Jump to content

Ignatieff pledges to erase deficit with no new taxes


jdobbin

Recommended Posts

Yeah, and remind me, who was it that demanded that money be spent? Oh right, the Liberals.

And now who is talking about getting rid of the deficit? Oh right, the Liberals.

Now, maybe your party will reveal how they will get rid of it. Flaherty has been pretty cagey about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 260
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just because you have the ships doesn't mean you're ready to use them or necessarily willing to use them. The minute the bombardment started Harper was more worried about defending Israel than actually thinking about getting people home.

These people always seem to reveal themselves sooner or later. It isn't about human rights. It isn't about protecting Canadians abroad. It's about your own rank bigotry. I'm betting Harper isn't anywhere near as racist as you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now who is talking about getting rid of the deficit? Oh right, the Liberals.

No, actually, what they're doing is blaming the deficit on the tories. They have made no suggestions, no statements, no plans, revealed no ideas, nothing about getting rid of it.

"Trust me. I'm from Harvard" seems to be the order of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could do absolutely nothing, and the deficit will shrink substantially with a growing economy, instead of a shrinking one. The recession is WHY there's a deficit.

So, present spending can still happen and the deficit will go away? I don't know any economist who believes that.

But let's not have facts get in the way of Ignatieff's talking points.

Please tell me what jurisdiction ended their deficit without either increases in taxes or decreases in spending?

Certainly revenue can jump but do you think it will get rid of that deficit entirely? You are really convinced of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for a plan to end the deficit, political parties are going to be on the hook for saying something about it even if it a "come hell or high water" speech that Martin gave.

All we're going to get from you guys are vague generalities along with a "who me" look when anyone suggests the deficit is as much your responsibility as it is Harper's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, actually, what they're doing is blaming the deficit on the tories. They have made no suggestions, no statements, no plans, revealed no ideas, nothing about getting rid of it.

And the Tories are blaming the deficit on the economy and the Liberals.

Maybe between the two of them they will start talking about how it will be ended. It is worth having an election over, don't you think? If you don't like what the Liberals offer then, you can continue to vote Tory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now who is talking about getting rid of the deficit? Oh right, the Liberals.

Now, maybe your party will reveal how they will get rid of it. Flaherty has been pretty cagey about that.

And Ignatieff hasn't? It hasn't been Flaherty screaming about the need to spend more, spend faster, bring in new expensive EI programs. That's been Ignatieff. Suddenly he's Mr. Deficit Fighter, but alas, no details.

Talking about getting rid of the deficit without any details is just bullshit and will convince no one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All we're going to get from you guys are vague generalities along with a "who me" look when anyone suggests the deficit is as much your responsibility as it is Harper's.

The Liberals are talking about ending the deficit. Will your party do the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from CTV

From your article.

Here's what you claimed:

Oh please, they didn't even start looking for charters until a month in.

I proved to you it was false. Try to check your facts before you post. And please don't label something as fact if you don't know.

Like this:

In the end, every single person the government refuses to bring back has been a person of colour.

That's b.s. too. Without looking, I can name Amanda Lindhout and Robert Smith. Who's on your list? Why not do some research on people the government has assisted?

And this:

She was whisked away from those pesky Mexicans and brought home to a hero's welcome and she just happened to be a white Christian woman from Alberta.

Citation that she is a Christian? Or did you make that up too because she's white? I noticed you inferred special treatment because she was white in the comment your economist article. What's with that?

(sorry for the thread drift)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we also know is that this deficit had four fathers, three determined and one reluctant, and yours was first among those determined to spend more money.

So now you don't believe that an election over the resulting deficit is not a worthwhile debate for the country to have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chretien benefited by ruling during a time of almost unprecedented, sustained economic world prosperity, especially American prosperity, which meant we benefited from that. He had a lot of money coming in, and was able to pay the bills on time. Had he ruled during Mulroney's time the story would have been far different.

You have said this before. And yet other countries slipped into deficit all around us during these boom times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the Tories are blaming the deficit on the economy and the Liberals.

Maybe between the two of them they will start talking about how it will be ended. It is worth having an election over, don't you think? If you don't like what the Liberals offer then, you can continue to vote Tory.

We had an election 10 months ago. Your party agreed on what to do about it with the Tories no more than six months ago, and that included a massive new deficit. Since then you've been doing nothing but complaining that more needs to be spent, and faster.

Suddenly you're going to solve the deficit. Sheesh. This is another talking point, another poll driven attempt to exploit an issue. You guys need to come up with actual policies or forget about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have said this before. And yet other countries slipped into deficit all around us during these boom times.

But not the Americans, and our economy is tied to theirs. Our economy improved four years or so into Chretien's reign because the American economy improved. Ours went into recession last year because theirs did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why the secrecy?

I have never heard of an entire election platform revealed before an election call is even made. What if the NDP form a coalition with the Tories? What is Harper prorogues Parliament till next year?

