Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2011, 09:12 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
11,155 posts, read 29,310,493 times
Reputation: 5479

Advertisements

OTTAWA - Whichever party winds up governing in Ottawa for the remainder of 2011 will still find something to like about Jim Flaherty's likely DOA budget.

With the opposition parties all vowing to defeat Flaherty's sixth budget and trigger an election, the likelihood is that none of the measures tabled in Parliament on Tuesday afternoon will see the light of day.
What survives, however, is the bottom line — the federal government of whatever stripe will have more money to spend or to squirrel away for a rainy day than was the case last year, or even a few months ago.
The finance minister mainly chose the latter course Tuesday — strewing a light sprinkle of new programs worth a mere $2.3 billion — but another finance minister and prime minister have the flexibility to take another direction.

The minister all but said as much at a news conference delivered under media lock-up just three hours before he knew the opposition reaction.
With a new review of government spending expected to find $4 billion in savings, the minister said he may be able to balance the budget in 2014-15, a year before his official goal, or have cash for other priorities.

"That could happen," he said. "(The review) will give us room to pay down public debt and ... it will give us an opportunity for more tax reductions. That's where the flexibility can come from going forward."

The latest accounting from the Finance Department shows that the fiscal cupboard is not nearly as bare as was the case a year ago, or possibly not even as Flaherty maintains now.
The economy is giving the government breathing room it hasn't enjoyed since 2008, even though Flaherty takes a super-cautious approach in his projections.

The government is now expecting to collect $19.1 billion more in revenues over the next five years than it thought was coming in as recently as October. And that's not counting $7.5 billion set aside for prudence.

The government's rosier assumptions stem from the fact that nominal growth, which includes inflation and price effects from higher commodity-export income, expanded by 6.2 per cent last year and is projected to increase by 5.8 per cent this year. Both are significantly higher than last budget's projections, or those of October's update.

The stronger growth has already enabled Ottawa to shrink this year's deficit to $40.4 billion from a previously projected $45.4 billion and many think it will be lower still.
"That better starting point gave them the manoeuvring room to introduce the new measures," said Bank of Montreal deputy chief economist Douglas Porter.

"If anything, despite succumbing to the temptation to spend the windfall provided by stronger economic and revenue growth, a budget surplus appears well on track by fiscal year 2015-16, if not a year sooner."
Flaherty still believes the cautious approach is best, as do many private sector economists.


So cautious, that following this year, Ottawa is forecasting slower nominal gross domestic product growth four years running than it did last March.
The U.S. recovery could vanish as soon as Washington stops pumping money into it; Europe is just pushing its debt crisis down the road, not solving it; and there remains a crisis in the Middle East and destruction in Japan.

"Fundamentally we stay on track, we make sure we get back to a balanced budget to protect our country," the minister told reporters. "We want to be in good shape when the next crisis comes, just like we were in good shape when the last crisis came."
The budget document warns that any hiccup in economic performance can throw the numbers out of whack.

As the budget shows, Canada may never recover the $100 billion in lost output from the recession. Analyst projections show that five years out, the economy will still be $105 billion smaller than it would have been had the slump not occurred.
Of course, the opposite is equally true. A bigger economic bounce pays dividends year after year.
And economic growth, especially nominal gross domestic product that directly impacts government revenues, could also be higher. Ottawa's estimates are still low by historic standards.
"There are high-side surprises," Porter noted. "If we had another commodities boom, some of these nominal GDP numbers would look quite modest."
And that would mean the next finance minister — whether Conservative or Liberal — will not be tied to what Flaherty produced Tuesday.
Budget's bottom line gives government room - *Federal Budget - Money - MSN CA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:14 PM
 
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
3,857 posts, read 6,956,563 times
Reputation: 1817
Canada has been plugging away at the deficit since the 1990's - under both Liberal and Conservative governments. A large part was cutting back on expenses - mainly social programs and transfer payments to the provinces - but this did put more pressure on the provinces who in turn downloaded expenses and responsibilities to the cities. There are of course political differences and a-hats but Canada isn't saddled with the US left/right hate that leads to inertia and inability to reach common ground. It's possible to discuss politics in the office without it getting heated. Question Period theatrics notwithstanding politics is not a blood sport. Overall IMHO Canadian politicians try to be good stewards vs US politicians who are beholden to corporate interest lobby groups... 'cause you have to dance with the person what brung you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:17 PM
 
183 posts, read 458,947 times
Reputation: 75
I think if America pulls its head out of its ass it could achieve a balanced budget...just not by 2015, more like 2050.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Somewhere Out West
2,287 posts, read 2,587,492 times
Reputation: 1956
Didn't the Liberals have successive balanced budgets, only to be replaced by deficit spending when Harper et al came in?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:20 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,096,009 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eman91 View Post
I think if America pulls its head out of its ass it could achieve a balanced budget...just not by 2015, more like 2050.
I disagree.. if americans would stop playing the class warfare, and start fostering a strong economy, a strong pro business environment, we could put americans back to work, decreasing the amount of "entitlements" needed to substain the nation, and we could balance the budgets in a matter of a 5 years.

