What are the odds that PeePee is lying to you and will just cut taxes for the rich along with the services you like? 100%
What will come first: a balanced budget from any Canadian government or the Toronto Maple leafs winning the Stanley cup?
- Thread starter Harveyspector
- Start date
about the same odds as you posting something unbiased and intelligent
i.e. zero
cutting fed govt services I like ??
hmm.................................
.........................................
there will be cuts to govt spending that' s for sure
he will cut the evil carbon tax, which was sold as being as being govt revenue neutral
too bad for the liberals they can not whine about lost govt revenue without admitting they were lying before
the new capital gains inclusion rate will be rolled back as well
what bunch of idiots the liberals - they say they want to foster AI in Canada and then attack the source for start up capital- bloody morons
look, the shrinking of govt will be expensive
dialing that back will require a lot of severance packages (78,000 to get back to 2014 levels)
there wont be any room for tax cuts for anyone until they can balance a budget
this assumes avoiding a recession
the bill always comes due
The capital gains change is supposed to only effect about 40,000 people in Canada.
Not the middle class.
You really haven't had a new idea in a few decades, have you?
Canadians might elect Trudeau again if he has the audacity
to make the same promise he made in 2015.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justin Trudeau says vow to balance budget in 4 years is 'very' cast in stone
Dec 17, 2015
Even as the economic hurdles pile up, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau insists his pledge to balance the federal books in four years is "very" cast in stone.
On top of the balanced budget, Trudeau told The Canadian Press on Wednesday that the Liberal government will also live up to its other fiscal "anchor" to lower the debt-to-GDP ratio every year until the end of its mandate.
.....................................................................................................
Bullshit. More misinformation from you.
There would be more than 40,000 people in Canada who would have invested in properties that would be subjected to this cash grab. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/46-28-0001/2019001/article/00001-eng.htm
Add to that, properties gifted to family when someone passes which is fairly common.
What right does the government have stealing money from people who have invested for their future and retirement?
"I'm going to build a stronger Canada."
-Trudeau 2015
.
.
.
.
"I'm going to tax the shit out of Canada"
-Trudeau 2024
-Trudeau 2015
.
.
.
.
"I'm going to tax the shit out of Canada"
-Trudeau 2024
What you've just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Oh wait, no, I've read plenty from frankie and notaboy so... I guess it isn't the most
Look. I've tried to explain it to you, but again much like the above mentioned frankie you are so consumed with hate or just so into your cult that you can't graps the concept that a larger income allows one to support a higher debt.
Even in a stagnent economy, if the economy grows in nominal terms which it still can, I won't explain the concept because that is a complete waste of my time, look it up if you haven't shorted out your keyboard from your drool. The forecast is for a declining debt to GDP ratio and that is WITH deficits.
We have gone many years of deficits with a declining debt to GDP ratio.
Your claim of "you can not run deficits in perpetuity" is just not true. Even if there is a recession, as long as there is overall growth then you increase your capacity to make interest payments. It is only if interest rates start piling on that you can get in trouble, BUT that isn't your claim, you just said "you can not run deficits in perpetuity' this is categorically false. To suggest that a few bad years makes your claim true just shows either an utter ignorance of economic history or wishful thinking on your part.
Almost nothing you posted actually challenges anything I have said, it is obvious that either you are incapable of understanding it, or your 2 minutes of hate/political cultism is getting in the way.
Again your claim is
you can not run deficits in perpetuity
Well if you increase the economy by just 2 percent because of inflation and another percent because of population growth and your deficits only increase your debt by 1 percent... that proves that YOUR STATEMENT is wrong.
Now if you run the deficit in such a manner that increases your debt to GDP ration which has been happening in much of our history, yes you can get in trouble we had a moment of reckoning in the 1990s, but that is NOT YOUR FUCKING CLAIM. The problem isn't the deficits, it's deficits that are too large.
FFS, the more shit I read on terb the more monarchy just makes sense. Even a tool like Chuck if he was actually put into a position of absolute power would be able to figure it out.
WE had one in the 90's, there was no hyperinflation or any problem with inflation.
