You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Conservative Campaign Promises - How can you NOT vote for this guy?!
- Thread starter Kassz007
- Start date
Taxing more and spending less during a robust economy, while taxing less and spending more during a weak economy, is the proper application of Keynesian economic theory. As you well know. Of course, when self-serving or unthinking ideologues only employ one side of the two-sided equation across the board, we can expect to find ourselves in quagmire.Quote from Ricter:
I think Canada should lay up a 36 month surplus while they're on a tear, and have something for the next "crisis of capital".
Quote from Gabfly1:
The deficit is there. They are the numbers you are looking for.
Credit where credit is due? The G7 comparison is a relative measure, by definition. Fiscal policy has no real bearing on Canada's relative standing and is more the result of cyclical commodity prices on a resource-rich economy. And, perhaps, a fairly healthy regulatory environment, to which Harper has not contributed in any demonstrable way.
Harper inherited a robust budget and a well-regulated banking system. It was there before he got there. Obama inherited an exploding bag of shit and a lousy regulatory environment. It was there before he got there.
I didnt even realise that commodities had went up since 2006....I must have missed it.
Again I will re-iterate, Exactly what did "Harper" do in order to create the deficit?
Quote from Gabfly1:
True. Every administration typically inherits both some good and some bad. But just to put a finer point on it, could you tell me what was the "good" that Obama inherited, and what was the "bad" that Harper inherited? Just curious.
I do not follow American politics closely enough to know what administration implemented what specific policies, so I have no comment there.
But as for the bad that Harper inherited, just a couple examples would be a giant infrastructure deficit, a war in Afghanistan, and ballooning healthcare costs. Not to mention a hostile country toward politicians following the Liberal Adscam that funneled millions of dollars into the pockets of insiders.
Quote from OPTIONAL777:
I don't see it as extortion.
I see it as membership dues.
People don't want to be a member? They don't have to. They can find another club.
This is wrong in so many ways. Government is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around!
If I have been living a peaceful, happy existence in Canada for say 50 years, and all of a sudden a new government policy states taxes to go up %50, does that mean I should just move? Find another club? Hell no! I like my club. I would rather find new club leaders who do not demand as much of my hard earned "dues".
Okay. And so the way to tackle these challenges is with tax cuts?Quote from Kassz007:
I do not follow American politics closely enough to know what administration implemented what specific policies, so I have no comment there.
But as for the bad that Harper inherited, just a couple examples would be a giant infrastructure deficit, a war in Afghanistan, and ballooning healthcare costs. Not to mention a hostile country toward politicians following the Liberal Adscam that funneled millions of dollars into the pockets of insiders.
Quote from Ricter:
I think Canada should lay up a 36 month surplus while they're on a tear, and have something for the next "crisis of capital".
Not a bad idea at all. Let's reduce spending and build up a surplus!
Spending cuts will get us much further ahead than tax increases. There is a lot of waste when government handles money. Cut out the wasteful spending, watch the surplus grow. But don't punish me by raising my taxes to pay for wasteful programs that do not benefit me.
The government is working for the people to protect them against the forces that they individually can not defend against themselves.
Who is going to stand up to the collective power of the wealthy and powerful corporate beast if not the government?
If you don't like the tax rate, you have choices.
1. Pay your taxes.
2. Don't pay them.
3. Move to another country.
You have the freedom to do whatever you like.
If you can vote in club leaders, go ahead. If many of the members get screwed over because of the new club leaders, then they will have a decision to make.
I understand your position as a conservative that you view the world as a jungle, but civilized people have a different view of society...where cooperation is the highest value, not competing like animals in the jungle.
Who is going to stand up to the collective power of the wealthy and powerful corporate beast if not the government?
If you don't like the tax rate, you have choices.
1. Pay your taxes.
2. Don't pay them.
3. Move to another country.
You have the freedom to do whatever you like.
If you can vote in club leaders, go ahead. If many of the members get screwed over because of the new club leaders, then they will have a decision to make.
I understand your position as a conservative that you view the world as a jungle, but civilized people have a different view of society...where cooperation is the highest value, not competing like animals in the jungle.
Quote from Kassz007:
This is wrong in so many ways. Government is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around!
If I have been living a peaceful, happy existence in Canada for say 50 years, and all of a sudden a new government policy states taxes to go up %50, does that mean I should just move? Find another club? Hell no! I like my club. I would rather find new club leaders who do not demand as much of my hard earned "dues".
Quote from Gabfly1:
Taxing more and spending less during a robust economy, while taxing less and spending more during a weak economy, is the proper application of Keynesian economic theory. As you well know. Of course, when self-serving or unthinking ideologues only employ one side of the two-sided equation across the board, we can expect to find ourselves in quagmire.
Not all of us believe that the government can spend our money better than we ourselves can. A better approach than the government taking care of our poor little souls, would be to take some self-responsibility. Let me keep my own money. Let me save my own money. So when there is an economic downturn, I am prepared. I don't like being at the mercy of government policy.
Right. Let's broad brush all social programs and other pressing needs as "waste," and get our house in order on the backs of the vulnerable. All aboard!Quote from Kassz007:
Not a bad idea at all. Let's reduce spending and build up a surplus!
Spending cuts will get us much further ahead than tax increases. There is a lot of waste when government handles money. Cut out the wasteful spending, watch the surplus grow. But don't punish me by raising my taxes to pay for wasteful programs that do not benefit me.