Standing for everything, and nothing, lying about it all.

[Wilber]

Then I suppose no one should every borrow money if one were to use such "logic."

When I borrowed a few hundred grand to buy into my accounting practice, at 6% interest, I should not have taken the risk despite the reward being an income that is 3 times what I would be earning had I not otherwise made the investment.

When I have borrowed to buy a car at low interest rates, pay it off within 48 months, and then hold the car for 11 years - nope, shouldn't do that either.

Too much "risk."

And buy a house with borrowed money? No way!! Too "risky."

Lets add one more - not borrow money to pay for big ticket infrastructure projects where the cost of capital is low and the return will certainly exceed such a low rate?

Too "risky."

What a load of nonsense.

Trudeau isn't planning on paying it back in 48 months. As far as we know, he isn't planning on paying it back at all. I'm probably closer to Trudeau on social issues than I am to Harper but his economic policy is the same snake oil as his father's.

[msj]

Trudeau isn't planning on paying it back in 48 months. As far as we know, he isn't planning on paying it back at all. I'm probably closer to Trudeau on social issues than I am to Harper but his economic policy is the same snake oil as his father's.

Ah, yes, that's wise: project the sins of the father onto the son.

[msj]

The Liberals do not plan on borrowing money to build anything other than their own support. The vast majority of extra spending is for program spending, not for any sort of building campaign.

Gosh, you mean politicians use taxes to get votes?

Didn't know that.

Things like cutting taxes and giving families a UCCB benefit count too so cut this hypocritical nonsense.

[dre]

Trudeau isn't planning on paying it back in 48 months. As far as we know, he isn't planning on paying it back at all. I'm probably closer to Trudeau on social issues than I am to Harper but his economic policy is the same snake oil as his father's.

Trudeau junior is getting the money for a song though. And despite the various promises each camp has made theres no real reason the believe a Conservative government will borrow any less than a liberal government.

[ToadBrother]

Trudeau junior is getting the money for a song though. And despite the various promises each camp has made theres no real reason the believe a Conservative government will borrow any less than a liberal government.

More to the point, there's no reason to expect that the Tories' revenue projections and tight margins are going to survive four years intact.

We have a balanced budget law in BC, much trumpeted when it was passed after the BC Liberal victory. In 2009 it was thrown out the window.

Such measures are populist feel good mumbo jumbo, not worth the paper they're written on.

[Wilber]

Trudeau junior is getting the money for a song though. And despite the various promises each camp has made theres no real reason the believe a Conservative government will borrow any less than a liberal government.

More to the point, there's no reason to expect that the Tories' revenue projections and tight margins are going to survive four years intact.

We have a balanced budget law in BC, much trumpeted when it was passed after the BC Liberal victory. In 2009 it was thrown out the window.

Such measures are populist feel good mumbo jumbo, not worth the paper they're written on.

And there is even less reason to think the Liberal's projections will result in a balanced budget down the road, particularly when they have made it clear there will be more debt to service at future interest rates which are unknown.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Wilber

[ToadBrother]

And there is even less reason to think the Liberal's projections will result in a balanced budget down the road, particularly when they have made it clear there will be more debt to service.

Marginally more debt. You really are blowing this completely out of proportion. It's hard to see how you can make this mole hill into Mount Everest.

[blueblood]

Marginally more debt. You really are blowing this completely out of proportion. It's hard to see how you can make this mole hill into Mount Everest.

People that lived through the 80s learned that lesson the hard way. Its always better to reduce the debt. Maybe there are some things that we just cant afford... However try telling a lot of canadians that especially when they think they can afford their 500k house on 60k per year along with gadgets, vaycay, and vehicles...

[ToadBrother]

People that lived through the 80s learned that lesson the hard way. Its always better to reduce the debt. Maybe there are some things that we just cant afford... However try telling a lot of canadians that especially when they think they can afford their 500k house on 60k per year along with gadgets, vaycay, and vehicles...

Governments are not households. The nature of sovereign debt is wholly different.

[Wilber]

Marginally more debt. You really are blowing this completely out of proportion. It's hard to see how you can make this mole hill into Mount Everest.

Manure piles are built one dump at a time.

[ToadBrother]

Manure piles are built one dump at a time.

Governments use debt to build infrastructure all the time.

[blueblood]

Governments are not households. The nature of sovereign debt is wholly different.

