Canada's Federal Deficit

[daniel]

And how would you get this food to where it needs to be Daniel

Well, if the US would stop selling arms overseas, maybe the NGOs would have safe access to help the helpless.

But nooooo. That would be bad for the US economy wouldn't it?

[Craig Read]

Hey sweetheart, France and Germany and Russia support rogue regimes. I have another post in the International section covering this.

BTW Canada made VERY good money selling arms and munitions to the Middle East so before you state your patent anti-american nonsense, take note that the Canadians are in the game of arms sales too.

The post refers to free riding. Canada free rides off the US and as Morgan says, lies basically about the state of its fantasy surplus. Over taxing people, abusing your military, and running up unfunded liabilities while free riding off the US is nothing to be proud of.

[KrustyKidd]

And how would you get this food to where it needs to be Daniel

Well, if the US would stop selling arms overseas, maybe the NGOs would have safe access to help the helpless.

But nooooo. That would be bad for the US economy wouldn't it?

Arms are not the problem Daniel, existing forms of government are. There is not much difference between a person dead of tribal violence at the end of a machette than a bullet. Also, let's try and keep this in the 20th century, the guns are already there. Sure they got there via Eastern or Western production but they are there at this moment. Want to know why a lot of them are there? To stop people from killing each other. If one side has an advantage then the deaths of millions is a forgone conclusion. Hard to fathom isn't it? A self perpetuating cycle of armament.

Until the political process changes in those places nothing will work. Tribal, Medival, Facist ways are the only thing understood. It's all the same with or without modern weapons; oppression.

Now, back to getting the food aid, you need a military to do it. Witness the dead UN workers in Somalia. Hijacked food shipments, food and starvation used as weapons to gain concesions from the West.

[Communist_boy]

You point out that if America let its guard down then the soviet union would march over the world. This is definetly not true.

An example would be the cuban missile crissis in which the big bad soviet union put nuclear missiles in cuba. but they didnt put those missiles in until america had placed its missiles in turkey, germany, and itally. when you back a nation into a corner of course it is going to fight back.

The reason people suffered during the communist regime in the USSR is because the capitalist pigs of the day didnt wat to trade with them and shut them out. As i said before communism isnt perfect but one must think a little before they blame allot of problems on it.

The fact is that if the world were under a communist economic system then world hunger would be eliminated.

That is the truth of the situation in which you point out. The soviet union was only feared because people didnt understand it.

[KrustyKidd]

The fact is that if the world were under a communist economic system then world hunger would be eliminated.

What if the world were under any one system? What if everybody did what they were supposed to do under this one system?

Why would there be any hunger then? There wouldn't be. Therefore your comment is only geared to promote communism for communism's sake, and does not prove that it is superior to any one system.

[Craig Read]

Take a tour of the FSU , read some economic history, you can start anywhere and quickly find that communist systems fail. You can't regulate price and supply by product, by market, and you can't dictate consumer choice. The market is too complicated to replicate in central gov't models and what happens is that politicians allocate resources to further national advantage. The Russians did this - all capital went into heavy industry, none into the consumer markets. The result; a pygmy consumer economy surrounded by state owned assets and military hardware, unable to generate enough GDP growth to sustain itself. Communism is illogical and immoral. It leads to tyranny and oppression and state sponsored terror, no freedoms, no free speech and a depressed demoralised citizenry.

If you love the idea so much, move to North Korea.

This thread is about Canada's real National deficit. The over-regulation and taxation of Canada is a prime reason why the Cdn economy has trouble producing enough growth and capital to reduce the standard of living gap with the US which is 25 % and growing.

[Hugo]

The reason people suffered during the communist regime in the USSR is because the capitalist pigs of the day didnt wat to trade with them and shut them out.

Pre-communist Russia and China were leading food producers and were net exporters of foodstuffs. After the Communists took over in each country, massive famines occurred. Approximately 30 million died of hunger in each country. It took both countries decades to become net exporters of foodstuffs again. Despite your hysterical anti-capitalist-running-dog nonsense, the USA actually exported large amounts of grain to the USSR, without which even more millions of Russians would have starved in a country that used to be the breadbasket of the world.

So... how does foreign capitalism cause a peasant, agrarian economy to stop producing food for it's own people? Simple: it doesn't. The massive famines in Communist nations are due to the failure of Communism as a system and the ineptitude and stupidity of Communist leaders such as Mao and Stalin. If you study Chinese and Russian history you'll find that very little of their famines can be blamed on natural disasters, wars and so forth, most of it can be laid at the door of collectivisation and asinine industrial "progress" such as the Great Leap Forward in China, which succeeded in creating a famine in the countryside and achieved a great increase in the production of steel of such low quality it was worthless for practically any application.

Communism does not work. History will teach you this if you are willing to listen.

[PIK]

On 10/29/2003 at 6:06 PM, Craig Read said:

What a sad answer 'varied and difficult country to manage'. Oh like the US has no variances, no differing degrees, no ethnic mix, and no time sizes and is the size of a Duchy in Europe.

Please.

Canada can't patrol its oceans, defend its rights in the arctic, or ensure its border security. It can send a few hundred men internationally to hand out parking tickets with no equipment and no transportation [with hysterical CBC docs telling you that it is the most dangerous mission since Dieppe. Ok if u insist]. It can't even pay war Vets pensions or other costs associated with army services. Its military budget is 10 % of health care and there are more CCRA people than military personnel.

UNO and soft power is an illusion. As you might gather from the homicides against the Red Cross in Baghdad, many people in the world no comprende las reglas para la fuerza suave.

It is the coward's and free loaders way out. The whole concept is 'listen to me since i am moral and better than you...' Yeah whatever.

Normalise the #'s - Canada - if it was mature - would be running now a 2.2 % of GDP deficit.

Under harper that started to change a little ,but now it is going backwards again. If harper won again, the ship building would not have been deferred and the debt would be nowhere where it is at and we would be taking possession of our brand new F-35's like our allies are doing now. Now we have put it back another 10 yrs.

Edited October 4, 2017 by PIK

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, PIK said:

Under harper that started to change a little ,but now it is going backwards again. If harper won again, the ship building would not have been deferred and the debt would be nowhere where it is at and we would be taking possession of our brand new F-35's like our allies are doing now. Now we have put it back another 10 yrs.

If Harper won again I suspect he would continue to deliver massive deficits as he did when he was in power, and a lot of it would likely come from buying useless piece of shit jets like the F-35 that we don't need.

[PIK]

15 minutes ago, Omni said:

If Harper won again I suspect he would continue to deliver massive deficits as he did when he was in power, and a lot of it would likely come from buying useless piece of shit jets like the F-35 that we don't need.

Funny he left the liberals a surplus. Just imagine if trudeau and morneau were in charge during the economic crisis, we would all be screwed still. lol And yes we need jets and we need the F-35. All the crap about how useless it was ,was fake news. They are being delivered to our allies as we speak, even being used in korea.

[Omni]

6 minutes ago, PIK said:

Funny he left the liberals a surplus. Just imagine if trudeau and morneau were in charge during the economic crisis, we would all be screwed still. lol And yes we need jets and we need the F-35. All the crap about how useless it was ,was fake news. They are being delivered to our allies as we speak, even being used in korea.

He only left a surplus in his final budget by robbing the "cupboard", so it wasn't really a surplus. The F 35 is hugely over budget, years behind schedule, a dubious single engine, (and it only has one) and we don't need stealth.

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 10/4/2017 at 6:44 PM, PIK said:

Funny he left the liberals a surplus. Just imagine if trudeau and morneau were in charge during the economic crisis, we would all be screwed still. lol And yes we need jets and we need the F-35. All the crap about how useless it was ,was fake news. They are being delivered to our allies as we speak, even being used in korea.

Over his time in office, he left a big deficit.

[PIK]

On 10/4/2017 at 5:24 PM, Omni said:

He only left a surplus in his final budget by robbing the "cupboard", so it wasn't really a surplus. The F 35 is hugely over budget, years behind schedule, a dubious single engine, (and it only has one) and we don't need stealth.

Funny it is flying all over the world. That is why the aussies are so horny to sell us their old planes. And you want to talk about wasting money, lets talk 216,000 dollars to design the front cover of the budget, 176,000 last yr. The conservatives last budget, 600 bucks.

[Omni]

14 minutes ago, PIK said:

Funny it is flying all over the world. That is why the aussies are so horny to sell us their old planes. And you want to talk about wasting money, lets talk 216,000 dollars to design the front cover of the budget, 176,000 last yr. The conservatives last budget, 600 bucks.

