Debt, Deficit, and GDP ratio

[TheNewTeddy]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/canada-deficit/

my thoughts:

Pearson, Liberal

Smallest deficit was $20 million, nearly a balanced buget. Largest was $1.2B in his first year and $1B in his last. Adjusted for inflation though, $14.7B in his first and $6.8B in his last. Debt to GDP ratio stayed the same pretty well throughout his term. Clearly you can read between the lines that Canada must have had massive inflation and inflation related growth though this time, making the figures a bit hard to calculate properly.

Trudeau, 1st time, Liberal

Managed to turn a surplus of 100M in one year, but the rest is all deficits, and save a single election-year holding the line, the deficit grew in every year that Trudeau was in office. Despite this, the GDP ratio managed to actually drop, even during the highest of his deficits. In his final year the deficit, adjusted for inflation was 41.3B and 5.3% of GDP. Once managed a surplus of .2% of GDP.

Clark, PC

Managed to reduce the deficit by all measures, yet slow economic growth resulted in a debt to GDP increase.

Trudeau, 2nd time, Liberal

This is where deficits and the debt started to run away. Remarkable increases in every year, with the final year being , when adjusted for inflation, a whopping 65.7B. Managed to, in these 4 years, undo the entire reduction of the GDP ratio in his first 11 years. His highest % of GDP was 7.9 for the deficit.

Mulroney, PC

Managed to grow the GDP ratio every year, despite some real-term decreases in the deficit during the middle of his term. First-term deficit, adjusted, of 72.8B and 8.3% of GDP, mid term high of just 46B in deficit, at 4.4% GDP.

Chretien, Liberal

Only PM on the list that clearly cut the deficit and debt without question. First year deficit, adjusted for inflation of 53.8B at 5.3% of GDP. His 1997 surplus was .3% of GDP, the highest number to that point in this entire interactive series. Every other surplus he returned was at least double that size. The largest surplus he returned was in 2000 with an inflation adjusted 24.7B at 1.8% of GDP. The GDP ratio was reduced from an all-time high to 2nd term Trudeau levels.

Martin, Liberal

Largely carried on the Chretien work, not much else to say.

Harper, Conservative

Began with surpluses similar in size to Chretien, but has since got into deficit. Debt to GDP ratio is back up to 2nd term Trudeau levels. after having dipped, under Harper, to 1st term Trudeau levels. Largest deficit was an adjusted 58.2B at 3.6% of GDP.

My read of all of this.

The single largest deficit we ever had in adjusted terms was the inherited deficit that Mulroney was given by 2nd term Trudeau of 72.8B at a GDP ratio of 8.3%, which makes current deficits nothing in comparison.

There is really no clear thing that shows one party does better than another IMO. Prime Ministers, generally, seemed to carry on what their predecessor did, making minor adjustments. The only thing that's clear is that 2nd term Trudeau and Mulroney were terrible, while Chretien and pre-deficit Harper were helpful. In fact, I'd say that 2nd term Trudeau and Chretien were opposites, and, compare (in terms of long-term health and harm) 2nd term Trudeau and 1st term Trudeau, saying that if I didn't know they were the same g**d*** person, that one would hate the other for undoing all the work he did.

[Smallc]

That tool is misleading...and, at under $600B of federal debt in a $1.6T (nominal) economy, we're looking at just over 1/3, not 1/2.

[Smallc]

Also, based on the numbers I'm reading, Canada is on track to this year run an operational surplus of several billion. In fact, we may have ran one last year.

[August1991]

IMV, this issue is badly understood in the generic press, left or right, and also in the specialized press.

Here's my take:

1. If you are really upset about government debt in Canada, you should buy government bonds - and burn them.

2. If you have children and are worried about leaving a debt to future generations, then you should buy government bonds and leave the bonds to your children.

3. If you are worried about leaving a debt to future generations but you have no children, you'll be dead when this becomes an issue. Don't buy government bonds.

-----

IOW, whatever you think of government debt, you have a solution.

Edited February 25, 2012 by August1991

[RNG]

Also, based on the numbers I'm reading, Canada is on track to this year run an operational surplus of several billion. In fact, we may have ran one last year.

You got to tell me who your drug supplier is. There is some strong shit he is selling.

[Smallc]

You got to tell me who your drug supplier is. There is some strong shit he is selling.

Do you know what an operational surplus is? Canada's debt service charges are just over $30B per year. Canada's deficit was about that much. This year, it will be less than that.

[RNG]

Do you know what an operational surplus is? Canada's debt service charges are just over $30B per year. Canada's deficit was about that much. This year, it will be less than that.

You are an accountant for a dicey firm that is trying to pump up it's share price, aren't you? What was the federal debt at the end of the last fiscal year. What is our debt going to be at the end of this fiscal year. And that isn't even counting the legacy costs. We aren't as bad as Europe, or even the US, but it still ain't Nirvana.

[Smallc]

Are you even reading what I wrote? You're not worth the effort.