Canadian Economic Growth

[I Think]

R. B. Bennett, 1930-1935. Average economic growth rate: -2.34 per cent.

William Lyon MacKenzie King, 1935-1948: 6.24 per cent.

Louis St. Laurent, 1948-1957: 5.20 per cent.

John Diefenbaker, 1957-1963: 3.78 per cent.

Lester Pearson, 1963-1968: 5.43 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1968-1979: 4.28 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1980-1984: 2.16 per cent.

Brian Mulroney, 1984-1993: 2.51 per cent.

Jean Chretien, 1993-2003: 3.32 per cent

Paul Martin, 2003-2006: 2.71 per cent.

Stephen Harper, 2006-present: 1.77 per cent.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY

Simple math indicates that yes, under the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper, Canada's economic growth rate has been the worst since the Great Depression.

[The Green Barbarian]

R. B. Bennett, 1930-1935. Average economic growth rate: -2.34 per cent.

William Lyon MacKenzie King, 1935-1948: 6.24 per cent.

Louis St. Laurent, 1948-1957: 5.20 per cent.

John Diefenbaker, 1957-1963: 3.78 per cent.

Lester Pearson, 1963-1968: 5.43 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1968-1979: 4.28 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1980-1984: 2.16 per cent.

Brian Mulroney, 1984-1993: 2.51 per cent.

Jean Chretien, 1993-2003: 3.32 per cent

Paul Martin, 2003-2006: 2.71 per cent.

Stephen Harper, 2006-present: 1.77 per cent.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY

Simple math indicates that yes, under the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper, Canada's economic growth rate has been the worst since the Great Depression.

Is there any reason why you didn't supply a link to whomever prepared this little tidbit of information?

[Hurtlander]

*removed*

[The Green Barbarian]

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY

Simple math indicates that yes, under the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper, Canada's economic growth rate has been the worst since the Great Depression.

The Experts say this eh?

It's always funny how these so-called "experts" use statistics. It's amazing to me how some of you just swallow everything you are fed, as long as it supports your pre-conceived notion.

So let's look at Trudeau's record. In 1968, Canada's GDP was $70 Billion or thereabouts. In 1983, it had reached $340 billion, so Trudeau, over the course of 15 years, grew the GDP of Canada by $270 billion. Good for him. You can apply percentages to these numbers, but the math is the math.

So now let's look at Stephen Harper. You say you want to start in 2006, even though that's hardly a fair date to judge him given he was running minority governments at this time, but fine. What was the Canadian GDP in 2006? $1.31 Trillion - according to google.

So what was the GDP in 2014? http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada- ... -1.2979658

the number according to Wikipedia is $1.992 Trillion.

So in 8 years, as opposed to Pierre's 15 years at the helm, Stephen Harper has grown GDP by $661 billion dollars. That 2.5 times more than Trudeau. And yet, because of the relative size of the GDP, the percentage growth seems lower. See how misleading stats can be? It's like a guy who takes over running a giant corporation. The guy previous to him may have doubled sales from $1 billion to $2 billion, but if the new guy now takes sales to $3 billion, he's only 50% as good as the last guy, even if he actually performed just as well or better. It's amazing to me what stats people are willing to believe, as long as it suits their purpose.

[WhenWhatWho]

R. B. Bennett, 1930-1935. Average economic growth rate: -2.34 per cent.

William Lyon MacKenzie King, 1935-1948: 6.24 per cent.

Louis St. Laurent, 1948-1957: 5.20 per cent.

John Diefenbaker, 1957-1963: 3.78 per cent.

Lester Pearson, 1963-1968: 5.43 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1968-1979: 4.28 per cent.

Pierre Trudeau, 1980-1984: 2.16 per cent.

Brian Mulroney, 1984-1993: 2.51 per cent.

Jean Chretien, 1993-2003: 3.32 per cent

Paul Martin, 2003-2006: 2.71 per cent.

Stephen Harper, 2006-present: 1.77 per cent.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY

Simple math indicates that yes, under the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper, Canada's economic growth rate has been the worst since the Great Depression.

Different times and different world economics. The Great Depression??? It was WWII that brought the world out of that situation. Apples to bananas

[The Green Barbarian]

Different times and different world economics. The Great Depression??? It was WWII that brought the world out of that situation. Apples to bananas

The one thing I've realized whenever any stats are disseminated by the leftists is that almost any good news can be spun to the negative just by changing how that information is presented.

