Ontario Budget 2014 -- Election

Mighty AC · June 10, 2014

Tax cuts for corporations have proven to be very effective at creating jobs actually. Just because companies are profitable and have cash doesn't mean jobs aren't being created.

Refer to the bottom of this link for a list of studies on the effects of taxes on gdp growth:

http://taxfoundation.org/article/what-evidence-taxes-and-growth

Unfortunately, government spending creates far more jobs than corporate tax cuts.

a 2009 Finance department chart estimates that if Ottawa spent $1 billion on support for unemployed and low-income individuals, it would generate 18,755 jobs. The same chart shows that if Ottawa gave up $1 billion in revenue in corporate income tax reductions, this would create only 3,310 jobs.

As it turns out, Hudak's job numbers tied to tax cuts were studied in isolation. They assume government spending will not be reduced to counter the loss of revenue from the tax cut. However, we know this is not the case. Hudak plans to reduce spending and eliminate 100,000 jobs. As a result Hudak's plan could very well be worse than doing nothing at all.

The 13-page analysis points out that the positive impacts associated with tax cuts are based on a big assumption — that the government doesn’t counter the tax cuts by reducing spending.

But Hudak is planning to do just that

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/05/14/a-million-jobs-heck-why-not-a-zillion/

I suspect the growing US economy will lead to job creation here as well. Natural growth will create jobs and revenue without intervention. Yet Tim will erase 100,000 service jobs and hurt education for a plan that is largely imaginary. At the same time he will not be looking at eliminating separate education...the largest source of waste in that sector.

After McGuinty I was hoping for intelligent change and instead we will be saddled with an idiot playing politics.

BobbyS · June 10, 2014

I believe that all of the issues have been aired and those who follow politics have made up their minds. I have already voted so have no real dog in this race but am still an interested observer.

Personally, I prefer a minority government to take power after this election. But I do not think that it will happen.

I think that the crucial vote will be made by those who are not sure when they get into the voting booth. They will have to choose from Mike Harris, Bob Rae or Dalton McGuinty. I think they will hold their noses and vote Liberal.

I predict a Liberal majority - to my chagrin.

Pretty bold pick. As someone who held my nose and voted Liberal...I'd be absolutely shocked if they got a majority. That is not something I want. If they got a minority and were held in check on spending that'd be fine. Then I'd hope for Hudak ousted and a sensible PC leader. Can we have Tory back? I'd vote for him right now in a heartbeat.

AngusThermopyle · June 10, 2014

So you choose more corruption and waste from a government currently undergoing two criminal investigations. Wow! Nice choice. I guess Ontario really does deserve the government it gets.

Boges · June 10, 2014

DES-PAR-ETE!!!!

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario_election/2014/06/10/kathleen_wynne_says_she_wouldnt_prop_up_a_tim_hudak_government.html

KINGSTON, ONT.—Kathleen Wynne says she would not back a minority Progressive Conservative administration if her Liberals lose Thursday’s election.

“Because of the plan he has put forward I will not support a Tim Hudak government. What he is proposing is dangerous to the people of this province,” she said Tuesday at St. Lawrence College.

“I don’t see any good coming of supporting the proposals he’s put forward,” Wynne added, repeating her pitch that voters should abandon the NDP for the Liberals as the only way to stop Hudak.

“I am running for a strong mandate,” she said, noting recent public opinion polls suggest “this race is effectively tied.”

“It will be Tim Hudak or it will be me . . . we need every progressive vote in this province.”

If there's a minority, does she think she can force another election?

If I was a Dipper I'd be seething that she is stooping this low.

Big Guy · June 10, 2014

Pretty bold pick. As someone who held my nose and voted Liberal...I'd be absolutely shocked if they got a majority. That is not something I want. If they got a minority and were held in check on spending that'd be fine. Then I'd hope for Hudak ousted and a sensible PC leader. Can we have Tory back? I'd vote for him right now in a heartbeat.

Perhaps that is the solution. A Liberal minority would mean Hudak and Horwath are through as leaders. Let both parties get somebody new with the PC's electing a moderate leader (like Tory). Give the parties a chance to organize. Let the Liberals govern for a couple of years while held in check in a minority and then force another election. The odds are that it would result in a PC majority ( or a minority as I would prefer). The Liberals have had their chance and like any other party in power for over a decade - are getting stale.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Big Guy

Big Guy · June 10, 2014

So you choose more corruption and waste from a government currently undergoing two criminal investigations. Wow! Nice choice. I guess Ontario really does deserve the government it gets.

I am not trying to defend the provincial Liberals or the old federal Liberals but I do not understand the concept in politics of "punishing" a party for former transgressions. Political parties are made up of plain people. Some are good, some are not so good and some are crooks. If you agree with the policies of a particular political party and the crooks have been tossed out or in jail then why would you support another party which does not reflect your views?

I would akin it to having had a bad time with a cashier at a grocery store when he/she short changed you. If you like what the store has to offer and they have gotten rid of the cashier why would you stop shopping there?

I would also compare it to what happened federally. Many people who are moderates politically, voted for the far right leaning Conservatives - not because of policy but to "punish the Liberals". Well, who was punished? The politicians responsible got their pensions and we have been saddled with a leadership unpopular with the majority of Canadians.

My point is that there are many different valid reasons for voting for or against a particular party. I do not think that to "punish" one of them is one of those reasons. The only person you are punishing by voting for a party you do not fully support is yourself.

BobbyS · June 10, 2014

So you choose more corruption and waste from a government currently undergoing two criminal investigations. Wow! Nice choice. I guess Ontario really does deserve the government it gets.

Speaks volumes about the choices, doesn't it?

And I normally vote PC.

AngusThermopyle · June 10, 2014

Big Guy, who said anything about punishing anyone? My post was about the waste and corruption endemic in the current government. This is not about punishing but rather about ousting those who have no intention but to continue their disastrous ways. Of all the party leaders the only one who has even attempted to address Ontario's current problems is Hudack. All the other two seam to capable of is talking about spend spend and spend with nary a peap about where this money will come from. Of course any sane person knows exactly where it will come from, our pockets, in a seemingly never ending stream. After all we really are no more than Wynnes revenue tools.

DFCaper · June 10, 2014

Hudak has said there will be fewer teachers and he has said he would give 10,000 support workers their pink slips. When stating 'none' he is relying on public ignorance of two terms. Spec Ed teachers, who we are already short of, will not be fires. They are different than Educational Assistants who also work with special needs children. EA's earn a fraction of what teachers make and assist with kids that have special issues that prevent them from being in a classroom full time. Tim will be firing EA's, Early Childhood Educators and regular teachers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/hudak-vows-to-cut-100000-public-sector-jobs-if-tories-win/article18580284/

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario_election/2014/05/28/who_are_the_11_million_public_servants_tim_hudak_is_talking_about.html

There isn't a 1 to 1 ratio of EA's to special needs students. In certain classes, some special needs kids receive 1 on 1 support, yet in others they can get by without extra help. Also many EA's work in specific learning resources areas within the school and when a student can't handle being in a class because something has triggered a problem, they leave and go for assistance in that area. Those EA's may deal with small or larger groups of special needs students depending on the day.

Transportation costs are also huge. Bussing or cabbing students from all over a school district to one specific school is very, very pricey. Plus, you've now created another building with additional overhead and administration costs.

As a parent of a special needs child, I am a bit afraid that Hudak will make the mess the Liberals created worst. The Liberals have been making cuts at Child services while giving raises to the members of the Big Unions that advertise for them (teachers).

When Special needs children were put into the classroom under McGuinty, a lot of people who worked with special needs lost their jobs so the money could be transferred to the schools. What happened to the Money???? Teachers got paid!!!

As a parent of an Autistic Boy, I am nervous about Hudak, but know the Liberals will just make things worst and worst. My son has so much potential to be a functioning member of society, but the current crop of crooks that are bought and paid for by the big public sector unions my force me to leave this province for one who cares about more than the $80-100K union members

Mighty AC · June 10, 2014

When Special needs children were put into the classroom under McGuinty, a lot of people who worked with special needs lost their jobs so the money could be transferred to the schools. What happened to the Money???? Teachers got paid!!!

When looking out for the interests of a child or children with special needs, one often finds themselves at odds with administration and politicians. It's an exhausting, endless battle for the time and resources necessary....made worse by the fact that we know these children can thrive in the right conditions.

Your information is a bit off the mark, however. I take it by your belief that the McGuinty government is responsible for the current struggles of special needs kids, that your child was not in the school system during the Harris days. I can assure you that things are infinitely better now for all students than they were under the Mike Harris regime. THanks to Hudak's plan to fire thousands of the Educational Assistants that work directly with children like your son, you will unfortunately get a taste of what it was like. Tim was actually part of that Harris government that made it so difficult on all kids, but particularly those with any additional needs.

As for your comment about teacher salaries, you'll find that Ontario teachers are about in the middle of the pack when compared to teachers across the country. When salaries are compared to the cost of living in a particular area, the graph gets even flatter. http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/TeacherSalaryRankings2013-14brief.pdf Check pages 2 and 3 on this link.

