44 replies to this topic

[johnk]

IMO Harper moved the vote to the fall in the hope that two prime rate cuts would revive the economic stats.

[spanky123]

IMO Harper moved the vote to the fall in the hope that two prime rate cuts would revive the economic stats.

 

The date was fixed in 2007 to be the 3rd Monday in October.

[johnk]

The date was fixed in 2007 to be the 3rd Monday in October.

He could have called it in spring when things looked less bad. Nothing to stop govt from calling it earlier.

[spanky123]

He could have called it in spring when things looked less bad. Nothing to stop govt from calling it earlier.

 

I guess he could have but they would have had to change the law setting a fixed election date.

 

I am not picking sides on this, just stating that all parties misled voters in order to further their own agendas.

Edited by spanky123, 30 November 2015 - 04:18 PM.

[Szeven]

Is the tax hike and cut for the 2015 tax year or 2016?

[Bingo]

2016 Budget

 

Finance Minister Bill Morneau will deliver his first budget in the House of Commons on Tuesday, March 22 at 4 p.m. ET.

Here's how to follow CBC News coverage of the budget and take part in our online coverage at cbcnews.ca and cbc.ca/politics.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...erage-1.3501238

 

[jonny]

Will they raise the GST?

Will they touch the inclusion rate for capital gains?

[Wally]

Will they raise the GST?

Will they touch the inclusion rate for capital gains?

 

Probably won't touch the GST but will continue to claw back any benefit from investments. Question is how large will the deficit be.

[UDeMan]

First budget they'll go after the people more well off.  It looks good in the media but will not really do anything. The majority of taxes are paid by the middle class, not the rich.  I think the budget next year they'll raise the GST.

 

Usually all tax increases are early in the mandate.  When the next election is coming, they'll deal out all their promises.

[lanforod]

Certainly some significant changes. I think one that is intriguing here is the change from 33% Federal funding for infrastructure to 50%. BC has committed to staying at 33%, so municipalities are now down to 17% to come up with on their own.

 

That really helps Vancouver and Surrey out with their subway/skytrain/light rail dreams.

 

Victoria... hmm, I wonder if that could change our sewage picture.

[Wally]

Certainly some significant changes. I think one that is intriguing here is the change from 33% Federal funding for infrastructure to 50%. BC has committed to staying at 33%, so municipalities are now down to 17% to come up with on their own.

 

That really helps Vancouver and Surrey out with their subway/skytrain/light rail dreams.

 

Victoria... hmm, I wonder if that could change our sewage picture.

 

True but the amount for infrastructure has been cut from Trudeau's $10B a year promise to $11.9B over two years and $3.6B of that amount was already committed by Harper. Will have to wait and see exactly what is allocated to which projects.

[LJ]

^I thought it was already stated that BC would get something like $554 million, and not a dime was mentioned for Victoria.

[Mike K.]

Remember when just the other day politicians were high-fiving each other about their productive talks with the Liberals? Lol...

[Bingo]

Deficit.

 

New numbers released Friday show the federal government ran a deficit of $2.8 billion over the first four months of 2016-17 — dropping Ottawa's fiscal position $8 billion lower than it was over the same period a year ago.

By comparison, Ottawa had a $5.2-billion surplus during the same April-to-July stretch last year, according to the Finance Department's monthly fiscal monitor.

This year in July alone, the report said the government books showed a deficit of $1.8 billion — down from a $200-million surplus a year earlier. The July data included a $1.4-billion increase in program expenses, an $800-million decline in revenues and a $200-million decrease in public-debt charges.

Last year's Liberal election campaign platform promised annual deficits of no more than $10 billion over the next couple of years to allow the government to invest billions in infrastructure projects as a way to inject some life in the economy.

But the Liberals later blamed a worsening economy for a revised projection in the March budget of five straight annual deficits totalling more than $110 billion, beginning with a shortfall of $29.4 billion in 2016-17.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...nitor-1.3786388

 

 

[Wayne]

I remember last election, Harper would drop money in a Garbage can (to show what would happen if the Liberals got in) during some of his speeches.  Crystal clear now.

 

Liberals answer is to spend more;

http://news.national...o-more-stimulus

 

and hire a British advisor (at $200,000) to help find a way ahead.

http://www.theglobea...rticle32187629/

[spanky123]

So the Government raises taxes on the wealthy and revenues decline. Who would have seen that coming? Who would have predicted that people like Marko would get tired of paying more than 50% of their income to a Government who will then waste it, so they find perfectly legal ways of restructuring to lower taxes now that the Government has made it worth their time to do so?

[RFS]

The upside is all this wasteful spending will be a great political attack for maxime bernier in 2019

[LJ]

I'm not sure Max is going to be the choice, he wouldn't be my first pick.

[Mr Cook Street]

I'm not sure Max is going to be the choice, he wouldn't be my first pick.

If I was Conservative, I'd lean towards Maxime. Someone has to advocate for ending government monopolies like the Dairy and Poultry Board. 

[spanky123]

Hardly a surprise, but the Libs $10B deficit has ballooned to $31B this year and there is no fiscal plan to balance it before 2022.

 

http://www.theglobea...rticle32635371/