gordiecanuk Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I'm sure Iggy will be blaming the Conservatives and their sh***y budget, but he endorsed it so that's hollow. And I'm equally sure the Cons will blame the Libs saying they had to cave to Liberal demands because of their minority situation...to spare us another election. The Igster will pull the plug when polling indicates its best...but after that, all bets are off. Harper doesn't want his kids growing up in a Socialist country, and by bankrupting the treasury he's ensuring the government won't be able to afford any of our social programs in a few years time. I'm looking forward to the next election, its gonna be a Liberal/Conservative blood bath...no holds barred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver King Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I'm sure Iggy will be blaming the Conservatives and their sh***y budget, but he endorsed it so that's hollow. And I'm equally sure the Cons will blame the Libs saying they had to cave to Liberal demands because of their minority situation...to spare us another election. The Igster will pull the plug when polling indicates its best...but after that, all bets are off. Harper doesn't want his kids growing up in a Socialist country, and by bankrupting the treasury he's ensuring the government won't be able to afford any of our social programs in a few years time. I'm looking forward to the next election, its gonna be a Liberal/Conservative blood bath...no holds barred. You seem a tad confused, are you asking who will wear the blame for a stimulative budget that might not stimulate or, who is to blame for the economic malaise requiring the attempt at spending our way out of it. If the latter, look no further than Wall Street bankers who promptly awarded themselves $20 billion in bonuses from the initial taxpayer-paid bailout stateside. If you mean who answers for our deficit budget that's an easy one - the govt of the day will take the flak for failure or kudos for its's success. Heres a market tip: don't buy Tory futures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Heres a market tip: don't buy Tory futures. I wouldn't buy liberal or NDP ones either. This looks like a budget that could have come from either of those camps too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordiecanuk Posted January 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 You seem a tad confused, are you asking who will wear the blame for a stimulative budget that might not stimulate or, who is to blame for the economic malaise requiring the attempt at spending our way out of it.If the latter, look no further than Wall Street bankers who promptly awarded themselves $20 billion in bonuses from the initial taxpayer-paid bailout stateside. If you mean who answers for our deficit budget that's an easy one - the govt of the day will take the flak for failure or kudos for its's success. Heres a market tip: don't buy Tory futures. The stimulation won't work, that is a foregone conclusion as far as I'm concerned...there will be no kudos to go around. In fact, this budget is going to make things worse...the government will be bankrupting itself and will not be able to intervene in a meaningful way 5 years out....and maybe that's what Harper wants, a former colleague of Harper's says he ran for the party leadership because he didn't want his kids growing up in a socialist country. After this budget, we won't be able to afford much in the way of social programs 5 years down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver King Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 The stimulation won't work, that is a foregone conclusion as far as I'm concerned.... There is fair chance the treasury vaults will be opening wider in 2009-10 when the true dimensions of the downturn become apparent. Frankly, I hesitate to pan the initial attempt at jump starting a now sputtering economy as this budget could have been written by Jack Layton on a bad day. I console myself with the certainty that voters will eventually hang the man who authorized all the red ink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 There is fair chance the treasury vaults will be opening wider in 2009-10 when the true dimensions of the downturn become apparent. Frankly, I hesitate to pan the initial attempt at jump starting a now sputtering economy as this budget could have been written by Jack Layton on a bad day.I console myself with the certainty that voters will eventually hang the man who authorized all the red ink. IGGY? He was the one who had the power to stop it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 IGGY? He was the one who had the power to stop it. And I have almost no doubt that he will within the next 12 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 And I have almost no doubt that he will within the next 12 months. I''m not sure that he will, if I were him I would let Harper rein until the recession was just about over, and then paint him with the whole mess. If Iggy strikes at the first opportunity he will tarred as an opportunist just like Dion and Layton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 If Iggy strikes at the first opportunity I don't think he will. It will probably happen either at the last