Friday, July 25, 2008

One Word Posts

Deficit

Labels:

posted by calgarygrit at 5:30 p.m.

32 Comments:

  • Liberals know all about deficits...Pierre and his ilk put us in debt for the rest of our lives. And please don't say that it was Martin that finally stopped deficit spending. It was the least he could do.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:46 p.m.  

  • Well, that didn't take long. Love how the CPC supporters are trying to blame the Liberals LOL

    Tory times are tough times - here we go again.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:55 p.m.  

  • Well at least wbw admits it was Paul Martin who eliminated the deficit. Usually they do not even admit that.

    By Blogger ottlib, at 6:24 p.m.  

  • Exactly! It was that damaging 1983 budget that set the groundwork for the current deficit!

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 6:27 p.m.  

  • ''The federal government ran a deficit of $517 million over April and May, the first two months of the current fiscal year...''

    Very misleading, Deficit in April SURPLUS in May:

    ''In April, the first month of the fiscal year, the budget was in the red for a total of $864-million, ...budget returned to surplus in May – $347-million ...''

    http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080725.wdeficit0725/BNStory/Business/home

    By Blogger wilson, at 6:38 p.m.  

  • Its only a temperary situation . . . as the year rolls along and revenues continue to come in it will dissapear!!!
    Reason being of course more Canadians have their money in their own bank accounts, instead of having Ottawa hold onto it for them.
    Part of the problem too, is the eastern half of the country can't seem to pull their weight!
    What would it be like with a Dion "Karbone Tax"? We are already having double-digit inflation because of high energy prices, throw Dion's silly tax into the equasion and you could add another 10% to the inflation factor!!!

    By Blogger Oldschool, at 7:04 p.m.  

  • “Part of the problem too, is the eastern half of the country can't seem to pull their weight!”

    The same nuts again. Are there any intelligent supporters left for the New Government? There's no doubt that harper's government is living on borrowed time. Any chance that Charest will replace harper?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 7:42 p.m.  

  • It won't be a deficit at the end of the year, but if the next update (in 2 months I presume, right?) shows the country still in deficit, that's a good issue for the fall campaign for the Liberals.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:07 p.m.  

  • They aren't going to allow a deficit to happen over the course of the year.

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 12:49 a.m.  

  • "They aren't going to allow a deficit to happen over the course of the year."

    Huh! They're going to cut expenditure with a possible election on the horizon?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 2:20 a.m.  

  • Hey easy on Harper - it's not easy making priorities.....a makeup lady and double the cost for polling, etc....expensive you know. And, using OUR taxpayer dollars on this chronic campaign trial of Harper's...not easy making priorities.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:17 a.m.  

  • The Liberals saved Canada from the $42 billion annual deficits from the Mulroney era. Now, Canada is back in deficit under the current Conservative government.

    HArper evaporatd $35 billion with income trusts. And Haper still has not collected the $5 billion from the Americans for softwood.

    Conservatives are good at being nasty to Liberals but they can't govern.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:33 a.m.  

  • They are going to sell off some crown assets Mike Harris-style by privatizing something, then next year economic growth gets them out of the hole.

    Well or they will just hope things get better on their own - 500 million is not large, and there was a surplus in all the other months, including May.

    (Isn't it fairly arbitrary whether Canada runs a deficit of .04% of GDP or a small surplus?)

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 11:20 a.m.  

  • H2H - In reality, yeah, and there might even be a time and place for a deficit. But there's become such a stigma around it, that you'd hate to be the government that goes back to them.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 12:02 p.m.  

  • Did anybody buy a sandwich today? Deficit!! Deficit!! You have zero income today and you spent money! Oh dear God!

    And then payday comes around and what happens?

    By Blogger The Rat, at 12:35 p.m.  

  • I have no idea what the spending profile of the government looks like. I have no idea whether there are revenue peaks and valleys. I have no idea whether there are, have been, or will be spending peaks and valleys. Does anyone else posting comments have any idea what a normal profile is for a given month, and for April and May in particular, relative to other months?

    By Blogger matt, at 2:17 p.m.  

