McGuinty government to get rid of deficit by 2018...

[Moonbox]

We went from a promise to not raise taxes when he took over, to new record deficits that for some reason can't be fixed for SEVEN years???

Telling us the deficit won't be taken care of for seven years is pretty much the same thing as telling us they have no intention of addressing it at all. It's pathetic.

[Shakeyhands]

this all sounds vaguely familiar.... but I don't hear you complaining about other pledges that others whom you support make..... weird

[Moonbox]

this all sounds vaguely familiar.... but I don't hear you complaining about other pledges that others whom you support make..... weird

Who do I 'support'? Nobody really. I think they're all clowns. Some better than others. Even Flaherty is looking to mostly slay the federal deficit by 2014. Add 3-4 years to that and those are some pretty unambitious targets.

[Shakeyhands]

Who do I 'support'? Nobody really. I think they're all clowns. Some better than others. Even Flaherty is looking to mostly slay the federal deficit by 2014. Add 3-4 years to that and those are some pretty unambitious targets.

I'd think the extra 3-4 years is at least more honest and reasonable.

Edited March 23, 2010 by Shakeyhands

[nicky10013]

I'd think the extra 3-4 years is at least more honest and reasonable.

Indeed, no economist but flaherty (who isn't even an economist, he's a lawyer) and Harper believe that the deficit is going to be wound down by that time. Even then, the target is 2015 and even at that, there will still be a 1.5 billion deficit. So, at least the Ontario government is shooting to be deficit free.

[Moonbox]

Indeed, no economist but flaherty (who isn't even an economist, he's a lawyer) and Harper believe that the deficit is going to be wound down by that time.

Wrong. It seems some of the biggest names in economics in Canada are agreeing with him, or are even more optimistic.

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Economists+give+Flaherty+boost+budget+debate/2646680/story.html

I'm at work and can't use the normal link function sorry. At any rate, these are just a handful of the people who DO think it's possible/likely.

Even then, the target is 2015 and even at that, there will still be a 1.5 billion deficit. So, at least the Ontario government is shooting to be deficit free.

1.5 billion on the federal level is peanuts, so it might as well be zero. Regardless, the target in Ontario is 3-4 years BEYOND even Flaherty's half-assed stab at the budget. Personally I'd prefer to see it gone in 2ish years max and see a cut back in program spending, but nobody is offering that option.

[Jack Weber]

Wrong. It seems some of the biggest names in economics in Canada are agreeing with him, or are even more optimistic.

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Economists+give+Flaherty+boost+budget+debate/2646680/story.html

I'm at work and can't use the normal link function sorry. At any rate, these are just a handful of the people who DO think it's possible/likely.

1.5 billion on the federal level is peanuts, so it might as well be zero. Regardless, the target in Ontario is 3-4 years BEYOND even Flaherty's half-assed stab at the budget. Personally I'd prefer to see it gone in 2ish years max and see a cut back in program spending, but nobody is offering that option.

I wonder if anyone,other than McGuinty and his friends,thinks that the Liberal will be in a position of power by the fall of '11 let alone 8 years from now?

[nicky10013]

I wonder if anyone,other than McGuinty and his friends,thinks that the Liberal will be in a position of power by the fall of '11 let alone 8 years from now?

Well, the challenge won't be coming from the right. Tim Hudak pretty much ensures another Liberal government. The most intelligent thing he and his caucus does is pound their hands on their desk because they don't like what they hear. They're so mature that they cat-called LG David Onley during the throne speech. This guy is a bigger gaffe machine than John Tory which says a lot.

[nicky10013]

Wrong. It seems some of the biggest names in economics in Canada are agreeing with him, or are even more optimistic.

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Economists+give+Flaherty+boost+budget+debate/2646680/story.html

I'm at work and can't use the normal link function sorry. At any rate, these are just a handful of the people who DO think it's possible/likely.

All the big banks on CBC during budget day all pretty much said that these numbers are valid if absolutely nothing goes wrong.

