Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
Habsrwfan wrote:
As for running a deficit - I don't mind it in the short term. After a long run of surpluses, we can probably afford to run a deficit for a year or two. It shouldn't last longer than that, though.


$30 Billion still seems a bit steep to me. We could probably cut that in half with some reasonable cuts. And most of the projections I've read are saying we'll have defecit budgets until 2011 or so, though 2009 is expected to be by far the worst year.


What could he cut that would greatly reduce this? Transfer payments to the provinces, donít think so. How about cutting the military budget? Donít think so.

They will have to take a good look at all government departments and find some cost cutting and cost savings, at the very least.
paisley_cross





Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 806
Reputation: 124.9
votes: 3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
FF_Canuck wrote:
Habsrwfan wrote:
As for running a deficit - I don't mind it in the short term. After a long run of surpluses, we can probably afford to run a deficit for a year or two. It shouldn't last longer than that, though.


$30 Billion still seems a bit steep to me. We could probably cut that in half with some reasonable cuts. And most of the projections I've read are saying we'll have defecit budgets until 2011 or so, though 2009 is expected to be by far the worst year.


What could he cut that would greatly reduce this? Transfer payments to the provinces, donít think so. How about cutting the military budget? Donít think so.

They will have to take a good look at all government departments and find some cost cutting and cost savings, at the very least.


Cutting arts subsidies...oops, tried that. :oops:
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

paisley_cross wrote:
SFrank85 wrote:
FF_Canuck wrote:
Habsrwfan wrote:
As for running a deficit - I don't mind it in the short term. After a long run of surpluses, we can probably afford to run a deficit for a year or two. It shouldn't last longer than that, though.


$30 Billion still seems a bit steep to me. We could probably cut that in half with some reasonable cuts. And most of the projections I've read are saying we'll have defecit budgets until 2011 or so, though 2009 is expected to be by far the worst year.


What could he cut that would greatly reduce this? Transfer payments to the provinces, donít think so. How about cutting the military budget? Donít think so.

They will have to take a good look at all government departments and find some cost cutting and cost savings, at the very least.


Cutting arts subsidies...oops, tried that. :oops:


Well, it only hurt us in Quebec. The rest of Canada could care less about arts funding, unless your name is George Stroumboulopoulos, Rick Mercer or Mary Walsh.
paisley_cross





Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 806
Reputation: 124.9
votes: 3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
paisley_cross wrote:
SFrank85 wrote:

What could he cut that would greatly reduce this? Transfer payments to the provinces, donít think so. How about cutting the military budget? Donít think so.

They will have to take a good look at all government departments and find some cost cutting and cost savings, at the very least.


Cutting arts subsidies...oops, tried that. :oops:


Well, it only hurt us in Quebec. The rest of Canada could care less about arts funding, unless your name is George Stroumboulopoulos, Rick Mercer or Mary Walsh.


During the election Harper backtracked on Bill C-10 meaning that the Tories now support state subsidized pornography. The ONLY people opposing the change were the artsy-fartsy types - and not just in Quebec. There was no opposition from the general public.

The CPC seems to have lost its stomach for cutting arts grants.


Last edited by paisley_cross on Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We fund what!!!? :o
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
We fund what!!!? :o


If you want to be disturbed, just what Show Case and see what the pornography the government funds.

Look at the end credits.
paisley_cross





Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 806
Reputation: 124.9
votes: 3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
We fund what!!!? :o


If you want to be disturbed, just what Show Case and see what the pornography the government funds.

Look at the end credits.


At the urging of Charles McVety Harper said he would end giving grants to objectionable movies. The film crowd went postal saying that all this gore and sex was what make Canadian movies so great, movies of course that nobody watches. The Bill involved was C-10. The film bunch appeared at the Senate whining and moaning. That was the situation when the election was called. During the election Harper said that because of "public opinion" he was retreating from his C-10 position. In other words he caved into the film industry.

This is separate from the funding of artistic groups.
fiscalconservative





Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 1043
Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9
votes: 6

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:29 pm    Post subject: Re: $30 Billion deficit next year Reply with quote

ezbeatz wrote:


p.s. at least there are tax cuts. Sounds like the GST will get the axe again.


When you borrow money for a tax cut, it is not really a tax cut. You are just forcing someone to take out a loan. The interest paid on that loan will have to be taken out of the economy, and thus will have the exact opposite effective for decades.

They are also not really that effective in stimulating the economy. If you cut one percent of the GST, most of the manufactured goods people will then buy are foreign made. You would give a small boost to our retain sector, but a bigger boost to China.

I think if we HAVE to go deep into deficit, we should do it in such a way that the money spent is really an investment - it is money we can recover later on. We could accellerate infrastructure. Take projects that are two years away and do them now, but then save the money two years down the road - and use it to pay down the debt.
In the end you could even break even because the cost to build a bridge now is probably less than it will be in a few years because of lower raw material supplies.
Whatever the case, there should be some mechanism for paying this thing off included. When times get better, it HAS to be paid off.
Big Tuna





Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 368
Reputation: 15
votes: 6

PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 8:14 am    Post subject: Re: $30 Billion deficit next year Reply with quote

fiscalconservative wrote:
ezbeatz wrote:


p.s. at least there are tax cuts. Sounds like the GST will get the axe again.


When you borrow money for a tax cut, it is not really a tax cut. You are just forcing someone to take out a loan. The interest paid on that loan will have to be taken out of the economy, and thus will have the exact opposite effective for decades.

They are also not really that effective in stimulating the economy. If you cut one percent of the GST, most of the manufactured goods people will then buy are foreign made. You would give a small boost to our retain sector, but a bigger boost to China.

I think if we HAVE to go deep into deficit, we should do it in such a way that the money spent is really an investment - it is money we can recover later on. We could accellerate infrastructure. Take projects that are two years away and do them now, but then save the money two years down the road - and use it to pay down the debt.
In the end you could even break even because the cost to build a bridge now is probably less than it will be in a few years because of lower raw material supplies.
Whatever the case, there should be some mechanism for paying this thing off included. When times get better, it HAS to be paid off.


Agreed. A GST cut on Canadian manufactured goods only I would support though... but perhaps that violates trade agreements. Does it?
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In brief, yes. Anything that purposefully produces a difference in prices between domestic and imported goods is a trade barrier. If you charged 2% GST on 'Canadian' goods, and 5% on Imports, that's a 3% import tariff.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2

Goto page Previous  1, 2  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


$30 Billion deficit next year

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB