Thanks Harper! Canadian debt on par with US

[Toma]

$600billion and spiraling out of control. Per capita, that is equal to the bankrupt American's.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/11/23...to-hit-600000b

What do you expect. Put a republican in power, and the result is always the same.

[davidI]

I have a hard time blaming the Conservaderps after so many years of Liberal spending (gun registry counts for 1/600th of that debt, Ad scandal etc.) and we all know the NDP would bankrupt this country. They're the best of the worst. End of the day, voters need to step up against over-spending and sacrifice some of the perks and entitlements we can't afford.

Unfortunately, that's the problem with democracy. Give people stuff so they want to vote for you instead of looking out for the nation's best interest and then not get re-elected.

[scary_perry]

Then the Liberals will get elected and fix it again, rinse repeat.

Paul Martin was a lousy PM, but maybe the best Finance Minister ever, certainly the best in my lifetime.

[scary_perry]

Originally posted by davidI
I have a hard time blaming the Conservaderps after so many years of Liberal spending (gun registry counts for 1/600th of that debt, Ad scandal etc.) and we all know the NDP would bankrupt this country. They're the best of the worst. End of the day, voters need to step up against over-spending and sacrifice some of the perks and entitlements we can't afford.

Unfortunately, that's the problem with democracy. Give people stuff so they want to vote for you instead of looking out for the nation's best interest and then not get re-elected.

You need a history lesson kid, after Kim Campbell this country was a mess and the Liberals fixed it. Balanced budgets and debt reduction were Liberal ideas - not Mulroney and not Harper's.

Those are facts - no need to PC interpretation. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your jingoism.

Harper has been spending like a sailor on shore leave.

[Toma]

Originally posted by scary_perry


You need a history lesson kid, after Kim Campbell this country was a mess and the Liberals fixed it. Balanced budgets and debt reduction were Liberal ideas - not Mulroney and not Harper's.

Those are facts - no need to PC interpretation. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your jingoism.

Harper has been spending like a sailor on shore leave.

Yup, this is it.

Just like in the US. Almost exactly.

Yet, their propaganda machine has us "scared" of parties that will supposedly "spend more"

lmao.

[Nitro5]

Interesting, considering the huge hit of debt came in 2009 in the recession where the Tories had a minority government and had to make concessions to the Grits and NDP, who both wanted to spend more.

So really I can understand how you can heap all of this on the head of Harper. I'm sure the other parties would have had a smaller debt while spending more.

[Toma]

Originally posted by Nitro5
Interesting, considering the huge hit of debt came in 2009 in the recession where the Tories had a minority government and had to make concessions to the Grits and NDP, who both wanted to spend more.

So really I can understand how you can heap all of this on the head of Harper. I'm sure the other parties would have had a smaller debt while spending more.

Ah, yeah, but spending where. Not all spending is the same. Harper is a corporate shill, just like the republicans in the US are/were when they bankrupted them.

No country can survive a Bush style economic plan.

Make no mistake. Conservative=Republican

[Nitro5]

So you are saying that in 2009 the Liberals or NDP would have spent more, but have less debt?

[hampstor]

Originally posted by Toma


Ah, yeah, but spending where. Not all spending is the same. Harper is a corporate shill, just like the republicans in the US are/were when they bankrupted them.

No country can survive a Bush style economic plan.

Make no mistake. Conservative=Republican

They're all corporate shills. They just cater to different types of corporations in different regions.

However given political donations from unions and corporations are illegal for federal parties, corporations have a lot less sway than they used to in Canada, or even at the provincial level.

[effingidiot]

Originally posted by Nitro5
So you are saying that in 2009 the Liberals or NDP would have spent more, but have less debt?

Scenario 1:
If you spent $100k in 2009 on a brand new mercedes would you have more or less money now?
Scenario 2:
If you spent $150k in 2009 on Apple shares would you have more or less money now?

