ReeferMadness Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 Everyone but the government ends up with more money. Those with less to begin with end up with the most. There's nothing wrong with it. You're avoiding the question. Do you mind if the Harper government lies to the people? Regardless of who winds up with more money? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 You're avoiding the question. Do you mind if the Harper government lies to the people? Regardless of who winds up with more money? How did they lie to people? You know about the program and the elimination of the tax credit. So do I. We must have seen through the lies. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 How did they lie to people? You know about the program and the elimination of the tax credit. So do I. We must have seen through the lies. His most recent lie of course is that he has balanced the budget. Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 His most recent lie of course is that he has balanced the budget. The budget is currently in a surplus position: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-22/canada-posts-april-may-budget-surplus-of-c-3-9-billion Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 The budget is currently in a surplus position: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-22/canada-posts-april-may-budget-surplus-of-c-3-9-billion Surely you're not silly enough to buy that horses**t. That was created by sale of GM shares. One time only and at a loss no less. More desperation! Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 Surely you're not silly enough to buy that horses**t. That was created by sale of GM shares. That doesn't account for about $1.2B. Nice try though. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 That doesn't account for about $1.2B. Nice try though. Wait until September when the real numbers show up. You can only sell GM shares one time, and you can only steal so much from the rainy day fund before, the chickens come home to roost. Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 and you can only steal so much from the rainy day fund before, the chickens come home to roost. Again, there was no money to 'steal'. Repeating the same wrong thing time and again doesn't make it true. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 Again, there was no money to 'steal'. Repeating the same wrong thing time and again doesn't make it true. Trying to ignore 2 billion out of a 3 billion fund time and again is just a bit silly. Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 Trying to ignore 2 billion out of a 3 billion fund time and again is just a bit silly. On March 31st, there was a rainy day fund of $0. On April 1st, there was a rainy day fund of $1B. I can't make it much clearer. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 On March 31st, there was a rainy day fund of $0. On April 1st, there was a rainy day fund of $1B. I can't make it much clearer. The 3 billion was set aside in the rainy day fund in a number of past budgets. I can't make it much clearer. Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 The 3 billion was set aside in the rainy day fund in a number of past budgets. I can't make it much clearer. That money was not carried over from year to year. That seems to be what you don't understand. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) That money was not carried over from year to year. That seems to be what you don't understand. Sorry, that seems to be what you don't understand. http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/federal-budget-conservatives-dip-into-contingency-fund Edited August 3, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
Smallc Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Your own link proves what I'm saying. Edit: It also shows that the government is actually about $2B in the black in the two months reported thus far when the sale of GM shares is taken out. Edited August 3, 2015 by Smallc Quote
blueblood Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 Your own link proves what I'm saying. Edit: It also shows that the government is actually about $2B in the black in the two months reported thus far when the sale of GM shares is taken out. Right back in the black as per the promise. All they are doing is reducing funding on one line of the budget. Just like the other guys... Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
Bryan Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 you can only steal so much from the rainy day fund There is no actual fund. It's a buffer that finance ministers customarily built into their budgets. All the smaller contingency means is Joe Oliver gave himself less margin for error than previous finance ministers have. It certainly is possible that he should have given himself more room, but saying that he took anything out of any fund is categorically false. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 There is no actual fund. It's a buffer that finance ministers customarily built into their budgets. All the smaller contingency means is Joe Oliver gave himself less margin for error than previous finance ministers have. It certainly is possible that he should have given himself more room, but saying that he took anything out of any fund is categorically false. No, it's categorically true. He eve admits it so you don't have to take my word for it. Of course it's all taxpayer money, surely you understand that. But it was set aside for just what it was called, a contingency, in a number of ongoing budgets. The deal is, Oliver/Harper decided to shift 2 billion worth into general revenues to make it see the budget balanced. And of course as we shall see officially next month, even that didn't work. Quote
Bryan Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 But it was set aside for just what it was called, a contingency, in a number of ongoing budgets. The deal is, Oliver/Harper decided to shift 2 billion worth into general revenues to make it see the budget balanced. No. There is no actual fund. No money was "moved". Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) No. There is no actual fund. No money was "moved". Call it what you want. 2 billion got "moved". It doesn't really matter, if something occurs requiring extra funding we just go further into deficit. It's the smoke and mirrors thing that Harper tries to do, and some people seem to buy, that is a bit humorous. We can't all be accountants I guess. I see you are drinking the same kool aid as does smallc. Edited August 3, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
Argus Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) So, you think it's OK for the government to be dishonest with the people by pretending to to hand out a bunch of money while knowing it will mostly be clawed back in 10 months time. It won't be unless they are higher wage earners. You people on the Left really can't have it both ways. Either you can be against this because it favours the rich or you can be against it because it's not really universal. You can't be both. Edited August 3, 2015 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 You mean the way you ignored the lengthy list of Conservative scandals and started talking about Liberal issues from 40 years ago? On the contrary. I directly addressed the list by pointing out it was pretty minor stuff compared to what the last government has done. I could have used the Mulroney or Trudeau governments but the result would be the same. You can honestly attack this government for a variety of reasons but not on corruption. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 As has been pointed out in another thread, CPC supporters tend to be less educated. Perhaps that is why they can be so easily sucked in to such facades. And again we see the nonsensical two faces of the Left. Tory supporters are less educated, yet why do the Tories have more money, because rich people favour them. Uhmmmm, so I guess the rich in Canada aren't very well educated, right? Even your cliche's are two faced. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Posted August 3, 2015 And again we see the nonsensical two faces of the Left. Tory supporters are less educated, yet why do the Tories have more money, because rich people favour them. Uhmmmm, so I guess the rich in Canada aren't very well educated, right? Even your cliche's are two faced. Not my cliche. It's part of polling results. Your interpretation is where the two facedness show up. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 It won't be unless they are higher wage earners. You people on the Left really can't have it both ways. Either you can be against this because it favours the rich or you can be against it because it's not really universal. You can't be both. I'm in favour of honesty and transparency. You remember them. Those were the things that Harper and his corrupt cronies promised to bring back to Ottawa. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
hitops Posted August 4, 2015 Author Report Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) And again we see the nonsensical two faces of the Left. Tory supporters are less educated, yet why do the Tories have more money, because rich people favour them. Uhmmmm, so I guess the rich in Canada aren't very well educated, right? Even your cliche's are two faced. I always love these claims. The theory is that since universities staff and students are leftist, being a lefty must go with being educated. Obviously those employed by the university will be more leftist. Their entire financial livelihood depends on government largess. More power for gov means more funding and more importance for them. The story of naked self-interest is as old as the human race. It is also true that higher age and experience correlates to voting conservative. Those with zero experience applying themselves to the real life world of career and work (students), will tend to vote NDP. Many change once they get involved in the work-reward system of regular life. What nobody ever mentions is the type of degree, which get to your point about money. People who graduate with STEM degress are disproportionately conservative voters. Those degree have market demand, and command higher salaries. Those who's habit and value choices tend to result in success, tend to vote conservative. Unfortunately gender studies, native studies etc etc liberal arts degrees simply do not have value to others. We already have an oversupply of self-important blowhards with a social-politically trendy buzzword-based vocabulary, and relatively little demand. Ergo, articulate starbucks workers do not command value in the real world. In a nutshell, the harder the degree is, the more objectively evaluated the material, the more likely the graduate votes conservative. Also the more likely that same degree produces financial stability. Edited August 4, 2015 by hitops Quote
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.