Both social democratic and neoliberal market economists defend austerity, but the reasoning behind the policy is not strong enough to explain why the doctrinaire approach was adopted. So who benefits?
This budget is another in a series of unspectacular austerity budgets. Michal Rozworski looks at the election year budget as a continuity of slow-motion austerity past, present and future.
The House of Commons returns after a two-week break. There will be a (late) budget, questions arising out of the Duffy trial, sale of the Wheat Board and much more.
Exiting the financial crisis comes with a cost. For women in Quebec, the price tag has nearly reached $7 billion since 2008.
Canadian governments have been selling us the line about how they cannot afford the cost of public services anymore, and austerity measures are the only solution. Guess what? They're wrong.
When the G20 meetings in Brisbane, Australia broke up last weekend, the usual "time to manage the news" approach of the host government ran into some serious difficulties.
Here in Ontario, we have glimpsed the future, and it looks a lot like Austerity 2.0. That's what Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne's mandate letters set out for her cabinet last week.
Quebec's government has radically reduced its spending growth because it has decided that we need to tighten our belts collectively. Let's look into who will be most affected.
France is at that critical juncture where it seems poised to begin tearing down its social democratic infrastructure by embracing the neoliberal playbook of austerity.
Using more of their doublespeak, the Harper government calls the 2014 federal budget "The Road to Balance: Creating Jobs and Opportunities." Little could be further from the truth.