budget report in December or at the next budget in just over a year. He may wait longer, but I'm not sure he can afford to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85RZ500 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Hey, they haven't voted on the Liberal budget ammendments yet, I'd wait `till that's overwith. The NDP are fielding attack adds, at Ignatief! The cable guy from NL is saying that their few Liberal MP's are going to vote against the budget This should be fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griz Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I don't think he will. It will probably happen either at the last budget report in December or at the next budget in just over a year. He may wait longer, but I'm not sure he can afford to. Whose to blame? The answer is simple! All the "greedy fat slobs" in this "greedy fat slob society!" of ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Whose to blame? The answer is simple! All the "greedy fat slobs" in this "greedy fat slob society!" of ours. Good Point. However, as for ignatieff accepting the budget, he had little choice. He makes it clear that while there are many things he doesn't like about it, Canadians can't afford to wait for months before it at least appears that someone cares about their future. He knows Canadians are sick of the drama, and just want to get on with it. I think Layton's days are numbered. Where I read support for him a few weeks ago, now it's mainly contempt. Even from NDPers. If probation means three months of calm, let's enjoy those three months. The Liberals are willing to work with the Conservatives, while keeping a watchful eye, and the Conservative execs promise no more juvenile behavour. It took a long time to get there, so enough already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver King Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I think Layton's days are numbered. Where I read support for him a few weeks ago, now it's mainly contempt. Even from NDPers. Jack certainly appears jilted, his carefully planned stint in a coalition cabinet destroyed. Our household has supported the NDP since 2006 with maximum contributions, scrutineering etc., however, our priority remains tossing Harper from govt and, increasingly, the Liberals under Ignatieff represent the surest way to realize this. Until Pat Martin takes the party leadership, we consider ourselves now at home in the Liberal tent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 The stimulation won't work, that is a foregone conclusion as far as I'm concerned...there will be no kudos to go around. In fact, this budget is going to make things worse...the government will be bankrupting itself and will not be able to intervene in a meaningful way 5 years out....and maybe that's what Harper wants, a former colleague of Harper's says he ran for the party leadership because he didn't want his kids growing up in a socialist country. After this budget, we won't be able to afford much in the way of social programs 5 years down the road.It's always a wise course to predict doom-and-gloom. If you are wrong, everyone will be happy and won't care about your wrong prediction.I hardly think that the Conservative budget will bankrupt us. The budget deficit next year will be a "small" $34 billion (on projected spending of around $270 billion). Federal debt is still less than 30% of GDP. The stimulus package itself is about $20 billion which on a per capita basis is less than one quarter of what Obama is trying to obtain. Harper introduced permanent tax cuts (and these have the most likely chance of improving aggregate demand, as well as limiting the size of government in the long run). In addition, the spending measures are specific and limited to the short run. I woudl have preferred larger and broader tax cuts but Harper seems to do things incrementally. He is a conservative after all. ---- Prices go up and down, and economies go up and down. The very strong monetary stimulus has yet to take effect. We are still along way from double-digit unemployment rates and I still see alot of signs in shop windows advertising for employees. Rather, the now always seems dramatic and the past always seems calm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 He is a conservative after all. Could have fooled me. Other than the deficit, I think I'm in love with his budget (in terms of infrastructure and CCG spending...though I wish they would restart the other contract for the CCG). It could be a Liberal budget....if it weren't for the huge deficit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 You seem a tad confused, are you asking who will wear the blame for a stimulative budget that might not stimulate or, who is to blame for the economic malaise requiring the attempt at spending our way out of it.If the latter, look no further than Wall Street bankers who promptly awarded themselves $20 billion in bonuses from the initial taxpayer-paid bailout stateside. If you mean who answers for our deficit budget that's an easy one - the govt of the day will take the flak for failure or kudos for its's success. Heres a market tip: don't buy Tory futures. There is a simple solution, tax bonuses at 99.9%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Could have fooled