;
Issues Pages:
Regions:
Liberal government's first budget 22 March 2016
Tue, 2016-03-22 12:59
#1
Liberal government's first budget 22 March 2016
Tue, 2016-03-22 13:04
#2
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/karl-nerenberg/2016/03/story-tuesdays-bu...
We can be almost certain that there will be no change to the current low corporate tax rate.
Even the Conservatives complained that large and well-financed corporations were sitting on piles of dead cash and not investing it in jobs.
It will also be interesting to see what the budget says about employment insurance (EI). Will it lift any of the restrictions the Harper government introduced, which mean that only four in 10 unemployed Canadians have access to EI?
The Liberals also made major spending promises for First Nations education and other services to Indigenous people, the CBC and other cultural agencies, foreign aid, fiscal transfers to the provinces for health care, and, of course, infrastructure.
The budget is where the rubber hits the road on all of those commitments.
It will be important, on Tuesday, to read its fine print carefully.
There should be a lot more to talk about in the Trudeau government's first major piece of legislation than the deficit number.
Tue, 2016-03-22 13:36
#3
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is promising Tuesday’s budget will deliver “historic investments” to improve the lives of Canada’s indigenous people – funding that will amount to billions of dollars, The Globe and Mail has learned.
The money will be directed toward education, housing, child welfare and water quality, especially for First Nations living on reserves, officials say.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-promises-historic-i...
Tue, 2016-03-22 14:08
#4
http://behindthenumbers.ca/2016/03/22/five-things-to-watch-for-in-the-fe...
Five things to watch for in the federal budget
1) Size mattersFor my entire professional life I’ve watched the federal government shrink its contribution to the economy.
Where will regime change take us?
Today, at 14.2% of GDP, the federal government is the smallest it has been in relation to the Canadian in the last 60 years. It peaked at 24.9% in 1982-83, a combination of a large contraction of the Canadian economy and big outlays on jobless benefits.
2) It’s not just how big it is, it’s how you use it
Size matters. It is unlikely we will be able to face the challenges of slowing growth, crumbling infrastructure and population aging without a significantly larger role for government in the coming years. But it’s not just how big the federal government is that matters; it’s how the government chooses to use that money.
Where will the new budget take us in terms of our supports for individuals, for provinces and direct program spending?
3) The debt “burden”: Is what we owe or what we pay more relevant?
Both the previous Harper government and the federal Liberals have announced their “anchor” for future performance is reducing the federal debt to GDP ratio to 25%. To meet this goal by 2020 – a Liberal campaign promise, and as yet not ruled out by the Finance Minister as a promise to be kept – either revenues will have to increase or spending will have to be cut.
4) Debtnation: Will the feds keep passing the buck to the provinces and cities?
While the federal government has devoted much political currency to shrinking the federal debt, it has done so at the cost of bearing less of the load in the wake of the 2008-09 crisis than in any previous recession. With the federal government announcing higher immigration levels, it will need to also spend more to support provinces and municipalities on housing and transit issues to accommodate this growth, or debt at this level of the confederation will have to rise.
5) Counteracting slowth: Can it be done?
The major challenge for this budget is to lay out a plan that can spur enough growth so that temporary deficits don’t become structural ones.
It will not be an easy or swift transition, and it will probably require a larger role of government.
Tue, 2016-03-22 14:23
#5
Budget day live coverage on CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/budget-day-coverage-liveblog-livestream-...
Right now they're showing question period. The budget will be delivered at 4PM. It's also being shown on TV on CBC News Network.
Tue, 2016-03-22 14:42
#6
Official Budget 2016 site:
Tue, 2016-03-22 14:47
#7
CBC is off the air here.
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:05
#8
So, they're going to present the budget shortly. It's called "Growing the Middle Class".
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:22
#9
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:40
#10
The debt to gdp ratio is being kept the same, supposedly, but some doubt about that has been expressed. They've written it projecting $25/barrel oil prices. Some speculate this is low-balling the oil prices, which sets them up to exceed expectations later. Seems most of their spending promises are lived up to (though I'm guessing funding for child care spaces is one that likely is not addressed). Health care spending has not gone up significantly though, I believe, which could present a problem for the provinces. Rather than a 6% increase it seems the budget allows for a 3% increase.
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:46
#11
Arthur Cramer
The debt to gdp ratio is being kept the same, supposedly, but some doubt about that has been expressed. They've written it projecting $25/barrel oil prices. Some speculate this is low-balling the oil prices, which sets them up to exceed expectations later. Seems most of their spending promises are lived up to (though I'm guessing funding for child care spaces is one that likely is not addressed). Health care spending has not gone up significantly though, I believe, which could present a problem for the provinces. Rather than a 6% increase it seems the budget allows for a 3% increase.