I understand deficit financing when necessary, however to me its a matter of principle as taking a small deficit is quite possibly the slippery slope to more deficits. Remember in the 50s and 60s canadas finances were outstanding and our country was prosperous and doing well. Then trudeau sr and the liberals started the debt madness and mulroney added to it and had to make huge debt servicing costs. I dont want to go back to that again which is why i think keeping the govt on a balanced budget is necessary as it draws a line. Canada has gone through the bond vultures and they pretty much told the chretien liberals to get their shit together.

I honestly dont think that the stimulus package got us through the recession as much as it was being lucky enough to have good prices for resourse exports and using that to ride out the storm. I would wonder if the stumulus package was even necessary...

[msj]

Funny how people make a big deal about a projected small deficit of about 3% of the budget (and less than 1% of the total economy) per year but completely ignore the infrastructure deficit that is ongoing.

Eventually, some of these projects are going to have to be done if only to maintain what we already have.

But, oh no, that's invisible because we don't need to spend the money until the highways crack and bridges fall down.

Then it will be fine to borrow the money no matter the interest rate.

The reactive attitude inherent in this is mind numbing.

[blueblood]

Funny how people make a big deal about a projected small deficit of about 3% of the budget (and less than 1% of the total economy) per year but completely ignore the infrastructure deficit that is ongoing.

Eventually, some of these projects are going to have to be done if only to maintain what we already have.

But, oh no, that's invisible because we don't need to spend the money until the highways crack and bridges fall down.

Then it will be fine to borrow the money no matter the interest rate.

The reactive attitude inherent in this is mind numbing.

The problem is that people have concocted all sorts of wishes for govt services that could be done by the private sector. Why do we need to spend 1 billion ish on the cbc for example. Id rather that money go into infrastructure as well as the child tax credit. But people want more and more and more.

And both lpc and cpc are guilty of this. In the early 2000s with the budget surpluses those projects could have been done with that. Saskatchewan has been financing a lot of infrastructure and maintaining balanced budgets.

[poochy]

So now the liberal co chair is stepping away after being outed as a lobbyist for trans canada, but i thought the cuddly, huggable liberal party was different, and better than the conservatives, but it seems not, funny how this bit of news fits in so nicely with the theme of this thread.

[poochy]

Gosh, you mean politicians use taxes to get votes?

Didn't know that.

Things like cutting taxes and giving families a UCCB benefit count too so cut this hypocritical nonsense.

Well at least your honest about not being better yourself or caring if the liberal party is better than the conservatives, you don't care so long as they get elected, and that's fine, it's just nice to see someone admit it instead of hiding behind this imaginary curtain of liberal betterness and niceness.

[poochy]

Marginally more debt. You really are blowing this completely out of proportion. It's hard to see how you can make this mole hill into Mount Everest.

A marginal, irrelevant, will accomplish nothing, while the liberals lie about what the money is for debt, that utter hypocrites like you would be, and have been complaining about with the conservatives. Again, another example, liberals have no principles, stand for nothing, while lying about everything, that's what happens to people when they have unquestioned belief in their own moral superiority.

[msj]

Well at least your honest about not being better yourself or caring if the liberal party is better than the conservatives, you don't care so long as they get elected, and that's fine, it's just nice to see someone admit it instead of hiding behind this imaginary curtain of liberal betterness and niceness.

It's a matter of priorities: I think we are all better off investing in infrastructure rather than cutting my corporate tax rate, for example.

I'm not so greedy as to demand a personal cut in my taxes at the expense of society and it is this factor that makes me a liberal rather than a conservative.

That and wanting a brothel on each corner....

[blueblood]

It's a matter of priorities: I think we are all better off investing in infrastructure rather than cutting my corporate tax rate, for example.

I'm not so greedy as to demand a personal cut in my taxes at the expense of society and it is this factor that makes me a liberal rather than a conservative.

That and wanting a brothel on each corner....

I like my taxes low so that they should be going to things such as infrastructure, policing, trade deals, and not the cbc, daycare, and excessive social assistance.

I however am greedy lol

[ToadBrother]

I like my taxes low so that they should be going to things such as infrastructure, policing, trade deals, and not the cbc, daycare, and excessive social assistance.

