Canada's middle class forges ahead of US - NY Times

[CPCFTW]

Things that basically protect the already well-to-do in other words.

Like the TFW program for example.

Less corporate taxes means more money available for labour who pay taxes anyway. Investors also pay taxes on any dividends or capital gains from their investments. Corporate taxes have been proven to hinder growth in countless studies.

I'm not sure how raising the upper limits of the lower tax brackets and raising the basic personal exemptions are protecting the well to do.

[waldo]

Federal corporate tax rates decreased from 22% in 2007 to 15% in 2012. Stimulus spending was much less than the spending the opposition demanded. Introduction of tfsa. $20-25B personal income tax breaks. Etc.

nice reach! The discussion here was around why Canada's recession impact was declared 'mild' and lasted just 3 quarters... and what Harper Conservative "limiting actions"... "directly applied limiting actions"... held the Canadian recession to it's mild 3 quarter impact? Certainly, yes, stimulus spending - the stimulus spending Harper Conservatives forever blamed the Opposition for making them bring forward! We're talking only about 3 quarters here. Considering corporations have been criticized for not applying tax cut saving equivalencies... for simply sitting on them. TFSA? C'mon.

the analysis I read, suggests Canada's 'mild & short" recession resulted more from how Canada was positioned going into the recession; positioned as a result of policy/actions over the prior decade where the Liberal federal governments had budget and trade surpluses for most of that prior decade. Of course, Canada's banks were solid and there was no ongoing/pending housing bubble. All of this helped to diminish any credit crunch when banks ultimately tightened up on loans. Additionally high commodity prices helped to reduce the initial recession impact; effectively Canada entered the recession well after most other countries. Milder, shorter and entered later... resulting in, again, only a 3 quarter recession. The summations I read suggest all of this pre-recession positioning, coupled with sounder markets, allowed Canada's domestic economy to whether the short recession quite well... that it was really export earnings and corporate profits that were significantly impacted.

of course, none of this stops fervent proponents of claimed Harper Conservative fiscal prowess from always over-emphasing the recession... in line with the 'meltdown' reference from a few posts back. Of always over-emphasing actions taken by Harper Conservatives to limit the recessionary impact... while conveniently ignoring the position Canada was in the lead-up to the recession, and how that position was realized over the prior decade by Liberal governments.

[CPCFTW]

You're right much of the recent performance of Canada's economy is based on the efforts of previous governments. We won't really be able to truly appreciate what Harper has done for us until years from now when the Canadian economy is growing strong while France and most of the EU follow in Greece and Italy's footsteps. Let's hope he gets another term with a majority government to truly position Canada as an economic powerhouse.

[PIK]

You're right much of the recent performance of Canada's economy is based on the efforts of previous governments. We won't really be able to truly appreciate what Harper has done for us until years from now when the Canadian economy is growing strong while France and most of the EU follow in Greece and Italy's footsteps. Let's hope he gets another term with a majority government to truly position Canada as an economic powerhouse.

Very well said.

[guyser]

Very well said.

Im shocked!

You just agreed the Liberals did some really good work.

You ok?

[Michael Hardner]

Even Harper, as leader of the Conservatives, indicated that he "liked" Martin's budget. ( Not sure which one. ) And the rejigging of the EI program when times were good was generally regarded as prudent.

[waldo]

Im shocked!

You just agreed the Liberals did some really good work.

You ok?

but... will an acknowledgement, such as received, put a damper on any future blustering concerning the "much vaunted (claimed) Harper Conservative slaying of the Canadian recession meltdown dragon"?

[guyser]

but... will an acknowledgement, such as received, put a damper on any future blustering concerning the "much vaunted (claimed) Harper Conservative slaying of the Canadian recession meltdown dragon"?

small victories...small victories

[PIK]

Im shocked!

You just agreed the Liberals did some really good work.

You ok?

I hit my head on the weekend and have not been the same.

[bleeding heart]

[PIK]

I see old Waldo is spinning in circles again - crushing his own arguments. As he pointed out - in the middle of a three year recession, Canada limited it's own recession to three quarters - while every other G7 country were hit far more seriously. If that's not a testament to sound stewardship of the economy, I don't know what is. At the very least, we can give the government credit for "doing no harm".

My understanding is spain was once regarded to replace canada on the G-8, just before harper came into office.

[waldo]

My understanding is spain was once regarded to replace canada on the G-8, just before harper came into office.

what's the point of quoting Simple's post? You already expressed your agreement that Liberal governments over the decade prior to the recession were the principal reason the recession impact on Canada was "mild and short"... in follow-up, obviously not realizing what you had done, you claimed "you had hit your head"! Are you trying to bring this full circle again?

[Bryan]

My understanding is spain was once regarded to replace canada on the G-8, just before harper came into office.

Indeed. Under Martin, Canada was never a serious member of the G7. It was an honorary position, that was subject to be changed. The last few years have changed all that. The rest of the G7 WANT Canada around now, because they want to learn how we were able to do so well, not just compared to our contemporaries, but also compared to past Canadian governments.

[waldo]

The last few years have changed all that. The rest of the G7 WANT Canada around now, because they want to learn how we were able to do so well, not just compared to our contemporaries, but also compared to past Canadian governments.

step up, take your shot! But why were you so conspicuously absent earlier when the challenges went out for Harper Conservative supporters to state the "limiting actions" taken by Harper Conservatives that accounted for the "mild and short" recession impact. I mean, after all, you were the actual originator that kicked this all off... you and your "meltdown" claim! C'mon, step up.

.

[waldo]

Indeed. Under Martin, Canada was never a serious member of the G7. It was an honorary position, that was subject to be changed. The last few years have changed all that. The rest of the G7 WANT Canada around now, because they want to learn how we were able to do so well, not just compared to our contemporaries, but also compared to past Canadian governments.

considering Canada became a G7 member in 1976, you've got to go through Trudeau1, Joe Clark, Trudeau2, Turner, Mulroney, Campbell and Chretien... before you get at your Paul Martin target! So, nothing "serious" up to that point, hey? Well done.

.

[dre]

I see old Waldo is spinning in circles again - crushing his own arguments. As he pointed out - in the middle of a three year recession, Canada limited it's own recession to three quarters - while every other G7 country were hit far more seriously. If that's not a testament to sound stewardship of the economy, I don't know what is. At the very least, we can give the government credit for "doing no harm".

To claim thats a testament to "sound stewardship of the economy" you would have to pick a policy and explain why it made a difference. The reality is that Canada has a more sound banking system, and a public central bank. We had nowhere near as much bad paper in the system as they did in the US. Way less financial fraud. But if you want to credit someone with this it would be John Macdonald who nationalized our central bank almost a century ago.

You are right though that we can credit the government for not doing anything really stupid. They did what the geeks told them to do, and we had a very garden variety keynesian policy... We eased credit to maintain liquidity... We kept our own housing bubble from collapsing... And we were in a stronger position with regards to debt. We were in a better position than most other countries, and that is the result of decisions by governments and ministers of finance over the last 80 years.

At the end of the day Canada is a really easy country to run. Probably the easiest in the world. That doesnt mean that Chretien, Martin, Harper, et al, dont deserve some credit... They do. But to pretend that Harpers economic genius made us avoid the recession is really just kind of silly.

[bleeding heart]

Yes, silly, because it's crude partisanship. Period.

the only defense I can give to the fanboys is the extremely tepid and backhanded one: leaders of other parties frequently inherit the same sort of dewy-eyed--and ahistorical--admiration. So it's not a Conservative phenomenon. Would that it were!

Edited May 2, 2014 by bleeding heart

[Keepitsimple]

You are right though that we can credit the government for not doing anything really stupid. They did what the geeks told them to do, and we had a very garden variety keynesian policy... We eased credit to maintain liquidity... We kept our own housing bubble from collapsing... And we were in a stronger position with regards to debt. We were in a better position than most other countries, and that is the result of decisions by governments and ministers of finance over the last 80 years.

