PDA

View Full Version : Justin Trudeau refuses to set date for balancing the budget



M1917 Enfield
06-27-2017, 09:17 PM
Who said Justine even wants to balance the budget and stop running deficits and putting Canadians deeper in debt?

http://globalnews.ca/news/3536189/justin-trudeau-budget-deficit-balance/


Justin Trudeau refuses to set date for balancing the budget

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will not tell Canadians when – or even if – he will bring Canada’s books back to the black.


Given several opportunities in a one-on-one interview, Trudeau chose to justify the Liberal government’s spending rather than say whether he has a plan to eliminate Canada’s growing deficit.

“The problem remains, this country needs growth after 10 years of sluggish growth under [former Prime Minister Stephen] Harper,” Trudeau said in an interview with The West Block’s Vassy Kapelos.

“We need to put money back in the pockets of the middle class and that’s exactly what we’ve been doing.”

Asked how investing in infrastructure, for example, precludes him from saying when the books will be balanced, Trudeau suggested the investments create a lot of moving parts but will, inevitably, grow the economy “in a significant way.”

“We know that that’s what it’s going to do. How long that’s going to take? What kind of trajectory that is? We’ve made strong projections around that, but that’s exactly what we’re trying to do better than, and that’s our focus.”

As opposition MPs often remind the prime minister, Trudeau had little trouble setting a timeline for spending and balancing during the 2015 election campaign.

The Liberals won a majority, leapfrogging the NDP and overtaking Harper’s Conservatives, on a platform vowing to invest billions in measures like infrastructure and child benefits as a means to re-energize Canadian growth.

Trudeau assured Canadians a Liberal government would run deficits of no more than $10 billion to finance the investments – and that they would return to balanced books by 2019-20.

Since taking office, however, it’s been a different story. The plan they were elected on was quickly abandoned, the Liberals citing a weaker-than-expected economy.

In its most recent budget, the Trudeau government projected a $28.5-billion deficit in 2017-18.

Though the policy- and spending-planning document projected slightly leaner deficits than previous forecasts, the government once again failed to outline a plan to return the books to balance.

“The fact is, Canada needs investment, particularly in infrastructure,” Trudeau said. “Now other governments and other political parties proposed to cure their way to balance. We know that in order for Canada to succeed, Canadians need to success… Those are the investments that are going to grow the economy. “


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbw1Bb32gQ0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7AE-C79xyk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLqEcgLpMqc

Waynetheman
06-27-2017, 09:25 PM
No date necessary it will balance itself.

JustBen
06-27-2017, 09:54 PM
What exactly is the middle class? Cause I'm not seeing the dollars in my pocket.

Mark-II
06-28-2017, 06:22 AM
Maybe stop taking money OUT OF our pockets, instead, and spend less on grandstanding.


"Ah - arrogance and stupidity in one package; how efficient of you"

RangeBob
06-28-2017, 08:57 AM
There are three schools of thought with this

1) The Payday Loan. When people have a shortfall between what they make and what they want to spend, it seems a lot of people don't follow Sheldon Cooper's "you could solve all your problems by obtaining more money (meaning a higher paying job and/or fewer expenses -- whatever it takes to have more in the bank. KgTqfHc1nLk )" but rather take out a loan. While this solves the problem temporarily, you end up paying interest on that as well, which just makes everything more expensive. The complaint with justin's not balancing the budget ever approach is that it looks like he's falling into this bit of stupidity hard, the way Wynne did, spending mostly on his/her favourite projects, spending on the necessities as well, without regard to the interest ever being something that has to be paid.

2) Foxer's False Economy. Foxer routinely suggested that money spent by the government on projects was a false economy, because a lot of it, such as replacing a Canada/USA bridge, only happens every few decades so there's a temporary boost that dries up at the whim of a government.

3) Wealthy Barber. When I looked at the last Ontario infrastructure spending study, they attributed that all the money being spent ended up in the GDP, and that in addition to getting 100% of it into the economy there was an additional benefit to local restaurants and businesses due to the work-in-progress itself, and an additional benefit to the work's completion. However, given that taxes are at most 50% of spending, putting taxes into infrastructure requires 200% efficiency to get back to 100% returned to the federal government coffers, not the mere 100% that went into the GDP (a bunch of that going to bureaucratic agencies in addition to the 50% tax difference). And worse I haven't seen any decent projections as to the benefit at the work's completion. The book "The Wealthy Barber" says that you should only take out a loan for projects that are guaranteed to make you more money than the Principle + Interest. But justin doesn't seem to be spending only on such projects (gifts to foreign countries, e.g. Canadian Red Cross the federal government will match 6.5 times whatever private citizens donate to Mali humanitarian response efforts), and even those that he is there's no estimate of profit as a result, nor reporting of 'profit' from past such and probably no decent way to get a cause-effect accounting because of so many other factors that affect a business's decision to engage in or increase at their production that are unrelated to anything a government infrastructure project might do, and certainly ignore the depressing effects of 'work-in-progress' reductions in infrastructure (lane closure, road closure, lost-sleep due to noise, depressed property values, late deliveries due to detours, etc) for the years it takes to actually do the work.