Wont ever happen though.. Everyone is too busy trying to take from the producers rather than trying to figure out how to get more producing..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:21 PM
 
183 posts, read 458,947 times
Reputation: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Siete View Post
Canada has been plugging away at the deficit since the 1990's - under both Liberal and Conservative governments. A large part was cutting back on expenses - mainly social programs and transfer payments to the provinces - but this did put more pressure on the provinces who in turn downloaded expenses and responsibilities to the cities. There are of course political differences and a-hats but Canada isn't saddled with the US left/right hate that leads to inertia and inability to reach common ground. It's possible to discuss politics in the office without it getting heated. Question Period theatrics notwithstanding politics is not a blood sport. Overall IMHO Canadian politicians try to be good stewards vs US politicians who are beholden to corporate interest lobby groups... 'cause you have to dance with the person what brung you.
It's not just the US that has that problem. Britain has it as well, to an even worse extent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:23 PM
 
1,041 posts, read 1,525,098 times
Reputation: 768
CAnada has been having surplus from 1998 to 2007. Paul Martin (Liberal Party ), then canadian finance minister can be credit for that. Conservatives only took over in 2006 (with a minority government) when they rapidly started increasing spending left and right to please people in case they went into elections, which can happen anytime with minority governments.

"Conservatives" do have a record of being very fiscally conservative so far and records don't lie. While I'm glad to hear we might have a balanced budget by 2015, I don't really trust Harper anymore. It's politics above all with that PM, even if he is a trained economist.

I regret voting for these so-called conservatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:30 PM
 
1,041 posts, read 1,525,098 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Siete View Post
Canada has been plugging away at the deficit since the 1990's - under both Liberal and Conservative governments. A large part was cutting back on expenses - mainly social programs and transfer payments to the provinces - but this did put more pressure on the provinces who in turn downloaded expenses and responsibilities to the cities. There are of course political differences and a-hats but Canada isn't saddled with the US left/right hate that leads to inertia and inability to reach common ground. It's possible to discuss politics in the office without it getting heated. Question Period theatrics notwithstanding politics is not a blood sport. Overall IMHO Canadian politicians try to be good stewards vs US politicians who are beholden to corporate interest lobby groups... 'cause you have to dance with the person what brung you.
I agree. The federal government pretty much shoveled expenses downward. They didn't disappear.

But it's true that our politics aren't as nearly heated, which is ironic considering that canadian political parties are so much more different ideologically (npd/tories/liberas/bloc) while american parties are pretty much the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 10:37 PM
 
1,041 posts, read 1,525,098 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy View Post
Didn't the Liberals have successive balanced budgets, only to be replaced by deficit spending when Harper et al came in?
Harper needs to go. His shady political tactics make the corrupted Liberals of the early 2000s look good.

I actually appreciated the Tories program in 2006 and how they followed through with their promises. But since then, Harper has been doing a lot calculated but questionable moves and seems to wanna replicate the american left vs right political climate.

He'll stop at nothing to become the new "natural governing party of Canada" that the Liberal Party once was.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,449 posts, read 14,464,213 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I disagree.. if americans would stop playing the class warfare, and start fostering a strong economy, a strong pro business environment, we could put americans back to work, decreasing the amount of "entitlements" needed to substain the nation, and we could balance the budgets in a matter of a 5 years.

Wont ever happen though.. Everyone is too busy trying to take from the producers rather than trying to figure out how to get more producing..
What has been taken away from the producers? Their artificially low taxes were extended, yet they continue to sit on a surplus well into the TRILLIONS. Hardly anti business.

You're right, we should decrease "entitlements" and cut the corporate welfare, allowing them to pay their fair share of taxes instead of leaching off this country while our school systems and infrastructure crumble.

The term "Class warfare" is a joke, I love when you guys throw that around. With your bombardment of animosity towards teachers and other working class stiffs, I can't imagine how any of you can say that phrase with a straight face. Kinda like claiming you care about addressing the deficit while demanding we cut taxes. What a joke....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top