Liberals unveil spending spree

[HistoryBuff44]

So i just read this in the G&M:

G&M article

The math doesnt seem to add up. we are currently near a deficit. Dion claims he will spend 54 Billion, introduce his green tax, but offset it with income tax cuts worth 15B a year. But if that money is excluded from the total, as he says, then where is the 54 Billion coming from? Supposedly not only will he spend that much but there will be 13 Billion in surplus. All in the next four years. How is that possible without raising the money from somewhere (ie a tax)?

[capricorn]

The math doesnt seem to add up. we are currently near a deficit. Dion claims he will spend 54 Billion, introduce his green tax, but offset it with income tax cuts worth 15B a year. But if that money is excluded from the total, as he says, then where is the 54 Billion coming from? Supposedly not only will he spend that much but there will be 13 Billion in surplus. All in the next four years. How is that possible without raising the money from somewhere (ie a tax)?

Simple answer. He won't keep his promises.

However, CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife said the Liberals, who plan to add an additional $16.3 billion in new spending over four years, may not be able to pay for the platform right away in the event of an economic downturn.

"They've got some explaining to do," he said, noting the Liberal platform is based on seven-month old revenue projections.

"Basically, they're telling Canadians 'we're going to give you these promises, but we can't guarantee that the economy will be good enough that we can fufil them right away."

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

Everything in the Liberal policy platform hinges on a stable economy. John McCallum said that given the situation in the US, no one has a clue about where the economy is headed. If the Liberals truly believe this, why did they bring in a plan which they based on 2 year old government economic forecasts and numbers?

[kengs333]

So i just read this in the G&M:

G&M article

The math doesnt seem to add up. we are currently near a deficit. Dion claims he will spend 54 Billion, introduce his green tax, but offset it with income tax cuts worth 15B a year. But if that money is excluded from the total, as he says, then where is the 54 Billion coming from? Supposedly not only will he spend that much but there will be 13 Billion in surplus. All in the next four years. How is that possible without raising the money from somewhere (ie a tax)?

Please refresh my memory: how much did the Cons spend between June and September of this year?

Also, according to Harper the economy is doing just fine and we're not in the same bind the US is in. So if your leader is claiming everything is okay, then why are you suddenly all concerned about the economy now that the Liberals have produced a platform that includes spend not on the military in the billions of dollars range.

Let's face it: the Liberals are the ones who rescued the country from the dysfunctional spending habits of the the Mulroney government, and I'm quite certain that they will be more inclined to spend responsibly.

[capricorn]

The full 76 page Liberal platform can be downloaded from the Liberal site.

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/platform/2008lp_action_plan_e.pdf

[HistoryBuff44]

Please refresh my memory: how much did the Cons spend between June and September of this year?

Also, according to Harper the economy is doing just fine and we're not in the same bind the US is in. So if your leader is claiming everything is okay, then why are you suddenly all concerned about the economy now that the Liberals have produced a platform that includes spend not on the military in the billions of dollars range.

Let's face it: the Liberals are the ones who rescued the country from the dysfunctional spending habits of the the Mulroney government, and I'm quite certain that they will be more inclined to spend responsibly.

really? spending 54 billion in 4 years, FP had an article saying the total spending promises by them is now 80 Billion, is responsible? claiming he can cover that with no new taxes is responsible?

So if your leader is claiming everything is okay, then why are you suddenly all concerned about the economy now that the Liberals have produced a platform that includes spend not on the military in the billions of dollars range.

UMMM... im not, because i know that the government doesnt control the economy.

Im not sure how much harper has spent from june to sept, but its nowhere near 80 billion and he definately hasnt said he can do it without it costing tax payers anything.

I love how when the liberals cut the hell out of everything to save the federal government it was all noble and what needed to be done, yet when Klein did the same thing for alberta it was reckless and careless.

[betsy]

Simple answer. He won't keep his promises.

They gave the excuse they'll use for not delivering on the promises. The economy!

[capricorn]

If the carbon tax works as the Liberal leader hopes, emissions will tumble as people substitute away from carbon. But if they tumble, so will tax revenue and what will then pay for the $55-billion tax cut and spending plan that he has already set in place? Will the $16-billion in personal income tax cuts be rescinded? A number of European countries have already gone down this route by introducing a carbon tax, spending the proceeds and then being forced to find new revenue sources, such as employment insurance or mandatory pension fund premiums, when the tax dried up.

This is the fundamental flaw in Mr. Dion's Green Shift - the carbon tax that he eschewed for so long suddenly became attractive as a means of funding an unfunded commitment to reduce the number of people living below the poverty line by 30% and the number of children living in poverty by at least 50%. Over four years, this package of measures will cost nearly $15-billion at a time when economists are urging that no party should promise to move spending or tax cuts beyond the Budget 2008 plan because of the risk of running a deficit.

