Smallc Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Maybe not but Morneau announced we were suddenly over $19b in the hole without telling us exactly how that happened. Well, we're actually $12B in the hole. That's the problem Page has. Why the $6B contingency? How was that number arrived at? Quote
ReeferMadness Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Well, 9/11 truthers might believe that, but Kevin Page doesn't seem to, and i dont recall him being a Harper fanboy. http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/preston-manning-s-prescription-to-recharge-the-right-1.3463742/liberal-fiscal-plans-less-transparent-than-under-harper-kevin-page-says-1.3464078 Nice ad hominem attack. I have a lot of respect for Page but we haven't even seen a budget yet. 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
CITIZEN_2015 Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Maybe not but Morneau announced we were suddenly over $19b in the hole without telling us exactly how that happened.We are actually close to 30 billion in red. That is the deficit liberals inherited from the conservative government and falling oil prices and much slower growth than the Con regime forecast (about $18 billion) and another 10 billion to get us out of the slow growth the Con regime created and slower economic growth by investing on infrastructure. We will be out of it in about 6 - 7 years. A dejavu of what happened under the former Con government in 2009 when they had to invest on infrastructure (to keep us from falling into depression) and slow economy causing a $55 billion deficit and then followed by growth and close to balanced budget 7 years later except that the balanced budget never occurred as we were hit by another economic turmoil (falling oil prices). Quote
Argus Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 We are actually close to 30 billion in red. We were discussing the Libeals forecast, not whatever numbers are beamed into your head from sources unknown. 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
Smallc Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 We were discussing the Libeals forecast, not whatever numbers are beamed into your head from sources unknown. I think he's accounting for Liberal spending promises, not included in the deficit figure. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 The next time one of you doofuses quotes how much we are in debt, you better provide a citation to some official source. Throwing around random numbers is stupid and not the least bit conducive to any sort of rational discussion. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 “A man in debt is so far a slave.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson “Debt is a social and ideological construct, not a simple economic fact.” - Noam Chomsky Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
CITIZEN_2015 Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) We were discussing the Libeals forecast, not whatever numbers are beamed into your head from sources unknown. It was Liberasl forecast dummy!!!!!. Liberals said the deficit will be $18.4 billion and that does not include infrastructure investment and they had said before they plan to invest about $10 billion on infrastructure this year. Edited February 28, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Then read my post again. It was Liberasl forecast dummy!!!!!. Liberals said the deficit will be $18 billion and that does not include infrastructure investment and they had said before they plan to invest about $10 billion on infrastructure this year. Additional infrastructure spending is supposed to be a bit less than $5B. They planned to spend $15B more than the baseline projection from Budget 2015. With the baseline being $12B worse than projected (at -$10B, vs +2B) if they follow through on their plans, and the situation gets no worse, without additional money spent, we can expect a $22B deficit. Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Only $5 investment on infrastructure will not do much to an over $1800 billion economy. It is like trying to start up a Jambojet with a matchstick!!!!!. I heard that they plan to invest about $10. Are you sure about the $5 billion figure? Quote
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Only $5 investment on infrastructure will not do much to an over $1800 billion economy. It is like trying to start up a Jambojet with a matchstick!!!!!. I heard that they plan to invest about $10. Are you sure about the $5 billion figure? The money is an additional $5B. Harper already had about $5B per year set aside. Quote
Argus Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 It was Liberasl forecast dummy!!!!!. Liberals said the deficit will be $18.4 billion and that does not include infrastructure investment and they had said before they plan to invest about $10 billion on infrastructure this year. Your statement was We are actually close to 30 billion in red. That is the deficit liberals inherited from the conservative government So you are blaming the former government for the additional money the Liberals are planning on spending, including the Liberals' new $6 billion 'contingency fund'. That's pretty dumb, in my opinion. 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 February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) Additional infrastructure spending is supposed to be a bit less than $5B. They planned to spend $15B more than the baseline projection from Budget 2015. With the baseline being $12B worse than projected (at -$10B, vs +2B) if they follow through on their plans, and the situation gets no worse, without additional money spent, we can expect a $22B deficit. Says who? The Liberals, who won't open up at how they arrived at that figure, except to admit $6 billion of it is for a larger contingency fund? This government is filled with people from the Ontario Liberals, who have all the economic and accounting integrity of Enron. Edited February 28, 2016 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
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Says who? The Liberals That's right, the government. If you have alternative data, share it. Quote
Argus Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 That's right, the government. If you have alternative data, share it. Hell, even the former PBO can't get data from this bunch. I eagerly await the new PBO's lawsuit when the Liberals refuse to offer up the data he asks for. I recall several lawsuits against the former Liberal government by parliamentary officers trying to pry information out of them. 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
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Hell, even the former PBO can't get data from this bunch. Why would they give data to the former PBO? Further to that, Kevin Page predicted large Harper deficits to infinity in 2010ish. Flaherty, every year, came in with a deficit smaller than anticipated. Page was proven wrong, pretty much every time. I have no faith in his pre budget nonsense analysis. I eagerly await the new PBO's lawsuit when the Liberals refuse to offer up the data he asks for. I recall several lawsuits against the former Liberal government by parliamentary officers trying to pry information out of them. You recall that, do you? Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Your statement was We are actually close to 30 billion in red. That is the deficit liberals inherited from the conservative governmentThis is another false statement. My post is still on previous page. Incredible how you make up things to get yourself out of hole.I clearly say as below that 18 billion dollar of that is what they inherited from the Cons not the whole 30 billion!!!!. We are actually close to 30 billion in red. That is the deficit liberals inherited from the conservative government and falling oil prices and much slower growth than the Con regime forecast (about $18 billion) and another 10 billion to get us out of the slow growth the Con regime created and slower economic growth by investing on infrastructure. We will be out of it in about 6 - 7 years. Quote
Argus Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Why would they give data to the former PBO? Gee, isn't this the new, open, transparent government the lefties have been wetting themselves over? 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
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Gee, isn't this the new, open, transparent government the lefties have been wetting themselves over? The former PBO is a nobody. Why would they give him information? More importantly, since when do you care what he says? Why the hypocrisy? Quote
Argus Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 This is another false statement. My post is still on previous page. Incredible how you make up things to get yourself out of hole.I clearly say as below that 18 billion dollar of that is what they inherited from the Cons not the whole 30 billion!!!!. If you find English difficult to work in blame it on your poor schooling, not my misreading of what you clearly said, which is that the Liberals inherited $30 billion deficit from the previous government. You also said that the slow growth was 'created' by the Tories, which suggest somehow you believe they caused the world price of oil to fall. I can't imagine how you can think that but then you seem to believe in a number of bizarre things. You will stop using the term 'con' now, I think. I've been tolerant enough, but the next time you do I'm going to report it. 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 February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 The former PBO is a nobody. Why would they give him information? More importantly, since when do you care what he says? Why the hypocrisy? So transparency is not so transparent at all, eh? It's only for insiders. Interesting way you fanatical Liberals have of changing your tune. The hypocrisy is all yours. 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
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 So transparency is not so transparent at all, eh? Would you give your credit card number to someone who used to work for your bank? Why not? It's only for insiders. Interesting way you fanatical Liberals have of changing your tune. The hypocrisy is all yours. Only one of us is being a hypocrite. It isn't me. Quote
Argus Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Would you give your credit card number to someone who used to work for your bank? Why not? My credit card numbers if private information. Are you saying that government budget and fiscal numbers are also private information? 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
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 My credit card numbers if private information. Are you saying that government budget and fiscal numbers are also private information? I'm saying that Kevin Page has no standing that would give him privileged access beyond that of the public. 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.