Liberal Promises top $80,000,000,000 and still counting

[Argus]

Dion continues to try to buy Canadians with their own money, making grandiose promises to anyone and everyone who might concievably vote for him. His promises now top $80 billion with no attempt whatsoever to explain how he'll pay for it all. When directly asked yesterday he stated he absolutely would not raise taxes. Well, hell, what does that leave? How are you going to pay for it, Mr. Dion? "You'll see!" he grandly replied to the reporter who asked.

You'll see? Is that to be the new theme of the Liberal election campaign now that they've abandoned the "Green Shift"?

Is this some kind of version of "Trust me, I'll let you know after the election" which Trudeau ran on some years back?

How many programs does he have to cut to find $80 billion - and counting? And what will they be? We know he won't cut cultural programs, at least! The Liberal Party position has been that you cannot cut any cultural program no matter what. So where do you find $80 billion? Is he going to apply to George Bush for a bailout to keep us from bankruptcy?

By the way, Conservative promises so far are around $2 billion.

Liberal Promises top $80 billion

[jdobbin]

By the way, Conservative promises so far are around $2 billion.

Liberal Promises top $80 billion

After the $20 billion spending announcement the Tories made prior to the election.

All parties seem to be spending money like crazy in a minority situation.

The Tories are announcing annual spending. The Liberals are announcing over 4 to 10 years.

I personally think many of the announcements are not going to meet the promise of both the Liberals and Tories to keep a leash on annual spending. We have seen the Tories make the argument that all their spending is within budget while ignoring that it breaks the promise they made last election and every year since to not go above certain thresholds annually.

Edited September 20, 2008 by jdobbin

[Argus]

After the $20 billion spending announcement the Tories made prior to the election.

All parties seem to be spending money like crazy in a minority situation.

The Tories are announcing annual spending. The Liberals are announcing over 4 to 10 years.

I personally think many of the announcements are not going to meet the promise of both the Liberals and Tories to keep a leash on annual spending. We have seen the Tories make the argument that all their spending in within budget while ignoring that it breaks the promise the made last election and every year since to not go above certain threshholds annually.

The point is that you and the Liberals have been wailing that Harper has spent too much, promised too much, and threatens to bring us back into deficits, so where is this $80 billion going to come from if not tax increases?

[August1991]

After the $20 billion spending announcement the Tories made prior to the election.

I tend to agree Dobbin but there is a difference between $80 billion and $20 bullion. Or at least, in the real world there is a difference. In the crazy world of political announcements, who knows? Is this a new programme or an old programme with a new name? Is the spending next year or spread over the next 10 years?

A politician would never announce $5 million for child care. Instead, they announce $50 million for a 10 year programme.

Even Argus' choice of title is a form of exaggeration. Argus wrote $80,000,000,000 instead of $80 billion because presumably all those zeroes make for a bigger number. I'm surprised that Argus didn't add cents to get two more zeroes in.

(BTW, Duplessis was famous for throwing in an odd number (eg. $73,653) every so often because, as he explained, it made the promise more realistic.)

Moreeover, does anyone really believe that Dion, if elected, is going to do any of this? At most, he can hope for a minority government which means his agenda will have to be flexible. The Liberal track record for election promises is close to nil. It's a fair bet that the Liberals will do the exact opposite of what they promise.

-----

I still like my suggestion that we should abolish tax collection through payroll deductions and instead the government should send us a bill every year - on the same date that we would have all of our fixed elections. If people voted on the same day that they had to cut a cheque for the government, politicians might be forced to rethink some of their campaign promises.

I don't think it's an accident that Americans have to file their income tax on April 15 but their election date in November is almost at the opposite end of the calendar.

Edited September 20, 2008 by August1991

[jdobbin]

The point is that you and the Liberals have been wailing that Harper has spent too much, promised too much, and threatens to bring us back into deficits, so where is this $80 billion going to come from if not tax increases?

Spending cuts.

[jdobbin]

I tend to agree Dobbin but there is a difference between $80 billion and $20 bullion. Or at least, in the real world there is a difference. In the crazy world of political announcements, who knows? Is this a new programme or an old programme with a new name? Is the spending next year or spread over the next 10 years?

A politician would never announce $5 million for child care. Instead, they announce $50 million for a 10 year programme.

I certainly don't agree with either party spending like drunken sailors.

At the moment, it is hard to tell what has the biggest spending commitments. The Tories don't have to promise as much in the election because they announced $20 billion already and have a hist of long term spending announcements from each year since they were in office.

Moreeover, does anyone really believe that Dion, if elected, is going to do any of this? At most, he can hope for a minority government which means his agenda will have to be flexible. The Liberal track record for election promises is close to nil. It's a fair bet that the Liberals will do the exact opposite of what they promise.

You always say that and I always point out to the promise they did keep which you always reject such as ending the deficit, making spending cuts, establishing ling term financing for CPP and health and long term military spending starting when Martin was PM.

The Liberal have some huge broken promises in their record but so do the Tories. Income trusts is enormous and still one that there is debate on whether it was the correct policy. The Tory promise in spending has been promised every year they have been in office and they have broken it every time. And there is fixed elections. It took some great contortions to call an election without a vote. I always said they would do it and no one here seemed to believe it.

[capricorn]

Speaking at Montreal's Place des Arts, Mr. Dion offered $530-million in promises to boost the country's cultural sector.

Mr. Dion is banking on a backlash against the Conservatives over the government's recent cuts to arts and culture funding. He repeated an earlier promise to reinstate the nearly $45-million in cuts.

---

Mr. Dion portrayed the Liberals as defenders of arts and culture, something he says is very close to the hearts of Quebeckers.

“When Stephen Harper made the cuts to culture, he didn't think us Quebeckers would pursue him – this is proof that he doesn't know us and he doesn't understand us,” Mr. Dion told a crowd of supporters.

“For us Quebeckers, culture is deeply rooted in our identity.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...NStory/National

"Us Quebecers"??

Glad CTV is tracking election spending promises made by all parties 'cause I can't keep up.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

[August1991]

You always say that and I always point out to the promise they did keep which you always reject such as ending the deficit, making spending cuts, establishing ling term financing for CPP and health and long term military spending starting when Martin was PM.

Is that how Chretien put the promises in the 1993 Red Book?

Did teh Liberals say that they would raise CPP and UI contributions? At most, they said that they would restore viability to the system, or some other euphemism.

---

The bottom line here is that Dion is now turning to the slippery, snake-oil salesmen and other assorted rainmen of the Liberal Party. Dion has deep-sixed his Green Shift and he's going to do what Liberal advisors advise him to do. He'll make spending promises and seek the votes of particular groups. He'll be a Trudeau-era Liberal. That's sad.

Trudeau's dead and gone and the Liberals no longer have 74 seats in Quebec. The Liberals no longer face a divided Right. Chretien can believe what he wants but if he were running today, he'd lose too.

I thought Dion would rise to the occasion and present something original. He sort of did but then he listened too much to Liberal advisors and he wasn't himself. Dion is trying to be something that he isn't. He's a smart, decent man; not a traditional, glad-handing politician. Dion doesn't want to go around Canada promising to spend billions of dollars. If he's doing it, it's because someone has convinced him to do it.

To me, Dion looks like Bourassa Mark I. Unlike Bourassa, there will be no Mark II.

The Liberals need a time out, like the Conservatives had after Mulroney. It appears that Canada is on the verge of a legitimate, viable, two party democracy: a two party democracy across a bi-national state. May we hope that the successors to Mulroney and Harper are as open-minded as the successors to Blake and Laurier.

----

Last point. Does it matter that the two parties appear similar? No. The simple existence of a choice ensures that both stay sort of honest. If Cubans could at least choose between Castro A and Castro B, then Cuba would be a different place. I don't believe in so-called bi-partisanship. I prefer a political system where the two parties are at loggerheads and don't trust each other. I want the parties to believe voters have the power to send them into the wilderness.

Colgate and Crest may seem similar products but when you buy one or the other, your money makes a difference to management. The simple existence of choice keeps them honest.

Sadly, like Cuba, Putin and Russia don't get this.

Canad is on the verge of becoming a mature a democracy, as it had the chance of being at Confederation.

[August1991]

You always say that and I always point out to the promise they did keep which you always reject such as ending the deficit, making spending cuts, establishing ling term financing for CPP and health and long term military spending starting when Martin was PM.

Is that how Chretien put the promises in the 1993 Red Book?

Did teh Liberals say that they would raise CPP and UI contributions? At most, they said that they would restore viability to the system, or some other euphemism.

---

The bottom line here is that Dion is now turning to the slippery, snake-oil salesmen and other assorted rainmen of the Liberal Party. Dion has deep-sixed his Green Shift and he's going to do what Liberal advisors advise him to do. He'll make spending promises and seek the votes of particular groups. He'll be a Trudeau-era Liberal. That's sad.

Trudeau's dead and gone and the Liberals no longer have 74 seats in Quebec. The Liberals no longer face a divided Right. Chretien can believe what he wants but if he were running today, he'd lose too.

I thought Dion would rise to the occasion and present something original. He sort of did but then he listened too much to Liberal advisors and he wasn't himself. Dion is trying to be something that he isn't. He's a smart, decent man; not a traditional, glad-handing politician. Dion doesn't want to go around Canada promising to spend billions of dollars. If he's doing it, it's because someone has convinced him to do it.

To me, Dion looks like Bourassa Mark I. Unlike Bourassa, there will be no Mark II.

The Liberals need a time out, like the Conservatives had after Mulroney. It appears that Canada is on the verge of a legitimate, viable, two party democracy: a two party democracy across a bi-national state. May we hope that the successors to Mulroney and Harper are as open-minded as the successors to Blake and Laurier.

----

Last point. Does it matter that the two parties appear similar? No. The simple existence of a choice ensures that both stay sort of honest. If Cubans could at least choose between Castro A and Castro B, then Cuba would be a different place. I don't believe in so-called bi-partisanship. I prefer a political system where the two parties are at loggerheads and don't trust each other. I want the parties to believe voters have the power to send them into the wilderness.

Colgate and Crest may seem similar products but when you buy one or the other, your money makes a difference to management. The simple existence of choice keeps them honest.

Sadly, like Cuba, Putin and Russia don't get this.

Canada is on the verge of becoming a mature a democracy, as it had the chance of being at Confederation.

[jdobbin]

Is that how Chretien put the promises in the 1993 Red Book?

Did teh Liberals say that they would raise CPP and UI contributions? At most, they said that they would restore viability to the system, or some other euphemism.

The promise was to fix the system so it wouldn't go broke. That was done. CPP is no longer an issue now.

EI could still use some work but I haven't heard Harper or Dion or anyone else say they will do anything.

The Liberals need a time out, like the Conservatives had after Mulroney. It appears that Canada is on the verge of a legitimate, viable, two party democracy: a two party democracy across a bi-national state. May we hope that the successors to Mulroney and Harper are as open-minded as the successors to Blake and Laurier.

It won't be a time out. It will be lights out.

Canada is on the verge of becoming a mature a democracy, as it had the chance of being at Confederation.

My guess is that probably means a two party system.

[Wilber]

Even Argus' choice of title is a form of exaggeration. Argus wrote $80,000,000,000 instead of $80 billion because presumably all those zeroes make for a bigger number. I'm surprised that Argus didn't add cents to get two more zeroes in.

On the contrary, I think it is a good way to describe all spending promises made by political parties. I think a lot of Canadians either don't know or don't stop to think about how many zeros there are in a billion.

[capricorn]

I think a lot of Canadians either don't know or don't stop to think about how many zeros there are in a billion.

The calculator with enough numerals on it to add up Liberal spending promises has not yet been invented.

[nothinarian]

The calculator with enough numerals on it to add up Liberal spending promises has not yet been invented.

But wait ...who is the biggest spending government in Canadian history and which end of the spectrum (relatively) drove US into 1/2 trillion dollar deficits ... ohhh no.... scooby its the conservatives/republicans.... mulrooney (and to be fair before him trudeau) digs a hole and Martin/Chretien(yes he backed up Martin when he could have vetoed his budget) digs us out... George Bush(right - relatively) digs us in and Clinton(left - relatively), digs us out...Flaherty digs us in and McGuinty... slowly digging us out

When notorious Conservative rag(NATPOST) and perennially supportive journalist Andrew Coyne hammers Cons then you know you have no credibility on the fiscal right

http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

Unfortunately Dion doesn't understand opportunity on the fiscal right and has chosen door #3

Where have all the fiscal conservatives gone? Liberals or Conservatives

[August1991]

My guess is that probably means a two party system.

I'd agree.

The question is not whether the NDP or Liberals form the other party but rather how we have a mature democracy of two parties in a country of two languages and different regions. If we Canadians achieve this, it will be a first in the world.

Europeans (Belgium in particular, even the Swiss) never managed it. Well, Europeans are uncivilized heathens who kill each other. Don't believe me? Look it up on Wikipedia. North and South Americans are peaceful, civilized people in comparison to Europeans. How many wars have Europeans had in the past two centuries? And Americans?

Europeans are a violent, warlike, uncivilized people. We North and South Americans are civilized and peaceful.

[Smallc]

I'd agree.

The question is not whether the NDP or Liberals form the other party but rather how we have a mature democracy of two parties in a country of two languages and different regions. If we Canadians achieve this, it will be a first in the world.

