Harper’s shadow public service

[Moonbox]

Hmmm, scary? Yup!

I thought you just said that GIVING MONEY (taxbreaks and government service contracts) to Corporations for nothing (services performed by the public service anyway) to those same Corporations that SUPPORT the Government is somehow DIFFERENT than what happened with the Sponsorship scandal... How so?

Here's a much more DIRECT example...

Big bucks: Harper government's ad buy costs taxpayers $26 million

Sure looks like the EXACT SAME THING except a WHOLE LOT WORSE because it's a GOVERNMENT POLICY rather than just a FEW Liberal outsiders looking to PROFIT from a crisis (the breakup of Canada)...

Using CAPITALS and BOLDING does not really make your argument any STRONGER.

Outsourcing government contracts to PRIVATE companies is FINE if you are actually paying for SERVICES at a decent BUCK. That's no different than paying public sector employees to do the SAME thing.

Adscam provided no SERVICES and WAS nothing but FRAUD

I'm sorry you can't see the difference...for your sake and for your poor childrens'.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Moonbox

[Moonbox]

Why do you think they are more expensive?

Y'know, a full accounting of the identities of all the various freelancers and consultants employed by the Harper Government would be interesting, if only for the time one could spend connecting them to Conservative causes and/or connections.

Sure. We should always have a full accounting of these sorts of things. I would hope that it's being done.

As for why do I think it's more expensive, that could be for a number of reasons. You could be getting better/more effective servicing. The nature of the jobs themselves could be completely different. A huge part of it is probably the way accounting is done. When we say a private sector contractor does the work more expensively, is that comparing the wages and the profits they take merely to what you would pay public sector employees as a wage, or are you comparing it their long term costs? The effective salary of a public sector employee skyrockets once you include their benefits and pension plans.

[GWiz]

Using CAPITALS and BOLDING does not really make your argument any STRONGER.

Outsourcing government contracts to PRIVATE companies is FINE if you are actually paying for SERVICES at a decent BUCK. That's no different than paying public sector employees to do the SAME thing.

Adscam provided no SERVICES and WAS nothing but FRAUD

I'm sorry you can't see the difference...for your sake and for your poor childrens'.

That's completely FALSE... A LIE even...

What's the matter, you don't know a damn thing about "AdScam" or the "Sponsorship Scandal" do you? You just liked the sound of it because it involved "Liberals"... Now that it's your party doing THE SAME THING in spades you don't seem to like it quite as much...

No wonder you're all upset about it...

[William Ashley]

Everything is costing Harper more - and this is with a relatively stronger dollar. (and for services not goods)

The size of the cabinet went up, the size of the PMO, the size of political staffing --- oh and while corporate taxes have gone down - income taxes are bringing in more money...

Yet spending is dramatically higher and has been runing deficit after they spent a multi billion dollar surplus in like a year.

They have racked up to date a third of the previous debt of the last 100 years. AND they have allocated more debt through bonds than that amount. (totaling about the previous total debt) So if the don't pull money from no where then it basically means if they were to win an election that "personal staffs would go up" the debt would double from 2006. Corporate taxes would go down, they would need to increase taxes by 10 billion a year (2% increase on income tax revenues atleast annually)

this all with "big spending and debt"

that debt of course has interst... meaning that the higher it is the less direct spending can be made.. this is called the debt to GDP ratio - which is increasing. This higher it gets the less money you actually have, so those 2% income tax increases still down account for debt interst, meaning to break even and provide the same funding you would need to increase income taxes even higher so say another 2-4% per annum. Until the debt is reigned in - forcast for about 2016.. if they pull money from no where (and you know where it has to be pulled from)

Basically so far the goal seems to be replace the "government staff" with political staff. Remove government employees and replace their duties with political staff.

Oh and the pension issue and health issue (rack on another 2-5% per year to income taxes)

so it is about a 10% income tax hike (on tax revenue) per year required to balance their budget as is. It is a gradual hike though. that will increase over the next 10 years.

If you look at the going in, going out... what you are left with is way higher taxes, way less money, and this makes providing for programs in the future more difficult.

