Vote Compass: Harper, Trudeau seen as winners in economy debate

[pikergolf]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vote...ians-1.3234556

[dmcbride]

The lefties are pulling there hair out in the comments section. LOL.

[JimPS]

No leader won or lost the debate.

Harper says Canada needs a Conservative government if we want a balanced budget.

1984 to 1992 Mulroney averaged a $33 billion deficit each year.
1993 to 1996 Chrétien steadily decreased the deficit.
1997 to 2003 Chrétien averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2004 to 2005 Martin averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2006 to 2007 Harper steadily decreased the surplus.
2008 to 2014 Harper has averaged a $24 billion deficit each year.

Over the last three decades, the Cons have demonstrated the worst record for balanced budgets.

If the economic debate was about balanced budgets, I guess Trudeau won the debate.

[Okotokian]

Well, I think Harper and Trudeau at least have a plan that is understandable. Harper will stay the course, keep taxes low and let the natural course of events right the economy. Trudeau will deficit spend to stimulate the economy. Both approaches have their supporters in the community of economists. No on really knows what Mulcair's plan is. He promises to not run deficits, but what exactly will he do economically?

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by JimPS

No leader won or lost the debate.

Harper says Canada needs a Conservative government if we want a balanced budget.

1984 to 1992 Mulroney averaged a $33 billion deficit each year.
1993 to 1996 Chrétien steadily decreased the deficit.
1997 to 2003 Chrétien averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2004 to 2005 Martin averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2006 to 2007 Harper steadily decreased the surplus.
2008 to 2014 Harper has averaged a $24 billion deficit each year.

Over the last three decades, the Cons have demonstrated the worst record for balanced budgets.

If the economic debate was about balanced budgets, I guess Trudeau won the debate.

Well of course your comparison is wrong on a couple points. First of all Mulroney represented the PC party, Harper the CPC. As you are well aware, they are not the same party.
Secondly, Harper's deficit was brought in while he was in a minority government and the opposition basically forced him to do it. Your confusion is about as funny as JT complaining about the deficit back then, and at the same time suggesting that a deficit is important to kick starting the economy.
Finally, Harper has steadily decreased the deficit over the past 4 years, culminating in a surplus last year (all of which you omitted for some reason).
Also FWIW Canada has the lowest debt to GDP ratio in the G7. Again something I am sure you know nothing about.

Thanks for playing

[220swifty]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Well of course your comparison is wrong on a couple points. First of all Mulroney represented the PC party, Harper the CPC. As you are well aware, they are not the same party.
Secondly, Harper's deficit was brought in while he was in a minority government and the opposition basically forced him to do it. Your confusion is about as funny as JT complaining about the deficit back then, and at the same time suggesting that a deficit is important to kick starting the economy.
Finally, Harper has steadily decreased the deficit over the past 4 years, culminating in a surplus last year (all of which you omitted for some reason).
Also FWIW Canada has the lowest debt to GDP ratio in the G7. Again something I am sure you know nothing about.

Thanks for playing

Also worth mentioning, is that Paul Martin has been regarded to be quite fiscally conservative.

[raab]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Well of course your comparison is wrong on a couple points. First of all Mulroney represented the PC party, Harper the CPC. As you are well aware, they are not the same party.
Secondly, Harper's deficit was brought in while he was in a minority government and the opposition basically forced him to do it. Your confusion is about as funny as JT complaining about the deficit back then, and at the same time suggesting that a deficit is important to kick starting the economy.
Finally, Harper has steadily decreased the deficit over the past 4 years, culminating in a surplus last year (all of which you omitted for some reason).
Also FWIW Canada has the lowest debt to GDP ratio in the G7. Again something I am sure you know nothing about.

Thanks for playing

If thats the case shouldn't we be able to spend a little to get workers off EI and back to work?

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by raab

If thats the case shouldn't we be able to spend a little to get workers off EI and back to work?

I am not sure what this means. The CPC is making things stable and friendly for businesses. As a result they are more inclined to invest and more people are employed.
Various provincial governments are actually working against this process by increasing energy costs, adding uncertainty to investments, and increasing taxes.
Should the federal government spend more money to offset the stupid provincial policies? Not in my opinion. In fact after Quebec just announced that they will purposely harm their economy to be green, I would suggest that the PM oblige them by ceasing transfer payments.

[mmmtracksoup]

Originally Posted by JimPS

No leader won or lost the debate.

Harper says Canada needs a Conservative government if we want a balanced budget.

1984 to 1992 Mulroney averaged a $33 billion deficit each year.
1993 to 1996 Chrétien steadily decreased the deficit.
1997 to 2003 Chrétien averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2004 to 2005 Martin averaged a $7 billion surplus each year.
2006 to 2007 Harper steadily decreased the surplus.
2008 to 2014 Harper has averaged a $24 billion deficit each year.

Over the last three decades, the Cons have demonstrated the worst record for balanced budgets.

If the economic debate was about balanced budgets, I guess Trudeau won the debate.

And you forget that Mulroney fell on his sword to bring in the GST (a good tax; if you gotta have taxes make them visible) which gave the Liberals the windfall to post those surpluses. The GST which Chretien promised to repeal if elected and then lied like a lieberal.

