Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Oh, did Joe Oliver come out of hiding and convince you of that? No, actually. A CBC article that I read today did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 No, actually. A CBC article that I read today did. Stats Canada figures clearly show by the guidelines of the government we did suffer a recession. Oliver has tried to call it a "contraction". OK, which of their own guidelines will they adjust next week I wonder, and who will buy the next round of kool aid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Stats Canada figures clearly show by the guidelines of the government we did suffer a recession. It seems there is a strong possibility that the number will be revised from -0.1% to flat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 We never had any of the economic problems that are plaguing other countries around the world. Government revenues are up, taxes are down, jobs are up, exports are up, inflation is down, interest rates are low, debt to GDP is low, the middle class has grown. Under other Prime Ministers, we did have trouble with many of those things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 We never had any of the economic problems that are plaguing other countries around the world. Government revenues are up, taxes are down, jobs are up, exports are up, inflation is down, interest rates are low, debt to GDP is low, the middle class has grown. Under other Prime Ministers, we did have trouble with many of those things. I guess you forgot to check what Harper has done to the national debt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 I guess you forgot to check what Harper has done to the national debt. As a percentage of revenue, it's gone down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Harper got rid of the penny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 As a percentage of revenue, it's gone down. You call a 150 billion dollar increase, the highest ever, going down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 You call a 150 billion dollar increase, the highest ever, going down? If one guy makes $30k and owes $100k, and the second guy makes $100k and owes $200k, which one do you think is deeper in debt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 If one guy makes $30k and owes $100k, and the second guy makes $100k and owes $200k, which one do you think is deeper in debt? Oh I'm sure you can do the math on that. Now what does that have to do with Harper huge national debt increase? More importantly, where do you think our money went? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Can you demonstrate in any legitimate way that the middle class and poor are poorer than they were when Harper took power? It depends on who you are and what your situation is. If you are trying to put a couple of kids through university, or buy a home, or if you burn a lot of fuel, or use a lot of electricity, or eat a lot of unprocessed food, then you are probably effectively poorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Oh I'm sure you can do the math on that. I can. But judging past performance, I'm not so sure you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 I can. But judging past performance, I'm not so sure you can. Well, why don't you throw out your answer and we'll see how you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Well, why don't you throw out your answer and we'll see how you do. I'm the one who asked you if you know the difference. If you need my answer, that tells me all I need to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 I'm the one who asked you if you know the difference. If you need my answer, that tells me all I need to know. Here's a hint, look at the debt numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Here's a hint, look at the debt numbers. Yes, please do look at them, and tell me which one YOU think is worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Here's a hint, look at the debt numbers. Debt to GDP is far more important than the actual number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Debt to GDP is far more important than the actual number. That's true, and that's what is scary about Harper's fiscal record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 That's true, and that's what is scary about Harper's fiscal record. Scary that it's substantially better than the last few Prime Ministers that preceded him? http://www.macleans.ca/general/a-quick-look-at-canadas-federal-debt-to-gdp-ratio/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 That's true, and that's what is scary about Harper's fiscal record. Because? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Scary that it's substantially better than the last few Prime Ministers that preceded him? http://www.macleans.ca/general/a-quick-look-at-canadas-federal-debt-to-gdp-ratio/ Or not. http://ipolitics.ca/2015/04/19/no-matter-how-you-add-it-up-harpers-fiscal-record-is-a-catastrophe/ Ad hopefully we can get that F 35 file found, and burned, before he takes us eve further down the debt trail for a ho hum product. Edited September 25, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Which to do you think is worse? A debt to GDP ratio of 68% or a debt to GDP ratio of 33%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Or not. http://ipolitics.ca/2015/04/19/no-matter-how-you-add-it-up-harpers-fiscal-record-is-a-catastrophe/ That article is full of it. There were surpluses in 2006-2007, and 2007-2008. That means with the recent surplus we're at 3 surpluses in 9 years. According to the article, it should be 0.Further, it doesn't mention that debt to GDP has been falling for 5 going on 6 years now. Edited September 25, 2015 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 That article is full of it. There were surpluses in 2006-2007, and 2007-2008. That means with the recent surplus we're at 3 surpluses in 9 years. According to the article, it should be 0. Further, it doesn't mention that debt to GDP has been falling for 5 going on 6 years now. Harper had blow the surplus handed to him by Martin prior to '08. Ad we've been there ever since. Once again...look at the debt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 25, 2015 Report Share Posted September 25, 2015 Harper had blow the surplus handed to him by Martin prior to '08. Ad we've been there ever since. Once again...look at the debt. The first deficit was in2008-2009, and none (or almost none) of the deficit spending actually took place until 2009 calendar year. That means that so far, 3 out of 9 years have been in surplus. As for the debt, what about it? The spending was initiated because of the failed 2008 parliamentary crisis. It's similar to spending undertaken by every other country. There's a reason every country in the world and every province in Canada added to their respective debts. What's worth noting is that almost all of them are still in deficit. Germany, Canada, and a few of the provinces aren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.