I however am greedy lol

I'm not sure why the Liberals and Tories are so allergic to a daycare program. If we want to encourage people to have children, we're going to have to make that a lot more attractive. A few extra bucks in the UCCB and a daycare tax credit just isn't going to cut the mustard.

Or just accept that we need a lot more immigrants, but then that gets a lot of peoples' hackles up.

[blueblood]

I'm not sure why the Liberals and Tories are so allergic to a daycare program. If we want to encourage people to have children, we're going to have to make that a lot more attractive. A few extra bucks in the UCCB and a daycare tax credit just isn't going to cut the mustard.

Or just accept that we need a lot more immigrants, but then that gets a lot of peoples' hackles up.

Thats also a result of the low interest shopping spree canadians are on right now. Things are at a point where both spouses have to work just to get bills paid as people are going crazy inflating the housing market and the rapid rise of auto prices.

A proper run daycare program would be very expensive and the fact that some people pay close to 50% of what they make in taxes is going to push some people to a breaking point.

However try selling that message that if one wants kiddies, maybe having a massive house in the city, expensive vehicles, trips south, and other luxuries might have to take a backseat so either mom or dad can stay home and take care of the kids which is far more efficient and cheaper than having govt run daycare.

[ToadBrother]

Thats also a result of the low interest shopping spree canadians are on right now. Things are at a point where both spouses have to work just to get bills paid as people are going crazy inflating the housing market and the rapid rise of auto prices.

A proper run daycare program would be very expensive and the fact that some people pay close to 50% of what they make in taxes is going to push some people to a breaking point.

However try selling that message that if one wants kiddies, maybe having a massive house in the city, expensive vehicles, trips south, and other luxuries might have to take a backseat so either mom or dad can stay home and take care of the kids which is far more efficient and cheaper than having govt run daycare.

Well, whatever reason you ascribe, the fact is that birth rates in Canada are too low, and either we make having children a lot more attractive (and a daycare program seems an awfully start), or we accept in a lot more immigrants. You can come up with your pet theory, if that pleases you, but it isn't going to solve the problem.

You think things are expensive now, wait until labor shortages start jacking up the price of, well, everything.

[dialamah]

Thats also a result of the low interest shopping spree canadians are on right now. Things are at a point where both spouses have to work just to get bills paid as people are going crazy inflating the housing market and the rapid rise of auto prices.

A proper run daycare program would be very expensive and the fact that some people pay close to 50% of what they make in taxes is going to push some people to a breaking point.

However try selling that message that if one wants kiddies, maybe having a massive house in the city, expensive vehicles, trips south, and other luxuries might have to take a backseat so either mom or dad can stay home and take care of the kids which is far more efficient and cheaper than having govt run daycare.

Is there any proof that a lot of parents are also buying huge houses, expensive vehicles and trips south? I haven't seen an indication of that; what I've seen is people waiting until they are at least well-employed, and then doing without all that luxury stuff when they start a family. But it would be interesting to see if there have been actual studies on the degree of luxury parents attempt to finance.

[blueblood]

Well, whatever reason you ascribe, the fact is that birth rates in Canada are too low, and either we make having children a lot more attractive (and a daycare program seems an awfully start), or we accept in a lot more immigrants. You can come up with your pet theory, if that pleases you, but it isn't going to solve the problem.

You think things are expensive now, wait until labor shortages start jacking up the price of, well, everything.

That has to be up to people themselves to make having a child more atteactive. The new houses i see going up in saskatoon, regina, and winnipeg are far bigger than my house and the one i grew up in. One has to wonder, is that really necesary based on avg income. Society cant afford daycare as it is right now. The problem with a lot of people is that they want and want and want and dont take very much responsibility. Take those who smoke cigarettes; society has to pay a fortune to keep up with their health problems.

Imo the problem with society is that no one wants to take responsibility. Its like the 2008 housing crash. People went around solely blaming bankers for what happened. Yeah the bankers shouldnt have been loaning money willy nilly, but people should not be asking for those kind of loans they cant afford in the first place.

Edited October 15, 2015 by blueblood

[msj]

I like my taxes low so that they should be going to things such as infrastructure, policing, trade deals, and not the cbc, daycare, and excessive social assistance.

I however am greedy lol

I agree to cut/privatize the CBC.

I also agree to a brothel on every street corner - the taxes raised can then fund our infrastructure deficit.