Recommendations for 'painless' spending cuts?

Smallc · December 14, 2009

There is never a revenue problem in Canada there is a spending problem.

Repeating something that is wrong (and ignoring all opposing positions) doesn't suddenly make it right.

Machjo · December 14, 2009

Maybe build highway is for stimulate economy so that more people can have job.

In China, they are building railways to stimulate economy, GDP increase of China will be over 8% this year.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8406910.stm

Also from the BBC video:

About 1,000 km takes 3 hours.

13,000 km more high speed railway will be built over the next 3 years.

While I can agree with the government creating jobs, job-creation must never, ever be the primary objective of any job, but always merely an added bonus, with the service provided by that job being the primary objective. A make-work job is just expensive welfare.

Visionseeker · December 14, 2009

We cut the federal fat in the 90's. There's not anything left that could be categorized as painless. The largest remaining expenditures are the military, Old Age Security and prisons.

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

Nope it is clear to him privatize everything, things that make money, things that don't, and no taxes, and no government, privatize the military and give all the money to the Rich. It makes sense to Mr. Canada.

This is actually very close. The government should own almost nothing but have laws in place to govern these things. Taxes reduced to almost nothing. I don't know about you but I want to pay less taxes. The path we're on will only lead to higher and higher taxes forever.

I want very few things "owned" by the government. The military being one of the things that are, of coarse. The only things I want to see funded by my government are Military, Old Age security, Corrections and Policing, Healthcare and Education. That's about it. Everything else should be dumped as it's wasteful. If we only funded these things our taxes would drop by a massive amount.

If the TTC, for example, was private it wouldn't need any money from any government. It would be run much more efficiently for one thing. The amount of waste that goes on within the TTC right now is staggering. A thorough house cleaning is in order.

Petro Canada was a crown corp. as well and it was sold off. So what? Dump this bloated garbage now, Canada Post.

I never said give any money to the rich. I just don't want all my money given to the poor. I don't believe in the redistribution of wealth, sorry. I don't believe that people who do nothing to make themselves better are entitled to anything least of all my money which I worked hard to accumulate.

If we spent less money there wouldn't be a need to raise taxes and our revenue would be enough but since the government at all levels wants to give more and more to special interest groups our taxes will go up forever. I say scrap almost all of it, it's wasteful and has limited success rates anyhow.

How many Billions are wasted on the bloated TTC every year? How much is spent on the LCBO for wages etc? Likewise for Canada Post who strike every 3 years?

That adds up to Billions of dollars in my books. Scrap it and we'll save. These are constantly in the red and make the government nothing yet cost us instead.

Not to mention the billions in foreign aid we've been throwing away to places like Africa for decades. If they cannot get their act together by now they need to be cut off.

Smallc · December 14, 2009

If the TTC, for example, was private it wouldn't need any money from any government. It would be run much more efficiently for one thing. The amount of waste that goes on within the TTC right now is staggering. A thorough house cleaning is in order.

If the TTC had to make money, it would suck, and Toronto wouldn't be the economic engine that it is today.

How many Billions are wasted on the bloated TTC every year? How much is spent on the LCBO for wages etc? Likewise for Canada Post who strike every 3 years?

I'll try this again: The LCBO and Canada Post MAKE MONEY.

That adds up to Billions of dollars in my books.

Don't care about your books.

Not to mention the billions in foreign aid we've been throwing away to places like Africa for decades.

Kind of like people who work at Wal Mart...except people that work at Wal Mart are much better off.

Shwa · December 14, 2009

If the TTC, for example, was private it wouldn't need any money from any government. It would be run much more efficiently for one thing.

This is illustrative of a really interesting concept - that private big businesses are run more efficiently than government ones. This is a persistent notion even though we have seen plenty of evidence of it being patently false.

Nevermind the big multi-national corporations and financial institutions that have been bailed out by billions of tax dollars in the past year, or the big natural resource companies that have sputtered and failed over the years, draining government money along the way or the supplemental monies paid to other corporations through tax breaks, grants, contracts, etc., there is this idea that big business does not incorporate an internal bureaucracy when it most certainly does.

The funny part is that people who want privatization of government services don't realize that most government departments are run like private corporations these days anyway, complete with MBA oriented management, current industry practices and procedures and the same sort of profit-reward system for executives. If you are frustrated by the inefficiency in government services today, it is because of this private corporate orientation. Privatization will only make things worse and more expensive.

