Conservative Surplus Nothing but Hot Air

[Smallc]

Also not clear to ~60% of Canadians. The previous "lightweight" never came close to those numbers.

Apparently, the mayor of Gatineau (the son in law of Bernard Landry) was very impressed with the meetings that they had with the government ministers and Trudeau. There was 6 ministers including Trudeau, something that never would happen under Harper. They were willing to listen, willing to talk, and willing to make deals so things could happen. He said he was very enthusiastic about the prospects for progress.

[Smallc]

So is smallc an LPC partisan now?

Small c has always favoured the LPC. That doesn't mean that they can't lose me (as Dion and Ignatieff did) and that doesn't mean that I agree with everything they want to do (pulling the jets, not raising the GST, etc). I have a far easier time identifying with the sitting government that the opposition most of the time, anyway.

[On Guard for Thee]

Apparently, the mayor of Gatineau (the son in law of Bernard Landry) was very impressed with the meetings that they had with the government ministers and Trudeau. There was 6 ministers including Trudeau, something that never would happen under Harper. They were willing to listen, willing to talk, and willing to make deals so things could happen. He said he was very enthusiastic about the prospects for progress.

At least if meetings are taking place there is the chance for positive outcomes. That's I guess a part of the current breath of fresh air that has given Canadians confidence in the new government.

[Bonam]

Not sure what you are implying but in 15 years when I am retiring I will be getting MY OWN money and this will be the money that I a am paying NOW deposited in bank for my pension years otherwise I would save this $10,000 annual contributions to MY pension myself and in 35 working years ii will be over half a million dollars (my payments plus interests) as my own direct payments plus an equal half a million more by my employers. So I don't feel in 15 years the young will be paying charity to me in my pension years or a wealth transfer from young to old as I said it is my own money (over a million dollars) which I am working hard for it and by law they take it away from me now to save it for my future.

Yes, that's what you feel. Unfortunately, government pension schemes the world over are underfunded. That means people have not been putting in enough contributions to pay for what they are expecting to get back from it, once you take into account the dismal returns and high administrative costs of these programs.

I agree with you... I would much rather save the annual contributions and invest them myself, that way I could know exactly how much money I have saved up at any time, and not have its collection, distribution, and returns be at the whim of politicians thousands of kilometers away. Unfortunately, that's not an option. And the reality is that the money that retirees are getting from these programs is not the money that they paid in decades ago (that money has long since been spent), rather, it is money that the young are paying in today.

The whole thing is a government mandated ponzi scheme.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Bonam

[Smallc]

The CPP is fully funded and has more than enough assets.

[Argus]

Good thing any young person with a brain should realize that none of these programs will exist in anything close to their current state 40 years from now. I'd much rather these programs didn't exist at all, they are nothing but wealth transfers from the young to the old. Too bad all you old folks would crucify anyone who dared to challenge your entitlements...

I don't HAVE any entitlements other than CPP and the like eventually, and a minimal employer pension. I expect to live off my investments, the money for which comes from my own work in the private sector.

Maybe you'd prefer to return to the days when old people were eating cat food in their freezing, darkened slum apartments, because of course, YOU'LL never get old, but most of us think pensions are a good idea.

[Bonam]

I don't HAVE any entitlements other than CPP

Reminds me of some Republican I heard talking on some TV show a few years ago. Was something along the lines of... "I was poor, I was on welfare, and no one ever gave me any money..."

and the like eventually, and a minimal employer pension. I expect to live off my investments, the money for which comes from my own work in the private sector.

That's good. The generation that lived through the greatest period of economic expansion in history has had plentiful opportunities to amass considerable investments, enough to fund their own retirements without leeching off today's workers, whose careers are in an environment of slowing growth and stagnant wages.

Maybe you'd prefer to return to the days when old people were eating cat food in their freezing, darkened slum apartments, because of course, YOU'LL never get old, but most of us think pensions are a good idea.

I'd prefer for people to fund their own pensions rather than depending on future generations to pay their pensions. And though that was the idea behind CPP and other similar programs, that has clearly failed. If people stopped paying into CPP today, and no one else that isn't retired right now ever started collecting CPP payments, CPP would run out of money and not be able to pay, and that means the program is funneling wealth from today's workers to retirees.