Low balling Liberal budgets? Really? Who could've seen that coming. The Paul Martin is stong in this one!
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:48
#12
Cindy Blackstock is saying the Libs are short on some of their promises for First Nations, saying they may take them to the (I think) Human Rights Tribunal on some of these issues. That said, she said it's an improvement, but some disappointment on some of the shortcomings.
Tue, 2016-03-22 16:54
#13
Notley seems fine with the budget. Elizabeth May is happy with many of the spending promises, but she feels they've failed when it comes to the environment. She points out that subsidies to big oil is continuing.
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:00
#14
Ambrose of course blew a gasket. Also Coyne. Hebert was lukewarm about it.
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:02
#15
Arthur Cramer
Well, if they deliver and this really does end up aiming to actually help oridnary people and not Lib cronies, I say Bravo! Time will tell if a cheer is warranted though. People need hope and work. He promised. He'd better deliver. No one forced him to do anything. He promised he would.
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:03
#16
Arthur Cramer
Ambrose of course blew a gasket. Also Coyne. Hebert was lukewarm about it.
Of course Coyne and Hebert have issues with it. They're a bunch of asses. Who f*****g cares what they think, parasites.
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:11
#17
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:12
#18
I believe the Guaranteed income supplement to the OAP (or its Québec equivalent) has been raised, no? What actual amount does this come to with the bonification (for seniors living alone who have no other pension)?
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:22
#19
*
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:27
#20
HIghlights of the federal budget:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-budget-2016-highlights-1.3501803
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:29
#21
Arthur Cramer
Lagatta, 2.59 a day, 75 a month. Cheap Liberal bastards!I believe the Guaranteed income supplement to the OAP (or its Québec equivalent) has been raised, no? What actual amount does this come to with the bonification (for seniors living alone who have no other pension)?
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:30
#22
Arthur Cramer
Budget missed opportunity to help Canadians, http://www.ndp.ca/news/mulcair-budget-missed-opportunity-to-reduce-inequ...
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:33
#23
Arthur Cramer
From a Tom Parkin twitter tweet, Bad news, Toronto: Trudeau budget give measly $3.4B over 3 years for public transit -- for a whole country. UPX alone cost $500M. Over promise, under perform, and claim victory. Morneau continues Martin's dance!
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:35
#24
Arthur Cramer
More on twitter from Tom Parkin, This infrastructure plan give Ontario less than $1.5B over three years for transit. This is not what Toronto was promised ,
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:40
#25
Arthur Cramer
http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/no-change-to-stock-options-tax-despite-campaign-promise-1.2828136#_gus&_gucid=&_gup=twitter&_gsc=aNIfS1Q. Trudeau clearly LIED during the election.
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:43
#26
Arthur Cramer
From Pam Pamater on Twitter, 2M per year for mental health in First Nations is 3k per First Nation. Less than a dollar a person. That won't address suicide crisis
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:45
#27
Arthur Cramer
Budget 2016 falls short on Trudeau's First Nation education promise . http://aptn.ca/news/2016/03/22/budget-2016-falls-short-on-first-nation-e...
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:46
#28
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:49
#29
Arthur Cramer
"Progressive", Broadbent Intitute says, "Federal budget falls short on fair tax agenda ", http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca/federal_budget_falls_short_on_fair_tax_...
Tue, 2016-03-22 17:54
#30
Arthur Cramer
Federal Liberal budget failed First Nation children, families: Blackstock . http://aptn.ca/news/2016/03/22/federal-liberal-budget-failed-first-natio...
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:00
#31
Arthur Cramer
Tom Parkin again on Twitter, Upshot: CEOs get to keep stock option deductibility. Downtown Toronto transit riders get to keep waiting for a streetcar
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:04
#32
That's a disappointment about the Income supplement; I thought it was more.
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:06
#33
Arthur Cramer
That's a disappointment about the Income supplement; I thought it was more.
You reaally didn't expect the Libs to actually do something meaningful, did you? Why would you be dissapointed. This was entirely foreseeable. But now the Libs can say they helped Seniors and the MSM will report it that way.
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:08
#34
"Progressive", Broadbent Intitute says, "Federal budget falls short on fair tax agenda ", http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca/federal_budget_falls_short_on_fair_tax_...