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=813331

When I first heard of the Green Shift plan, what caught my curiosity was the claim that it was revenue neutral. I was particularly interested in the promise that there would be tax cuts for all Canadians. As I read the first day's reviews of the Green Shift plan, I couldn't help but think that there are too many underlying "ifs" to believe the plan would be revenue neutral. Either it would never get off the ground because of poor economic conditions, as McCallum admitted, or revenue would dry up and, tax increases would be inevitable to continue funding the newly created programs and monetary incentives.

Going through the plan itself, it's evident that government would grow as a result of implementing and managing the plan. Kelly McPartland speaks to this in the NP's full comment section.

If you believe in big government, you should vote for the Liberal party of Stéphane Dion. If you believe governments are really good at creating and operating complex programs that aim to control and adjust the way ordinary people act, it’s the party for you. If you feel federal civil servants are good at creating and staffing bodies that oversee and evaluate a wide range of activities across the economy, and that these bodies are cost effective in that the added time and expenditure they generate in bureaucratic activity is offset by what they achieve, by all means pick the Liberals.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...-civil-sre.aspx

The Green Shift is a valiant attempt at intertwining concern for climate change/global warming with the economy. IMO conditions are such that the Green Shift plan, as it is presently constructed, would be the wrong way for our country to go.

[Oleg Bach]

So i just read this in the G&M:

G&M article

The math doesnt seem to add up. we are currently near a deficit. Dion claims he will spend 54 Billion, introduce his green tax, but offset it with income tax cuts worth 15B a year. But if that money is excluded from the total, as he says, then where is the 54 Billion coming from? Supposedly not only will he spend that much but there will be 13 Billion in surplus. All in the next four years. How is that possible without raising the money from somewhere (ie a tax)?

From what my uneducated brain tells me a billion bucks is a lot of money...I believe a billion is one thousand million..and 54 billion is 54 thousand million dollar incriments - 54000 million dollars....imagine if we dug up 54 thousand people who all had a net worth of a million dollars a piece and asked them to all give up their wealth immediately and donate the money to society - and government - (which is not society). This just shows the impact of such a move. The term "surplus" really means nothing - who ever heard of a surplus of money? Money never makes it's self a surplus....the very nature of money is that there is never enough!

The souless eyed one with the complexion of cheap lined legal paper will rant about giving money to everyone - most liberal money is handed over to professional liberals - those that will be given a hundered grand a year to study the poor and to make caring statements about the problem publically via very expensive reports. All the money in the world will not create men and woman of true caring social service...Liberals of the higher archy are machinists and not human beings...anyone that can come up with the bleeding heart seductive dupage such as "Child Poverty" serves only them selves - only a liberal would pull the heart strings of the public with such a silly term - there is no such thing as child poverty - children to not control the finances of a house hold - there is only ADULT POVERTY- But liberals hate adults and use children like big brown eyed puppy dogs to jerk the emotional and finacial chain of the public! Dion will fail because his type of social charity is religious in it's scope and the funds will end up in the church of liberality never to be dispersed to those in need - but only to the high priests of girlydom.

[Argus]

The NP had an excellent writeup on it.

Under the Liberals, climate change will take on a priority equivalent to the effect the Marsall Plan had on post-war Europe: it’s the centre of everything.

Here are a few of the legislative creations the Liberals have in mind. I can’t promise to have caught them all. And I can’t tell you what they’ll all do:

• An Advanced Manufacturing Prosperity Fund

• A Renewable Power Production Incentive

• A system of Green Mortgage Loans

• Something called the Low-income Homes Retrofit Partnership Fund

• A Green Fisheries and Transport Fund

• A Canada-specific comprehensive footprint calculator

• A Canada Gold Standard for carbon offsets

• A National Adaptation Strategy on climate change

• A new Interdisciplinary Sustainability Fund

• “Tough new” National Ambient Air Quality Standards

• A new National Water Strategy

• A Canada Water Fund

• A National Water Council

• A new Water Efficiency Act

• A Toxic Substances Reduction Strategy

• A Network for Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research (the NCEHDPR for short)

• A National Ecosystem Stewardship Strategy

• A Federal Sustainable Development Act

• A Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights

Those are just the plans for the Green Shift part of the platform folks. There’s more in other parts, as the Liberals set out to create a Canada of such enviable goodness and right-mindedness the Vatican will cringe in mortification.

Kelly McParland

BTW, the Post had previously costed Dion's promises at $80 billion, but they've now raised that by another $3 billion.

Edited September 23, 2008 by Argus