[bootlegga]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Sure I can. Debt incurred when times are good is a bad thing, period - even more so when it is spent on things that benefit only a portion of the population. In the case of previous Liberal governments, it was social programs. In Harper's case, it was boutique tax cuts aimed at his base.

Times right now aren't bad. So your entire point about spending now because times are "bad" is just plain false.

Economists all over Canada, have shown growth in both June and July.

So while we're talking "recession" in the first half of 2015, the term is being thrown around wildly because of the election when many economists don't agree.

The recession, as tiny as it was, is over. Nothing like a recession that add's 100,000 jobs, right?

How many of those 100,000 jobs are full time, good paying jobs like the 35,000 lost in Alberta this year? If history is any indication, not many.

And now it's a recession - thanks for agreeing with me!

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

$1:

The downturn has also kicked off spirited discussions in Canadian economic circles about how to properly define a recession. Most economists agree that the two-consecutive-quarters rule of thumb relied on by laymen is overly simplistic, and that true recessions show evidence of broad-based economic decline beyond the GDP numbers. At the very least, most economists’ criteria for identifying a recession include a downturn in employment – and the Canadian economy has added more than 100,000 jobs this year.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... e26056053/

See your own admission above...

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

But spending on infrastructure at a time when debt is cheap and labour plentiful is a smart investment. As I said in the other thread, infra pays out economic benefits for generations, not a few years or even a decade or two.

There's already money in the budget for infrastructure projects. Trudeau has taken the money that was already there and doubled with the intention to stimulate the economy. There's still billions already allocated for these projects.

If you are true to your word, you wouldn't support his budget.

By your own admission, we were in a recession for the first six months of the year, and there is no guarantee it will get better with both oil and our dollar at 10 year lows.

But let's turn this around for a second - you are attacking the Liberals for proposing to do a quarter of what Harper did (going into debt $40 billion where Harper went $172 billion in the hole) - why is that?

Seems kind of hypocritical if you ask me...

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

No, I don't agree with running a deficit when the country is in relatively good economic times, no matter who is in office.

If that is indeed the case, you wouldn't support Trudeau's plan.

You just admitted we were in a recession for six months and we won't actually know until after the election which way the economy is going, now will we? And out here in the West, it's definitely a recession...but I know almost nobody in central Canada cares about us, no do they?

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Zip sure hit the nail on the head about you toeing the party line. Thanks for confirming yet again how biased you really are.

Pot/Kettle, boots.

I don't "toe" any party line. I don't blindly support the CPC, not a member, no sign on the lawn and never visit their website for information. In fact, my line of thinking is much in line with the NDP on this.

Bottom line here is, Liberals like yourself think that government can spend their way to a prosperous economy while Conservatives think putting the money back into the pockets of Canadians and allowing them to use the money to stimulate the economy is the better choice.

Just because I believe the economy is driven by Canadians and private business, doesn't mean I "toe the party line".

I've never said that the government can spend their way to a prosperous economy, but by investing things like education, health care and yes, infrastructure, they can create an environment where the economy grows and people are prosperous.

Ever wonder what the difference is between the developed world and developing world? The things I just mentioned are what separate us and if we left nation-building up to people like you, CEOs and their corporations would have children working in sweat shops for 18 hour a day earning 5 cents an hour and pouring pollution in the air, water and land while they reaped all the benefits (just like they do in the developing world right now) and lived like kings.

Past infrastructure projects like the CPR and Trans-Canada Highway have done far more to stimulate economic growth than you want to admit, but facts are facts.

Too much of either side of the political spectrum is terrible, which is why we need a middle of the road approach, not austerity.

Whether you like it or not, Harper's spending during the recession cushioned the blow for lots of people across Canada and needs to happen again if we are in a recession.

[OnTheIce]

bootlegga bootlegga:

How many of those 100,000 jobs are full time, good paying jobs like the 35,000 lost in Alberta this year? If history is any indication, not many.

And now it's a recession - thanks for agreeing with me!

$1:

“Despite the five-month string of GDP declines to start the year, Canada’s economy just keeps on adding jobs, mostly of the full-time variety,” Mr. Porter said.