1.5 billion on the federal level is peanuts, so it might as well be zero. Regardless, the target in Ontario is 3-4 years BEYOND even Flaherty's half-assed stab at the budget. Personally I'd prefer to see it gone in 2ish years max and see a cut back in program spending, but nobody is offering that option.

1.5 billion might as well be 0??????????? Are you nuts? Here I thought Conservatives were fiscally responsible.

[Jack Weber]

Well, the challenge won't be coming from the right. Tim Hudak pretty much ensures another Liberal government. The most intelligent thing he and his caucus does is pound their hands on their desk because they don't like what they hear. They're so mature that they cat-called LG David Onley during the throne speech. This guy is a bigger gaffe machine than John Tory which says a lot.

Hudak's a Harrisite boob!

I'm afraid to admit that he's my MPP...I'VE NEVER VOTED FOR HIM!!!!

It should be noted that he also backed Jim Flaharty when Slasher Jimmy was running for the PC leadership.The same Flaharty who thought jailing the homeless was a good idea.He's also married to Deb Hutton,who was an advisor to Mike Harris...Just in case anyone wants to know the direction Hudak might take this province if we have the great misfortune of finding out...

[Moonbox]

All the big banks on CBC during budget day all pretty much said that these numbers are valid if absolutely nothing goes wrong.

Okay...so if all things are equal...Flaherty's projections were right according to them???

1.5 billion might as well be 0??????????? Are you nuts? Here I thought Conservatives were fiscally responsible.

On the federal level it's a drop in the bucket. Take a look at our national debt level. Tell me if 1.5 billion is a big deal relative to that.

[Moonbox]

The same Flaharty who thought jailing the homeless was a good idea.He's also married to Deb Hutton,who was an advisor to Mike Harris...Just in case anyone wants to know the direction Hudak might take this province if we have the great misfortune of finding out...

I'd take Harris back in a second over McGuinty.

[Jack Weber]

I'd take Harris back in a second over McGuinty.

In a majority situation???

Yeeesh

Been there,seen that...

[Moonbox]

In a majority situation???

Yeeesh

Been there,seen that...

Other than the 407 at least he didn't piss money into the wind. Crybaby Dalton is worse than anything we have on the federal level, Liberal or Conservative.

[Smallc]

Or maybe, they're just padding the numbers.....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/03/24/to-duncan-deficit.html

If I had to guess, I would say that may provinces will eliminate their deficits ahead of schedule.

[Moonbox]

Or maybe, they're just padding the numbers.....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/03/24/to-duncan-deficit.html

If I had to guess, I would say that may provinces will eliminate their deficits ahead of schedule.

I'm not optimistic. Spending increases under Dalton were pathetic even leading up to the recession. Harper and Flaherty were no gems either, but at least we were headed for red because of tax decreases. At least everyone enjoyed some benefit to that. McGuinty increased taxes and still blew us out of the water.

[DFCaper]

I'm not optimistic. Spending increases under Dalton were pathetic even leading up to the recession. Harper and Flaherty were no gems either, but at least we were headed for red because of tax decreases. At least everyone enjoyed some benefit to that. McGuinty increased taxes and still blew us out of the water.

For this reason, I will be voting for Hudak, as sad as that sounds. I am so sick of Dalton and he's lies and over spending. I used to think that in reality, that Liberals were more fiscally responsible than the Cons, but McGuinty is truly a tax and spend liberal. He has taken out over $2000 per person in this province. For my family, who happens to be at above the average income/tax payer, I am betting that works to over $10000. This year alone!!! And that's just provincially. I just think that he's send up towards bankruptcy if he gets re-elected. I'll take my chances with Hudak, as he has potential to not be a corrupt government that always increases taxes so he can spend more. I see Dalton as a worst case scenario.

[Jack Weber]

For this reason, I will be voting for Hudak, as sad as that sounds. I am so sick of Dalton and he's lies and over spending. I used to think that in reality, that Liberals were more fiscally responsible than the Cons, but McGuinty is truly a tax and spend liberal. He has taken out over $2000 per person in this province. For my family, who happens to be at above the average income/tax payer, I am betting that works to over $10000. This year alone!!! And that's just provincially. I just think that he's send up towards bankruptcy if he gets re-elected. I'll take my chances with Hudak, as he has potential to not be a corrupt government that always increases taxes so he can spend more. I see Dalton as a worst case scenario.

