Where are the jobs coming from? Not Alberta.

[overthere]

http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/gary-lamphier-without-alberta-where-will-canadas-new-jobs-come-from

What happens when Alberta’s oilpatch — until recently Canada’s most robust growth engine and the nation’s key wealth generator — abruptly stalls?

The rest of the country is about to find out, and I’m afraid the news won’t be good, especially for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s new Liberal government, which is already ratcheting up its budget deficit projections mere weeks after the Oct. 19 federal election.

Obviously, Alberta has already had a rude wake-up call. With oil prices down 60 per cent in the past 18 months and the province gushing red ink, the good times are long gone. Our province is in recession and will likely stay there for a while, barring a surprise uptick in crude prices.

But the rest of Canada has yet to feel the full impact. That could be about to change in 2016, as suppliers’ order books dry up and the flow of cash from Alberta, in terms of paycheques as well as corporate and personal tax revenues, slows to a trickle.

Trudeau - and Notley- think that civil service jobs and fixing some bridges on borrowed money are the answer to this question.

Government spending its way out of a downturn never worked before, why would it now?

[Smallc]

http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/gary-lamphier-without-alberta-where-will-canadas-new-jobs-come-from

Trudeau - and Notley- think that civil service jobs and fixing some bridges on borrowed money are the answer to this question.

There's a debate over which is more dangerous and costly in the long run - infrastructure deficit vs fiscal one. We can run relatively moderate deficits for a while while actually being more able to afford interest from said debt via economic growth.

[Topaz]

Outside of the GTA, Ontario is still feeling the down turn of 2008 and unemployment is still high and in some cities higher than the national average and part of the reasons behind it is the foreign companies picking up and leaving, especially the USA. Canada should have some safe guard against that, but it keeps coming back, its a global economy...and the corporation love that.

[bush_cheney2004]

Outside of the GTA, Ontario is still feeling the down turn of 2008 and unemployment is still high and in some cities higher than the national average and part of the reasons behind it is the foreign companies picking up and leaving, especially the USA. Canada should have some safe guard against that, but it keeps coming back, its a global economy...and the corporation love that.

They are leaving Ontario because of its Wynning ways...taxes..."hydro" costs....and unions. USA corporations do not owe Ontario any jobs at all...be thankful for the ones it still has...for now.

Edited November 22, 2015 by bush_cheney2004

[Wilber]

There's a debate over which is more dangerous and costly in the long run - infrastructure deficit vs fiscal one. We can run relatively moderate deficits for a while while actually being more able to afford interest from said debt via economic growth.

That's a treadmill you can never get off.

[Smallc]

That's a treadmill you can never get off.

I'm not going to rehash a debate that I've already watched here in the last couple of weeks. I will say this though - many would say the same about infrastructure deficits.

[Wilber]

I'm not going to rehash a debate that I've already watched here in the last couple of weeks. I will say this though - many would say the same about infrastructure deficits.

It's not deficits that are the problem, it's the fact the money is never paid back and we are sentenced to pay interest on it forever. I'll keep rehashing it as long as you keep bringing it up.

[CITIZEN_2015]

http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/gary-lamphier-without-alberta-where-will-canadas-new-jobs-come-from

Trudeau - and Notley- think that civil service jobs and fixing some bridges on borrowed money are the answer to this question.

Government spending its way out of a downturn never worked before, why would it now?

It worked in 2008 and 2009 when the great depression hit the world. Canada was to a large extend spared because of Harper government spending of tens of billions on infrastructure (yes fixing some bridges too). This was the only conservative action in 10 years that was right, timely and good for anyone. Yes they added 150B to national debt but it was a necessary evil. Otherwise Canada and Canadians would have suffered immensely.

[Smallc]

Studies show that infrastructure investment has a multiplier effect of 1.14 on GDP.

[-1=e^ipi]

It's not deficits that are the problem, it's the fact the money is never paid back and we are sentenced to pay interest on it forever. I'll keep rehashing it as long as you keep bringing it up.

Nah. There is always the option to default.

Studies show that infrastructure investment has a multiplier effect of 1.14 on GDP.

Lots of expenditure has such a multiplier effect. The problem is that you have to pay it back. And the marginal cost of taxation is generally higher than 1.14.

[eyeball]

Where are the jobs coming from?

Tourists where I live, eight months of the year anyway at least, packing more dollars per Euro and Greenback than when Alberta was riding high. Busiest year I've ever had and they're packing me off to boat driving school yet again to certify me for some larger boats apparently coming down the pipe.

Boats built elsewhere 'cause...well, just 'cause for some reason.

[Smoke]

It worked in 2008 and 2009 when the great depression hit the world. Canada was to a large extend spared because of Harper government spending of tens of billions on infrastructure (yes fixing some bridges too). This was the only conservative action in 10 years that was right, timely and good for anyone. Yes they added 150B to national debt but it was a necessary evil. Otherwise Canada and Canadians would have suffered immensely.

Hahaha, so now Harper's spending was a great move. Before Oct 19 Harper's spending was roundly criticized by those on the left. Now that Trudeau 's gonna spend, it's the most brilliant move in the world. For being the self-proclaimed "more intelligent voters" the left sure do have a hard time with the concept of hypocrisy.

[CITIZEN_2015]

Hahaha, so now Harper's spending was a great move. Before Oct 19 Harper's spending was roundly criticized by those on the left. Now that Trudeau 's gonna spend, it's the most brilliant move in the world. For being the self-proclaimed "more intelligent voters" the left sure do have a hard time with the concept of hypocrisy.

First of all I am not left. Ny political ideas are more on the right than left. Second if you had bothered to read my posts before October 19, on several occasions I praised Harper's big spending in 2008.

[Topaz]

BC, I didn't say the US corps did owe Canadians jobs, what I said was foreign companies have the choice of leaving when economies get tough and by leaving the country, create unemployment. The problem is, those same corps, will come back to Canada, when their economy dives and Canadians is better and some of those US companies don't treat Canadian workers that well when they leave.

[Keepitsimple]

Planning for deficits in an economic downturn runs the very real risk if incurring even larger deficits. If the deficit "investment" does not - at a minimum - pay for itself in economic benefits....then all you're doing is inviting fiscal cannibalism.

Edited November 22, 2015 by Keepitsimple

[overthere]

They are leaving Ontario because of its Wynning ways...taxes..."hydro" costs....and unions. USA corporations do not owe Ontario any jobs at all...be thankful for the ones it still has...for now.

Two out of three of those are a certainty in Alberta. Notley has already jacked up personal and corporate taxes with the promise of increases to royalties in the near future. We can pretend that the current low price of oil is entirely to blame for all the investment that has been deferred in the oilo patch, but without question corporations look at our political landscape in this and other industries and say a whopping "no thanks". The other aspect in which Alberta is about to emulate the resounding failure of governance in Ontario is hydro costs: they are about to skyrocket in AB due to Notleys actions. All of this comes at the worst of times, and is voluntary. Oh, lets make it three out of three. Notley is paying abck her union backing by absolutely refusing to address the bloated, overpaid public sector unions in AB because... she owes them. An example is the cancellation of the continued outsourcing of laboratory services in northern AB. Another is her complete refusal to even examine civil service costs, when civil servants, nusreses, teachers are the highest paid in Canada already.. Ideology over sense......

There's a debate over which is more dangerous and costly in the long run - infrastructure deficit vs fiscal one. We can run relatively moderate deficits for a while while actually being more able to afford interest from said debt via economic growth.

Governments get into this navel gazing all the time.......

What I wonder is if investing in infrastructrue is such a great idea- building when labour is cheap/plentiful and interest rates are very low- why aren't corproations rushing to expand their infrastructure? Why is the opposite happening in Cnada?

[msj]

Governments get into this navel gazing all the time.......

What I wonder is if investing in infrastructrue is such a great idea- building when labour is cheap/plentiful and interest rates are very low- why aren't corproations rushing to expand their infrastructure? Why is the opposite happening in Cnada?

Because business is too busy navel gazing: cutting investment for short term reasons to make shareholders happy.

[Wilber]

Tourists where I live, eight months of the year anyway at least, packing more dollars per Euro and Greenback than when Alberta was riding high. Busiest year I've ever had and they're packing me off to boat driving school yet again to certify me for some larger boats apparently coming down the pipe.

Boats built elsewhere 'cause...well, just 'cause for some reason.

Unfortunately the increase in tourism is largely due to the devaluation of our dollar and the resulting pay cut most Canadians have taken.

[Wilber]

What I wonder is if investing in infrastructrue is such a great idea- building when labour is cheap/plentiful and interest rates are very low- why aren't corproations rushing to expand their infrastructure? Why is the opposite happening in Cnada?

Because business has to be more realistic when it comes to spending and they have a choice of countries to do business in.

Labour and interest rates may be low but materials, machinery and anything else that has to be imported is now more expensive due to our cratering dollar.

[bush_cheney2004]

BC, I didn't say the US corps did owe Canadians jobs, what I said was foreign companies have the choice of leaving when economies get tough and by leaving the country, create unemployment. The problem is, those same corps, will come back to Canada, when their economy dives and Canadians is better and some of those US companies don't treat Canadian workers that well when they leave.

Correct...I said that USA corps don't owe Canadians jobs...in Ontario...Alberta...or any other province/territory. They will come and go based on conditions that are favourable to business, the same way that Canadians got jobs that were formerly in the United States. The real point is to stop depending on so much foreign investment as the lazy/cheap way of going forward, or accept the consequences without surprise.

[overthere]

Because business has to be more realistic when it comes to spending and they have a choice of countries to do business in.

Labour and interest rates may be low but materials, machinery and anything else that has to be imported is now more expensive due to our cratering dollar.

So the corollary is that governments don't have to be realistic?

Does govt have any reason to create conditions where corporations want to invest and create jobs in the country? Or is their duty to do whatever they can to insure that those companies leave?

[msj]

Does govt have any reason to create conditions where corporations want to invest and create jobs in the country? Or is their duty to do whatever they can to insure that those companies leave?

Bringing income tax rates back to the Ralph Klein era is not the reason the O&G industry is sucking wind.

It's because of Saudi and US production.

In fact, Canada continues to produce at higher outputs but when the price has been cut in two the economy takes a hit.

It's also funny how Canada is contributing to the supply glut forcing the price down, however temporarily that may be.

[Wilber]

So the corollary is that governments don't have to be realistic?

Does govt have any reason to create conditions where corporations want to invest and create jobs in the country? Or is their duty to do whatever they can to insure that those companies leave?

Companies can go broke, governments don't, although the country can.. Most politicians aren't business people and their primary consideration is to get re-elected. That's why paying back debt is such a low priority for them.

[eyeball]

Unfortunately the increase in tourism is largely due to the devaluation of our dollar and the resulting pay cut most Canadians have taken.

That said it is growing so....that's good enough for me.

[Wilber]

That said it is growing so....that's good enough for me.

I've no doubt it is good for people for people who depend on tourism for their livelihood but it is because Canadians in general have less purchasing power.