me. Other than the deficit, I think I'm in love with his budget (in terms of infrastructure and CCG spending...though I wish they would restart the other contract for the CCG). It could be a Liberal budget....if it weren't for the huge deficit.It's conservative in the sense that it doesn't do anything radical. It takes small steps in different, sensible directions.As to the deficit, it just doesn't matter for the federal government. But here too, it is a small deficit when compared to current debt and GDP. Spending is what matters and most of the spending initiatives are limited and are not recurrent. The tax cuts OTOH are modest but permanent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Jack certainly appears jilted, his carefully planned stint in a coalition cabinet destroyed. Our household has supported the NDP since 2006 with maximum contributions, scrutineering etc., however, our priority remains tossing Harper from govt and, increasingly, the Liberals under Ignatieff represent the surest way to realize this. Until Pat Martin takes the party leadership, we consider ourselves now at home in the Liberal tent. I'm with you on Pat Martin. He really deserves the job. It's funny I was reading from an online newspaper and they provided a link to a new facebook page. Can't remember exactly what it was called but something like 'Jack Layton must go'. I read some of the comments and many claimed to be NDP but were fed up. He was making them look foolish. There are a lot of things I liked about Jack layton, and still do; but he's starting to get on my nerves now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I wouldn't buy liberal or NDP ones either. It certainly could have come from the Liberal Camp because they appear pretty happy about it. It's a budget Bob Rae would be proud of, or Brian Mulroney, or maybe even Trudeau. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 IGGY? He was the one who had the power to stop it. agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 IGGY? He was the one who had the power to stop it. We all know the only one who really had the power to stop it was Stephen Harper. He could have stuck to his original pre-election promise "I will never allow a deficit. I will not be forced into a deficit'. Keeping his job was more important than keeping his promises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Until Pat Martin takes the party leadership, we consider ourselves now at home in the Liberal tent. Welcome. I'm new to the tent too. I started voing NDP when the PC Party became extinct. A new NDP leader, especially if it was Pat Martin, could create a bit of a dilemna, though I think I'm going to stick it out with Ignatieff for awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85RZ500 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 (edited) The party in power will be blamed if the economy tanks. But lets get real here. One of the major contributors to the state we're in was the ratcheting up of the price of oil. Fuel went up in lockstep therby reducing the disposable income of the average worker. The ripple efffects were the increases in the costs of transporting goods which in most cases were passed on to the consumer. All this at a time of job losses, those with jobs getting pitifull raises if at all and the clawback of benefits, another reduction in disposible income. If gas goes back up to the high point, all the stimulus in the world won't change a thing. Edited January 30, 2009 by 85RZ500 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 The party in power will be blamed if the economy tanks. But lets get real here. One of the major contributors to the state we're in was the ratcheting up of the price of oil. That was definitly a contributing factor, but not the main one. This is a result of the US economic apocalypse, that is being blamed on market free fall and too many tax cuts. And let's not forget all the wars - Iraq, Afghanistan, War on Terror... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 That was definitly a contributing factor, but not the main one. This is a result of the US economic apocalypse, that is being blamed on market free fall and too many tax cuts. And let's not forget all the wars - Iraq, Afghanistan, War on Terror... Not to suggest that you are talking out of your backside or anything (actually I am), but the wars in east had next to nothing to do with the free falling economy. I'm sure they didn't help, but they're certainly not a main cause in ANY WAY. Tax cuts also help the economy. They always have. Deficits are another matter, but anyways... At least you were on to something as far oil prices were concerned. That might have been the last straw but you can lay MOST of the blame for the economic collapse on idiotic lending practices and garbage regulation insisted upon by the US democrats (they're all idiots, not just Bush and the republicans). The american banks and government were allowing stupid people to get stupid mortgages they couldn't afford which amounted to countless billions of dollar being lost when (big surprise) the mortgages started going bad. The amount of money that dissapeared from the economy when that happened was catastrophic and it caused all sorts of ripples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.