2011 Canadian Election Thread

[old-fart]

Oh uh... more bad news for Iffy and the Libs. Looks like the deficit isn't going to be as large as projected, thanks to the improving economy. Specifically, tax revenue was up INCLUDING TAX REVENUE FROM BUSINESS depite the tax rate reduction.

That eats significantly into the number the Conservatives have said will need to be made up to balance things, and hasn't come on a single "healthcare cut", despite the lame attack ads from Iffy and team.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by old-fart

Oh uh... more bad news for Iffy and the Libs. Looks like the deficit isn't going to be as large as projected, thanks to the improving economy. Specifically, tax revenue was up INCLUDING TAX REVENUE FROM BUSINESS depite the tax rate reduction.

That eats significantly into the number the Conservatives have said will need to be made up to balance things, and hasn't come on a single "healthcare cut", despite the lame attack ads from Iffy and team.

You know the response will be an accusation that the Conservatives knew this and have been sandbagging the numbers. Of course this comes from thae party that consistantly over budgeted in power and then spent the surplus like sailors on their favored ridings instead of paying down debt or reducing taxes more.

[old-fart]

Originally Posted by Slava

If this was a Liberal making these allegations I'd be inclined to agree. I just think that when a guy from the governing party is making this comment at a campaign speech he should know better than us?

Its not like I'm digging deep here, a guy in government says this is the plan. Why would he lie about this?

Perhaps Iffy should be honest with the public about the abortion issue, and about this specific instance which involves an international Planned Parenthood group.

You'll remember, of course, that IT WAS THE LIBERALS that defeated the last vote on this particular issue.

Iffy. Flip flopping and ignoring democracy at every opportunity.

Slip sliding away...

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

You know the response will be an accusation that the Conservatives knew this and have been sandbagging the numbers. Of course this comes from thae party that consistantly over budgeted in power and then spent the surplus like sailors on their favored ridings instead of paying down debt or reducing taxes more.

Where do you get these "facts" from? The Chretien/Martin Liberal governments started paying down the national debt and lowered both personal and corporate taxes.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Where do you get these "facts" from? The Chretien/Martin Liberal governments started paying down the national debt and lowered both personal and corporate taxes.

Certainly they did, but that didn't account for all the surpluses. A good chunk went to new spending initiatives.

[Ark2]

The department said February saw a $1-billion increase in revenues from higher personal and corporate income tax filings. For the first 11 months of the year, revenues were up by $13.1 billion, or 6.6 per cent, over last year.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories...eficit-110421/

I find this part of the article very interesting as it shows that corporate tax cuts do more then just line the pockets of the already rich.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by Ark2

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories...eficit-110421/

I find this part of the article very interesting as it shows that corporate tax cuts do more then just line the pockets of the already rich.

Couldn't it just mean that the revenue increased because of a stronger economy?

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Abortions for some, miniature Canadian flags for others!

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ark2

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories...eficit-110421/

I find this part of the article very interesting as it shows that corporate tax cuts do more then just line the pockets of the already rich.

To be fair, corporate tax reciepts would have naturally increased anyway as companies burned through their prior losses during the recession and became taxable on new earnings. Also one would assume that personal taxes would have increased as well as people who were laid off start re-entering the work force.

Pretty much all numbers will look rosy during periods of recovery relative to the prior year, much as the numbers looked pretty dire in 2009. It's really a backwards look at things.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo

Couldn't it just mean that the revenue increased because of a stronger economy?

Couldn't it mean the economy was stronger because of the Tax Cuts?

[calculoso]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/a...te-on-abortion

Ignatieff's director of communications Mario Lague said the leader would not discuss whether there would be any consequences for Liberal MPs who voted against the motion or abstained, saying it was a question of "internal discipline."

Who's the control freak??

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

You know the response will be an accusation that the Conservatives knew this and have been sandbagging the numbers. Of course this comes from thae party that consistantly over budgeted in power and then spent the surplus like sailors on their favored ridings instead of paying down debt or reducing taxes more.

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Certainly they did, but that didn't account for all the surpluses. A good chunk went to new spending initiatives.

You do know that Conservative ridings, on average, got 38% more stimulus money than opposition ridings, which one Conservative MP went on to claim "is normal" and that the Conservatives are actively campaigning in Quebec on the idea that there are rewards to be had for electing a candidate who will be part of the government, right?

Further, you know that the Conservatives increased spending 18% in their first three budgets (i.e. before the recession)?

You also know that the Conservatives have increased personal income taxes?

You also know that by federal law, all surplus is automatically applied towards the debt?

You know that between 2000 and 2004, the Martin government dropped the corporate tax rate from 28% to 20%?



Seems to me its the Conservatives who have a spending problem.

They also have a stupid tax cut problem (and no, I'm not talking corporate, I'm talking GST).

[V]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If I remember the private members bill last year, it would have made it illegal to coerce or force a woman to have an abortion, but the Conservatives made it a concience vote, and the vast majority of votes by the Conservatives killed the bill.

To me, it was a pretty smart move by Harper to try to show that his party wasn't a bunch of nuckle dragging knee jerkers socially conservative types.

I'm honestly surprised that Harper didn't bring this up.

This is specifically why I and other knuckle draggers I know will not be voting for Harper this year. As far as we're concerned this killed any hopes of a hidden agenda. Honestly, if it weren't for blind partisanship on the part of Liberal supporters I'm pretty sure they would see it for what it is as well.

It's also very disconcerting that someone so supposedly against abortion like Calgaryborn would ignore this. It makes him look fairly hypocritical, IMO.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by SebC

You do know that Conservative ridings, on average, got 38% more stimulus money than opposition ridings, which one Conservative MP went on to claim "is normal" and that the Conservatives are actively campaigning in Quebec on the idea that there are rewards to be had for electing a candidate who will be part of the government, right?

Further, you know that the Conservatives increased spending 18% in their first three budgets (i.e. before the recession)?

You also know that the Conservatives have increased personal income taxes?

You also know that by federal law, all surplus is automatically applied towards the debt?

You know that between 2000 and 2004, the Martin government dropped the corporate tax rate from 28% to 20%?



Seems to me its the Conservatives who have a spending problem.

They also have a stupid tax cut problem (and no, I'm not talking corporate, I'm talking GST).

If with you on these points. But if the Conservative have a spending problem (and they clearly do!), and every opposition party wants to increase spending dramatically higher than the Conservatives (which they do!), what do they have?

Insanity rules federal politics.

[IliketoPuck]

I think the spending problems of the various parties can be explained by Nash Equilibrium.

[CaptainCrunch]

Is this something else that I need to frackin google.

[IliketoPuck]

I like to poke fun at LPC partisans

[SebC]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

If with you on these points. But if the Conservative have a spending problem (and they clearly do!), and every opposition party wants to increase spending dramatically higher than the Conservatives (which they do!), what do they have?

Insanity rules federal politics.

Based on platform, the Libs will outspend the Cons. Based on record over the last 20 years, the Cons will outspend the Libs.

Cowboy89's characterization of the Liberals as the party who blew (past tense) the surplus spending on their own ridings fits better to the Conservatives.

(And before anyone says I'm contradicting my earlier assertion that the Cons ignore Alberta - the 38% figure is an average... I suspect that most of the uneven stimulus spending went to contested seats rather than safe ones.)

[Slava]

I just find it odd that the CPC supporters think we ought to ignore the statement from an incumbent, particularly because its a sensitive issue. In reality though this guy was a member of the government who would be in the know for these things.

[SebC]

"Pet Peeve: Reality."

Oh Flying Spaghetti Monster, please let this be authentic.