The economy in 2010

[blueblood]

According to the bank of Canada, growth is expected to be 3.4% in 2010, and no recession!!!

ctv

What would the looney left do if this is what ends up happening...

[Mr.Canada]

Oh, they never have any shortage of things to whinge about.

Edited October 24, 2008 by Charles Anthony
re-copied Opening Post deleted

[msj]

Have no idea what the loony left will do, nor do I really care.

But it is obvious what the loony right will do: focus on the 3.4% projection for 2010 while ignoring the 0.6% for each of 2008 and 2009.

Edited October 24, 2008 by msj

[Mr.Canada]

Have no idea what the loony left will do, nor do I really care.

But it is obvious what the loony right will do: focus on the 3.4% projection for 2010 while ignoring the 0.6% for each of 2008 and 2009.

Are you suggesting that the world economic banking crisis is Mr. Harpers fault now?

[msj]

Are you suggesting that the world economic banking crisis is Mr. Harpers fault now?

No.

[blueblood]

Have no idea what the loony left will do, nor do I really care.

But it is obvious what the loony right will do: focus on the 3.4% projection for 2010 while ignoring the 0.6% for each of 2008 and 2009.

It is still bloody growth, what do you want integers? This is good news in spite of other countries making a mess of things. The looney left strikes again!!!

We can see the end which is really great, we will still have growth through the worst of it even better!

[Wilber]

The "experts" haven't got much right in the past year, they have been revising their estimates on a bi weekly basis. Don't expect this one to be any different.

[msj]

It is still bloody growth, what do you want integers? This is good news in spite of other countries making a mess of things. The looney left strikes again!!!

We can see the end which is really great, we will still have growth through the worst of it even better!

Sure Canada didn't get as foolish as the US - to our credit.

This doesn't mean that Harper will have done anything to keep us out of recession or anything to help get the expansion going.

Now, if he were to stop spending like a drunken New Democrat and start cutting income taxes like the Liberals did (2000 through 2005) then maybe I would change my mind on the man.

Edited October 24, 2008 by msj

[Alta4ever]

Sure Canada didn't get as foolish as the US - to our credit.

This doesn't mean that Harper will have done anything to keep us out of recession or anything to help get the expansion going.

Now, if he were to stop spending like a drunken New Democrat and start cutting income taxes like the Liberals did (2000 through 2005) then maybe I would change my mind on the man.

Recessions are part of the economic cycle, they will always happen, as the market does need to correct and renew itself ever so often.

No government can do anything to prevent a recession, if you believe otherwise....

[blueblood]

Sure Canada didn't get as foolish as the US - to our credit.

This doesn't mean that Harper will have done anything to keep us out of recession or anything to help get the expansion going.

Now, if he were to stop spending like a drunken New Democrat and start cutting income taxes like the Liberals did (2000 through 2005) then maybe I would change my mind on the man.

No, I think your biased towards centre right gov'ts. You slam the US gov't and the Canadian gov't when both our economies are going in opposite directions. Who is right then?

As for harper spending, he bloody well has to because eastern canada and canadian cities are full of people who want government to spend spend spend. It's not my fault some people over there have a poor grasp of economics. Harper has to spend because he has elections to win. Paul Martin had a much bigger spending platform in 2005, so there isn't really much of a case you have there.

[msj]

Sure there is the business cycle to consider.

That's not Harper's fault.

But then, to claim that 3.4% is somehow Harper's credit... well, that defies credibility.

Of course, just because the government, eventually at least, can not prevent a recession, does not mean that a government should not put into place rational spending priorities and income tax policies.

Granted, Harper has the excuse of another minority government, but his fiscal decisions have been atrocious.

But that is a topic for another thread and, who knows, maybe Harper will finally get a budget right next spring.

Here's hoping ....

[normanchateau]

According to the bank of Canada, growth is expected to be 3.4% in 2010, and no recession!!!

Well then Harper would be wise to wait until 2010 before once again pulling the plug on his government. That way he can take credit for the growth and attribute it to his economic brilliance.

And if anyone doubts Harper's "economic brilliance", consider this:

The last Liberal government budget was for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, 2006. In that budget, government spending, excluding payments on the debt, grew by $22.7 billion or about 16 per cent compared to the fiscal year ending in 2003.

The next three budgets were Harper's. Using the same three-year comparison, program spending under the Harper's Conservatives is up $46.8 billion or about 29 per cent.

And Harper supporters claim Harper is a fiscal conservative.

[drewski]

you forgot the "but just barely" part.

if the world economy gets worse then projections, then a recession is quite probable

[Jerry J. Fortin]

2010? The economic wizards can't predict what happens tomorrow let alone two years from now. Harper should concern himself with the falling numbers of jobs in the manufacturing sector. Ontario is being slowly bled out of employment, and that fellow citizens is indeed bad news for Canada.

[Mr.Canada]

I don't really see any discussion value here as any argument cannot be disproved or proven.

[jdobbin]

What would the looney left do if this is what ends up happening...

What would the wacky right do if this is not what ends up happening?

Would it react with the stunned shock and surprised like Greenspan did yesterday?

[jdobbin]

We can see the end which is really great, we will still have growth through the worst of it even better!