Especially pensions.

bear in mind a 10% increase is only 25 billion dollars.. a year. they debt spent twice that last year. This is not new... There are 15 years of 10% increase just to pay off previous fiscal mistakes and another 10 - just to pay off the future mistakes written already. And they are tacking on more time.

Canada's population is aging, that is like a person aging. 2020 work force numbers are going to be ratioed catastrophically. and old age wealth is very well protected these days.. the government will find it more difficult to access it.

They are going to need to find it somewhere. Sure 30 year bonds have an advantage that they don't crap out till the world does but it isn't fair 30 years down the road.

END TAXES!!! END THE EXTORTION, END THE REMOVAL OF ECONOMIC FREEDOM! FREE CANADA, END TAXED CANADA! FREE THE PEOPLE!

Edited March 14, 2011 by William Ashley

[GWiz]

Everything is costing Harper more - and this is with a relatively stronger dollar. (and for services not goods)

The size of the cabinet went up, the size of the PMO, the size of political staffing --- oh and while corporate taxes have gone down - income taxes are bringing in more money...

Yet spending is dramatically higher and has been runing deficit after they spent a multi billion dollar surplus in like a year.

They have racked up to date a third of the previous debt of the last 100 years. AND they have allocated more debt through bonds than that amount. (totaling about the previous total debt) So if the don't pull money from no where then it basically means if they were to win an election that "personal staffs would go up" the debt would double from 2006. Corporate taxes would go down, they would need to increase taxes by 10 billion a year (2% increase on income tax revenues atleast annually)

this all with "big spending and debt"

that debt of course has interst... meaning that the higher it is the less direct spending can be made.. this is called the debt to GDP ratio - which is increasing. This higher it gets the less money you actually have, so those 2% income tax increases still down account for debt interst, meaning to break even and provide the same funding you would need to increase income taxes even higher so say another 2-4% per annum. Until the debt is reigned in - forcast for about 2016.. if they pull money from no where (and you know where it has to be pulled from)

Basically so far the goal seems to be replace the "government staff" with political staff. Remove government employees and replace their duties with political staff.

I agree completely... If Harper isn't stopped we'll be in the same shape we were in post Harper's mentor lyin' Brian MORONey, maybe EVEN WORSE...

[Scotty]

Outsourcing is done for two reasons. The first reason is the day to day hiring of lower level staff on a temporary and semi temporary basis. This is done because government hiring systems are horrifically complex, time-consuming, and expensive. Say you want to hire a temporary clerk to see to an expected surge in work, and you need them for one month. It will take you about a year to go through all the processes in order to hire them. Far easier and cheaper to just hire a temp.

The second reason is the hiring of highly skilled/experienced consultants at a higher level, for IT and management consulting. The government has to hire them externally because, while this might go against the grain to those who hate the public service, public service salaries are too low to attract or keep these types of people. They can make far more in the private sector. The wage differential between the public and private sector (at higher levels) has been growing for some years now, which is why the government has to hire private sector 'consultants' for a lot of jobs.

[Shakeyhands]

All this talk and defense of the CPC and the fact remains that the costs were almost double for the same work. Wow...

[William Ashley]

Outsourcing is done for two reasons. The first reason is the day to day hiring of lower level staff on a temporary and semi temporary basis. This is done because government hiring systems are horrifically complex, time-consuming, and expensive. Say you want to hire a temporary clerk to see to an expected surge in work, and you need them for one month.

There is why there ought to be a better CIVIL SERVICE RESERVE. Like the CF but for the civil service. People could get tax credit for the work they do and prestige and awards, and entry into an annual 5 million dollar lottery. (the reserve forces for the CF should have similiar rewards) (also the service should be able to nominate some members from within itself for distinction and reward) Say 10$ per man hour is saved - and 50,000 people volunteer, in a year 10 hours would have to be served in a year by each member to make up the cost of the lottery. (and they would have a 1 in 50,000 chance of winning 5 million dollars) of course you might set the limit like 20 hours of service for 5 million.. or however many hours served totoal by the total membership and cost savings it would go back into the lottery. So the more money saved the more money won. The exact formula might change a bit to insure that the odds of winning are high. as to the total participants. And perhaps special reards can be given from a list like the chance to fly in a fighter jet after x number of hours, or a tour on a CF navy vessel, or the chance to ride in a government limosene, or the allowance to drive top speed at an indy 500 , or other DREAM selections for people at random from the program and those reaching benchmarks those with citations and those with the most service. Free airfare during government aircraft transports on a first come first serve basis when other government employees are being flown on private jets. The package could be numerous and things people couldn't get any other way. I could probably think up a really good list.

