Harper's Economic Statement

[daniel]

Just curious.

Edited June 12, 2009 by daniel

[ToadBrother]

Just curious.

There should be another option; "somewhere in between".

[Topaz]

There should be another option; "somewhere in between".

what, somewhere in between BUT he's thinks he's always right.

[tango]

Flaherty says budget officer 'wrong' to predict long-term deficits

By Alexander Panetta – 4 hours ago

OTTAWA — Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has dismissed a prediction of deeper, longer-term deficits from Parliament's budget watchdog.

He rejected analysis from Kevin Page, the parliamentary budget officer, that major spending cuts or tax hikes will be the only way to get Canada out of the red within five years.

Past warnings from Page have proven accurate. But Flaherty says he's off-base this time, because the bleak prediction is based on unduly pessimistic economic-growth projections.

"He's wrong," Flaherty told journalists in a conference call from a G8 finance ministers' meeting in Lecce, Italy.

"Because he says growth rates likely will be slower than I had predicted. Now, if you make an assumption with respect to lower growth rates, then you get the results that he postulates.

"But anybody can do that."

The government says it should easily return to surpluses after five years, as the economy improves and higher federal revenues restore Ottawa's balance sheets.

However, since the last election campaign, the government's projections have consistently been rosier than reality.

The Tories were promising a balanced budget until the end of the year, then tabled a $34 billion deficit in January, and finally ramped up their deficit forecast last month to more than $50 billion.

Over that time Page, and several private-sector analysts, have repeatedly warned that the books were in worse shape.

The Toronto Dominion Bank now projects $167 billion in deficits over five years - almost double what the government forecasts - and expects a $19.4 billion deficit in 2013-14, the year Flaherty foresees a return to surplus.

Page has said that he can't envision a five-year return to surplus without a government move to significantly cut spending or increase revenue.

The Bank of Canada expects the economy to shrink 3 per cent this year - almost quadruple the 0.8 per cent drop forecast in Flaherty's January budget.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...U-aKPnbB6z2TT_g

Oh now ... let me think ... who's right ... the politicians ... or the professionals?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

This guy, our Finance Minister, hasn't been right yet. The pundit hasn't been wrong, now who do you want to listen to?

[Oleg Bach]

This guy, our Finance Minister, hasn't been right yet. The pundit hasn't been wrong, now who do you want to listen to?

All Harper knows it that Canadian banks have horded - "we are in good shape" as the bankers say --- they actually include us in their statement...just wish they would free up some cash and I wish that these rich guys would connect with the thought that NOT everyone has money ---- they really believe we all have money - This is normal to them - they have been rich for so long they assume all in the world have bus fare and enough cash to step out and get a steak in a nice place - I remember 30 years ago I was living with a rich girl and we ran out of cash and money --- so she called up a friend of the family - instead of taking us out grocery shopping ---------------he took us to a very expensive resturant - and we were back to hungry the next day - rich people do not think like us ----why would a person who has never felt cold - know what cold is?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

All Harper knows it that Canadian banks have horded - "we are in good shape" as the bankers say --- they actually include us in their statement...just wish they would free up some cash and I wish that these rich guys would connect with the thought that NOT everyone has money ---- they really believe we all have money - This is normal to them - they have been rich for so long they assume all in the world have bus fare and enough cash to step out and get a steak in a nice place - I remember 30 years ago I was living with a rich girl and we ran out of cash and money --- so she called up a friend of the family - instead of taking us out grocery shopping ---------------he took us to a very expensive resturant - and we were back to hungry the next day - rich people do not think like us ----why would a person who has never felt cold - know what cold is?

Been there and done that too! The thing is you can't expect to campaign from the left and win a government. Most folks are getting by and they pay their taxes and want their services, but they sure as hell hate paying the government their hard earned money. To campaign a platform of handing out more tax dollars has two very distinct consequences, one is bigger deficits and increased debt, the other is higher levels of taxation to cover the increased expenditures. The fools wants more service and is unwilling to pay for them, the wiser citizen understands that the two are linked.

A vast majority of Canadians work for someone else for a living and they make out okay. There is the functional demographic, the vast majority of working citizens. Of all of these folks there are of course a large pile of partisans who split votes six ways from Sunday to give us minority governments, yet there is an even larger pile of citizens, with the one caveat, they simply don't vote. This is where our answers can be found! This group COULD HAVE CONTROL, if they got off their collective asses and showed up at the polls. Soon or later somebody in politics will finally figure this out and do something about it.

To actually get these citizens to break down and participate in democracy they will require a carrot, so to speak. They will want to know what is in it for them. Well before anybody starts counting chickens, they need a hen that will lay eggs. They need a political platform that will serve THEIR needs. The only thing that will serve these people is an increase in their disposable income. Give them more money to spend on things they want and you will have them supporting you. This usually done in the old tried and true technique of buying votes with government programs and services. The partisan politicians regularly drag out plans that specifically target this group or that group to capture a larger market share of potential voters. The right wing serves the upper middle class, the left wing serves the labour groups, and the Liberals reach for the centre and want everybody's vote. They all have agendas that compell governments and politicians to provide an never ending string of programs and services. None of these groups advocates anything more than spending tax dollars and that means less money for the citizens and more money for the government. There is no question as to why there are so many bureaucrats, they are needed to handle all of the programs and services that politicians have convinced the public they need. Don't get me wrong, some of these programs are useful and needed, in fact most of the programs and services we now have are needed because the government has made it that way. To return to the point, the best way to increase individual disposable income is to reduce the tax load on the citizen. Do that and citizens will support you. Cutting programs and services does the opposite, so it is a difficult line to walk. Thankfully, there is a lot of fat in bureaucracy, and huge savings could be realized through trimming it. The down side to this is the number of bureaucrats, because of the size of this demographic most politicians run and hide. Even so, the administrative costs can be rationalized to a large degree by attrition and amalgamation of working groups. There is definitely a way to do it properly, it just takes guts and a political will.

[Oleg Bach]

The tragic part is that these non-voters that you mentioned are usually of a higher intelligence level - they are jaded - and have lost faith...in the end they will pay for their non-participation - as the brighter retract their services - the partizans will march forward and take over completely - those that are partizan by their very nature are game players and do not grasp the big picture - in other words slightly dumber than the non-voters..and that is the serious problem - the partizans take position of authorship and they simply are poor writers of laws and have disinhibited judgement. Given enough time you will see the effect of partizan power federally -----Perfect micro-comic example are the super partizans that have taken over Toronto - LOOK - and view one of their meetings ------there people are not fit to run a day care let alone a city - and our smug superiour non-voters are under the control of poor and inept leaders that bring the quality of life down for all...

The term nobleman - meant generous - and aristocrat meant best to rule - our nobles are not doing their jobs and are aristocrats - think they are too good for politics...so the partizanism will grow and eventurally in years to come - out comes the gilotine...when the collective becomes to large - and beastly a leader rises - first thing he does is kill all the non--partizans - the non-voters - the intelligensia....Don't laugh- historically this happens always - and it could happen here! Given enough time - then we have a grey soviet style hell. Because we did not walk to the ballot box or personally run for office.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The tragic part is that these non-voters that you mentioned are usually of a higher intelligence level - they are jaded - and have lost faith...in the end they will pay for their non-participation - as the brighter retract their services - the partizans will march forward and take over completely - those that are partizan by their very nature are game players and do not grasp the big picture - in other words slightly dumber than the non-voters..and that is the serious problem - the partizans take position of authorship and they simply are poor writers of laws and have disinhibited judgement. Given enough time you will see the effect of partizan power federally -----Perfect micro-comic example are the super partizans that have taken over Toronto - LOOK - and view one of their meetings ------there people are not fit to run a day care let alone a city - and our smug superiour non-voters are under the control of poor and inept leaders that bring the quality of life down for all...

The term nobleman - meant generous - and aristocrat meant best to rule - our nobles are not doing their jobs and are aristocrats - think they are too good for politics...so the partizanism will grow and eventurally in years to come - out comes the gilotine...when the collective becomes to large - and beastly a leader rises - first thing he does is kill all the non--partizans - the non-voters - the intelligensia....Don't laugh- historically this happens always - and it could happen here! Given enough time - then we have a grey soviet style hell. Because we did not walk to the ballot box or personally run for office.

It need not be that way. For the first time in human history the largest single demographic is a retired baby boomer. Never before have we had so many senior citizens. These people don't need to work for the most part, and are also reasonably well educated. Very soon, someone will figure this out and start to utilize these folks to start acting like "elders" and begin to spread a political word or two. They are ideal as door knockers, greeters, and can speak with the voice of experience. They are also able to give their time freely, which in most cases is available all year long.

I will admit that will still live in a class based society, but the definitions have changed as you say. We need to use that little piece of knowledge to the benefit of all citizens.

[Randy Nicholas]

There should be another option; "somewhere in between".

The problem with Canada is that too many people are content to sit on the fence about everything forever.

Edited June 14, 2009 by Randy Nicholas