Just how fiscally conservative are these Conservatives?

[Argus]

Jeffrey Simpson had an excellent column on the government's misuse of the tax code today. It summarized, in part, some of the things which have been bugging me about this government for some years. Their lack of intelligent, coherent tax policy isn't the only issue I have with their fiscal management (or lack thereof) but Simpson echoed my thinking pretty clearly in his statement that much of what they've done with tax credits has been done for pure, crass political reasons, to the detriment of Canada's finances.

I could add in all those corporate tax cuts which cost us $10-11 billion a year, and the GST cuts which cost the treasury another $12 billion a year. The latter was done for pure politics. The former out of the application of an old theory which no longer seems applicable in this day and age. I.e., cut taxes on business and they'll expand, hire more people, create more economic activity, and you'll get more back in the end. Mostly, from what I've seen, the corporate tax cuts have resulted in them squirreling away the money or investing in China.

I'd add that I'm also not a fan of 'regional economic' funds either. A real conservative government ought to be doing away with all these bribes, loans, grants and funding for businesses. But then, Harper hasn't really been running a conservative government so much as a government designed to please voters so he can keep getting re-elected.

Unfortunately, I, as a voter, see little improvement on the horizon. It's either Harper or Mr. Prettyhair. And if you think Trudeau couldn't do worse examine what McGuinty has done to Ontario's finances. And for all I despise and have contempt for McGuinty, he seems both smarter and more politically savvy than Trudeau. Both are given to pie-in-the-sky ideological economic, environmental and social theories, however, and have scant respect or care in what they cost.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/jeffrey-simpson-someone-will-eventually-have-to-clean-up-the-conservatives-tax-code/article10198519/

Is it too late to get Preston Manning back?

Edited March 23, 2013 by Argus

[Sleipnir]

it too late to get Preston Manning back?

Wasn't it Manning who made the pedophile commments? If so, then yes it far too late to bring him back.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Sleipnir

[Argus]

Wasn't it Manning who made the pedophile commments? If so, then yes it far too late to bring him back.

No, it wasn't. And that you don't know that would seem to indicate any opinion you'd have on political matters comes from quite a poor grounding in knowledge.

[RNG]

Mr. Harper was the most fiscally conservative of the choices we had in the last federal election. I haven't a good handle on Trudeau Jr's economic slant, but given that he is a Liberal I currently assume that my first statement is still true. Could he be more fiscally conservative. Oh, yes. Would he loose many votes? Oh, yes. It is a fine balancing act in this great and diverse land.

My biggest bitch about Mr. Harper et al is the stupid "tough on crime" agenda. It is expensive and experts from around the world agree that it doesn't work. But it sure sells to the uninformed. Is he cynical or does he really feel he is helping our quality of life? I don't know. But he should look at the US where over 1% of the population is incarcerated and it still doesn't seem to be making the streets any safer. And the war on drugs is about as successful as prohibition was.

[TimG]

Mr. Harper was the most fiscally conservative of the choices we had in the last federal election.

Sad but true.

.

.

My biggest bitch about Mr. Harper et al is the stupid "tough on crime" agenda. It is expensive and experts from around the world agree that it doesn't work.

Meanwhile he has managed to appoint 5 supreme court justices that hand down ruling after ruling that mandate spending on various progressive causes. Such rulings will destroy the country in the long run because governments will no longer be able to choose to spend money on the things that voters want because unelected judges have decided that they know better. Edited March 23, 2013 by TimG

[RNG]

Sad but true.

.

.Meanwhile he has managed to appoint 5 supreme court justices that hand down ruling after ruling that mandate spending on various progressive causes. Such rulings will destroy the country in the long run because governments will no longer be able to choose to spend money on the things that voters want because unelected judges have decided that they know better.

What, you mean supreme court judges aren't supposed to be social activists above the wishes of the population and the laws as passed by parliament? How radical of you [/sarcasm]

[shortlived]

They arn't fiscal conservatives. The are borrow and spend conservatives.

Flaherty is an offloader, if you arn't conservative expect to be offloaded onto the policy is plain and simple. Its been that way for him since the 90's.

There is no functional economic purpose to the budget other than to punish groups that they don't like.

Edited March 23, 2013 by shortlived

[ReeferMadness]

I don't think we're seeing Harper's true nature. This is the same guy, after all who once called Canada a "second tier socialist country" (why anyone would vote for him after that is beyond me). The problem you guys have is much deeper. Harper is pushing Canada to the right as fast as he dares but the country isn't there. And it won't be anytime soon.

[punked]

It takes a New Democrat to Balance a budget just look at NS 800 million dollar conservative deficit to balanced in 4 years.

[hitops]

I don't think we're seeing Harper's true nature. This is the same guy, after all who once called Canada a "second tier socialist country" (why anyone would vote for him after that is beyond me). The problem you guys have is much deeper. Harper is pushing Canada to the right as fast as he dares but the country isn't there. And it won't be anytime soon.