Plus government employee percs, access to government facilities AND knowing they are lowering their taxes. For every dollar saved through the program 50 cents could go to charity, and the other 50 cents to the tax payer.

Oh and the military should could handle "peak demand work" also like a couple hours a day during high load periods.

Most consulting work is just like saying. "I'm stupid do this for me." The more money the government spends on consulting the more they admit they have no fing clue what they are doing or how they should do it.

To me it just sounds like a way of cleaning payoffs.

Its the only reason I can think of to hire a consultant - to funnel, bribe someone or admit you are stupid.

Christs sake parliament can force people to give information through a summons to the bar there is no legal requirement to pay consultants, they are legally obligated to supply information to parliament. People can be imprisoned indefinately by parliament - it is sadly legal. (very scary with a prospect of conservatives attaining a majority. It should be an HONOUR to serve your countries needs.

lets get real though they are all on the lam.

Edited March 15, 2011 by William Ashley

[capricorn]

Plus government employee percs, access to government facilities AND knowing they are lowering their taxes. For every dollar saved through the program 50 cents could go to charity, and the other 50 cents to the tax payer.

Oh and the military should could handle "peak demand work" also like a couple hours a day during high load periods.

Most consulting work is just like saying. "I'm stupid do this for me." The more money the government spends on consulting the more they admit they have no fing clue what they are doing or how they should do it.

To me it just sounds like a way of cleaning payoffs.

Its the only reason I can think of to hire a consultant - to funnel, bribe someone or admit you are stupid.

Christs sake parliament can force people to give information through a summons to the bar there is no legal requirement to pay consultants, they are legally obligated to supply information to parliament. People can be imprisoned indefinately by parliament - it is sadly legal. (very scary with a prospect of conservatives attaining a majority. It should be an HONOUR to serve your countries needs.

lets get real though they are all on the lam.

What parallel universe do you inhabit?

[Shwa]

All this talk and defense of the CPC and the fact remains that the costs were almost double for the same work. Wow...

And that is the point isn't it. For some reason, since 2006, but more likely since 2007 once the CPC had learned the ropes the bureaucracy, the word started to filter down that it was OK to simply go on a contract and outsourcing frenzy. Not a little extra spending here or there, not some sort of easy upward curve - a frenzy. And those sorts of drastic directions are never the work of some sort of anomoly of the hiring practices of the bureaucracy. They were given the green light - not to reform the hiring processes for civil servants, but to bypass the practices entirely.

Now one could say this is a phenomenon of the baby boomer's starting to retire, but in a 5 year period the costs went up 79% when there are plenty of people unemployed and plenty of time to train them and develop expertise. Instead of plowing investment into reform - always the CPC catchword, we have a very expensive workaround.

And, no doubt, plenty of those contracts went to CPC friendly sources who will mostly likely contribute back to the CPC for the favour. It's an 'in and out' scheme, but by the backdoor. If you know what I mean.

[GWiz]

And that is the point isn't it. For some reason, since 2006, but more likely since 2007 once the CPC had learned the ropes the bureaucracy, the word started to filter down that it was OK to simply go on a contract and outsourcing frenzy. Not a little extra spending here or there, not some sort of easy upward curve - a frenzy. And those sorts of drastic directions are never the work of some sort of anomoly of the hiring practices of the bureaucracy. They were given the green light - not to reform the hiring processes for civil servants, but to bypass the practices entirely.

Now one could say this is a phenomenon of the baby boomer's starting to retire, but in a 5 year period the costs went up 79% when there are plenty of people unemployed and plenty of time to train them and develop expertise. Instead of plowing investment into reform - always the CPC catchword, we have a very expensive workaround.

