2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Al Czervic
Guru
Posts: 7805
Joined: Nov 29th, 2004, 10:30 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Al Czervic »

I am really looking forward to the Federal Budget. One of my complaints about “minority” governments is that the opposition has far too much influence and that influence is often used irresponsibly to simply force more spending to appease various interest groups. Of course the Government is all too happy to comply as spending money and trying to buy votes in an unstable political climate is something all governments with their hands on the purse strings love to do.


I think we all know (well maybe we don’t ALL know that) that reckless spending cannot continue. Eventually it must come to an end. However putting the brakes on the treasury means you have to be willing to make some difficult decisions and *bleep* some people off. This is something a majority government with strong leadership can do (if so willing) but it remains to be seen if a minority government has the gumption to do what it takes. Obviously this will remain to be seen on budget day.

My fingers are crossed but the proof will be in the pudding (so to speak)
Back with a vengeance
User avatar
westsidebud
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Jul 18th, 2009, 11:36 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by westsidebud »

spend harper spend
GO CANUCKS GO
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

westsidebud wrote:spend harper spend


He has already done that in spades Westside.. now it's time to but on the brakes as it were.

Funny though, several years ago when he was spending far less, some were criticizing him for what he did dole out as he dug into the supposed surplus accounts. I guess I will never understand that.

Nab
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

OTTAWA (Dow Jones)--The Canadian government's legislative agenda for the new session of Parliament will outline the overall plan to return to balanced budgets, a senior government official said Tuesday.

The agenda will be laid out in the so-called Speech From The Throne Wednesday, the primary focus of which will be the economy, the official told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

He said the government's top priority is to complete the second year of fiscal stimulus, worth some C$19 billion, in 2010/2011. But the speech will also say that the stimulus will wind in March 2011, the first step to returning to a balanced budget as the economy recovers.

"The throne speech will clearly signal that measures under Canada's economic action plan will come to an end by March 31, 2011," the official said.

The government won't raise taxes or cut transfers to provinces and will instead restrain spending to return the budget to balance, he said. But it will "protect growth in transfers that Canadians need the most," including pensions, healthcare and education, he added.

The speech will describe the government's plan to invest in education and infrastructure, and to keep taxes low and have a stable investment climate to ensure that the private sector can grow and ensure long-term economic expansion, he said.

"We must ensure that the government t is helping and not hurting their ability to grow, innovate and prosper," he said.

The speech will also make it clear that Canada's military mission in Afghanistan will end in 2011 and the focus thereafter will be on development and humanitarian aid.

The speech, to be read by Governor General Michaelle Jean, will be a lengthy one - over 6,000 words - and will take 60-90 minutes to deliver, the official said.

-By Nirmala Menon, Dow Jones Newswires; 613-237-0668; [email protected]
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

Ya gotta wonder if some of the growth BC is counting on might have more to do with anticipated federal immigration policy softening than with anticipated Olympics spinoff benefits>>>>>>>>>

Gonna be an interesting couple of days now on the federal budget front to see how it dovetails with our provincial budget and plans.

Nab

**************************
"The speech from the throne on Wednesday will not just promise more jobs, it will address a lack of skilled workers that has left some Canadian jobs going begging, government sources say."

"A recent report from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce found that a low Canadian birth rate combined with an inefficient immigration system has created a perfect storm. The report, released Feb. 22, predicts that in the next decade, 100 per cent of net workforce growth will come from new immigrants to Canada."

"Atkinson said his industry will need to replace 317,000 workers by 2017, including on-site workers, managers and supervisors. That's going to be difficult, he said, because of current barriers within the immigration system."

"Our point system is really geared towards people with post-secondary education and with proficiency in both of our official languages, with very little points or merit given for experience or qualifications in a trade," he said.

"It's easier to get into Canada as a permanent resident with a couple of degrees in Greek pottery or Greek mythology rather than 25 years experience as a welder."