  • "sell off some crown assets Mike Harris-style by privatizing something"

    What? Please be specific.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 6:28 p.m.  

  • I'm with Matt at 2:17. But it would sure be a shame if Canada slip back into deficit again - I'm not a deficit kind of person, we worked hard to get into shape.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:51 p.m.  

  • Yes, it's become quite popular to suggest that the Government is better to overtax you and me, and then spend the excess on gifts for their friends, rather than to leave a few measly bucks in my pocket for a few extra months and collect it later.

    By Blogger Paul, at 7:16 p.m.  

  • “Yes, it's become quite popular to suggest that the Government is better to overtax you and me”

    Ok! So what would you like to cut? Defence, doctors wages or welfare?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 1:39 a.m.  

  • Check out the Fiscal Monitor - the Liberals were regularly running monthly deficits - including multi-billion dollar ones - as recently as 2003-2005.

    I'd love to hear how the Liberals explain that Flahrety or Harper caused them to run monthly deficits under Paul Martin or Ralph Goodale as Finance Minister...

    http://www.fin.gc.ca/purl/fiscmon-e.html

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:33 a.m.  

  • Once you get a month loaded, you can just toggle the number of the month in the url to quickly flip through the months and look at the bottom line. If I had more time I'd graph it. In any event, this story isn't news. It's unremarkable when viewed in context.

    By Blogger matt, at 10:28 a.m.  

  • “the Liberals were regularly running monthly deficits - including multi-billion dollar ones - as recently as 2003-2005”

    Let me try to help the financially-challenged.

    Any government will run monthly deficits because of the seasonal nature of tax income. It is a concern when the usual periods of surplus turn into deficits.

    “The federal government ran a deficit of $517 million over April and May, the first two months of the current fiscal year, mainly due to lower corporate income tax and GST revenues.

    Over the same time period last year, the government ran a $2.8 billion surplus.”

    By Blogger JimTan, at 12:06 p.m.  

  • "Any government will run monthly deficits because of the seasonal nature of tax income. It is a concern when the usual periods of surplus turn into deficits."

    Only if you're trying to match to match the surplus from the previous year (which the Tories aren't). Nice try, though.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:32 p.m.  

  • I meant something like Scott Brison's building thing, where the government sells off buildings it owns, and then leases them back. This gives them short-term cash, but also masks deficits. Then, next year, with economic growth, and relative fiscal prudence you can escape a small deficit. The Harris government did this, selling off a highway and elements of Ontario Hydro.

    (I have nothing against privatizing things if the numbers are right, I just don't think masking deficits is a good motive - some of the Harris era privatizations did have sound numbers behind them... for instance Indiana recently sold a toll highway for billions, enough to build many and maintain many highways)

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 3:40 p.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 12:12 a.m.  

  • "Only if you're trying to match to match the surplus from the previous year (which the Tories aren't). Nice try, though"

    You mean it doesn't matter to the Tories that the fiscal balance has deteriorated by $3.3b from last year? I guess they must be rich!

    By Blogger JimTan, at 12:14 a.m.  

  • OK, I should have said if you are trying to match the revenue and spending profiles, not the surplus. Nice catch.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:25 a.m.  

  • Just a quick correction:

    It was not Paul Martin who eliminated the deficit. . . It was ME!!
    Me and the thousands of $$$ I sent to those Bas***ds. Me. Singlehandedly.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:56 p.m.  

  • This won't truly have success, I think this way.

    By Anonymous diseño web valencia, at 2:52 a.m.  

  • coach outlet
    nike huarache
    nike huarache
    ralph lauren outlet
    christian louboutin sale
    michael kors outlet
    nike shoes
    mont blanc outlet
    christian louboutin shoes
    gucci shoes

    By Blogger raybanoutlet001, at 9:04 p.m.  

  • air jordan uk
    michael kors uk
    ray ban sunglasses outlet
    mlb jerseys wholesale
    michael kors outlet
    nike free run
    ray ban sunglasses outlet
    cheap oakley sunglasses
    colts jerseys
    cheap ray ban sunglasses

    By Blogger raybanoutlet001, at 9:08 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home