And, no doubt, plenty of those contracts went to CPC friendly sources who will mostly likely contribute back to the CPC for the favour. It's an 'in and out' scheme, but by the backdoor. If you know what I mean.

When a Government runs up a record $56 BILLION deficite that money had to be spent somewhere...

If Canadians are to stupid to care and re-elect Harper and Co. Canadians will get much, much more of this, BUT they'll get exactly what Canadians deserve...

Sad but true... "Stupid is as stupid does"... Don't be stupid...

[Moonbox]

When a Government runs up a record $56 BILLION deficite that money had to be spent somewhere...

If it was up to Ignatieff he would have spent even more. I seem to recall him flipping out and carrying on that Harper wasn't spending ENOUGH during the recession. It's interesting how you and he forget that after the fact...

[GWiz]

If it was up to Ignatieff he would have spent even more. I seem to recall him flipping out and carrying on that Harper wasn't spending ENOUGH during the recession. It's interesting how you and he forget that after the fact...

Or NOT...

I know he'd save a minimum of $20 BILLION in deficit spending by reopening the Jet Fighter contract to competition... That's just for starters... Oh, then there's those "Corporate Tax Cuts", he'd reverse and cancel those too...

Hell, I'm even for raising taxes on people above a certain income level, say over $250,000 NET, in order to get back into a balanced budget scenario...

You?

Harper can do no wrong and the Liberals can do nothing right, that all you got?

So all in all your statement adds up to a whole lot of BS...

[Smallc]

Or NOT...

I know he'd save a minimum of $20 BILLION in deficit spending by reopening the Jet Fighter contract to competition... That's just for starters... Oh, then there's those "Corporate Tax Cuts", he'd reverse and cancel those too...

What are you talking about? We haven't spent a penny to buy jets yet. That comes in future years, and by then, the projections by both the government and the TD Bank show that we'll be running a surplus.

[GWiz]

What are you talking about? We haven't spent a penny to buy jets yet. That comes in future years, and by then, the projections by both the government and the TD Bank show that we'll be running a surplus.

Why did Harper even mention it then? Nothing changed regarding the FUTURE purchase of the F-35 for Canada or any other purchaser...

I hope you're BETTING on it... I'm not...

What has the TD bank got to do with anything?

I'm actually BETTING the other way, a second, deeper recession, that will actually be felt by Canada unlike the last one...

That's when we'll really see things get "shook up" like a Japanese earthquake...

While you're at, mind telling us how, on what, when, where and why your Harper Regime spent some $76 BILLION of our money, I can't get the accounting for it anywhere, maybe YOU can...

[Moonbox]

I know he'd save a minimum of $20 BILLION in deficit spending by reopening the Jet Fighter contract to competition... That's just for starters... Oh, then there's those "Corporate Tax Cuts", he'd reverse and cancel those too...

So if he opened the contract to competition he'd get the replacement fighter for free? Or at least 60% cheaper? You're not very good with numbers are you???

Hell, I'm even for raising taxes on people above a certain income level, say over $250,000 NET, in order to get back into a balanced budget scenario...

You?

No I'm pretty much with you on that and I'm certainly against the tax cuts.

Harper can do no wrong and the Liberals can do nothing right, that all you got?

Nope. I think Harper is a bad fiscal manager and socially he's a bible-thumping wing-nut. My problem is that I trust him more than Ignatieff. I tuned Ignatieff out completely when, after the cons already opened the floodgates and committed tens of billions in stimulus, he wanted them to spend more. Harper's the evil I know. Ignatieff's given me about a dozen different reasons to fear him even more.

[William Ashley]

What parallel universe do you inhabit?

One that is parallel to keep people like you out.

Edited March 15, 2011 by William Ashley

[GWiz]

So if he opened the contract to competition he'd get the replacement fighter for free? Or at least 60% cheaper? You're not very good with numbers are you???

You're actually not far off the mark when you say FREE... Depending on which fighter plane Canada ends up getting...

My numbers are OK, a bit conservative maybe, Canada may actually save a whole lot more...

No I'm pretty much with you on that and I'm certainly against the tax cuts.

Good... We now have a good basis for discussion...