[Muzza]

I think a more accurate (and more honest) representation of the data would be to do a comparison with other countries to see how Canada performed. But as it is a more honest comparison, I don't expect to see it done.

[The Green Barbarian]

I think a more accurate (and more honest) representation of the data would be to do a comparison with other countries to see how Canada performed. But as it is a more honest comparison, I don't expect to see it done.

Not by any NDP propaganda arm or union-funded think tank anyway.

[The Green Barbarian]

I think a more accurate (and more honest) representation of the data would be to do a comparison with other countries to see how Canada performed. But as it is a more honest comparison, I don't expect to see it done.

Funny you should ask. We aren't doing so well compared to Paraguay, but we sure are kicking the corn out of Finland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. But what do those right-wingers at the World Bank know anyway....

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG

[FreeRights]

The Experts say this eh?

It's always funny how these so-called "experts" use statistics. It's amazing to me how some of you just swallow everything you are fed, as long as it supports your pre-conceived notion.

So let's look at Trudeau's record. In 1968, Canada's GDP was $70 Billion or thereabouts. In 1983, it had reached $340 billion, so Trudeau, over the course of 15 years, grew the GDP of Canada by $270 billion. Good for him. You can apply percentages to these numbers, but the math is the math.

So now let's look at Stephen Harper. You say you want to start in 2006, even though that's hardly a fair date to judge him given he was running minority governments at this time, but fine. What was the Canadian GDP in 2006? $1.31 Trillion - according to google.

So what was the GDP in 2014? http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada- ... -1.2979658

the number according to Wikipedia is $1.992 Trillion.

So in 8 years, as opposed to Pierre's 15 years at the helm, Stephen Harper has grown GDP by $661 billion dollars. That 2.5 times more than Trudeau. And yet, because of the relative size of the GDP, the percentage growth seems lower. See how misleading stats can be? It's like a guy who takes over running a giant corporation. The guy previous to him may have doubled sales from $1 billion to $2 billion, but if the new guy now takes sales to $3 billion, he's only 50% as good as the last guy, even if he actually performed just as well or better. It's amazing to me what stats people are willing to believe, as long as it suits their purpose.

Now I have no idea whether or not the first post is accurate, but you do know that total dollars is no more "accurate" than percentage of growth, right? The value of a dollar now is substantially different than it was in the 1930's, and international trade is unrecognizable to what it was in the 1930's.

That being said, due to those facts, obviously the variables are different now than they were then, so while the statistic may not be absolutely telling, it's no less so than the numbers that you've provided.

It would take research to accurately compare.

[I Think]

Funny how anything that criticizes harper, is the spawn of a leftist, commie pinko NDP brainless idiot.

[The Green Barbarian]

Funny how anything that criticizes harper, is the spawn of a leftist, commie pinko NDP brainless idiot.

I'll be the first to agree with you that NDP supporters are brainless idiots, but it's not just about being a brainless idiot. It's being a brainless idiot who also is deliberately manipulating data and lying about it. You can criticize Harper all you want, but when you have to lie and cheat to try and present him in a bad light, that just makes you look bad, and says something about your party, and that is that not only are you brainless idiots (your words) but you have no integrity either, and so, are not any better than the person and party that you are criticizing.

[Muzza]

On a whim I thought I would have a look at the World Bank info posted by GB. I looked at only countries that are lead by Western style governments so that I am comparing apples to apples, instead of apples to oranges. I have listed these countries by economic performance for the 2010 - 2014 period. I would say that Canada is performing quite well!

New Zealand 2.5
US: 2.2
Canada 2.0
UK 1.7
Poland 1.7
Sweden 1.5
Norway 0.6
France 0.3
Belgium 0.3
Ireland 0.2
Austria 0.2
Germany 0.1
Denmark -0.5
Netherlands -0.7
Spain -1.2
Finland - 1.2
Italy - 1.9

[Muzza]

Even for the 2005-2009 period Canada performed well, and judging by the 2010 - 2014 period, is coming out of the recession better than most countries. For some reason, Norway is really dropping.....

Norway 2.9
New Zealand 2.5
US: 2.3
Poland 1.8
Canada 1.7
Austria 0.9
UK 0.7
Germany 0.4
France 0.3
Belgium 0.1
Ireland -0.3
Sweden -0.3
Denmark -0.7
Finland - 1.5
Netherlands -1.6
Spain -2.1
Italy - 2.3

[Hurtlander]

And since the Harper government put all its economic eggs in the Alberta oil basket, and most of those eggs have now broken, what do you think Canada's economic performance will look like on a graph compared to other countries two or three years from now.....