The forecasts have been routinely downgraded over the last months. I really do hope we are going to have a come back in 2010 and that we will limp along till then.

[jdobbin]

Recessions are part of the economic cycle, they will always happen, as the market does need to correct and renew itself ever so often.

No government can do anything to prevent a recession, if you believe otherwise....

And yet I'm sure you would be blaming the Liberals had they won the election.

[Kitch]

I don't really see any discussion value here as any argument cannot be disproved or proven.

I think that there are some really good points that can be debated. For example...

Can some of the economic experts on this forum please try to explain to me how it is possible for the economy to grow indefinitely?

[blueblood]

Well then Harper would be wise to wait until 2010 before once again pulling the plug on his government. That way he can take credit for the growth and attribute it to his economic brilliance.

And if anyone doubts Harper's "economic brilliance", consider this:

The last Liberal government budget was for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, 2006. In that budget, government spending, excluding payments on the debt, grew by $22.7 billion or about 16 per cent compared to the fiscal year ending in 2003.

The next three budgets were Harper's. Using the same three-year comparison, program spending under the Harper's Conservatives is up $46.8 billion or about 29 per cent.

And Harper supporters claim Harper is a fiscal conservative.

What's your definition of a fiscal conservative, someone who taxes the hell out of people and doesn't spend a dime? We've had that and people voted that out of office.

Then there's the Liberal spending promises... Which begs the question, Should the Liberals be Liars for breaking election promises to run a fiscally sound economy or be financially incompetant keeping those promises?

Platforms of this election stated the tories are planning on keeping spending down.

Harper has increased spending, lowered taxes, paid off some debt, and still runs a surplus (albeit a very small one). That is financially competant to me, and as a taxpayer is far better than having that money sit in some slush fund doing nothing. It's not Harper has vast amount of city people and easterners who believe in high gov't spending, Harper has to win elections by attempting to cater to these people. Hell Paul Martin, the Liberals financial hero was prepared to spend a boatload of money to cater to these people as well.

I have had more money in my pocket due to Conservative gov't policies. I like how the Liberals equate theft with fiscal conservatism.

[blueblood]

I think that there are some really good points that can be debated. For example...

Can some of the economic experts on this forum please try to explain to me how it is possible for the economy to grow indefinitely?

In spite of a recession, there are still uses for what we export such as grain, oil, metals, etc.

[independent]

What's your definition of a fiscal conservative, someone who taxes the hell out of people and doesn't spend a dime? We've had that and people voted that out of office.

Then there's the Liberal spending promises... Which begs the question, Should the Liberals be Liars for breaking election promises to run a fiscally sound economy or be financially incompetant keeping those promises?

Platforms of this election stated the tories are planning on keeping spending down.

Harper has increased spending, lowered taxes, paid off some debt, and still runs a surplus (albeit a very small one). That is financially competant to me, and as a taxpayer is far better than having that money sit in some slush fund doing nothing. It's not Harper has vast amount of city people and easterners who believe in high gov't spending, Harper has to win elections by attempting to cater to these people. Hell Paul Martin, the Liberals financial hero was prepared to spend a boatload of money to cater to these people as well.

I have had more money in my pocket due to Conservative gov't policies. I like how the Liberals equate theft with fiscal conservatism.

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/govt49a.htm?sdi=revenue

The amount of revenue from taxes as gone up ever year for the federal government. How do you figure the conservatives dropped their taxes. Just because a government reduces one tax it does not mean they will not get it some where else.

[eyeball]

In spite of a recession, there are still uses for what we export such as grain, oil, metals, etc.

So there is no limit on how much of these we can produce, indefinitely? Perhaps you're one of those folks who believe that oil is refilling the reservoirs from below. Even if that were true it still stands to reason that whatever it is that's being transmuted into oil would eventually run out.

Can some of the economic experts on this forum please try to explain to me how it is possible for the economy to grow indefinitely?

The only way would be a bottomless Horn of Plenty. Perhaps if we could develop Star Trek like replicator technology that allows us to simply materialize whatever we want out of the quantum foam...

[Kitch]

In spite of a recession, there are still uses for what we export such as grain, oil, metals, etc.

Again, how can this continue to grow indefinitely.

[blueblood]

Again, how can this continue to grow indefinitely.

the population of people is always growing. In ag terms, that is an indefinite market. As the countries of the world get richer and they still are, China's growth will still be around 9% instead of high 10's. In Canada's situation, even though there is global problems, there is still demand for our products, we will take a hit, but won't be sunk. People still need oil, food, and metals.

As for oil running out, that will occur in about 80 years, which is more than enough time for our country and private sector to spend oil and other revenues on diversifying our economy and discovering new technologies. The petroleum industry didn't exist 150 years ago.

The amount of revenue from taxes goes up because it's based on percentages, not fixed values. The higher the salaries of Canadians, the higher they pay (same percentage of income though). Same goes for GST, the more Canadians spend, the more the gov't collects in GST. The more oil gets pumped out of the ground, the more provincial gov'ts get. When the feds cut tax, they cut off some percentage points. When times are good this doesn't matter as the levels coming into the gov't stay somewhat the same or even increase in spite of tax cuts. It's simple algebra.