You are right, and he's tried to improve us from the pure socialist state. Medicare expansion now has a realistic, responsible goal of increasing with GDP. And corporate taxes are near all-time lows. And our nation has had the best economic performance over the last 5-6 years in the G7.

[WWWTT]

Mr. Harper was the most fiscally conservative of the choices we had in the last federal election. I haven't a good handle on Trudeau Jr's economic slant, but given that he is a Liberal I currently assume that my first statement is still true. Could he be more fiscally conservative. Oh, yes. Would he loose many votes? Oh, yes. It is a fine balancing act in this great and diverse land.

My biggest bitch about Mr. Harper et al is the stupid "tough on crime" agenda. It is expensive and experts from around the world agree that it doesn't work. But it sure sells to the uninformed. Is he cynical or does he really feel he is helping our quality of life? I don't know. But he should look at the US where over 1% of the population is incarcerated and it still doesn't seem to be making the streets any safer. And the war on drugs is about as successful as prohibition was.

May the real RNG please stand up.

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

You are right, and he's tried to improve us from the pure socialist state. Medicare expansion now has a realistic, responsible goal of increasing with GDP. And corporate taxes are near all-time lows. And our nation has had the best economic performance over the last 5-6 years in the G7.

False

Unless you can provide a link showing Germany with a weaker performance than Canada?

Germany is a G7 country,no?

WWWTT

[RNG]

May the real RNG please stand up.

WWWTT

I'm consistent in being very fiscally conservative but socially liberal. And I'm not sure if socially liberal is the correct term, in that I am more in favor of the government being involved in a few things as possible. If such a thing were available here, I'd be a member of a party with the same agenda as the Libertarian Party in the US. (If you want to get truly scared, look at the Libertarian Party of Canada website.)

[RNG]

False

Unless you can provide a link showing Germany with a weaker performance than Canada?

Germany is a G7 country,no?

WWWTT

Germany's banks were at greater risk than Canada's although they didn't Iceland. And our GDP remained better through the whole mortgage melt-down. Germany was the star of Europe, no doubt about it, but on most metrics, Canada did better.

[WWWTT]

Link please.Because your story is changing

WWWTT

Edited March 23, 2013 by WWWTT

[Argus]

Mr. Harper was the most fiscally conservative of the choices we had in the last federal election. I haven't a good handle on Trudeau Jr's economic slant, but given that he is a Liberal I currently assume that my first statement is still true. Could he be more fiscally conservative. Oh, yes. Would he loose many votes? Oh, yes. It is a fine balancing act in this great and diverse land.

You know what. I think you're wrong. I think if Harper said today "Well, cutting the GST was a good idea at the time, but now circumstances have changed. We, as conservatives, believe you should pay for what you use, so we're reinstating the 2c GST in order to help balance the budget" the great majority of Canadians would be impressed and agree. And if he then went on to say "Economic theory does say that cutting taxes on business will increase jobs and economic activity -- but it's not happening now" and reinstated the corporate tax cuts, the great mass of people would applaud. I think the Conservatives' popularity would soar, and we'd have a balanced budget within a month.

My biggest bitch about Mr. Harper et al is the stupid "tough on crime" agenda. It is expensive and experts from around the world agree that it doesn't work. But it sure sells to the uninformed. Is he cynical or does he really feel he is helping our quality of life? I don't know. But he should look at the US where over 1% of the population is incarcerated and it still doesn't seem to be making the streets any safer. And the war on drugs is about as successful as prohibition was.

The war on drugs is a failed war. I heartily agree. There's no point banging your head against a wall. Bring in a lot more treatment, decriminalize soft drugs, and issue fines instead. Tax the hell out of them too. But for those who do violence and use weapons, sorry, I'm with the Tories. I want them in prison.

[Argus]

It takes a New Democrat to Balance a budget just look at NS 800 million dollar conservative deficit to balanced in 4 years.

Yeah, and look at the free spending New Democrats elsewhere...

[Argus]

You are right, and he's tried to improve us from the pure socialist state. Medicare expansion now has a realistic, responsible goal of increasing with GDP. And corporate taxes are near all-time lows. And our nation has had the best economic performance over the last 5-6 years in the G7.

You don't think all the oil fields, gold, diamonds, silver, potash, etc. has a little something to do with that, do you?

You know, we've been hearing of how lowering corporate taxes would increase jobs and economic activity for a long time now. The US started playing that tune back in the eighties. Is their unemployment lower than it was then? Is ours? It seems to me that unemployment has never gone down, and that the quality of the jobs, and thus the quality of our lifestyle has deteriorated. But corporations are making bigger profits, and those who largely own those corporations, ie, the wealthy, are even wealthier.

