Tories find small cuts to reduce spending by $1B

[jolinar of malkshor]

It's about bloody time. This was one of the most ######ed programs, not to mention one of the most abused.

Eliminating the visitor rebate program, under which Revenue Canada refunds GST to foreign visitors, is the single largest program cut, saving $78.8 million.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...eral-cuts.html

[I-Hate-Hulse]

• Programs that didn't spend all the money allocated.

What a stupid thing to do - I never understood this mentality in government. Department X manages it's finances smartly and decides to not blow all it's budget on stupid things in a mad rush at year end - and gets penalized for it.

I saw this repeatedly in by dealings with government and regulated organizations and it always lead to stupid and wasteful decisions. "Hey, I don't need your services just yet, but can you just send me a bill anyways for services to be rendered next year?"

Talk about about reinforcing negative behaviours.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

• Programs that didn't spend all the money allocated.

What a stupid thing to do - I never understood this mentality in government. Department X manages it's finances smartly and decides to not blow all it's budget on stupid things in a mad rush at year end - and gets penalized for it.

I saw this repeatedly in by dealings with government and regulated organizations and it always lead to stupid and wasteful decisions. "Hey, I don't need your services just yet, but can you just send me a bill anyways for services to be rendered next year?"

Talk about about reinforcing negative behaviours.

Your right, that is stupid, but, I don't think they are shutting down those programs, they are just taking the un used money and putting it back into general revenue. I hope that is the case any how.

[ken0042]

Maybe if they were smart they told department managers to not worry about spending all their budget; that it wouldn't be slashed the next year.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Maybe if they were smart they told department managers to not worry about spending all their budget; that it wouldn't be slashed the next year.

Why give them more money than what they need? If they didn't spend all their money, they don't need that much. If they want more the next year then they most show why they need more. Not enough of that goes on.

[Devils'Advocate]

Speaking as a middle-manager in the government, I can say that I outright hate that rule. In my division have an okay computer system for what we are doing, but there are parts of the system that are inefficient and require the users to do a lot of manual effort. I have an arms-length list of things that I want to do that would make the system more efficient and reduce the number of necessary users (and with the roll-over we've been having, we *NEED* to be more efficient).

However, the boss won't let us hire anyone because "we don't know if the Conservatives will cut our budget next year". So we've got more than enough budget now to pay someone this year that will likely be spent on chairs, new computers, painting the boardroom... money that SHOULD be spent on making the government more efficient will end up being spent on frivilous garbage. I really don't understand why we can't *save* the money in case there is a cut next year rather than being "forced" to spend it in areas that we don't need it.

[Devils'Advocate]

BTW - I see that the medical marijuana research program has been gutted. My co-worker with MS should be pleased.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

BTW - I see that the medical marijuana research program has been gutted. My co-worker with MS should be pleased.

I don't think the government needs to be in the business of marijuana research. Leave it up to the private sector. They haven't reversed the decision to allow medical marijuana.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Speaking as a middle-manager in the government, I can say that I outright hate that rule. In my division have an okay computer system for what we are doing, but there are parts of the system that are inefficient and require the users to do a lot of manual effort. I have an arms-length list of things that I want to do that would make the system more efficient and reduce the number of necessary users (and with the roll-over we've been having, we *NEED* to be more efficient).

However, the boss won't let us hire anyone because "we don't know if the Conservatives will cut our budget next year". So we've got more than enough budget now to pay someone this year that will likely be spent on chairs, new computers, painting the boardroom... money that SHOULD be spent on making the government more efficient will end up being spent on frivilous garbage. I really don't understand why we can't *save* the money in case there is a cut next year rather than being "forced" to spend it in areas that we don't need it.

True. What they should come up with is a system where departments that don't use all their budget get a percent of their surplus put aside for future expenditures. The problem is that upper managment get bonuses when they don't spend all their money. So your boss could care less about hiring someone else if he can get away with it and obtain a bonus.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

BTW - I see that the medical marijuana research program has been gutted. My co-worker with MS should be pleased.

Government shouldn't have anything to do with that in the first place.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Government shouldn't have anything to do with that in the first place.

Government shouldn't have anything to do with marijuana specifically, or they should be out of the drug-testing business altogether?