Again, we don't need stealth, and, if you wanna talk about deficit spending, let's go back to Harper's record. As I say, he robbed the cookie jar to finally fake a budget into the "black".

[dre]

On 11/2/2003 at 7:13 AM, Craig Read said:

Incredible. You actually believe that the US would have been better off to do the following:

-Not fight in WW1 and WW2

-Not fight the Cold War [the Russians loved their children too according to that great political analyst Mr. Sting]

-Not fight to liberate Kuwait

-Not fight to liberate Kosovo

-Not fight the war on terror

-Allow fascist regimes to terrorise their citizens and the world community at large

-Allow China to dominate the Asian world militarily

 

The US should have fought WW1 and WW2, they just shouldn't have waited so long.

The cold war was a colossal waste, and both the Russians and Americans are too blame.

They only fought to liberate Kuwait after they green lighted Sadams invasion.

In Kosovo they actually liberated a terrorist army (the KLA)

They help and sponsor fascist regimes, dictatorships, autocracies, etc.

The war on Terror has been by all objective measures a massive failure.

The US has funded China's military buildup, by being its biggest customer.

 

At the end of the day, while there's no question that the US has been a hugely positive influence on the world, it is mostly through the development and export of life improving technologies. Its military adventures are at BEST a mixed bag.

 

 

[OftenWrong]

On 13/10/2017 at 1:41 PM, Omni said:

Again, we don't need stealth, and, if you wanna talk about deficit spending, let's go back to Harper's record. As I say, he robbed the cookie jar to finally fake a budget into the "black".

The same was said of the Right Honourable Paul Martin. 

While Martin's record as finance minister was lauded in business and financial circles, there were undeniable costs. This was probably most noticeable in health care, as major reductions in federal funding to the provinces meant significant cuts in service delivery. Martin's tactics, including those of using contributor's funds from RCMP, Military and Civil Service pension plans and Employment Insurance, created further controversy.

[peoples advocate]

On ‎2003‎-‎10‎-‎28 at 5:43 AM, Craig Read said:

Minister Manleyness announces a $6 billion surplus ie. over - taxation. CBC applauds, Canadians snigger that they are better than the Deficit eating Americans. Ho hum.

Okay let's normalise the numbers. The US spends approximately USD$400 Billion on defence and security or about $1428 per capita. Let's assume Canada, as an adult modern serious nation [ok bad assumption], should spend at least 70 % of the US level or about $920US per capita.

This equates to a military budget of U$29 Bn or about C$36 Bn. This is more than TRIPLE the current military spend.

Result: Federal Deficit of about $30 Bn or GASP 3 % of GDP.

Normalise the numbers you fantasists and recognise that you FREE RIDE. Free riding has costs - military, trade, and political.

Canada if it had any semblance of pride and military effectiveness would be running deficits.

Instead it channels the free riding $ into post modern babble and programs.

Hey for starters let everyone see the money in and out of general funding That is a good first step. Then let us make each member responsible for spending in respective departments and then how about real punishment for the politicians that break laws .

 Partial pension losses for wrong doing . complete transparency after all it is the peoples money they are spending is it not.

 People are always looking at the hard way to do things when the answers are usually obtained by the simplest means so lets get real and make simple demands .

 

[cannuck]

On 11/4/2003 at 6:22 AM, Craig Read said:

-Are now fighting against Islamofascism and terror while nitwits like yourself, who have no common sense, no honor, no sense of fighting for freedom heap scorn and opprobrium on the only nation, along with Britain and the Aussies, with the courage to see reality for what it is.

I seem to remember a very long period of time where a significant number of Canadian soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan - seems to match up with that citation my son-in-law received for leading the deepest incursion into Taliban territory of ANY of the combatants.  BTW: their greatest fear was "friendly fire" from US troops.

We had a different government that wisely backed out of Vietnam #2, and a VERY different government that honoured our commitment to come to the aid of our ally to reply to the legitimate source of the attack on your country.  While I may strongly disagree with our current government's foreign and military policy, I will defend that as it is what we do in freely elected, democratic countries.

I don't need to remind you that the only two major wars in which the US has ever been on the winning side Canada was on the front line for YEARS before the US showed up late to the party.

 

Edited October 23, 2017 by cannuck