Topaz Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 Many economist are saying that it doesn't look like the Tories will have surplus and they may even go into a deficit. I can't see where they would be able to have one if revenues are going to be down, the expenses are going to be up through the war we are in, increase of unemployment starting up again and all the other expenses the government has. It's going to cost 375 million just to have an election alone. So, will they start selling more crown property and raise taxes, AFTER the election. http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/little-chance-of-federal-budget-surplus-in-2014-2015-td-report-1.2899104 Quote
Smallc Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 You really need to get a sense of perspective. Quote
Topaz Posted January 14, 2015 Author Report Posted January 14, 2015 Smallc, since you seem to disbelieve most of the things I post, then tell me are they going to have a surplus and if so how ??? Quote
Smallc Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 If they don't, it's no big deal. A few billion dollars in either direction is virtually the same. They were set to have a surplus. The price of oil decided to nosedive in a way that no one predicted, and so we're here, to the point where they may or not have one. No economist will tell you that the federal government is in an unsustainable fiscal position. Quote
Moonbox Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 Nicely stated. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
PIK Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 Topaz,I think you mean many liberal economist are hoping they will be no surplus. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Michael Hardner Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 No economist will tell you that the federal government is in an unsustainable fiscal position. Relative to other countries, we're in good shape no ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Topaz Posted January 14, 2015 Author Report Posted January 14, 2015 The debate was about if/when the government goes into a deficit, will it still go ahead with the income splitting, mainly to get votes. and if they do and if they get re-elected and things get even worse, all the income slitting will have to come back to the government if they can't cut anymore, then, they have to rise taxes because their spending will increase. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted January 14, 2015 Report Posted January 14, 2015 It's all speculation as to what the falling oil prices will do to our economy. Sure it's bad for Alberta and Saskatchewan and will continue so until oil starts to rise again. But hey, the resulting low Canadian dollar is great for Ontario's manufacturing sector and any Canadian exporter....and its estimated that low gas prices will put an extra $1500 in the pockets of all Canadians on average - which they will spend - and stimulate the economy even more. Oil and Gas are about 10% of Canada's economy. So yes, we'll take a hit for a while but when these other positives kick in, perhaps it will end up to be a blessing in disguise with a more robust economy. Could anyone foresee this happening so quickly? Nobody did. So small surplus, no surplus, small deficit - who cares.....other than the faux-outrage from the opposition parties. Interesting times. Buckle up. Quote Back to Basics
cybercoma Posted January 15, 2015 Report Posted January 15, 2015 The economy improves, it's all Harper's doing. The economy tanks, it's world market forces beyond his control.Except, I seem to recall someone mentioning Dutch Disease and the problem with putting all of your eggs in one oil basket. Quote
Smallc Posted January 15, 2015 Report Posted January 15, 2015 Actually, overall, projections (medium and long term) show that the low cost of oil is only a slight net negative to the Canadian economy. Energy as a whole is not even close to being the major piece of our economy, and oil most certainly isn't on its own. As for Harper and the credit he can take, well, that varies depending on the subject. This certainly isn't his fault. Quote
Smallc Posted January 17, 2015 Report Posted January 17, 2015 The debate was about if/when the government goes into a deficit, will it still go ahead with the income splitting, Income splitting became law January 1st, 2015. Quote
msj Posted January 17, 2015 Report Posted January 17, 2015 Income splitting became law January 1st, 2015.Yes and it is effective for the 2014 tax year. But I ask anyone this: why does it allow one to split up to $50,000 with one's spouse if the tax credit is limited to $2,000? Why do I ask this? The tax credit rate is 15% so if it is going to be capped then that implies that a deduction of $13,333 is all it takes to get to the $2,000 of savings. May just be optics - sounds better to deduct $50,000 on the one hand while sounding better to others that the tax cut is limited to $2,000 on the other hand. I will wait to see how this all works out in the real world once I start doing up tax returns. Pension splitting, for example, has turned out great for wealthy retirees since it has eliminated/reduced OAS clawback for many people earning big time pensions (like retired politicians) so I am interested to see the intended and unintended consequences of this policy. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
eyeball Posted January 17, 2015 Report Posted January 17, 2015 I will wait to see how this all works out in the real world once I start doing up tax returns. Sounds like a euphemistic way of saying just let the budget balance itself. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
msj Posted January 17, 2015 Report Posted January 17, 2015 I have no idea how this policy is going to work until I see it in action so I have to reserve some judgement until I have an understanding of it. As to its effect on the budget: there are many ways to balance a budget and I think Harper chooses whatever is most expedient for him at the time which does not, and has not, created very good policy. But that is for another discussion. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
August1991 Posted January 26, 2015 Report Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) But I ask anyone this: why does it allow one to split up to $50,000 with one's spouse if the tax credit is limited to $2,000? Why do I ask this? The tax credit rate is 15% so if it is going to be capped then that implies that a deduction of $13,333 is all it takes to get to the $2,000 of savings. May just be optics - sounds better to deduct $50,000 on the one hand while sounding better to others that the tax cut is limited to $2,000 on the other hand. I will wait to see how this all works out in the real world once I start doing up tax returns. Like the child tax credit, this income-splitting scheme is retail politics at its best. (A colleague with kids and a non-working spouse said to me, "I still won't vote for him." Her aversion to Harper was no surpise; it struck me that she knew of the tax changes.) Surplus? If I were Harper, I would start talking about our federal government debt-to-GDP ratio. It's very low, and generally going down - compared to Ontario and Obama's US. Edited January 26, 2015 by August1991 Quote
overthere Posted January 27, 2015 Report Posted January 27, 2015 The economy improves, it's all Harper's doing. The economy tanks, it's world market forces beyond his control. Except, I seem to recall someone mentioning Dutch Disease and the problem with putting all of your eggs in one oil basket. 6% of the Canadian GDP comes from energy related resources. That is all energy related: gas oil uranium renewables hydro etc. Looks like it occupies a wee corner of the overall basket. What hurts is that it generates a lot of export money, or used to. No problem, Ontario has a plan to invest in the resurrection of industry. They have all the tools they could possibly need: cheap energy, outstanding work force, low dollar, and a dynamic govt led by K Wynne. How can we lose? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.