Some asset classes generate value, while others can only depreciate. The two words you're looking for are "asset allocation". Also note that Harper literally bought brand new MBs for corporate executives and mortgage brokers. Corporate socialism is still a form of socialism

[Thomas Gabriel]

The "stimulus" was extremely stupid and was most likely the result of a decision to cater to Ontario voters. Many industrial facilities ended up doing jobs for the government. Saying that, the Liberals would have spent double what Harper did, in an equally useless attempt at economic stimulus. I'm not sure what you guys are talking about regarding asset allocation. You think the Liberals would have been investing in the stock market? Hell no. It all goes to supporting jobs that society needs so little that they are the first to go during a recession.

[effingidiot]

You think the Liberals would have been investing in the stock market? Hell no.

Infrastructure projects, education, training, environment, etc Yes, given that it's the Liberal party we're talking about here, most of that spending would have been happening in Quebec But there are more productive ways to spend money than to give corporate tax cuts.

[masoncgy]

The Liberals of the Chretien/Martin era were also a fiscally conservative/socially moderate bunch. A good blend. What the fuck happened to them since? A bunch of lefties with no vision, no direction, no sound policies and Justin Trudeau as their fucking savior.

They are slightly less left wing than the NDP... and I mean slightly.

The Liberals need to go back to where they used to dominate... centre/centre-right. That's the most appealing blend.

Most of the Red Tories have fled to the Conservative fold, albeit reluctantly, but as a result, the Conservatives can win a majority without Quebec, a feat once said was impossible.

I am not a hardcore Conservative voter... I swing dependent on which party best suits my position. Currently, there is only one choice.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by davidI
I have a hard time blaming the Conservaderps after so many years of Liberal spending (gun registry counts for 1/600th of that debt, Ad scandal etc.) and we all know the NDP would bankrupt this country. They're the best of the worst. End of the day, voters need to step up against over-spending and sacrifice some of the perks and entitlements we can't afford.

[ZenOps]

Its just money

Really though, if everyone had the same amount of debt burden, it would all be ok. The big problem is that China is ever so slightly - not in debt. Switzerland also is above water, which is absolutely killing them with high prices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index

[Nitro5]

Originally posted by masoncgy
The Liberals of the Chretien/Martin era were also a fiscally conservative/socially moderate bunch. A good blend. What the fuck happened to them since? A bunch of lefties with no vision, no direction, no sound policies and Justin Trudeau as their fucking savior.

They are slightly less left wing than the NDP... and I mean slightly.

The Liberals need to go back to where they used to dominate... centre/centre-right. That's the most appealing blend.

Most of the Red Tories have fled to the Conservative fold, albeit reluctantly, but as a result, the Conservatives can win a majority without Quebec, a feat once said was impossible.

I am not a hardcore Conservative voter... I swing dependent on which party best suits my position. Currently, there is only one choice.

I agree that the Cretien Liberals were very good fiscally, but they did off-set a lot of costs to meet the bottom line. The military really suffered under them. Everything from helicopters, ships, vehicles, transport aircraft, etc ( I'm not going to touch F-35's, but that money hasn't been spent yet). This equipment was majorly overdue to be replaced and cost billions. The Liberals let helicopters fall out of the sky instead of replacing them. I have a very hard time with a party that was willing to let servicemen die for political reasons.

[Toma]

Where's Pierre Trudeau when you need Him?

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Nitro5
Interesting, considering the huge hit of debt came in 2009 in the recession where the Tories had a minority government and had to make concessions to the Grits and NDP, who both wanted to spend more.

So really I can understand how you can heap all of this on the head of Harper. I'm sure the other parties would have had a smaller debt while spending more.

They didn't have to make concessions as much as they like to tell people. No spending decisions were big enough to have a confidence vote over, the power was always in Harper's hands.

Plus, while the need to reduce spending was apparent, they still went ahead with the GST reduction which was stupid (a point shared by right-wing and left-wing economists alike). Lower revenue without lowering spending? Shouldn't have been done but they won political points with their base knowing they'd blame the grits.

[vengie]

Originally posted by Toma
Where's Pierre Trudeau when you need Him?

NEP... That is all.

[e31]

Originally posted by Toma
Where's Pierre Trudeau when you need Him?

6 feet under, where he is needed by a vastly greater margin than up here.