the most efficient way to get the job done with one caveat - a fair and reasonable bidding process must be undertaken for each project and the spending should be closely monitored. this means that overruns should be limited and significant deficiencies or failure to meet deadlines should be penalized. in europe, they do this all the time and projects get done on time.

when the government starts acting like a business and starts keeping tabs on where the money is going, i truly believe that Canada can be a world leader. foolish spending has been synonomous with govts and big business for years- i am pleased to see that the global financial crisis has opened peoples eyes to the fact that this shit should no longer be tolerated

i apologize for my rant - its just that this is a big issue for me and given the highly intelligent comments that have been made in this thread, i thought i would throw in my own two cents given that fellow contributors would understand.

p.s. adam smith's invisible hand theory still applies in 2008 - the govt should not bail anyone out - bad businesses should fail (sorry big 3)

quote:

Originally posted by funkapotamus For one, give the north American consumer a fuel efficient, quality vehicle which doesn't fall to pieces before the warranties up.

Done.

Toyota Yaris. Honda Fit. Even Nissan Versa. Ditto w/ Toyota Corolla, and other Japanese compacts, etc.

The Corolla has the same mileage (well, 1 MPG off) as the Yaris. The new Fit is rated 1 MPG less than the Yaris AFAIK.

These vehicles will run for 10+ years if you treat them right (and even if you dont). They are all VERY fuel efficient (the best out there currently, diesels and hybrids excluded, of course) and highly reliable -- ie. will NOT fall to pieces before the warranties up... or anytime soon afterward.

(Exterior styling and/or interior appearance (ie. hard plastics, etc) may not appeal to all, but if you're looking for a damn well-made vehicle for a very reasonable, affordable price, then there it is.)

Those "fuel efficient, quality vehicles" are available (in spades!) now to the North American market. (Though, yes, still no where NEAR the same level as in Europe.) ... But blame the US for dictating much of our auto choices... they hate those "cheap hatchbacks" which Europeans are so fond of and that you see EVERYWHERE over there... thus, we in Canada get fucked over much of the time since we usually get what they get (there are exceptions, though). American preferences in cars too strongly dominates what Canada gets, unfortunately.

FINALLY the opposition is forcing the CPC to reconsider it's position of governing as if it has a majority. Long overdue.

quote:

Liberals, NDP in coalition talks Conservatives back down over party funding changes after Liberals, NDP threaten to form coaltion Nov 28, 2008 12:56 PM Randall Palmer Reuters News Agency THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA�Canada's minority government teetered on the edge of collapse today, just six weeks after its re-election, as opposition parties talked of forming a coalition to replace the ruling Conservatives. Both the Conservatives and the three opposition parties were engaged in high-stakes brinkmanship over the fiscal update that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty presented yesterday. The opposition said the update did not contain needed stimulus for an economy increasingly squeezed by the global downturn, but they were most angered by a planned end to direct public financing of political parties. If neither side blinks, the government will likely fall, perhaps as early as Monday, and Canada would either head into a snap election or into some sort of coalition led by the opposition Liberals. "Canadians . . . just might get a Christmas present next week and have the Conservatives turfed, which is exactly what they deserve for their mismanagement of the economy," Thomas Mulcair, deputy leader of the New Democratic Party, told CBC television. The Conservatives were in no mood to back down, however, although they did announce that the first confidence vote on the fiscal update � due on Monday � would not be on the public financing proposal. That would be included in a separate financial bill and no vote on that has yet been set. "We're not anticipating changing our agenda," Kory Teneycke, a top spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, told CTV television, accusing opposition parties of trying to subvert democracy. "This is an attempt to take control of the government without actually having to go to the electorate in a democratic vote," Teneycke said, noting that the Conservatives won a strengthened minority in last month's election. The uncertainty helped push down the Canadian dollar. At 12.10 p.m., it was at $1.2378 to the U.S. dollar, or 80.79 U.S. cents, down from $1.2311 to the U.S. dollar, or 81.23 U.S. cents, at yesterday's close. "A lot of investors are rewarding governments that are showing strong leadership on the financial crisis and it looks like we're (Canada) going to be thrown into disarray," said David Watt, currency strategist at RBC Capital markets. The New Democrats' Mulcair said all three opposition parties � the NDP, the Liberals and the separatist Bloc Quebecois � had consulted with one another more intensively than usual in the last 48 hours. Former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chr�tien and former NDP leader Ed Broadbent were working behind the scenes on possibilities for a coalition government. If the Conservatives lose the vote in the House of Commons, Harper would go to Governor General Michaelle Jean to say he had lost the confidence of Parliament. Harper could ask Jean to call an election but experts said she could also call upon the opposition to see if it could form a government instead. If the Liberals and NDP sought to form a coalition, they would also have to rely on at least the tacit support of the Bloc Quebecois. "They'll have to answer to the Canadian people if they make certain coalitions," Flaherty said.. The Conservatives have 145 members, including two allied independents, in the 308-seat House. The Liberals have 77 and the New Democrats 37 � totaling only 114 and well short of the 155 needed for a majority. They would thus need the backing of the Bloc, which has 49 seats. In recent past political crises, the Liberals have often backed away from bringing down the the government because of their weak political position, but this time they seem to smell power.

Heh. I forgot about GG can ask the opposition leader to form a govt.

Either way, if Libs does form a govt, with Dion at helm... Much lulz will ensue, esp trying to get Bloc to play along.
Actually, the Bloc might have the most to gain if the Libs-NDP coalition does happen, because without Bloc votes, no Libs legislation will get through.

I think the Libs will fold... as usual. If it was just Libs and NDP coalition, I wouldn't think so, but needing Bloc votes... Too unstable, esp with pretty much discredited Dion in charge

I'd have to assume the Libs would push Dion out pretty quickly if a coalition were to become a real possibility. Surely he would step aside too, knowing that he doesn't have the party's support.

bizarre that Chretien and Broadbent have met numerous times to discuss this. Does this lend legitimacy to the process? Symbolic?

interesting.

I think the GG would be hard pressed to NOT allow the opposition the opportunity to form the gov't. Canadians would (or at least should) be outraged at the possibility of ANOTHER $300 million being pissed away on an election (although I'll argue that this time it would indeed be worthwhile, LOL)

I think it's a real possibility. I think the other parties really dislike the CPC in power and with Dion stepping aside, there is room for more concensus and negotiation between the opposition without it looking like one is "caving" just to form the coalition.

e.g. the new Liberal leader wouldn't be making a "concession" (as Flaherty claims)...they'd simply say they didn't really agree with Dion's position before.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.