“The 54,400 jump in August brought this year’s increase in full-time jobs to a massive 174,000, hardly consistent with a true recession,” he added.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... e26246943/

bootlegga bootlegga:

But let's turn this around for a second - you are attacking the Liberals for proposing to do a quarter of what Harper did (going into debt $40 billion where Harper went $172 billion in the hole) - why is that?

Seems kind of hypocritical if you ask me...

Not hypocritical at all.

Comparing the crash of 2008 to today is absolute nonsense. Not even comparable. There is no reason to go into debt.

Second, Harper tripled the amount spent on national infrastructure during his tenure. Now JT wants to double that. It's nonsense.

bootlegga bootlegga:

You just admitted we were in a recession for six months and we won't actually know until after the election which way the economy is going, now will we? And out here in the West, it's definitely a recession...but I know almost nobody in central Canada cares about us, no do they?

If you've bothered to read any articles beyond what happened in the first month, you'd know that the recession is over.

You're trying to use the word "recession" to drive fear.

bootlegga bootlegga:

Past infrastructure projects like the CPR and Trans-Canada Highway have done far more to stimulate economic growth than you want to admit, but facts are facts.

Too much of either side of the political spectrum is terrible, which is why we need a middle of the road approach, not austerity.

Whether you like it or not, Harper's spending during the recession cushioned the blow for lots of people across Canada and needs to happen again if we are in a recession.

Austerity doesn't include tripling the National infrastructure budget. Keeping government spending in control doesn't equate to "austerity".

The recession is over. Justin jumped the gun and now looks like the fool we know him to be.

[CountLothian]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

You can always count on OTI for the offical Conservative party line.

You can always count on Zip to avoid the tough questions. Nice dodge.

dire drivel .

you never add to a conversation just insult because you know nothing about what you read.

[CountLothian]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Finally, the Country isn't in a recession. Two months of growth, waiting on August numbers as well. By your own terms, this is not the time to blow billions more on stimulus money; money that we'll never pay back.

yes it is in it's 2nd recession since Harper took control.
where do you get your facts?

[OnTheIce]

CountLothian CountLothian:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Finally, the Country isn't in a recession. Two months of growth, waiting on August numbers as well. By your own terms, this is not the time to blow billions more on stimulus money; money that we'll never pay back.

yes it is in it's 2nd recession since Harper took control.
where do you get your facts?

No, we're not. If you think we're in a recession now, you're the one who lacks facts.

Two recessions under Harper's control. None of which were his fault or the fault of anything in Canada.

CountLothian CountLothian:

dire drivel .

you never add to a conversation just insult because you know nothing about what you read.

I've taken you to task and then some. I have more knowledgeable debates with my 10 year old. You're the mental midget here and that's why you're insulted.

You think you're some genius when in fact, you're a typical troll who has a serious deficiency in mental capacity. It's not insulting when it's true.

Run along, Count. The adults are talking.

[CountLothian]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

CountLothian CountLothian:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Finally, the Country isn't in a recession. Two months of growth, waiting on August numbers as well. By your own terms, this is not the time to blow billions more on stimulus money; money that we'll never pay back.

yes it is in it's 2nd recession since Harper took control.
where do you get your facts?

No, we're not. If you think we're in a recession now, you're the one who lacks facts.

Two recessions under Harper's control. None of which were his fault or the fault of anything in Canada.

CountLothian CountLothian:

dire drivel .

you never add to a conversation just insult because you know nothing about what you read.

I've taken you to task and then some. I have more knowledgeable debates with my 10 year old. You're the mental midget here and that's why you're insulted.

You think you're some genius when in fact, you're a typical troll who has a serious deficiency in mental capacity. It's not insulting when it's true.

Run along, Count. The adults are talking.

you are terrified that your man Harper actually had 2 recessions.

He did nothing but live off bloated oil revenues. You like the idiots ranting at reporters in his shilled to the rafters campaign pieces are in horror mode.

i like it actually to see this huge bunch of absolute moronic voters writhe in pain as their partyless performer feigns knowledge.

He has no cabinet ministers of any value anymore , they all left the sinking ship of fools. hahahahahahahahahaAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAH

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/news/canada-recession/


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-11/inside-ground-zero-canadas-burst-oil-bubble
http://www.thestar.com/business/2015/08/17/canadas-recession-mild-and-recovery-will-be-too-bloomberg-report-says.html

[Thanos]

It's been a distressing day. We probably permanently lost one of the best members CKA ever had but we'll probably be stuck with this Lothian twit for the rest of forever.

[CountLothian]

Thanos Thanos:

It's been a distressing day. We probably permanently lost one of the best members CKA ever had but we'll probably be stuck with this Lothian twit for the rest of forever.

ROFLMA...

ack now you made me sorry for my last post. you do make me lol.

But seriously dude you need a real life.

[Winnipegger]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Two recessions under Harper's control. None of which were his fault or the fault of anything in Canada.

He's the Prime Minister. The buck stops there. If he can't take responsibility, he doesn't belong in the office.

Besides, he is responsible for the current one. He deliberately focussed Canada's economy on oil. Which put the whole country in the same boom-and-bust cycle as Alberta. After this many decades, why would anyone be surprised that the oil boom was followed by a bust? It always does.

[martin14]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

He's the Prime Minister. The buck stops there. If he can't take responsibility, he doesn't belong in the office.

Besides, he is responsible for the current one. He deliberately focussed Canada's economy on oil. Which put the whole country in the same boom-and-bust cycle as Alberta. After this many decades, why would anyone be surprised that the oil boom was followed by a bust? It always does.

Wrong.

Canada is a small player in global economics. A very small player. A very very tiny player.
Harper is no more responsible for the '08 crash than you are.
In case you missed it, the whole developed world went for a dump.
Somehow, Canada even missed the worst of it.

Oil was also a market reaction to a seriously overvalued Canadian dollar.
Money went into oil because oil made money.
Manufacturing in Ontario didn't stop because of the recession, it stopped because the dollar
was too high, and Canada is not very competitive in this area.

This recession is being cause by a big slowdown in China that started a couple of years ago,
Along with some rather interesting oil policy run by Obama and the Saudis.
Canada, as usual, just got taken along for the ride.

People who think Canada has an independent economy really need to get out of the basement.

[Winnipegger]

I repeat, anyone who can't take responsibility doesn't belong in the PM office. You have to take world affairs into account, and ensure Canada does well anyway. The world will always have economic challenges. And there will always be wars. Historians say every year in recorded history had a war somewhere in the world.

Harper and his Conservatives drastically increased spending starting the first months they were elected. According to the May 2006 budget, Jim Flaherty's first budget, the status quo surplus for the 2005-2006 fiscal year was $17.4 billion. That budget stated their intend to reduce spending to $8.0 billion, not through tax reductions, but by increasing spending. The Actual spending for that year was in the Auditor General's report, and published in the 2007 budget. Actual spending was $175.2 billion, but Ralph Goodale's 2005 budget had $161.3 billion for that year. And remember the federal government's fiscal year is April 1 through March 31, but the election was January 23, 2006, and ministers sworn in February 6. So Conservatives increased spending by $13.9 billion in their first two months alone. The 2005 budget projected spending through 2009-2010. Actual Conservative spending was $18.8B more for 2006-2007, $21.6B more for 2007-2008, and $22.1B more for 2008-2009. Based on these figures, the surplus should have been $3.5 billion for 2005-2006. But due to economic policy of the Liberals, Canadians earned more and paid more taxes than anyone predicted. And yes, Liberals were in power for the first 10 months of that fiscal year, so yes, Liberals do take credit. That resulted in an actual surplus of $13.2 billion. It would have been much more if not for Conservative spending. Then the for 2006-2007 the surplus was $14.2 billion, it was $9.6B for 2007-2008, and a deficit of $5.8 for 2008-2009.

This is all before the financial melt-down in the states. And yes, I did see that coming. Once George W. was inaugurated in January 2001, America ran massive deficits. The company I worked for at the time sold primarily to American manufacturers. We saw a drop in business starting the second week of February 2001. America started their recession then. And I lived in Miami from the beginning of June 1999 through end of March 2000, so I was paying attention. The American per capita federal debt hit double Canada's in August 2006. That was using the exchange rate at the time, and population figures from Census Canada and the US Census Bureau. Yes, I worked it out. I knew something was going to give. In August 2009 it hit triple Canada's.

When financial times are good, you pay down your debt. That prepares you to weather bad times. Paul Martin Liberals were doing that, but Harper Conservatives spent us into recession. And that's before the melt-down.

This time it's all Conservative fault. We are in a second recession. This time you can't blame it on external forces. Harper claimed he would make Canada an energy superpower. He focussed the Canadian economy on oil. Subsidize the oil industry, and tell manufacturers they're on their own. And gave in on the softwood lumber dispute.

[martin14]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

2005-2006 2009-2010.2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009. 2008-2009.

You mean the minority government where the opposition was forcing the Conservatives to spend more money ?




This is the problem when trying to discuss things with a party hack.

How quickly they forget everything their own party did.

[OnTheIce]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Two recessions under Harper's control. None of which were his fault or the fault of anything in Canada.

He's the Prime Minister. The buck stops there. If he can't take responsibility, he doesn't belong in the office.

Besides, he is responsible for the current one. He deliberately focussed Canada's economy on oil. Which put the whole country in the same boom-and-bust cycle as Alberta. After this many decades, why would anyone be surprised that the oil boom was followed by a bust? It always does.

Nonsense.

Do you take responsibility for things that aren't your fault?

CANADIANS focused it's economy on oil. Governments don't dictate the economy. They only provide the environment for the economy.

Second, this one isn't due to ANYTHING Canada did. See: Saudi Arabia & China.

[OnTheIce]

CountLothian CountLothian:

you are terrified that your man Harper actually had 2 recessions.

I'm terrified that people like you actually reside in Canada and get to vote.

[Winnipegger]

martin14 martin14:

You mean the minority government where the opposition was forcing the Conservatives to spend more money ?

Liberal criticized Harper for spending so much, for throwing us into deficit. They didn't start calling for increased spending until AFTER the American financial melt-down. And actually I didn't agree with Liberal MPs about that; spending was high enough during the 2009-2010 fiscal year. In fact it was too high. The problem was Harper spent money in wrong ways. One RCMP station replaced a single door knob, so they put a big sign in front of the building. The sign cost more than the door knob. They upgraded a curling rink supposedly for the G20 summit, but never used it. Built bicycle paths in the richest neighbourhoods in Winnipeg, but neighbourhoods with Conservative MPs. Meanwhile aboriginals in northern Manitoba don't have flowing water. And town of Stoney Wall outside Winnipeg is growing, but new housing construction is limited by provincial legislation until they build a new sewage processing plant.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Nonsense.

Do you take responsibility for things that aren't your fault?

CANADIANS focused it's economy on oil. Governments don't dictate the economy. They only provide the environment for the economy.

Second, this one isn't due to ANYTHING Canada did. See: Saudi Arabia & China.

There you go again. Sorry, but Harper and his Conservatives have been the government. There's no one else to blame. They did focus the economy on oil. They did provide government subsidies for oil exploration and construction of pipelines. But they didn't provide any government subsidies for manufacturing. In fact, they created new free trade agreements that allowed existing companies to move manufacturing facilities out of the country. And they just gave up on the softwood lumber dispute. They focussed our economy on oil at the expense of manufacturing and lumber. They let Americans buy raw logs, but let Americans penalize Canadian lumber mills that process logs into finished lumber. And Peter Loughheed said he wanted to build upgraders to convert bitumen into synthetic crude oil. Sell synthetic crude. But Harper is allowing oil companies to sell diluted bitumen. Yes, it's government regulation that allows diluted bitumen through pipelines designed for crude oil.

Liberal MPs did criticize Conservatives for overspending; some wanted even more spending, but many like John McCallum criticized for over spending. Until Bob Rae became interim leader. It was ironic, and disturbing: a former NDP leading the Liberal party while Thomas Mulcair, a former Liberal, led the NDP. We are *NOT* the same! I'm a fiscally responsible Liberal, a Paul Martin Liberal. I respect Bob Rae as a politician, and hoped he would bring some NDP values regarding how policy conventions are run, but he didn't do that. Oh, well.

Here are actual numbers.