Though I was never a fan of McGuinty's I did applaud his efforts to repair education in Ontario as much as he did. I also was in agreement with his efforts to reduce teacher compensation a year ago. He managed to get real concessions without handing out pink slips and harming education itself. That makes sense!

Mighty AC · June 10, 2014

Speaks volumes about the choices, doesn't it?

And I normally vote PC.

Agreed! I wholeheartedly wanted change this time, but then Hudak started talking and made it very clear that this time around we have no good options. In this case, change looks far more dangerous than the status quo.

BobbyS · June 10, 2014

Agreed! I wholeheartedly wanted change this time, but then Hudak started talking and made it very clear that this time around we have no good options. In this case, change looks far more dangerous than the status quo.

This is exactly how myself and so many other people I know feel. I would love to see some changes with the way government spends money and would love more accountability...but Hudak and his tea-party style is not for me. This election has been crap - has almost inspired me to the point of wanting to run for MPP in the future.

Argus · June 10, 2014

As for your comment about teacher salaries, you'll find that Ontario teachers are about in the middle of the pack when compared to teachers across the country. When salaries are compared to the cost of living in a particular area, the graph gets even flatter. http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/TeacherSalaryRankings2013-14brief.pdf Check pages 2 and 3 on this link.

Teachers in Canada are paid far too much compared to their colleagues around the world, and McGuinty has hired them in droves, to please their unions, in place of, for example, early childhood educators who would have been far cheaper, and also, apparently, replacing others who worked with problem children as well.

Now they're repaying the Liberals with millions in free advertising. And they'll expect reciprocity again if the Liberals get in. That's how the system works.

Moonbox · June 10, 2014

Well, if you want to discount anyone who disagrees with you. Blind partisan faith is the kool aid of modern conservatives.

You can read more at http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/feb/15/government-jobs-vs-private-jobs-which-help-economy/ if you'd like.

That's cute.

Did YOU read that article and actually consider what it was saying? Basically everything about it proves my point. I said that simply paying public sector salaries doesn't help the economy. I said only value-adding jobs help the economy. Healthcare, police, teaching jobs etc all indirectly contribute to productivity, and thus help the economy. The article you linked states: "Obviously, teachers, police and many others contribute significantly to growth. The question is simply an empirical one—do we spend too much or too little on such jobs?"

That's the question. Paying for public sector workers to dig holes and fill them does NOT help the economy. Extend that logic further (if you can), and you can similarly say that paying teachers, police officers, garbagemen, bureaucrats etc more than similarly skilled private sector workers would make, and completely ignoring the supply/demand dynamics of the available workforce, is no better than paying people to dig holes and fill them.

MiddleClassCentrist · June 11, 2014

That's cute.

Did YOU read that article and actually consider what it was saying? Basically everything about it proves my point. I said that simply paying public sector salaries doesn't help the economy. I said only value-adding jobs help the economy. Healthcare, police, teaching jobs etc all indirectly contribute to productivity, and thus help the economy. The article you linked states: "Obviously, teachers, police and many others contribute significantly to growth. The question is simply an empirical one—do we spend too much or too little on such jobs?"

That's the question. Paying for public sector workers to dig holes and fill them does NOT help the economy. Extend that logic further (if you can), and you can similarly say that paying teachers, police officers, garbagemen, bureaucrats etc more than similarly skilled private sector workers would make, and completely ignoring the supply/demand dynamics of the available workforce, is no better than paying people to dig holes and fill them.

You said I couldn't find an economist who didn't believe the public sector jobs were a drain and you are cherry picking your comments. I'm not sure that you are following the line of debate. Not only that but I chose to ignore your hole digging example because it was simply a strawman you made to beat down. I never proposed useless jobs.

Public Sector jobs aren't a drain on the economy.

Said no worthwhile economist ever.

""I am very happy that the government will be removing snow this weekend -- this will make it possible for a lot of private sector workers to generate output,"" Public sector adding value once again.

Again, your stance was that no economist would say anything other than public sector jobs are a drain on the economy. Your stance that you portrayed was much like the CEO's.

What irked several of the economists we contacted -- and also irritated Krugman during the show -- was Fiorina’s apparent presumption that nothing government does adds anything to the economy. In reality, various levels of government hire workers to build roads and airports, to prepare students for future employment, to offer police and rescue services and to provide courts to enforce laws. In many ways, these services are a prerequisite to economic growth, not a barrier to it.

I've provided a rebuttal that economists do not view public sector jobs as drains to the economy because they in fact add value as per award winning economists. It doesn't matter whether it's a public or private job or how the job is paid for, it is adding value. You might be able to cherry pick a few jobs that are redundant but, almost all public jobs serve a purpose whether it's policing, maintenance, teaching, health care, city planning, etc.

I'm pretty sure this line of discussion has closed.

Edited June 11, 2014 by MiddleClassCentrist

BobbyS · June 11, 2014

Teachers in Canada are paid far too much compared to their colleagues around the world, and McGuinty has hired them in droves, to please their unions, in place of, for example, early childhood educators who would have been far cheaper, and also, apparently, replacing others who worked with problem children as well.

Now they're repaying the Liberals with millions in free advertising. And they'll expect reciprocity again if the Liberals get in. That's how the system works.

But it's totally okay for corporations to donate money to the PCs which they use on advertising, right?

All Political Ads should be banned. Period.

Mighty AC · June 11, 2014

Teachers in Canada are paid far too much compared to their colleagues around the world, and McGuinty has hired them in droves, to please their unions, in place of, for example, early childhood educators who would have been far cheaper, and also, apparently, replacing others who worked with problem children as well.

Why then is Hudak firing so many of the apparently cheap but adequate EAs and ECEs? The same slash and burn strategy screwed students over in the Harris era, a government Hudak was a part of, and now he's planning on doing it again. Though, his plan isn't designed to make sense, it was designed to appeal to old voters.

The frustrating part is that so much could money could be saved in education without harming students. We could merge the Catholic system with the public and save about a billion dollars per year. We could end the expensive but useless EQAO testing program and save millions per year. We could start public audits of school board offices and put an end to a ridiculous amount of waste. All this could be done without lowering the quality of education for Ontario students.

I really, really wanted an intelligent PC option in this election. Without Hudak and his horrible platform this election would have been a walk in the park for the Tories. Hell, John Tory could have even won this one without a struggle. Unfortunately, the best we can hope for now is a minority government and that the major parties will take their platforms back to the drawing board.

MiddleClassCentrist · June 11, 2014

The frustrating part is that so much could money could be saved in education without harming students. We could merge the Catholic system with the public and save about a billion dollars per year. We could end the expensive but useless EQAO testing program and save millions per year. We could start public audits of school board offices and put an end to a ridiculous amount of waste. All this could be done without lowering the quality of education for Ontario students.

You can always throw your vote behind the Green Party because they are the only party with nothing to lose so are making the intelligent decision to support one publicly funded school board.

I will say that EQAO has served a purpose. It has shown that the crazy "new math" that the ministry and boards have been pushing is a failure. Unfortunately, the board and ministry reframed it as a "lack of teacher training"... The candidate pool of teachers is roughly the same as it was 10 years ago, except now we have "new math" that doesn't make sense and doesn't enforce skills through practice.

Boges · June 11, 2014

You guys can talk all you want about scrapping the Catholic System, but it's not on any of the Top 3 parties radar. It'd be political suicide to propose it.

cybercoma · June 11, 2014

Wealthy people don't create new jobs because they pay less personal tax or save a few bucks on the corporate tax bill. They hire people when demand forces them to add more workers.

Exactly. In fact, the entire point of business is to drive their costs to zero. They will hire as few people as possible and only when it's absolutely necessary will they hire more. Unless there's increased demand for their products and services, they're not hiring anyone, tax cuts or not.

cybercoma · June 11, 2014

If there's a minority, does she think she can force another election?

If I was a Dipper I'd be seething that she is stooping this low.

That's the way our system of government works. The Premier has to have the support of the legislature. If he's not willing to work with the other parties in a minority situation, then it's possible that another election would be called or a coalition that does have the legislature's support will be formed.

Boges · June 11, 2014

That's the way our system of government works. The Premier has to have the support of the legislature. If he's not willing to work with the other parties in a minority situation, then it's possible that another election would be called or a coalition that does have the legislature's support will be formed.

She's the one that's outright refusing to work with the other parties.

cybercoma · June 11, 2014

Teachers in Canada are paid far too much compared to their colleagues around the world

Are they?

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/teachers-salaries_teachsal-table-en

Teachers in Canada start out at $35,534 and the OECD average starting salary is $28,854. Should we be comparing our teachers' salaries to those Slovenia, Turkey, Mexico, and Estonia though? It seems amongst comparable countries Canada's teachers are making similar salaries.

cybercoma · June 11, 2014

She's the one that's outright refusing to work with the other parties.

She doesn't have to. If she disagrees with his policies, then she's not required to support them. It's up to the governing party to find consensus in a minority situation not the other way around.

Edited June 11, 2014 by cybercoma

MiddleClassCentrist · June 11, 2014

You guys can talk all you want about scrapping the Catholic System, but it's not on any of the Top 3 parties radar. It'd be political suicide to propose it.

Talking an end to racial segregation in the southern states used to be political suicide too. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been talked about.

Edited June 11, 2014 by MiddleClassCentrist