I think it's time to raise those taxes again.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Argus

[TimG]

You don't think all the oil fields, gold, diamonds, silver, potash, etc. has a little something to do with that, do you?

Those resource fields don't exploit themselves. You need companies investing capital because they are looking for a return.

You know, we've been hearing of how lowering corporate taxes would increase jobs and economic activity for a long time now.

Taxes are only part of the picture. The bigger issue is the regulatory framework. If the framework enhances productivity by providing clear rules and timelines for projects then business will bring jobs. If the framework a byzantine process driven by bureaucrats making rules up as they go along or by lawyers abusing the law for personal advantage then business will stay away no matter what the taxes.

In the US and Canada the regulatory framework is bad and getting worse - fiddling with taxes won't make much difference.

Edited March 24, 2013 by TimG

[Bryan]

You know, we've been hearing of how lowering corporate taxes would increase jobs and economic activity for a long time now. The US started playing that tune back in the eighties. Is their unemployment lower than it was then? Is ours? It seems to me that unemployment has never gone down, and that the quality of the jobs, and thus the quality of our lifestyle has deteriorated. But corporations are making bigger profits, and those who largely own those corporations, ie, the wealthy, are even wealthier.

I think it's time to raise those taxes again.

Americans' corporate taxes are still insanely high compared to ours. Ours are working out much better for us because they are much lower.

And yes, our unemployment is much better now than it has been during times when other countries were experiencing economic troubles. Even minor recessions that were nothing compared to what's still happening around the world led to unemployment much higher than now. People do not understand just how bad it is out there. Our government is doing an amazing job compared to just about anyone else who has ever been tasked with the job in this country or anywhere else.

That said, yes the bar has been set very low. They're better than anyone else, but still way short of my expectations.

[RNG]

Americans' corporate taxes are still insanely high compared to ours. Ours are working out much better for us because they are much lower.

And yes, our unemployment is much better now than it has been during times when other countries were experiencing economic troubles. Even minor recessions that were nothing compared to what's still happening around the world led to unemployment much higher than now. People do not understand just how bad it is out there. Our government is doing an amazing job compared to just about anyone else who has ever been tasked with the job in this country or anywhere else.

That said, yes the bar has been set very low. They're better than anyone else, but still way short of my expectations.

Very well said.

[hitops]

You don't think all the oil fields, gold, diamonds, silver, potash, etc. has a little something to do with that, do you?

You know, we've been hearing of how lowering corporate taxes would increase jobs and economic activity for a long time now. The US started playing that tune back in the eighties. Is their unemployment lower than it was then? Is ours? It seems to me that unemployment has never gone down, and that the quality of the jobs, and thus the quality of our lifestyle has deteriorated. But corporations are making bigger profits, and those who largely own those corporations, ie, the wealthy, are even wealthier.

I think it's time to raise those taxes again.

No the US started going on a massive spending binge in the 80's to fight the cold war. Our unemployment rate is one of the best in the developed world, we're talking 7%. That is a dream scenario compared to most socialist democracies today. And with the EI reforms that should help lift that anchor a little and help us improve that even more. There are plenty of high-paying labor jobs in the west, pretty much for anyone that wants one.

If you object to corporations making bigger profits, then don't buy from them. Do what our grandparents did and repair more things or make more things yourself. Better yet start your own company. Your appeal could be that you hardly make any profits and maybe some people would support that cause. And I'd applaud you for going for it. But don't hope that a company just starts handing out reasonably low stress but high paying jobs simply because it has money in the bank. If you want it to pour money into the Canadian economy, vote for the conditions that make them most likely to do so.

The world has changed. You cannot have the lifestyle that you could 60 years ago with a high-school education. An no amount of legislation or taxation can change that, that's just sticking our collective heads in the sand. They tried that in many European countries and are now figuring out it does not work. It's actually kind of ethnocentric to assume that you deserve a certain standard of living, when today so many hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians and others are willing to do that same work for cheaper. Why should us in Canada or the west have some kind of divine right to those jobs? Just because we had them before?

When people in other parts of the world can build things cheaply, that means the labor market domestically changes to support more people who do jobs that cannot move. Many of those are service jobs and professional jobs. We need to to vigorously embrace the changing world and learn how to thrive, not sulk that the old one isn't coming back.

Edited March 24, 2013 by hitops

[Sleipnir]

And that you don't know that would seem to indicate any opinion you'd have on political matters comes from quite a poor grounding in knowledge.

oh nvm it was Tom Flanagan and thank you for any attemtps to correct me

[ReeferMadness]

You are right, and he's tried to improve us from the pure socialist state. Medicare expansion now has a realistic, responsible goal of increasing with GDP. And corporate taxes are near all-time lows. And our nation has had the best economic performance over the last 5-6 years in the G7.

Canada was a "pure socialist state"? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[punked]

Yeah, and look at the free spending New Democrats elsewhere...

Where?