Europeans (Belgium in particular, even the Swiss) never managed it. Well, Europeans are uncivilized heathens who kill each other. Don't believe me? Look it up on Wikipedia. North and South Americans are peaceful, civilized people in comparison to Europeans. How many wars have Europeans had in the past two centuries? And Americans?

Europeans are a violent, warlike, uncivilized people. We North and South Americans are civilized and peaceful.

Do we really want a two party system? I certainly don't. I like having choice in who I can vote for.

[jdobbin]

I'd agree.

The question is not whether the NDP or Liberals form the other party but rather how we have a mature democracy of two parties in a country of two languages and different regions. If we Canadians achieve this, it will be a first in the world.

If we go by certain provinces, it looks more like the Liberals will disappear. The name may still exist for Liberal/Conservative governments but that is all.

Europeans (Belgium in particular, even the Swiss) never managed it. Well, Europeans are uncivilized heathens who kill each other. Don't believe me? Look it up on Wikipedia. North and South Americans are peaceful, civilized people in comparison to Europeans. How many wars have Europeans had in the past two centuries? And Americans?

Europeans are a violent, warlike, uncivilized people. We North and South Americans are civilized and peaceful.

Um, okay.

[August1991]

Do we really want a two party system? I certainly don't. I like having choice in who I can vote for.

Two choices is enough, and the Liberals are the other choice.

Harper has followed Macdonald's and Mulroney's riff. One side of Canada is Blue. The other side is Red. Let's see how this plays out.

[nothinarian]

Do we really want a two party system? I certainly don't. I like having choice in who I can vote for.

We need 2 more seperatist parties (Nfld & Ab) with a full fledged legal party status that all Cdn taxpayers support a la Bloc and further vote spreading so we can be in a perennial minority ( I jest)

Give me 2 parties and a majority and we will live with our choices

If one party goes too far left or right their policies will not sell and we'll keep them centrist at election time plus provides a much more functional parliament

[Smallc]

Two choices is enough, and the Liberals are the other choice.

I don't agree. I would also submit that many Canadians would feel the same. I don't see it happening any time soon. People can't agree well enough to be happy with two parties. There will always be other choices here. Its the nature of our diverse federation.

[Argus]

Spending cuts.

What do you cut that gives you $80 billion? I mean, given that you clearly have no intention of cutting one dime from the $3 billion which goes to arts and culture.

Let me guess - the military. You're going to reduce the size of the military to 129?

[capricorn]

What do you cut that gives you $80 billion?

Yesterday (I think in Alexandria) Dion said there would be no spending/program cuts. I haven't seen his quote in the media yet.

[Argus]

Yesterday (I think in Alexandria) Dion said there would be no spending/program cuts. I haven't seen his quote in the media yet.

Well I definitely saw him promise no tax increases........ magic beans! He's going to use magic beans to pay for everything! Yaaaayyy!

What a wise man he is!

[Moonbox]

The Liberals need a time out, like the Conservatives had after Mulroney. It appears that Canada is on the verge of a legitimate, viable, two party democracy: a two party democracy across a bi-national state. May we hope that the successors to Mulroney and Harper are as open-minded as the successors to Blake and Laurier.

----

Last point. Does it matter that the two parties appear similar? No. The simple existence of a choice ensures that both stay sort of honest. If Cubans could at least choose between Castro A and Castro B, then Cuba would be a different place. I don't believe in so-called bi-partisanship. I prefer a political system where the two parties are at loggerheads and don't trust each other. I want the parties to believe voters have the power to send them into the wilderness.

Colgate and Crest may seem similar products but when you buy one or the other, your money makes a difference to management. The simple existence of choice keeps them honest.

Sadly, like Cuba, Putin and Russia don't get this.

Canad is on the verge of becoming a mature a democracy, as it had the chance of being at Confederation.

This is a really good post. Very smart and very true. I'm glad I read that.

[jdobbin]

What do you cut that gives you $80 billion? I mean, given that you clearly have no intention of cutting one dime from the $3 billion which goes to arts and culture.

Let me guess - the military. You're going to reduce the size of the military to 129?

Transfer payments should be cut...again. And yes, the can add up to $80 billion. They are that big.

[TCCK]

Transfer payments should be cut...again. And yes, the can add up to $80 billion. They are that big.

YES let the Liberals cut transfer payments TO QUEBEC the black hole!!

BC and ALberta get crap all compared to the Eastern provinces thus why all the Eastern provinces (except those ridiculous people in Quebec) vote Liberal because the Liberals love to dole out money to the Eastern provinces.