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/03/ ... z0h8z29WIg
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

Well, there we have it folks, the speech frome the "throne". Gawd, that was a long one LOL.
The analysts and media are all over it of course, and the first interview I saw seems to be an exciting hotbutton issue. They want to change some of the words in our national anthem back to what they were in the beginning. :dyinglaughing:

Nab
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
User avatar
Urbane
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22737
Joined: Jul 8th, 2007, 7:41 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Urbane »

    NAB wrote:Well, there we have it folks, the speech frome the "throne". Gawd, that was a long one LOL.
    The analysts and media are all over it of course, and the first interview I saw seems to be an exciting hotbutton issue. They want to change some of the words in our national anthem back to what they were in the beginning. :dyinglaughing:
    Nab
Maybe they should look at The Maple Leaf Forever as well. All these years we've been discouraged from singing it because the words apparently offend Quebec by reminding them about Wolfe and Montcalm. And then to hear the beautiful job that Michael Buble did at the closing ceremonies on that piece made me think that we should hear it more often. I'm not sure what needs to be changed with O Canada though. Can you give us more info Nab?

Edit to add: Ok, I found it. "All thy sons command."
Al Czervic
Guru
Posts: 7805
Joined: Nov 29th, 2004, 10:30 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Al Czervic »

NAB wrote:Well, there we have it folks, the speech frome the "throne". Gawd, that was a long one LOL.
The analysts and media are all over it of course, and the first interview I saw seems to be an exciting hotbutton issue. They want to change some of the words in our national anthem back to what they were in the beginning. :dyinglaughing:

Nab



I thought they were making it more “gender neutral”
Back with a vengeance
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

Al Czervic wrote:
NAB wrote:Well, there we have it folks, the speech frome the "throne". Gawd, that was a long one LOL.
The analysts and media are all over it of course, and the first interview I saw seems to be an exciting hotbutton issue. They want to change some of the words in our national anthem back to what they were in the beginning. :dyinglaughing:

Nab



I thought they were making it more “gender neutral”


Apparently that's the idea Al. But they just want a committee to look at that one line with "sons" in it. That should keep a parliamentary committee busy for a few years :-)

Scanning the headlines this evening, I get a general sense of "steady as she goes" for one more year. But next budget (spring 2011) we had better be prepared for the major hits to take place.

We have been warned.

Nab
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
Static
Guru
Posts: 6808
Joined: Nov 11th, 2008, 4:47 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Static »

In order to raise tax revenue, the Bank of Canada can raise interest rates so those who invest in cash & equivalents (retirees aka-the ones with the cash) generate more income creating higher tax revenue for the government. The higher income will more than likely be spent in the economy creating even more tax revenue via GST etc. Today's low rates are exacerbating government shortfalls.
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

Static wrote:In order to raise tax revenue, the Bank of Canada can raise interest rates so those who invest in cash & equivalents (retirees aka-the ones with the cash) generate more income creating higher tax revenue for the government. The higher income will more than likely be spent in the economy creating even more tax revenue via GST etc. Today's low rates are exacerbating government shortfalls.


I wonder how many involved in RRIF's invested that way, and not taking any more than necessary into income while clamping down on their expenditures, will balance against those who are invested that way outside of RRIF's and are forced to take all related returns into income?

I also wonder how the net of that will balance against higher interest costs government might pay on massive debt accumulation?

Seen any meaningful statistics in that regard Static?

Nab
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
NAB
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22985
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by NAB »

"Balancing the nation's books will not come at the expense of the pensioners. It will not come by cutting transfer payments for heath care and education, or by raising taxes on hardworking Canadians."

Throne speech highlights include:

* Reviews of department spending, eliminating of "unnecessary" gov't appointments
* Looser foreign investment rules in industries such as telecommunications and uranium
* Cutting environmental red tape for energy projects
* Increasing child support payments for single-parent families
* More ‘Tough on Crime" bills
* Revisiting the lyrics to ‘O Canada'
* Creation of a high Arctic research station

Many economists have said that the government cannot balance the budget without raising taxes or cutting spending, something the Tories have rejected.

The government does not plan any significant spending cuts and will end its stimulus program after the last $19 billion is handed out in the next fiscal year.

***********

Also noted a reaffirmation that our military will be out of Afghanistan next year as planned.

Nab
"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still." - Lao-Tzu
Static
Guru
Posts: 6808
Joined: Nov 11th, 2008, 4:47 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Static »

NAB wrote:I wonder how many involved in RRIF's invested that way, and not taking any more than necessary into income while clamping down on their expenditures, will balance against those who are invested that way outside of RRIF's and are forced to take all related returns into income?

I also wonder how the net of that will balance against higher interest costs government might pay on massive debt accumulation?