Why should the Liberals reveal their entire campaign by detailing everything early? They tried to reveal a major plank before last election with the Green Shift. The problem for the party is that the major election issue became that Liberal plank. The other parties didn't have to talk about cap and trade and its costs. Moreover, the timing of Dion's meant that they unveiled things just before the economy was in a tailspin. I wonder if their platform may have been the economy if they had not made the announcement before the election. It was only when Dion talked about the economy that he was able to salvage himself from an even greater defeat.

So, why the secrecy? To ensure that the other parties are not off the hook in an election. The Liberals are choose the main issue. We'll see of the other parties dance to the tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once that's done, the deficit is mostly gone. Will people actually understand this? I think it could be explained in a fairly simple way.....but we'll see how it plays out......it might just end up being a technical argument that gets negated because of the confusion.

The economists have said the deficit will be around a long time to come. It won't suddenly vanish. Moreover, if we have a downturn again as we do every decade, we might not have even got rid of this deficit before the next cycle.

So...no. No, we can't afford not to plan for 2010. There are plenty of ways for the country to stimulate spending while reducing spending elsewhere. Not all government spending has the same impact when it comes to getting people to work and spending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Telling me your party is the same as the one in power is not going to convince me of the need to hold an election.

The big difference is that the Liberals are talking about the deficit and that they will tackle it. Flaherty has given no indication of what he will do. This will force the Tories to talk about it for which you should be thankful.

It might make you furious but if the Tories offer even more vague ideas, perhaps you might make you put pressure on your party to come clean themselves. No one should get a free ride on the deficit. No one.

So act angry at the Liberals. Say there isn't a plan but for heaven's sake, focus some of that anger on the lot of them and get them to talk about how to end the deficit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had an election 10 months ago. Your party agreed on what to do about it with the Tories no more than six months ago, and that included a massive new deficit. Since then you've been doing nothing but complaining that more needs to be spent, and faster.

Most minorities don't last a year or more.

The Liberals didn't call the last election. Your party did.

Suddenly you're going to solve the deficit. Sheesh. This is another talking point, another poll driven attempt to exploit an issue. You guys need to come up with actual policies or forget about it.

And what is your part's policy on the deficit? You think they have one? Do you think they should have one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But not the Americans, and our economy is tied to theirs. Our economy improved four years or so into Chretien's reign because the American economy improved. Ours went into recession last year because theirs did.

Yes, the Americans. They went into deficit long before we did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But not the Americans, and our economy is tied to theirs. Our economy improved four years or so into Chretien's reign because the American economy improved. Ours went into recession last year because theirs did.

This is precisely why Harper was blowing smoke when he said we were “fine” The recession hadn’t caught up with us in October but it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that as the American Economy goes, so goes ours as they are our largest trading partner. Yet rather than campaigning on an action plan, rather than planning for the worst and hoping for the best he decides to go partisan and attempt to destroy the opposition parties.

Are all parties responsible for the budget and the subsequent debt? Yes. Only the CPC is responsible for the 11th hour nature of it and as the current government of Canada only they are responsible for coming up with a solid concrete plan to reduce the deficit in the future. If they're unwilling or unable to do so then absolutely we need an election. Even though we will only get another minority over it, the only time the CPC acts is when their hand is forced to do so.

I'm afraid the "we'll return to surplus sometime in the future" won't cut it. They need a concrete plan and heretofore we have nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, if that second part is meant to be a pot-shot at the Liberals lack of spending on the military, what exactly have the Tories done?
Most of the major equipment re-hauls or orders were actually placed by Liberal governments with the notable exception of Canada's new C-17s and used Chinook helicopters.

Major DND/CF Investments

Date

Location

Summary of Announcement

Amount

June 25, 2006

CFB Halifax, NS

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC: Three Joint Support Ships (supply ships), and in-service support.

$2.9 billion

June 26, 2006

CFB Valcartier, QC

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC – 2,300 Medium-sized logistics trucks, and in-service support.

$1.1 billion

June 27, 2006

CFB Edmonton, AB

Announced by MND, Min Public Safety and Min PWGSC 16 medium- to heavy-lift helicopters, and in-service support.

$4.7 billion

June 28, 2006

CFB Trenton, ON

Announced by MND, Min PWGSC and Min Industry - four strategic and 17 tactical aircraft, and in-service support.

$8.8 billion

April 12, 2007

La Citadelle -

Quebec City, QC

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC – Purchase of up to 100 Leopard II Main Battle Tanks

$650 million

April 21, 2008

Halifax Shipyards, NS

Victoria Ships Ltd., BC

Announced by MND (East) and Min PWGSC (West) – Refit portion of the Halifax Class Modernization / Frigate Life Extension Project (HCM/FELEX).

$900 million

August 7, 2008

St Hubert, QC

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC – Afghanistan Air Capabilities: six Chartered Helicopters (MI17s), six Chinook Ds, small UAV (Scan Eagle), and two-year tactical (Heron) UAV lease.

$438 million

January 9, 2009

CFB Valcartier, QC

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC – Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS): 1300 Military Commercial Off-the-shelf vehicles (MilCOTS)

$274 million

February 13, 2009

CAE Inc. HQ - Montreal, QC

Announced by the Prime Minister and Min PWGSC – Operational Training System Provider: simulation training for the new CC-130J Hercules fleet

$346 million

March 9, 2009

NDHQ -Ottawa, ON

Announced by MND and Min PWGSC – Two long-term support contracts for the Army’s Land Command Support System (LCSS)

$525 million

July 2, 2009 Montreal, QC Announced by MND and Min PWGSC - the awarding of a contract to Weir Canada Inc. for the operation of the Naval Engineering Test Establishment (NETE). $600 million

May 7, 2007

News Release – 16 Enhanced Road Opening Capability (EROC) vehicles.

$29.6 million

May 10, 2007

News Release - 82 new Armoured Heavy Support Vehicle Systems (AHSVS)

$87 million

May 31, 2006

News Release – 25 additional RG31 Nyala Armoured Patrol Vehicles

$31 million

July 9, 2007

News Release – Purchase of six to eight Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) in support of Prime Minister’s Announcement Event

$4.4 billion

July 8, 2008

PWGSC News Release – LAV III Service and maintenance contract.

$374 million

September 5, 2008

PWGSC News Release – Combat Systems Integration and Command and Control System Portion of the HCM/FELEX project.

$2.0 billion

July 8, 2009 News Release - Current fleet of Light Armoured Vehicles (LAV) III will be upgraded and three new fleets of land combat vehicles will be acquired.

$5.2 billion

Total major investments announced to date: $34.68 Billion All done by the Cons and Mr Harpers Government...

here is a report written in 2000 well into a liberal tour, it explains what the liberals knew about the condition of our military back then....if you could name the liberal projects that address some of these issues....perhaps even the total value of those projects.

2000 report.

wonderful was our Canadian government at purchasing these items, they did so without thinking of allocating money to build hangers for them. Those planes had to spend the entire Canadian winter sitting outdoors on a tarmac at CFB Trenton. So much for supporting the armed forces!

Infra structure projects are not very high on anyone's list....that being said one could hardly blame the government for DND's lack of planning....

Yet more lipservice. Granted, the spending is the highest it has been since WW2, all of it is being poured into Afghanistan and all this equipment will have to be replaced after the mission is over.

Lets not forget who's mission this was, and how unprepared our military waqs to take on that task, so your comment about a bulk of the purchases being bought are for afghan really reflects on all levels and parties....

Also, who saw to it that the RCN was one of the biggest in the world? Mackenzie King and Louis St. Laurent. I'd also like to know what the acceptable standard is for the military these days? Should it be 3rd in the world like back in the good old days when China and India had no economy? They should have modern equipment and for the most part they do (the frigates are some of the best in the world). Delusions of grandeur thinking that a nation of 30 million people can keep up with countries even like the UK is wrongheaded and totally unpragmatic

Acceptable standard is what can the Canadian tax payer afford or want.....it has nothing to do with NEEDS....

do we need the 3 rd largest navy in the world....NO, but we do need one that can defend our coast lines., and carry out of foreign policies.....and that requires more than a few ships we have now....even a die hard liberal can see that...So nobody is asking to keep up with the jones....just able to do the job assigned to them....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is precisely why Harper was blowing smoke when he said we were “fine” The recession hadn’t caught up with us in October but it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that as the American Economy goes, so goes ours as they are our largest trading partner. Yet rather than campaigning on an action plan, rather than planning for the worst and hoping for the best he decides to go partisan and attempt to destroy the opposition parties.

Are all parties responsible for the budget and the subsequent debt? Yes. Only the CPC is responsible for the 11th hour nature of it and as the current government of Canada only they are responsible for coming up with a solid concrete plan to reduce the deficit in the future. If they're unwilling or unable to do so then absolutely we need an election. Even though we will only get another minority over it, the only time the CPC acts is when their hand is forced to do so.

I'm afraid the "we'll return to surplus sometime in the future" won't cut it. They need a concrete plan and heretofore we have nothing.

The $50B stimulus funds do not continue as a year-to-year deficit - they are one-off spending. We borrowed money to inject stimulus into the economy and that money gets added to our national debt - we pay interest on it as we continue to pay it down over the time. Remember all the "surplus" money that Harper and the Conservatives used to pay down the National Debt? Well, now we're borrowing it back. The structural deficit (money that's required every year) on the other hand is affected by a decrease in revenues because of the recession - we're not taking in enough money to pay for our programs - so we're running an operating deficit. That will clear up when the economy gets rolling....so maybe the next 3 or 4 years may show a declining deficit until the economy really starts to roll. That shortfall in revenues is what we have to worry about - not the 50 billion that we borrowed on a one-time basis. That's the point that hopefully, people will start to understand.....but it's an advantage to the other parties that people don't.

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will clear up when the economy gets rolling....so maybe the next 3 or 4 years may show a declining deficit until the economy really starts to roll. That shortfall in revenues is what we have to worry about - not the 50 billion that we borrowed on a one-time basis. That's the point that hopefully, people will start to understand.....but it's an advantage to the other parties that people don't.

This idea that the deficit will disappear on its own is not supported even by our own Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...