In a business the first sign of death is to stop growing (Profits). Sell more every year. Screw the little guy with the credit card. The condition is incurable.
|
|
|
Canada Votes 2019
- Thread starter Mad Mike
- Start date
In a business the first sign of death is to stop growing (Profits). Sell more every year. Screw the little guy with the credit card. The condition is incurable.
Ah yes the great conservative balanced budget fairy tail that the rubes fall for....the narrative has worked because people are too dumb to look at the numbers. Basically the mythology goes like this:
If you take a $10K after tax pay cut and reduce your spending by $5K you will pay off your debts faster.
The only fiscally responsible PMs in modern times were Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin. Harper cranked up the debt (but promised good old "conservative fiscal discipline") using the above logic. There will be cries of but but but.... the great recession. Well Jean and Paul caught the tail end of the early 90s recession and the dotcom bust as well.
Bottom line, if this matters to you as a voter, NONE OF THE PARTIES HAVE ANY CHANCE OF BALANCING THE BOOKS BASED ON THEIR PLATFORMS! Full stop right there.
Personally I firm believe in balanced books, the only option is to build a time machine and make sure Martin beats Harper...
As for the tax cuts, do the math and see how little it will actually mean to you in actual $$$s (again look the the hard numbers), unless you are well into the six figure range it ain't going to be much. BTW Canada is below the OECD average for taxation. We compare ourselves to the US (you know run by conservative Trump) but to keep pace with the US (per capita) we would need to increase our deficit to $100B! That is why their taxes are lower, MASSIVE, EPIC DEFICITS. To top it off, one of the biggest line items in our budgets is universal healthcare, which they do not have!
If you take a $10K after tax pay cut and reduce your spending by $5K you will pay off your debts faster.
The only fiscally responsible PMs in modern times were Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin. Harper cranked up the debt (but promised good old "conservative fiscal discipline") using the above logic. There will be cries of but but but.... the great recession. Well Jean and Paul caught the tail end of the early 90s recession and the dotcom bust as well.
Bottom line, if this matters to you as a voter, NONE OF THE PARTIES HAVE ANY CHANCE OF BALANCING THE BOOKS BASED ON THEIR PLATFORMS! Full stop right there.
Personally I firm believe in balanced books, the only option is to build a time machine and make sure Martin beats Harper...
As for the tax cuts, do the math and see how little it will actually mean to you in actual $$$s (again look the the hard numbers), unless you are well into the six figure range it ain't going to be much. BTW Canada is below the OECD average for taxation. We compare ourselves to the US (you know run by conservative Trump) but to keep pace with the US (per capita) we would need to increase our deficit to $100B! That is why their taxes are lower, MASSIVE, EPIC DEFICITS. To top it off, one of the biggest line items in our budgets is universal healthcare, which they do not have!
Attachments
William Watson: Liberals try to convince us the Stephen Harper years were rife with plagues and hellfire
'The hurtful cuts of the Conservative years' is a funny way to describe the guy who ran the biggest nominal deficit in Canadian history
business.financialpost.com
sorry, I hope your statement is a typo or miss spoken. If you worry your kids are inheriting your ( parent?) and grandparent credit card debt? all discussion of financial sanity is closed for you.
Nope and nope.
Again though...that balancing the budget obsession set canadian universities back by years. You may not care about that but it set our international standing and reputation back too. Hiring freezes meant higher student to faculty ratios and meant that promising researchers left Canada. Nearly all our universities dropped in global rankings as they expanded to take in more students to make up for shortfalls and they still haven’t fully recovered. It was a pretty dark time and not one I want to see again. Over in the UK the conservative protectionist agenda linked to Brexit is driving promising researchers out of the country too. Luckily for us, some are coming to Canada now, or at least they will be if they know the atmosphere here is a welcoming one.
This is called cutting ones nose off to spite ones face.
Doesn't matter what you cut, someone will be upset about it. However the net as you like to say, is the big picture. I understand however the end doesn't justify the means, to you. I just don't agree.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Read it again carefully. -- "they / their " pronouns make me & my wife, "their parents" and my and my wife's parents "their grandparents"
I guess since they are now voting age I can also suggest they are leaving a further generations debt for their offspring.
I don’t expect to change minds. A polite exchange of views is good and multiple parties need to exist for a healthy democracy, it’s all good. At the end of the day I don’t really believe any one party wants to truly destroy everything we enjoy and like about this country but there are multiple single issue items we may have issues with for all of them.
Agreed.
Listening to the debate on the radio and it’s a bit of a revelation. Singh sounds young, dynamic and eloquent, Trudeau sounds plastic and forced, Scheer doesn’t sound too bad but he’s not a natural speaker. Interesting stuff.
The time constraints are really working against the French guys. They can’t get any points across in the time.
The time constraints are really working against the French guys. They can’t get any points across in the time.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Realistically it's a choice between Trudeau and Scheer, the others will only take meaning if they are if they are the tipping weight in minority coalition. If that happens, historically we will be heading to another election sooner than later.
I don't know how many Canadians actually vote base on party principles vs likability of the candidates. I think Trudeau was a lot more like-able, if his image had not been sullied by a wide range of issues he would have been a shoo in -- even with questionable economic policies and performance.
Think for a second, after reading this list of stupid deeds:
- political conflict of interest
- judicial interference
- ethics violations
- racial buffoonery
- diplomatic gaffes
- inappropriate behaviour toward women --
Well singh has nicer hair.
Roadghost
Well-known member
Trudeau rumored to be in talks with accusor to suppress explosive sex scandal. Globe pulled the article but...
Trials
Well-known member
Are any of them ready to make a political stand on their own performance?
or is this just another, don't vote for that dude because of blah blah blah bs
I shut that Sheer video down at: Trudeau doesn't remember how many times he put black face on <-wtf?
Trudeau is the only one with PM experience, he had a face to face with the guy with the fast hair and we still have a country
must have done something right.
or is this just another, don't vote for that dude because of blah blah blah bs
I shut that Sheer video down at: Trudeau doesn't remember how many times he put black face on <-wtf?
Trudeau is the only one with PM experience, he had a face to face with the guy with the fast hair and we still have a country
must have done something right.|
|
|
|
|