Nope. I think Harper is a bad fiscal manager and socially he's a bible-thumping wing-nut. My problem is that I trust him more than Ignatieff. I tuned Ignatieff out completely when, after the cons already opened the floodgates and committed tens of billions in stimulus, he wanted them to spend more. Harper's the evil I know. Ignatieff's given me about a dozen different reasons to fear him even more.

Good again...

I view it the opposite way though, based on what the Chretien/Martin Liberals did when faced with a simular situation post the MORONey era...

I'm looking at the Liberals bench strength, the bigger picture, if you will...

Look, I'm no Ignatieff fan by any means... BUT, I see a very, very bad agenda at play in Harper's mindset which to me is the second coming of lyin Brian MORONey, maybe even worse...

His relationship with Lockheed Martin to start with, first the Navy Refits, then Canada's Census, NOW the sole source purchase (at any cost) of the F-35s... That's a little scary don't you think?

[Smallc]

Why did Harper even mention it then?

What? What?

[Shakeyhands]

What? What?

Chicken Lady - kids in the hall?

[Smallc]

Chicken Lady - kids in the hall?

No, it's more like...What? What?

[Moonbox]

You're actually not far off the mark when you say FREE... Depending on which fighter plane Canada ends up getting...

My numbers are OK, a bit conservative maybe, Canada may actually save a whole lot more...

No I think your numbers are based on NOTHING. Run them by us please.

I view it the opposite way though, based on what the Chretien/Martin Liberals did when faced with a simular situation post the MORONey era...

Mulroney was a terrible PM, but he inherited a Canada in shambles from the worst fiscal manager Canada's ever seen in Pierre Trudeau. Chretien and Martin ran the country through the most prosperous 14 years Canada's seen since the 1950's. They had to be idiots to screw things up then. I'll give them credit for not blowing their load on and actually paying down Canada's debt, but they certainly didn't do anything special.

I'm looking at the Liberals bench strength, the bigger picture, if you will...

I'm not terribly thrilled with it considering THEY felt they had to import Ignatieff to do the job. I shudder at the thought of Turdeau II getting a shot at things.

Look, I'm no Ignatieff fan by any means... BUT, I see a very, very bad agenda at play in Harper's mindset which to me is the second coming of lyin Brian MORONey, maybe even worse...

I'm not thrilled with him either, but I'm used to PM's being not doing what I want. At least I know what Harper's planning and he's likely to follow through with it. Ignatieff and the Liberals have been so shifty and mercurial over the last 5 years that I can't trust him even BEFORE he forms a government.

His relationship with Lockheed Martin to start with, first the Navy Refits, then Canada's Census, NOW the sole source purchase (at any cost) of the F-35s... That's a little scary don't you think?

Personally I think the long form census is a joke and it didn't bother me at all. I'm wary of the F-35 and don't really like the plane much, but I'm not army and I don't see much out there that would do the job a whole lot better.

[Battletoads]

I don't know why your saying "so much for conservative" It's been clear for the last 5 years that the Harper Regime is more concerned with the destruction of the public sector than with fiscal expediency.

The only people who believe otherwise are party boosters.

[Battletoads]

All this talk and defense of the CPC and the fact remains that the costs were almost double for the same work. Wow...

That's not atypical of the private sector. Higher costs and less accountability as I say.

[GWiz]

Personally I think the long form census is a joke and it didn't bother me at all.

Nope, not about "the long form census", I'm talking about an American Company taking over doing CANADA'S CENSUS, all of it, all Canadians' information handed over to an American arms giant, Lockheed Martin... The "long form deal" was simply a way for Harper to make it easier, and cheaper, for LM and it's a way for the CONS to fudge real census figures to their liking...

Canada's Census outsourced to Lockheed Martin

Get it now? You mean you didn't know?

But, hey, everything the Harper Regime does seems a-ok with you as long as it's not the Liberals, right?

You may want to "check out" the "state of affairs" Canada was in in 1993 when the Chretien/Martin Government took over Government, you might be VERY surprised at how bad it really was after MORONey left Canada virtually bankrupt with a debt at 104% of GDP and after a record (broken by Harper) deficit of $43 BILLION in lyin' Brian's final year...