At the end of the day Canada is a really easy country to run. Probably the easiest in the world. That doesnt mean that Chretien, Martin, Harper, et al, dont deserve some credit... They do. But to pretend that Harpers economic genius made us avoid the recession is really just kind of silly.

I tend to agree with you somewhat (mostly actually) and as I said. at least you can give them credit for doing no harm. The nature of Canadian politics is contrarian - and in these times, very much so. When the recession was entering full bloom, Harper was accused of doing nothing - or of "taking the wrong path" - certainly not doing the "right" things. In hindsight, the government was mostly right - and they "did no harm" by reacting to the opposition and critics in a knee-jerk fashion. As for Canada being an "easy" country to run......well, economically we are very fortunate to have the natural resources we have......but socially and politically....wow, just read this forum to see the difficulties.

[dre]

As for Canada being an "easy" country to run......well, economically we are very fortunate to have the natural resources we have......but socially and politically....wow, just read this forum to see the difficulties.

Hahahah. Fair point! On the other hand... if racking up warning points on a political forum constitutes political turmoil we are probably doing ok

[eyeball]

As for Canada being an "easy" country to run......well, economically we are very fortunate to have the natural resources we have......but socially and politically....wow, just read this forum to see the difficulties.

I think most of the difficulties stem from the fact that there is so little public trust or integrity in our ridiculously politicized system of governance. In a way we're unfortunate to be on a part of the planet that is still easy for the taking because it allows us to keep skating across thin ice by sheer momentum alone.

If and when that changes and you think the acrimony is bad in here, wait until it goes viral in the real world.

[Topaz]

The only reason the Canadian middle-class looks good against the US is the US has fallen behind and Canada's middle-class hasn't fallen or gone up in wages. How many workers in Canada have gotten a increase in pay beside CEO's and MPP's MP's etc. I think its a bad thing to compare one thing against another because there a certain circumstances that's not taken into consideration.

[cybercoma]

To claim thats a testament to "sound stewardship of the economy" you would have to pick a policy and explain why it made a difference. The reality is that Canada has a more sound banking system, and a public central bank. We had nowhere near as much bad paper in the system as they did in the US. Way less financial fraud. But if you want to credit someone with this it would be John Macdonald who nationalized our central bank almost a century ago.

You are right though that we can credit the government for not doing anything really stupid. They did what the geeks told them to do, and we had a very garden variety keynesian policy... We eased credit to maintain liquidity... We kept our own housing bubble from collapsing... And we were in a stronger position with regards to debt. We were in a better position than most other countries, and that is the result of decisions by governments and ministers of finance over the last 80 years.

This is such a good post. It's tough to get a clear answer from anyone about what the Conservative government actually did themselves to help with the economic crisis. The fact is they did things that probably prolonged the problem, like cutting taxes like crazy at a time when the demand for government services was going up from unemployment and a war overseas. This is terrible economic policy by any standard, regardless of partisanship. But those were their actual policies that they implemented themselves. In other words, what little they did do was actually the wrong thing.

[Michael Hardner]

Good points on this discussion, from all sides.

[Bryan]

considering Canada became a G7 member in 1976, you've got to go through Trudeau1, Joe Clark, Trudeau2, Turner, Mulroney, Campbell and Chretien... before you get at your Paul Martin target! So, nothing "serious" up to that point, hey? Well done.

.

Some previous governments were considered credible internationally, Martin wasn't even considered credible within his own party.

[Bryan]

The fact is they did things that probably prolonged the problem, like cutting taxes like crazy at a time when the demand for government services was going up from unemployment and a war overseas.

There's the biggest disconnect. The tax cuts were and are the biggest factor in why we did so well. Consumers had more money in their pockets, employers had more breathing room on their bottom lines, it made Canada a better place to do business creating more jobs. It was the best possible policy at the time that it was most needed.