August1991 Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 Despite plans to increase spending on security and public safety, the Harper government expects to cut federal spending by more than $10 billion this year.The Conservative government projects that it will spend $250.8 billion in the 2011-2012 fiscal year. That is a reduction of $10.4 billion from the previous year, and represents a four-per-cent decrease in overall spending, according to federal forecasts tabled Tuesday in Parliament. Ottawa CitizenI will ignore the unseemly spin about "increase spending on security and public safety" in the lead paragraph. I will even ignore that this federal budget comes after a Keynesian boost in spending to counteract a recession. I will finally ignore the creative accounting of modern government budgets. IMHO, I am just happy to see a government claim to limit spending. Too many people look at their tax bill, while others focus on debt. IMV, it is government spending that deserves all the attention. ---- To be sexist, government is like an ex-wife with both your credit card and your debit card. Some people argue that it's bad if she uses your credit card. Debt! Others say it's bad if she uses your debit card. Taxes! I say that it's bad if she spends foolishly - and the method of payment is irrelevant. After all, she's spending someone else's money. ---- Stockwell Day is an honest guy. If he says our federal government is spending less, I'm inclined to believe him. Thank God. We may finally be on the right track. Quote
William Ashley Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 Uhm but according to this they are spending more when taking away the ActionPlan Stimulus funds differential.. actually spending 20+ billion more this year than last without the stimulus. Quote I was here.
Sir Bandelot Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 And so this means I am paying more taxes than ever before, but receiving less services for my money? Yeah sure, I feel good about that. Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 And so this means I am paying more taxes than ever before, but receiving less services for my money? Yeah sure, I feel good about that. That's interesting...I'm paying about $300 less than last year (same income) and about $500 less than the year before.. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Shady Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 And so this means I am paying more taxes than ever before, but receiving less services for my money? Yeah sure, I feel good about that. What services won't you receive next year that you currently receive this year? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 2, 2011 Report Posted March 2, 2011 I am long time left-of-centre voter and I applaud Harper for trying to spend less, as long as he can do it responsibly. I think that he's capable of doing that. I honestly think that a restructuring of the Federal government services machine could result in both lower costs and improved services. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
nicky10013 Posted March 3, 2011 Report Posted March 3, 2011 I am long time left-of-centre voter and I applaud Harper for trying to spend less, as long as he can do it responsibly. I think that he's capable of doing that. I honestly think that a restructuring of the Federal government services machine could result in both lower costs and improved services. It could but as I recall there were going to be cuts last year too, as I recall. Quote
Evening Star Posted March 3, 2011 Report Posted March 3, 2011 To be sexist, government is like an ex-wife with both your credit card and your debit card. Some people argue that it's bad if she uses your credit card. Debt! Others say it's bad if she uses your debit card. Taxes! I say that it's bad if she spends foolishly - and the method of payment is irrelevant. After all, she's spending someone else's money. I agree, which is why I question this government's spending priorities. The huge increase for Correctional Services, for example, seems unwarranted, given all the other areas that need money. Quote
August1991 Posted March 5, 2011 Author Report Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) That's interesting...I'm paying about $300 less than last year (same income) and about $500 less than the year before.. So I can put you in the camp of "let the ex-wife use the credit card as long as she doesn't use debit". Morris, what difference does it make what card she uses?IOW, it's not about debt or taxes. It's about spending. I agree, which is why I question this government's spending priorities. The huge increase for Correctional Services, for example, seems unwarranted, given all the other areas that need money.I tend to agree. But sentences over two years are a federal jurisdiction, and I think that it's a wise signal to send that the federal government is ready to house prisoners - rather than let them go free because of over-crowding. (I sometimes wonder whether sending prisoners to work in the NWT would be a cheaper and better alternative.)Or what about the F-35? If I were Harper, I would spend the $20 billion elsewhere - or not spend it at all. (Imagine!) At least the new penitentiaries and the F35 are clearly within federal jurisdiction. This "Harper Government" seems to respect the Constitution and jurisdiction spending authority. Anyway, it's all about spending - and I'm happy to see that Stockwell "The Goof" Day is claiming that our federal government is spending less. Edited March 5, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Evening Star Posted March 5, 2011 Report Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) Or what about the F-35? If I were Harper, I would spend the $20 billion elsewhere - or not spend it at all. (Imagine!) Me? My impulse is to agree with you but, honestly, I don't know that much about military equipment or our military's needs. Edited March 5, 2011 by Evening Star Quote
Bryan Posted March 5, 2011 Report Posted March 5, 2011 That's interesting...I'm paying about $300 less than last year (same income) and about $500 less than the year before.. Indeed. I'm paying a lot less now than I did before the CPC came to power, and it has been getting better every year. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted March 5, 2011 Report Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) Or what about the F-35? If I were Harper, I would spend the $20 billion elsewhere - or not spend it at all. (Imagine!) The F35 is really a red herring and has nothing to do with this budget - or the next one for that matter. It's $16 billion total - $9 billion is spread over 20 years to buy them and $6 billion spread over 40 years to maintain them. Do your own math but it's less than one billion a year - and we don't start paying until we start receiving them which is a couple of years off yet. Edited March 5, 2011 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
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.