And there we have it from the other side of the ranks
Public debt as a percentage of GDP beyond a certain level for all levels of government do have a drag on the economy, this is both obvious from a theory perspective and there has been empirical work on the subject but non cultists.
If you are suggesting that you can pile on the debt forever, you are as much the fool as the person you are arguing with. The breaking point can vary depending on national circumstances but there are modest effects long before you get to that level.
Piling on the deficits, what could possibly go wrong.
Newfoundland Commission of Government - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Actually governments go bankrupt all the time, it's not a good thing, most of the time they don't pay their debts and well, we know what happens when banks that are too big to fail start failing.
Asl the Greeks how they would be doing without the EU bailing them out.
I'd suggest you get this book from interlibrary loan, but you won't
Last edited:
I was just posting about larue yelling the sky is falling endlessly.And there we have it from the other side of the ranks
Public debt as a percentage of GDP beyond a certain level for all levels of government do have a drag on the economy, this is both obvious from a theory perspective and there has been empirical work on the subject but non cultists.
If you are suggesting that you can pile on the debt forever, you are as much the fool as the person you are arguing with. The breaking point can vary depending on national circumstances but there are modest effects long before you get to that level.
Piling on the deficits, what could possibly go wrong.
Bankruptcy, loss of independence.Newfoundland Commission of Government - Wikipedia
Actually governments go bankrupt all the time, it's not a good thing, most of the time they don't pay their debts and well, we know what happens when banks that are too big to fail start failing.
Asl the Greeks how they would be doing without the EU bailing them out.
I'd suggest you get this book from interlibrary loan, but you won't
Sure, if the debt/gdp ratio and interest rates get high you're in trouble.
But its not debt that will finish endstate capitalism, that's just a symptom.
Considering you think you think you're not on the side of hate, there are some clear holes in your thinking.
stagnant means little or no growth
no
i think if you insult me like you did you had better be ready to explain yourself
hand waving does not cut it
wrong
name a country that has done this successfully
a business? forget it
if you report losses for more 7 years , they CRA audit you as the viability of the business is very questionable
too funny
your contradict yourself in the same sentence
pay attention now
what s the definition of a recession?
so there is not overall growth
you do understand what the words decline , reduced or a fall in GDP mean,.......... or do you?
???????
gee its a good thing that never ever happens
WTF ??
recessions happen
inflation happens
interest rates increasing happens
the funny thing about interest rates is they often move in long term trends
30 years of declining rates to next to zero and then a move up
what's next ? , who knows , certainly not the fools who decide they can run deficits in perpetuity
what's the reason for deficits? excessive govt spending
excessive govt money printing/spending drives inflation >>> higher interest rates
opps, there goes your theory
"you can not run deficits in perpetuity' is absolutely true
recessions happen
inflation happens
interest rates increasing happens
since you brought up economic history
name a country that has successfully run deficits in perpetuity ?
history is littered with examples of countries which have tried , only to crash and burn & screw their bond holders, devalue their currency (to screw the bond holders) or go begging to the IMF
again a loan requires both a lender and a borrower
lenders demand higher rates to lend to serial deficit generators
higher rates?
opps, there goes your theory
wrong again
name a country that perpetuity runs deficits where the debt only increases by 1 %.............in perpetuity
that is mathematically impossible unless the cost of borrowing is less than 1% .............in perpetuity
Canada will be lucky to each out 2 % growth even with 3+% population growth
is our debt growing @ 1% ?
no the debt is growing much much faster than that
your example is a fictious fairy tale
???
unless the cost to borrow money is free ,......in perpetuity, which it is not
constant deficits will always grow the debt
A is always growing that is the definition of perpetual deficits
R is positive ... in perpetuity
if you don't reduce A, which never happens if you are running perpetual deficits , the debt servicing cost increase , which in turn increases A
irrelevant drivel
why don't you run deficits in perpetuity ?
you know , just show up at the bank every year and take out a brand new annual loan of say $50,000 every year
tell the loan officer you have a ratio to show him
Attachments
Last edited:
