October 2007 monthly deficit cause for alarm?

[jdobbin]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/budget_deficit

Retroactive tax cuts introduced in October by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty have had a dramatic impact on the government's budgetary bounty, reducing the accumulated surplus by $2.7 billion after recording the first monthly deficit of the current fiscal year.

The government reported Friday that its accumulated surplus for this fiscal year has shrunk to $6.6 billion for the first seven months of the fiscal year as of the end of October, down from the $9.3 billion at the end of September.

This marks the first time during the 2007-2008 fiscal year that the government has recorded a monthly deficit, and it is almost entirely due to a $2.5-billion adjustment to revenues as a result of Flaherty's Oct. 30 mini-budget.

Guess we could be seeing more of the same when the GST cut happens in the next days.

No wonder Harper is worried about the economy.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[Michael Bluth]

Misleading thread title, with the following conveniently omitted from the post.

The year-to-date surplus, while considerably smaller than last month, is still $200 million higher than during the same period last year when the final surplus totalled $13.8 billion.

So the Liberals attack the Conservatives for large surpluses. Then attack them when the surplus number shrinks.

How very convenient indeed.

[Argus]

Misleading thread title, with the following conveniently omitted from the post.

So the Liberals attack the Conservatives for large surpluses. Then attack them when the surplus number shrinks.

How very convenient indeed.

You can't expect anything even approaching honesty from a Liberal Party shill like him.

[jdobbin]

You can't expect anything even approaching honesty from a Liberal Party shill like him.

No need for personal attacks.

The fact is that the Tories have fallen into deficit this month which is something they said would not happen if they were elected government.

[BubberMiley]

You can't expect anything even approaching honesty from a Liberal Party shill like him.

If you're going to question someone's honesty, perhaps you should have numbers to back up your claim.

But, of course, you haven't backed up a claim with anything other than a grammar-school personal attack in your history on this forum, so I guess that's asking a lot.

[August1991]

No need for personal attacks.

The fact is that the Tories have fallen into deficit this month which is something they said would not happen if they were elected government.

Dobbin, the personal attacks are justified in this case and I have reported the thead title to the moderators.

It is wrong to suggest that the federal government budget deficit has slipped into deficit.

As your own cite states:

This marks the first time during the 2007-2008 fiscal year that the government has recorded a monthly deficit, and it is almost entirely due to a $2.5-billion adjustment to revenues as a result of Flaherty's Oct. 30 mini-budget.

Here's another quote:

In the April to October period of this year, the surplus was up slightly from a year earlier to C$6.62 billion from C$6.45 billion.

The government said revenues fell by 9.2 percent to C$16.6 billion in October year-on-year as it took a C$2.5 billion charge to include the cost to date of previously announced personal income tax cuts.

Reuters

IOW, if you earn $60,000 a year (or $5,000 a month), the month you pay cash to buy a used $10,000 car, you are in "deficit".

----

Frankly though, I have no objection to seeing the federal government budget in deficit. (It's not). I would prefer to see this "deficit fetish" turn into a "spending fetish". Why does a headline about a "deficit" attract so much attention but a headline about "more government spending" is just another "dog-bites-man" story?

Edited December 22, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Dobbin, the personal attacks are justified in this case and I have reported the thead title to the moderators.

It is wrong to suggest that the federal government budget deficit has slipped into deficit.

IOW, if you earn $60,000 a year (or $5,000 a month), the month you pay cash to buy a used $10,000 car, you are in "deficit".

----

Frankly though, I have no objection to seeing the federal government budget in deficit. (It's not). I would prefer to see this "deficit fetish" turn into a "spending fetish". Why does a headline about a "deficit" attract so much attention but a headline about "spending" is dog-bites-man?

There is no excuse for personal attacks and I am surprised you agree with them.

This is what CP is reporting:

Retroactive tax cuts introduced in October by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty have had a dramatic impact on the government's budgetary bounty, reducing the accumulated surplus by $2.7 billion after recording the first monthly deficit of the current fiscal year.

The title of the thread is accurate. The government has slipped into deficit.

This is what Reuters says in their title:

Canada posts October budget deficit on tax cuts

Could you tell me that difference between that title and the one I wrote? Are you complaining to Reuters as well?

What exactly do you think the thread title should be? Or do you think the whole topic should be eliminated because it is inconvenient?

If you recall, I have a thread about spending. Many in these forums dismiss that even though those reports are accurate as well.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[August1991]

The title of the thread is accurate. The government has slipped into deficit.

In October.

Put the word "October" in the thread title and it won't be wrong (misleading). The federal government took a one time hit. That's all.

To be more exact, given the CPP and EI payments, the federal government budget (viewed broadly and accurately) is nowhere near a deficit - but that's not the issue here.

Dobbin, IMHO, you're using the D-word incorrectly and for partisan political purposes. But let's let the moderators decide. (The moderators chastized me because I called Paul Martin a word that rhymes with "withers" - which, if you think about it, is what the Liberal PM PM did.)

Edited December 22, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

In October.

Put the word "October" in the thread title and it won't be wrong (misleading). The federal government took a one time hit. That's all.

To be more exact, given the CPP and EI payments, the federal government budget (viewed broadly and accurately) is nowhere near a deficit - but that's not the issue here.

Dobbin, IMHO, you're using the D-word incorrectly and for partisan political purposes. But let's let the moderators decide. (The moderators chastized me because I called Paul Martin a word that rhymes with "withers" - which, if you think about it, is what the Liberal PM PM did.)

Changed. Although the original post mentioned October right in the first paragraph. It was also the first time in 2007 this has happened which is how they were reporting it on CTV tonight.

As far as the word deficit goes...sorry. I can't help you there. It is how it is being reported in all financial news reports. Do you have an issue with Reuters using deficit?

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[sharkman]

Misleading thread title, with the following conveniently omitted from the post.

So the Liberals attack the Conservatives for large surpluses. Then attack them when the surplus number shrinks.

How very convenient indeed.

This is the kind of liberal logic which the average Canadian starts to tune out after a while since it's so obviously flawed. I feel like leveling a pesky personal attack right now myself, but with liberals aiding the Tory cause like this, I'll just give the beast its head.

[jdobbin]

This is the kind of liberal logic which the average Canadian starts to tune out after a while since it's so obviously flawed. I feel like leveling a pesky personal attack right now myself, but with liberals aiding the Tory cause like this, I'll just give the beast its head.

Something must be working with the Liberals ahead of the Tories in the polls.

The Tory government is in deficit for October based on the tax cuts. I know people are trying to spin it differently but there it is.

[Wilber]

Changed. Although the original post mentioned October right in the first paragraph. It was also the first time in 2007 this has happened which is how they were reporting it on CTV tonight.

As far as the word deficit goes...sorry. I can't help you there. It is how it is being reported in all financial news reports. Do you have an issue with Reuters using deficit?

Interesting but pretty weak. Ever had a month where you spent more than you earned? If they start adding to the debt, I will be concerned.

[August1991]

The Tory government is in deficit for October based on the tax cuts. I know people are trying to spin it differently but there it is.

Tax cuts? Tax me and spend it? I'm Canadian?

Federal Liberals are wrong to believe that tax-and-spend defines Canadians, and Liberals are also wrong to think that they alone speak Canada's two official languages.

I think that the federal Liberal Party, whatever the polls say now, is in for a severe surprise. And you know what? The Liberals will mistakenly blame Dion for the demise. IOW, this problem is more severe than the leader.

Dobbin, I could be wrong. Let's see.

Edited December 22, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Interesting but pretty weak. Ever had a month where you spent more than you earned? If they start adding to the debt, I will be concerned.

Since it is the first time in a long time where a monthly deficit has been run up, I'd should be noted. It is especially noteworthy when there has been no spending cuts to go along with the tax cuts.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

Tax cuts? Tax me and spend it? I'm Canadian?

Federal Liberals are wrong to believe that tax-and-spend defines Canadians, and Liberals are also wrong to think that they alone speak Canada's two official languages.

I think that the federal Liberal Party, whatever the polls say now, is in for a severe surprise. And you know what? The Liberals will mistakenly blame Dion for the demise. IOW, this problem is more severe than the leader.

Dobbin, I could be wrong. Let's see.

It is the Tories that are spending like crazy right now. Or have you forgotten? You yourself have criticized them for such. They are way over what they promised in their election manifesto and continue to spend like drunken sailors.

And the biggest tax cuts and spending cuts came during different Liberal regimes. Martin's tax cut didn't put Canada into a monthly deficit and easily surpassed the first two Tory budgets. That is confirmed by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and has been posted in this forum a number of times.

As for the big surprise in the polls, I haven't seen it yet.

[CandianWatcher]

You can't expect anything even approaching honesty from a Liberal Party shill like him.

You are suggesting that the Tories are more honest!

The Tory government is in deficit for October based on the tax cuts. I know people are trying to spin it differently but there it is.,

Not quite, you forget the part about tax cuts to Corporations. They are the ones winning big time in these tax cuts.

Edited December 22, 2007 by CandianWatcher

[sharkman]

Since it is the first time in a long time where a monthly deficit has been run up, I'd be concerned. It is especially concerning when there has been no spending cuts to go along with the tax cuts.

Everyone, take note: when the last Tory budget came out with tax cuts and another reduction on the GST, smarty pants here declared that there should have been deeper cuts for corporations. And here we have him being all concerned about a 'deficit' directly related to the tax cuts, or so he says. Here we have yet another case of liberal logic: arguing for more tax cuts, then raising the alarm about the result of the tax cuts. A classic case of wanting it both ways, now watch him spin it around and claim otherwise, but you heard the straight goods here.

In truth, a temporary deficit in this context is a good thing, it means the government is not over taxing us as much as they used to. Hopefully smaller yearly surpluses will ensue.