It would be interesting to know the reasons behind dumping this program. I wonder if they actually believe that it's not their job, or the program is wasteful, or if it's just prudish conservatism stemming from dated "reefer madness" beliefs about the evil plant.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Government shouldn't have anything to do with marijuana specifically, or they should be out of the drug-testing business altogether?

It would be interesting to know the reasons behind dumping this program. I wonder if they actually believe that it's not their job, or the program is wasteful, or if it's just prudish conservatism stemming from dated "reefer madness" beliefs about the evil plant.

He's saying that there is no need for the government to be wasting money, conducting research on dope. Leave it up to the private sector.

[Ayrahb]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Government shouldn't have anything to do with marijuana specifically, or they should be out of the drug-testing business altogether?

It would be interesting to know the reasons behind dumping this program. I wonder if they actually believe that it's not their job, or the program is wasteful, or if it's just prudish conservatism stemming from dated "reefer madness" beliefs about the evil plant.

It's against God.

[Devils'Advocate]

But the private sector is doing very little with marijuana research as far as I know. The only company I have heard of is PhytoCan. There is very little interest by companies put off by the strict regulations in place regarding the production of the drug. If you know of other companies beyond PhytoCan, please let me know.... I'm quite interested in the subject.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

But the private sector is doing very little with marijuana research as far as I know. The only company I have heard of is PhytoCan. There is very little interest by companies put off by the strict regulations in place regarding the production of the drug. If you know of other companies beyond PhytoCan, please let me know.... I'm quite interested in the subject.

Sorry, I don't. Your right, who wants to touch something that is illegal. Denamrk must have done some studies.

I think it should be decriminalized but I don't think my tax dollars need to be spend on seeing how it helps people with pain. If it helps them, use it, if it doesn't don't.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

He's saying that there is no need for the government to be wasting money, conducting research on dope. Leave it up to the private sector.

Okay but that doesn't really answer the question I asked him.

Is it just "dope" that our government shouldn't be involved in, or should all drugs and drug testing be left to the private sector?

If marijuana is helpful to some people and the private sector isn't getting involved, what's wrong with the government doing it? They do run the entire health care system after all.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Okay but that doesn't really answer the question I asked him.

Is it just "dope" that our government shouldn't be involved in, or should all drugs and drug testing be left to the private sector?

If marijuana is helpful to some people and the private sector isn't getting involved, what's wrong with the government doing it? They do run the entire health care system after all.

I don't know the answer to this, maybe you do. I don't think the government does any testing of drugs as far as research goes. They may test it for release into the market. Is this right or wrong?

If its right, why would they reasearch marijuana? Also we already know it helps some people, so if someone wants to use it so be it. No need to research it.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I think it should be decriminalized but I don't think my tax dollars need to be spend on seeing how it helps people with pain.

what a humanitarian you are. i hope you never a get a debilating disease in your lifetime, and then have someone random dude tell you that the one thing that might ease your pain shoudnt be researched any further because of his tax dollars. what about other drugs that get tested before they are let out on the market...should we just stop testing those as well?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Table 5

what a humanitarian you are. i hope you never a get a debilating disease in your lifetime, and then have someone random dude tell you that the one thing that might ease your pain shoudnt be researched any further because of his tax dollars. what about other drugs that get tested before they are let out on the market...should we just stop testing those as well?

oh boy....here we go....I am such a inhumane ******* because I think there is a limit to where our taxes go. I was simply giving my opinion. The government is not into R&D of new drugs that is the drug companies jobs. I didn't say take their dope away. Jeez...Private companies will study any drug they think will benifit an illness....if there is potential all I am saying is leave it up to the private industry.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Government shouldn't have anything to do with marijuana specifically, or they should be out of the drug-testing business altogether?

It would be interesting to know the reasons behind dumping this program. I wonder if they actually believe that it's not their job, or the program is wasteful, or if it's just prudish conservatism stemming from dated "reefer madness" beliefs about the evil plant.

I think the government should legalize marijuana, but they should leave it to the private sector to do drug-testing.

By legalizing it, they get their hands completely away from where they shouldn't be.

True conservatism would support this.