Seen any meaningful statistics in that regard Static?

Nab


Good point NAB. Would that really matter since the money in the RRIF eventually becomes taxable at one point or another. Also the commercial debt market, which will also pay higher interest, is much larger than the governments $515b in national debt...so far...and hopefully for as long as I live. I will look into this though, it may surprise me.
Last edited by Static on Mar 3rd, 2010, 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19172
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by steven lloyd »

NAB wrote:"Balancing the nation's books will not come at the expense of the pensioners. It will not come by cutting transfer payments for heath care and education, or by raising taxes on hardworking Canadians."

Throne speech highlights include:

* Reviews of department spending, eliminating of "unnecessary" gov't appointments
* Looser foreign investment rules in industries such as telecommunications and uranium
* Cutting environmental red tape for energy projects
* Increasing child support payments for single-parent families
* More ‘Tough on Crime" bills
* Revisiting the lyrics to ‘O Canada'
* Creation of a high Arctic research station

Many economists have said that the government cannot balance the budget without raising taxes or cutting spending, something the Tories have rejected.

The government does not plan any significant spending cuts and will end its stimulus program after the last $19 billion is handed out in the next fiscal year.

***********

Also noted a reaffirmation that our military will be out of Afghanistan next year as planned.

Nab


This will be indeed interesting Nabs. I missed the Throne speech but at first take find myself quite on board with what you’ve highlighted here. I definitely support the first four points, and support the fifth one (more ‘Tough on Crime" bills) with some cynicism and guarded optimism. Working in the field we definitely get frustrated with some of the sentencing that occurs and would definitely like to see repeat offenders, especially repeat violent offenders (particularly those who repeatedly beat up their girlfriends and wives) get more realistic sentences. But having evidence-based research to base our opinions on (something it seems politicians never bother reviewing) we are also acutely aware of the correlation between increased rates of incarceration and increased recidivism, and without a targeted approach along with an increase in intervention supports in both the institutions and communities this isn’t going to be the solution people are expecting. In fact, this could backfire over time in a very ugly way.

Regarding revisiting the lyrics to ‘O Canada' I saw on the news tonight that the original poem was gender neutral, although a little “Old English”. They suggested one other alternative would be “by all our hearts command” and my wife and I thought what an easy and acceptable fix that would be. What do you think?

The creation of a high Arctic research station ? Well, if we want to exercise our sovereignty in the north we better start demonstrating some credibility in our claim (unlike imaginary “Olympic-generated” revenue, there is real wealth to be had in the north).

My only real concern with what you’ve posted is the reaffirmation that our military will be out of Afghanistan next year as planned. I know I have an opinion on this issue that is not shared by too many and not very popular but I personally believe we should keep our troops there. I believe what we are doing over there is important (freeing people from real oppression) and that it is important to finish the job (wipe the Taliban right out). I have served in the Armed Forces and know that I would be *bleep* if I lost the life of a friend in a mission we did not complete because of failing political will. I know many families of soldiers feel exactly the same way. This is just my opinion and I know there are many who do not share it. However, I also know there are many who do.
User avatar
Homeownertoo
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3922
Joined: Nov 10th, 2008, 1:50 pm

Re: 2010 Federal Budget - Cost cutting?

Post by Homeownertoo »

steven lloyd wrote:My only real concern with what you’ve posted is the reaffirmation that our military will be out of Afghanistan next year as planned. I know I have an opinion on this issue that is not shared by too many and not very popular but I personally believe we should keep our troops there. I believe what we are doing over there is important (freeing people from real oppression) and that it is important to finish the job (wipe the Taliban right out).

I'm not sure if it's a bad sign when I start agreeing with SL. On this topic, I take heart in some recent successes by the Pakistani military. Leaving Afghanistan also means abandoning the Pakistanis after all the blood they have shed and treasure they have spent fighting the Taliban, of which they have little to spare.

As for the budget, maybe more on that when it comes down. But departmental reviews are usually code for doing nothing. Andrew Coyne recently outlined in a Maclean's magazine piece $20 billion worth of cuts that need little in the way of departmental reviews. His suggestions would be a good start.
“Certain things cannot be said, certain ideas cannot be expressed, certain policies cannot be proposed.” -- Leftist icon Herbert Marcuse
“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs.” -- Hillary Clinton, 25/10/2014

Return to “Canada”