I live in Hudak's riding...I won't take a chance on that Harrisite thug at all...Perhaps a Liberal minority with the con's with increased seats,but no con majority.

[Smallc]

Harper and Flaherty were no gems either, but at least we were headed for red because of tax decreases.

Yes, because that's always so much better than needed program spending....

[Moonbox]

Yes, because that's always so much better than needed program spending....

Much of what you say is 'needed' I (and many others) would say is 'wasteful' program spending. If we're going into debt, I'd much rather it be because I saved money instead of because of handouts and spending increases for lazy deadbeats. When Mike Harris went after welfare, teachers (who at the time had probably the cushiest jobs in North America) etc, I was in heaven.

As long as basic things like healthcare are looked after, I'll vote for anyone who's going to make government smaller.

[Smallc]

Much of what you say is 'needed' I (and many others) would say is 'wasteful' program spending. If we're going into debt, I'd much rather it be because I saved money

And that's fine, but your opinion is no more valuable than those who would rather the money be spent on things like education and training....on making sure that people have food, drug rehab programs, etc.

I say we don't need tax cuts when they put us in deficit. I'd say there's no good way to go into a structural deficit. This deficit (for almost every government in Canada) wasn't really the fault of those particular governments, whether they were cutting taxes or increasing spending.

[Moonbox]

I say we don't need tax cuts when they put us in deficit. I'd say there's no good way to go into a structural deficit. This deficit (for almost every government in Canada) wasn't really the fault of those particular governments, whether they were cutting taxes or increasing spending.

I'll agree with your first point, that being there's no good way to go into deficit, but I have some problems with your second point. While it was almost unavoidable to go into deficit due to stimulus spending for the recession, program spending was going sky-high leading up to it in the first place, particularly in Ontario but on the federal level as well.

Recession and stimulus can account for a few years of deficit, but when it takes close to 10 years to get back to the black there are obvious structural shortfalls.

On the federal level, much of our continuing deficit comes from tax cuts. Personally I'd rather they use what they would have earned without the cuts to prevent or pay back the deficit, but that's another story altogether.

In Ontario, however, we've had significant tax increases since McGuinty came to power, and we're still going to be running a deficit longer and harder than even the federal Conservatives are. The main thing you and I seem to argue on regularly (and I'm sure we'll never convince each other otherwise) is that you seem to think program spending and big government is inherently good whereas I take a much more cynical view and see it as wasteful. I don't think I could think of a better example than the one you brought up of drug rehab centres. Those are the epitome of useless and wasteful spending. The success rate for these abominations is something like 2-6%.

I'm almost positive you could come up with a 2-6% rehabilitation rate without any rehab centres at all.

I could go over all sorts of things like this that I consider wasteful government spending and you would probably disagree on all of them. There is no slight intended to you when I say this, but it would be very interesting to see how your opinion changes when you're a little bit older, have a career/family, and are paying any meaningful taxes yourself.

[madmax]

We went from a promise to not raise taxes when he took over, to new record deficits that for some reason can't be fixed for SEVEN years???

Telling us the deficit won't be taken care of for seven years is pretty much the same thing as telling us they have no intention of addressing it at all. It's pathetic.

Just pull your hair out and it will all be over...

How's that fairy tale character that slept for 7 years? Was that Rip Van Winkle? If i just lay down and get up 7 years later, everything will be ok.

Unfortuneately, we all know that we have been dealing with Pinochio and his nose is still growing.

[Topaz]

I think I read somewhere that if the Ontario had a "yardsale" they think they could be out this deficit BUT would Ontarians go for it? Thoughts?

[Moonbox]

I think I read somewhere that if the Ontario had a "yardsale" they think they could be out this deficit BUT would Ontarians go for it? Thoughts?

That doesn't address the problem. They're talking about selling the LCBO. It's a cash cow for the province and it would be akin to Mike Harris selling off the 407. It makes the budget look good for a year . Then what?