Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
I'm not going to dispute the numbers and the per capita spending you quoted is probably right. But why shouldn't the government spend more per capita? We don't have the debt issues that those other provinces have, and we all know that we want more services.
|
Why shouldn't the government spend less per capita? Just saying 'spend because we have it' is a rather pointless exercise in itself?
Government spending should be tied to results, and wanted programs. Simply saying, well we have lots so we should spend it all is not a policy anyone should support?
Quote:
I guess I can't really argue with the "spend what we need to spend and spend it smartly" tactic....except that it doesn't mean anything. Its just rhetoric. The only thing that I've read that shows any change was the alternative budget they released this spring, and frankly that was a joke.
If people had complaints about the PC budget (and they did) thats nothing compared to what the WRA was proposing. We're talking about spending that couldn't even keep up to the very small amount of inflation that we had/have. Its one thing to say that you're a fiscal conservative but entirely another to push todays problems further down the road because you want to score a few political points.
|
I think tying an increase in spending to an automatic solution to today's problems is a huge fallacy in modern political thinking. Very much akin to the problems in Health Care, the answer from the left over the past decade is simply to throw more money at the problem and it will fix itself. However, we've seen spending increase at unprecedented levels (and not only in health care but in all social programs) and yet there's been very little change in outcomes.
The WRA party clearly recognizes this fact and thats why they propose to limit spending increases. Spending more money does not automatically solve anything!