Yes we still hear this mantra repeated over and over and over, even in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Shwa

Michael Hardner · December 14, 2009

This is illustrative of a really interesting concept - that private big businesses are run more efficiently than government ones. This is a persistent notion even though we have seen plenty of evidence of it being patently false.

Really ? I'm interested in this topic and I haven't seen any evidence that this is false.

Nevermind the big multi-national corporations and financial institutions that have been bailed out by billions of tax dollars in the past year, or the big natural resource companies that have sputtered and failed over the years, draining government money along the way or the supplemental monies paid to other corporations through tax breaks, grants, contracts, etc., there is this idea that big business does not incorporate an internal bureaucracy when it most certainly does.

Those are side issues to the questions of efficiency though. Certainly bad strategy landed the big auto makers in hot water, but it seems to me that they were very efficient as they headed full speed towards the cliff.

The funny part is that people who want privatization of government services don't realize that most government departments are run like private corporations these days anyway, complete with MBA oriented management, current industry practices and procedures and the same sort of profit-reward system for executives. If you are frustrated by the inefficiency in government services today, it is because of this private corporate orientation. Privatization will only make things worse and more expensive.

Yes we still hear this mantra repeated over and over and over, even in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary.

Can you please indicate how this is so ? If government was increasing in efficiency, and MBAs were behind it I would expect them to be crowing about it to the high heavens, to their political bosses at least. And what politician wouldn't want to spread the good news about how efficient "their" department is ?

punked · December 14, 2009

I want very few things "owned" by the government. The military being one of the things that are, of coarse. The only things I want to see funded by my government are Military, Old Age security, Corrections and Policing, Healthcare and Education. That's about it. Everything else should be dumped as it's wasteful. If we only funded these things our taxes would drop by a massive amount.

You do know that is about 80% of the government budget right? So our taxes wouldn't drop a dime because they would give all those tax cuts to bisuness claiming it would bring more to Canada. You are just wrong. Very poor math.

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

You do know that is about 80% of the government budget right? So our taxes wouldn't drop a dime because they would give all those tax cuts to bisuness claiming it would bring more to Canada. You are just wrong. Very poor math.

I see. So cutting all those corporate entities and cutting almost all social programs wouldn't facilitate a drop in taxes?

Lol. That is all...just lol.

punked · December 14, 2009

I see. So cutting all those corporate entities and cutting almost all social programs wouldn't facilitate a drop in taxes?

Lol. That is all...just lol.

Not if you actually look at the numbers it wouldn't.

segnosaur · December 14, 2009

I just want to point out too all the right wingers on the board. Privatizing government bisuness that makes money is a revenue cut not a spending cut and they make the problem worse.

Not necessarily.

If you're talking about the federal government (or even provincial governments that are currently running a deficit), then selling off profitable government-owned business can bring in revenue that will help pay down the debt. (The end result is that while the government may not have as much revenue coming in, they also won't have to pay out as much in interest servicing the debt.)

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

I just want to point out too all the right wingers on the board. Privatizing government bisuness that makes money is a revenue cut not a spending cut and they make the problem worse.

How much revenue is the TTC generating? They operate at a loss every single quarter. The TTC constantly needs to be bailed out every year by all levels of government...it's a trickle up effect...for those who aren't smart enough to figure out what I'm saying. It could be run much more efficiently if it were privately held.

Same goes for Canada Post. Perhaps items would get delivered much more efficiently if it were privately held as well. Just look at UPS, FedEX etc to see how efficient service can actually be. The snails pace that Canada Post delivers items is appalling,. not to mention CUP goes on strike every other year.

Booze doesn't need to be sold by government employees making $30/hr either. The price of booze would drop considerably if the LCBO didn't have a monopoly on it like they do. They do it in Alberta and everything works out just fine there, why not here too?

Lay off or package out all LCBO employees as well as all Postal workers.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Mr.Canada

Riverwind · December 14, 2009

How much revenue is the TTC generating? They operate at a loss every single quarter.

It is pointless to privatize monopolies that would need to be regulated.

M.Dancer · December 14, 2009

I just want to point out too all the right wingers on the board. Privatizing government bisuness that makes money is a revenue cut not a spending cut and they make the problem worse.

Not always. See alberta's experiance with liquor. They privatized the retail operations but royaties and profits still flow to the public purse. It in the end was revenue neutral and the cfonsumers benefited.

punked · December 14, 2009

How much revenue is the TTC generating? They operate at a loss every single quarter. The TTC constantly needs to be bailed out every year by all levels of government...it's a trickle up effect...for those who aren't smart enough to figure out what I'm saying. It could be run much more efficiently if it were privately held.

Same goes for Canada Post. Perhaps items would get delivered much more efficiently if it were privately held as well. Just look at UPS, FedEX etc to see how efficient service can actually be. The snails pace that Canada Post delivers items is appalling,. not to mention CUP goes on strike every other year.

Booze doesn't need to be sold by government employees making $30/hr either. The price of booze would drop considerably if the LCBO didn't have a monopoly on it like they do. They do it in Alberta and everything works out just fine there, why not here too?

Lay off or package out all LCBO employees as well as all Postal workers.

Canada post made 60 million last year that is how much it made.

http://www.cupw.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/10673/la_id/1.htm

Topaz · December 14, 2009

Why not get rid of Ottawa and let the provinces do their thing. Right now we pay Fed. tax and provincial so get rid of Ottawa and pay only to the provinces. The provinces share the military only. Ottawa pays off the debt and any surplus gets shared BUT under this government there isn't any.IF something serious comes along then the premiers are one that vote and makes the decision. When you think about about much money Ottawa spends, in wages, benefits,etc. all that money could go to the provinces to help more people.

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

Canada post made 60 million last year that is how much it made.

http://www.cupw.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/10673/la_id/1.htm

That's peanuts.

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

Why not get rid of Ottawa and let the provinces do their thing. Right now we pay Fed. tax and provincial so get rid of Ottawa and pay only to the provinces. The provinces share the military only. Ottawa pays off the debt and any surplus gets shared BUT under this government there isn't any.IF something serious comes along then the premiers are one that vote and makes the decision. When you think about about much money Ottawa spends, in wages, benefits,etc. all that money could go to the provinces to help more people.

Yes the federal government should have very little to do with our daily lives and the provinces should have more power to govern as they please.

Decentralization of power. Someone gets it.

punked · December 14, 2009

That's peanuts.

So privatize it and don't get that money at all right? You are really good at bisuness.

Shwa · December 14, 2009

Really ? I'm interested in this topic and I haven't seen any evidence that this is false.

Take your pick:

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0907/gallery.G500_money_losers_fortune.fortune/

http://www.usatoday.com/money/jobcenter/workplace/rules/2002-11-08-corporate-bureaucracy_x.htm

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/05/acting-chief-attacks-corporate-bureaucracy/

Or... make a complaint to Bell or Rogers.

Those are side issues to the questions of efficiency though. Certainly bad strategy landed the big auto makers in hot water, but it seems to me that they were very efficient as they headed full speed towards the cliff.

See all of the above or research some on your own.

Can you please indicate how this is so ?

Indicate what is so? I didn't say that the "government was increasing in efficiency" nor that the "MBAs were behind it." What I did say is that private big businesses run more efficiently than government ones is a false notion. So you'll need to clarify as to what you want indicated.

Mr.Canada · December 14, 2009

So privatize it and don't get that money at all right? You are really good at bisuness.

First learn to spell.

Second, we need less government in our daily lives not more.

I know you Trotskyites are scared of doing it on your own but that's how grown ups do it.

punked · December 15, 2009

First learn to spell.

Second, we need less government in our daily lives not more.

I know you Trotskyites are scared of doing it on your own but that's how grown ups do it.

First learn to take off the blinders. If the government can make money from something that means more revenue and less taxes. I know that escapes you. But if the government needs 100 million to run and they make it all on crown corps they don't need your money. Get over it, you don't understand this simple concept.

Jerry J. Fortin · December 15, 2009

I maintain the issue is one of revenue shortfalls not spending. The government needs more revenues.

Mr.Canada · December 15, 2009

I maintain the issue is one of revenue shortfalls not spending. The government needs more revenues.

More spending means higher taxes. Very simple. We need to limit spending and lower taxes.

The current system we have is spend as much as possible and when you don't have enough revenue just raise taxes or create a new tax. I'm sorry but I'm sick and tired of my taxes going up so some lazy person can benefit from my hard work.

Edited December 15, 2009 by Mr.Canada

Michael Hardner · December 15, 2009

More spending means higher taxes. Very simple. We need to limit spending and lower taxes.

The current system we have is spend as much as possible and when you don't have enough revenue just raise taxes or create a new tax. I'm sorry but I'm sick and tired of my taxes going up so some lazy person can benefit from my hard work.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Canada has no idea how much of his money goes to welfare, but he has me on 'ignore' so I can't ask him.