[propliner]

Originally Posted by mmmtracksoup

And you forget that Mulroney fell on his sword to bring in the GST (a good tax; if you gotta have taxes make them visible) which gave the Liberals the windfall to post those surpluses. The GST which Chretien promised to repeal if elected and then lied like a lieberal.

Exactly.

[Twisted Canuck]

I just love how our various members can spin info like politicians around here....not pointing any fingers mind you....

The information and further enlightenment on given information is what keeps me coming back. We have an intelligent bunch on this board. And some who seem to like Kool-Aid. Anyone who would think Angry Tom or Shiny Pony is going to tax and spend us in to prosperity is going to be in for a rude awakening. Reminds me of our Provincial election, now we have no budget but already taxes are going to be increased.

[Redfrog]

Mulcair got a spanking and he deserved it for lying.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Mulcair got a spanking and he deserved it for lying.

Mulcair deserved more than a spanking IMO.

He is disingenuous and a handshake ring stealing shyster.

You can't trust him to go camping with you because you will wake up with a sore ........

The guys just reeks of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by EZM

Mulcair deserved more than a spanking IMO.

He is disingenuous and a handshake ring stealing shyster.

You can't trust him to go camping with you because you will wake up with a sore ........

The guys just reeks of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Exactly!!!

[raab]

Originally Posted by JamesB

I am not sure what this means. The CPC is making things stable and friendly for businesses. As a result they are more inclined to invest and more people are employed.
Various provincial governments are actually working against this process by increasing energy costs, adding uncertainty to investments, and increasing taxes.
Should the federal government spend more money to offset the stupid provincial policies? Not in my opinion. In fact after Quebec just announced that they will purposely harm their economy to be green, I would suggest that the PM oblige them by ceasing transfer payments.

Should the Federal government not help out with infrastructure projects and mass transit though? Spending money on building those things would help Canadians from Coast to Coast get back to work. I've talked to people from every part of this country and maybe as Albertan's its hard to understand but there are places in Ontario and the Maritimes where your lucky to have a job and bringing in some good paying jobs would help the working class. I'd also expect to see a trickle down effect on top of that.

[raab]

Originally Posted by EZM

Mulcair deserved more than a spanking IMO.

He is disingenuous and a handshake ring stealing shyster.

You can't trust him to go camping with you because you will wake up with a sore ........

The guys just reeks of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

He's the scariest of the big 3. The guys a separatist and people want to vote for him to lead the country. Voting NDP is like a vote for the Bloc Quebecois.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by raab

Should the Federal government not help out with infrastructure projects and mass transit though? Spending money on building those things would help Canadians from Coast to Coast get back to work. I've talked to people from every part of this country and maybe as Albertan's its hard to understand but there are places in Ontario and the Maritimes where your lucky to have a job and bringing in some good paying jobs would help the working class. I'd also expect to see a trickle down effect on top of that.

Actually they do now. The real issue again is that the provinces like to blame the Feds when they don't have enough money for their big projects. Also spending on infrastructure is only short term and typically does not result in long term employment. So once the projects are done, what exactly is going to increase employment? It is always better to ensure business is welcome than to spend tax money rewarding your favorite government freindly construction companies. See Montreal for a case study in how this goes wrong.

[coreya3212]

Originally Posted by raab

He's the scariest of the big 3. The guys a separatist and people want to vote for him to lead the country. Voting NDP is like a vote for the Bloc Quebecois.

No offence raab, but how you can hit the nail on the head with pinpoint precision when it comes to tommy the commie, and then turn around and be so far from the mark when it comes to Trudeau is astonishing to me.

It's like lining up at the range and putting five inside a toonie at 500 yards and then on your next group you manage to shoot the guy at the bench next to you.

Again no offence, but wow.

Carry on.

[Sporty]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Well of course your comparison is wrong on a couple points. First of all Mulroney represented the PC party, Harper the CPC. As you are well aware, they are not the same party.
Secondly, Harper's deficit was brought in while he was in a minority government and the opposition basically forced him to do it. Your confusion is about as funny as JT complaining about the deficit back then, and at the same time suggesting that a deficit is important to kick starting the economy.
Finally, Harper has steadily decreased the deficit over the past 4 years, culminating in a surplus last year (all of which you omitted for some reason).
Also FWIW Canada has the lowest debt to GDP ratio in the G7. Again something I am sure you know nothing about.

Thanks for playing

Thank you!! So many people forget that Layton, while holding hands with separatists, threatened to topple the government over the budget at the time.

I've mentioned this to many people and they insist I'm wrong and it's infuriating.

[roper1]

Originally Posted by raab

Should the Federal government not help out with infrastructure projects and mass transit though? Spending money on building those things would help Canadians from Coast to Coast get back to work. I've talked to people from every part of this country and maybe as Albertan's its hard to understand but there are places in Ontario and the Maritimes where your lucky to have a job and bringing in some good paying jobs would help the working class. I'd also expect to see a trickle down effect on top of that.

Raab, every municipality in the free world wants better infrastructure. There is no such thing as good enough. If you were in Phoenix 20 years ago, you would have been mightily impressed with overpasses being built 20 miles out of town in anticipation of growth.

Today Phoenicians bitch & moan about infrastructure like everybody else. If it's my tax money building a bridge in Ontario, not really interested.

Somewhat short of jobs in lots of places, but refugees, immigrants, & TFW abound. Forgive my astonishment please......