The majority of government spending is on pensions and healthcare for the old. This far outweighs its investments in the future (i.e. infrastructure and education), by orders of magnitude in fact. This is ass backwards. It is a truly backwards set of priorities that spends hundreds of billions on handouts to those who have already lived 70+ years and had every opportunity to provide amply for themselves while watching infrastructure crumble away and young people struggle to get an education.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Bonam

[Argus]

Apparently, the mayor of Gatineau (the son in law of Bernard Landry) was very impressed with the meetings that they had with the government ministers and Trudeau. There was 6 ministers including Trudeau, something that never would happen under Harper. They were willing to listen, willing to talk, and willing to make deals so things could happen. He said he was very enthusiastic about the prospects for progress.

You mean they were willing to give him money to do what he should be doing with his own municipality's money. Yes, everyone is always happy to meet with Santa Clause.

[Argus]

At least if meetings are taking place there is the chance for positive outcomes. That's I guess a part of the current breath of fresh air that has given Canadians confidence in the new government.

Yes, Trudeau is dancing and prancing and gayly throwing big wads of cash around with a big smile on his face and not a thought in his head. What's not to love?

[Argus]

Yes, that's what you feel. Unfortunately, government pension schemes the world over are underfunded.

Were. The CPP is not underfunded.

That means people have not been putting in enough contributions to pay for what they are expecting to get back from it,

That was the case for the boomers, yes.

I agree with you... I would much rather save the annual contributions and invest them myself,

Most people have no idea how to invest for their retirement. It just wouldn't work.

[Shady]

Leaving aside all the stuff you're missing in there, I've already said I'd rather raise taxes than run deficits.

Yes we all know that you'd rather raise taxes instead of cut spending or reform programs.

[Argus]

Reminds me of some Republican I heard talking on some TV show a few years ago. Was something along the lines of... "I was poor, I was on welfare, and no one ever gave me any money..."

Why? I was poor. No one gave me any money. I've never been on welfare or pogey.

That's good. The generation that lived through the greatest period of economic expansion in history has had plentiful opportunities to amass considerable investments,

I came along after them. I got the leavings. Which weren't much. I graduated in the 80s, during stagflation.

I'd prefer for people to fund their own pensions rather than depending on future generations to pay their pensions.

There's nothing wrong with Canada's pensions. The problem is its welfare schemes, including pogey.

The majority of government spending is on pensions and healthcare for the old.

No, it isn't. In fact, the amount the government spends on servicing the debt is actually greater than it spends on pensions. The amount federal and provincial government spends on servicing the debt is $10billiion a year greater than is spend on the CPP and QPP combined. It is almost more than is spent on education.

And that figure is rising year by year as lazy government simply borrows to please a lazy-minded electorate. As the New Brunswick government said in its budget this week, announcing huge new tax increases - even with a continuing deficit "The people of New Brunswick have made it clear they will not accept major cutbacks in services".

[On Guard for Thee]

Yes, Trudeau is dancing and prancing and gayly throwing big wads of cash around with a big smile on his face and not a thought in his head. What's not to love?

Ever thought it may not be him who hasn't a thought in there head? Perhaps you don't understand the value of governments working together.

[Argus]

Ever thought it may not be him who hasn't a thought in there head? Perhaps you don't understand the value of governments working together.

I understand the value of money since I'm one of the sources. I understand that if you keep running big, fat deficits you wind up as Greece.

I understand incompetent government which prefers style over substance and hasn't got the spine to make hard choices.

[On Guard for Thee]

I understand the value of money since I'm one of the sources. I understand that if you keep running big, fat deficits you wind up as Greece.

I understand incompetent government which prefers style over substance and hasn't got the spine to make hard choices.

Most Canadians agree, which is why they voted Harper out of office.

[Argus]

Most Canadians agree, which is why they voted Harper out of office.

The people who voted Harper out of office were a mix of those unhappy with him being "mister frowny face" and welfare collectors who were eager to stuff their faces into a bigger trough.

[On Guard for Thee]

The people who voted Harper out of office were a mix of those unhappy with him being "mister frowny face" and welfare collectors who were eager to stuff their faces into a bigger trough.

I helped vote him out and I'm neither of the people you describe. But you do tend to be known for your outlandish assumptions.

[ReeferMadness]

The people who voted Harper out of office were a mix of those unhappy with him being "mister frowny face" and welfare collectors who were eager to stuff their faces into a bigger trough.

What a bitter view of 70% of the population.

Edited February 8, 2016 by ReeferMadness

[Argus]

What a bitter view of 70% of the population.

You mean realistic.

Harper's not niiiice. Whine Whine. So what if Harper is nice? I didn't like him either. So what? The PM isn't SUPPOSED to be nice. He's supposed to be competent. That's the bar you should measure people by who are or want to run the country. I could care less how 'nice' they are.

And it's an absolute fact that if you pay little or no taxes you are going to vote for politicians who offer you more 'stuff', and certainly not for those who want to cut back on 'stuff' in order to balance the budget. What the hell do you care if the budget is balanced? You're not paying for it. If you're a freeloader, say a fisherman or lumber worker or construction guy and regularly works a few months of the year then takes the rest of the year off on pogey, are you going to vote for a conservative politician? Hell no! You want those lefties making life easier for you! so you can relax

Edited February 8, 2016 by Argus

[Smoke]

What a bitter view of 70% of the population.

There's that leftie math again. What you meant to allude to (I'm sure ) is that 70% of the people who voted, voted for someone other than Harper. That's a lot less than 70% of Canadians.

[ReeferMadness]

There's that leftie math again. What you meant to allude to (I'm sure ) is that 70% of the people who voted, voted for someone other than Harper. That's a lot less than 70% of Canadians.

And you have some reason to believe that the people who stayed home felt differently? Don't forget, btw, that the Harper base (older, middle class and above) tend to vote in much bigger numbers than those who don't support him. So, if anything, that number is probably very conservative.

[ReeferMadness]

You mean realistic.

Harper's not niiiice. Whine Whine. So what if Harper is nice? I didn't like him either. So what? The PM isn't SUPPOSED to be nice. He's supposed to be competent. That's the bar you should measure people by who are or want to run the country. I could care less how 'nice' they are.

So, let's agree that it would have been much better if Harper had been competent as a PM.

And it's an absolute fact that if you pay little or no taxes you are going to vote for politicians who offer you more 'stuff', and certainly not for those who want to cut back on 'stuff' in order to balance the budget. What the hell do you care if the budget is balanced? You're not paying for it. If you're a freeloader, say a fisherman or lumber worker or construction guy and regularly works a few months of the year then takes the rest of the year off on pogey, are you going to vote for a conservative politician? Hell no! You want those lefties making life easier for you! so you can relax

You know what? You're absolutely wrong. There are lots of low income people out there who are anti-union, anti-government and completely bought into the religion of right wing capitalism. And I know that because I used to be one of them. I've been at lots of different tax rates and my political views have had nothing in common with the amount of taxes I've paid. So, maybe you're just projecting how you see things.

[Argus]

So, let's agree that it would have been much better if Harper had been competent as a PM.

He was far from perfect, but way better than the clowns who were put up against him over the past few elections. Certainly he was more competent than Trudeau will ever be.

You know what? You're absolutely wrong. There are lots of low income people out there who are anti-union, anti-government and completely bought into the religion of right wing capitalism.

Riiight. Atlantic Canada is FILLED with them! LOL

Pretty much the only poor people in Canada who vote right are social conservatives.

[ReeferMadness]

He was far from perfect, but way better than the clowns who were put up against him over the past few elections. Certainly he was more competent than Trudeau will ever be.

Yeah. I could tell he was imperfect when he tried to scare people into voting for him with a 'cultural practices hotline'.

Riiight. Atlantic Canada is FILLED with them! LOL

It seems like you share his disdain for Atlantic Canada. Ever think of joining Derek in Texas?

[On Guard for Thee]

You mean realistic.

Harper's not niiiice. Whine Whine. So what if Harper is nice? I didn't like him either. So what? The PM isn't SUPPOSED to be nice. He's supposed to be competent. That's the bar you should measure people by who are or want to run the country. I could care less how 'nice' they are.

And it's an absolute fact that if you pay little or no taxes you are going to vote for politicians who offer you more 'stuff', and certainly not for those who want to cut back on 'stuff' in order to balance the budget. What the hell do you care if the budget is balanced? You're not paying for it. If you're a freeloader, say a fisherman or lumber worker or construction guy and regularly works a few months of the year then takes the rest of the year off on pogey, are you going to vote for a conservative politician? Hell no! You want those lefties making life easier for you! so you can relax

Maybe if we would have had a competent PM for the last decade we wouldn't have added 150 billion to the debt, been swept off the international stage, and had the economy go down the tube along with the price of a barrel of oil. And the thing is, he wasn't even nice.