[jdobbin]

Everyone, take note: when the last Tory budget came out with tax cuts and another reduction on the GST, smarty pants here declared that there should have been deeper cuts for corporations. And here we have him being all concerned about a 'deficit' directly related to the tax cuts, or so he says. Here we have yet another case of liberal logic: arguing for more tax cuts, then raising the alarm about the result of the tax cuts. A classic case of wanting it both ways, now watch him spin it around and claim otherwise, but you heard the straight goods here.

In truth, a temporary deficit in this context is a good thing, it means the government is not over taxing us as much as they used to. Hopefully smaller yearly surpluses will ensue.

I said there should be deeper corporate tax cuts and NO GST cut. Try and be accurate, please.

I also said there should be spending cuts accompanying any tax cuts.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[sharkman]

So you admit it, kind of. So since the latest GST reduction hasn't even occurred yet, and we have this deficit, that proves the tax cuts you called for you would now be against, since they would cause a possible deficit.

I know, you voted FOR the tax cuts before you voted AGAINST them, right? Dobbin, stop channeling Kerry right now!

[jdobbin]

So you admit it, kind of. So since the latest GST reduction hasn't even occurred yet, and we have this deficit, that proves the tax cuts you called for you would now be against, since they would cause a possible deficit.

I know, you voted FOR the tax cuts before you voted AGAINST them, right? Dobbin, stop channeling Kerry right now!

I was against the last GST cut which has taken a few billion every year out of the economy. I am against the next one as well. It has been in every post I have made about taxation and the economy. I have also said that spending needs to be reduced. I criticized Martin for going over what was promised. I criticize Harper for doing the same.

All tax cuts should have come from personal and corporate income. It would have acted more of a stimulus on the economy and resulted in more GST.

As for the rest of your personal attacks, I see no need for it.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[sharkman]

I see no need for your spin strategy either, but there you go, although it is rather fun to watch. Does it make you dizzy?

You are simply saying that the deficit is bad when before you were arguing for tax cuts. Spin some more for me baby!

[CandianWatcher]

Has anyone really figured out how much money they will get in these tax breaks, or have you even asked if we would have been better off as a society forgetting these tax breaks right now and help kids with their tuition fees, Harper could have taken the opportunity to introduce measures to adjust seniors' pensions to help those seniors who have to decide about what to buy, hydro or food. Nothing was done about investing in home care for seniors. Nothing was done to help seniors pay for drugs.

Nothing was mentioned about transferring money into social programs to help at least 12,000 people who are living on the streets in BC , God knows how many across Canada, because they can't afford housing.

A 1% GST tax cut or an income tax cut that only applies to a higher tax bracket means very little. It likely will not even cover the increase in home heating oil or hydro costs this year. For Seniors on low income, it means nothing.

Not only will oil and gas companies get big tax cuts, they also continue to get the estimated $1.4 billion in subsidies.

We use to have a decent size middle class in this country, we now are getting to be those who have and those who have not.

I could think of hundreds of different ways of doing society some good than giving tax breaks to multi national corporations, but then why should I care, I will take my tax break and run.

Edited December 22, 2007 by CandianWatcher

[jdobbin]

I see no need for your spin strategy either, but there you go, although it is rather fun to watch. Does it make you dizzy?

You are simply saying that the deficit is bad when before you were arguing for tax cuts. Spin some more for me baby!

Quite inaccurate. And please refrain from the personal attacks.

[sharkman]

Everyone, take note: when the last Tory budget came out with tax cuts and another reduction on the GST, smarty pants here declared that there should have been deeper cuts for corporations. And here we have him being all concerned about a 'deficit' directly related to the tax cuts, or so he says. Here we have yet another case of liberal logic: arguing for more tax cuts, then raising the alarm about the result of the tax cuts. A classic case of wanting it both ways, now watch him spin it around and claim otherwise, but you heard the straight goods here.

In truth, a temporary deficit in this context is a good thing, it means the government is not over taxing us as much as they used to. Hopefully smaller yearly surpluses will ensue.

So here you go, folks, if you follow the above liberal spinmeistering by dobbin, you can learn much from the constant denial and personal attack refrain. Deny, spin and repeat.

If you'll notice, he never addresses the underlying issue, that the one time deficit is actually a good sign, since as a liberal he really thinks anything the Tories do is wrong no matter what it is.

Hey dobbin, why don't you accuse me of a personal attack again, but this time use a frowny face!

Edited December 22, 2007 by sharkman

[jdobbin]

So here you go, folks, if you follow the above liberal spinmeistering by dobbin, you can learn much from the constant denial and personal attack refrain. Deny, spin and repeat.

If you'll notice, he never addresses the underlying issue, that the one time deficit is actually a good sign, since as a liberal he really thinks anything the Tories do is wrong no matter what it is.

Hey dobbin, why don't you accuse me of a personal attack again, but this time use a frowny face!

I don't think the one time deficit is a good sign given the additional GST cut that comes in a few days. Since even Harper says that the economy could be in tough next year, I think it just emphasizes how wrong the GST cut was and will be. It would have been far better for income and corporate tax cuts. The GST should have been left alone as it is better to keep the taxes from falling into deficit over the course of the year.

As for the rest of your baiting and personalizing, it doesn't add anything to do the forum.