Broken link above due to an extra space. Here's the link:
http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca/federal_budget_falls_short_on_fair_tax_...
OTTAWA—The 2016-17 federal budget is a missed opportunity to implement a fair tax agenda and build Canada’s shrunken fiscal capacity that is needed to fight inequality, the Broadbent Institute says.
And although the government committed to reviewing the tax system, keeping the corporate tax rate at 15% and a lack of serious action to close tax loopholes that particularly benefit the top 1% of Canadians, such as special treatment of stock options, means federal tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is lower than in the mid-1960s before the creation of much of the modern welfare state.
“That’s why failing to address Ottawa’s fiscal capacity problem is such a missed opportunity. Think of what we could build together. Strangling the ability of the federal government to deliver many important programmes is arguably Stephen Harper’s most significant achievement. Despite some steps forward in the budget, the Liberals have not reversed this sorry state of affairs.”
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:16
#35
I think the actual budget, along with other stuff, is here: http://www.budget.gc.ca/2016/home-accueil-en.html
Here's the entire thing (pdf): http://www.budget.gc.ca/2016/docs/plan/budget2016-en.pdf
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:23
#36
Arthur Cramer
Raachel Notley tweeted about half an hour ago that 65% of EI benefit enhancments will go to Alberata. EI changes didn't include anything to help sesonal workers, or address issues with administation and claim processing. In other words, Justin screws workers while we pay for his Nannies. What a jerk that guy is. Got a clue Justin, you clown.
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:25
#37
Arthur Cramer
From Rob Gillizeau on Twitter, This budget reads much more like an Ontario budget in its fiscal transparency than recent Flaherty/Oliver budgets
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:26
#38
Arthur Cramer
Boy you Libs are being quiet right now, No reaction? Waiting for LPC HQ to send you your talking points?
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:29
#39
It's called "Growing the Middle Class".
A few growing tips:
- While the middle class is fairly hardy, and typically easy to grow in Zones 4, 5 and 6, it doesn't do well in more northerly zones such as 3 and 2, and is nearly impossible to grow in Zone 1.
- Middle class requires very specific environmental factors, without they will fail to grow, despite their apparent fertility.
- Nearly all examples of the middle class are recent imports to Canada -- native middle classes have been all but extinct for over a century, despite well-meaning but ineffectual growing programs.
- Don't be fooled! Many other classes can superficially resemble middle class -- only careful inspection of roots, fruit, and climbing intention can provide definitive identification.
- The presence of upper classes can be beneficial when co-planted, as they train new shoots and stems to climb in the appropriate direction, and have been known to repel pests, however great care must be taken to remove lower classes with a sharp trowel or grub hoe, lest they crowd out the middle class by depleting resources or rendering the environment unsuitable for middle class.
- Many a grower has watched as their once-thriving patch of middle class suddenly withers and vanishes, only to reappear several yards away where conditions are more favourable.
- Regular and sustained attention, as well as watering with tax cuts and incentives, is the best way to ensure that your middle class will reward you with a new crop of middle class season after season!
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:31
#40
Tue, 2016-03-22 18:51
#41
Arthur Cramer
Justin clearly LIED! http://www.pressprogress.ca/liberals_pledge_to_spend_billions_less_on_so...
Tue, 2016-03-22 19:05
#42
'have some crumbs Canadians'
'have a couple of crumbs Aboriginals'
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:03
#43
Arthur Cramer
As I told someone today, this is just infruating. And on cue, the MSM and Huff Post are singing Le Dauphin's praises. And we're about to have the same switcheroo happen here in Manitoba, helped my Manitoba's own version of Christy Clark, Rhana Bokari. Srategic voting? Nah! ONLY if it helps Libs. ABC. As I have said over and over, it means VOTE LIBERAL! Voters are stupid!
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:08
#44
Arthur Cramer
And on queue, the Libs raid EI again. They love stealing from the Poor and giving to the rich!
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:17
#45
Arthur Cramer
From Erin Weir on Twitter, Erin Weir @Erin_Weir 4h4 hours ago#Budget2016 projects no increase in transfers to provinces relative to GDP (p. 240). So much for a new Health Accord! #cdnecon #NDP #cdnpoli
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:21
#46
Arthur Cramer
Libs took 6.9 Billion from EI fund and put it into General Revenues. Paul Martin, anyone?
Well Debater, Pondering, Cody, Terrytowel, you have been saying there is no difference between the NDP and the Libs. You ALL KNOW the NDP wouldn't have made these choices and you've all been silent on this thread. Come on, post. Defend all of this nonsense. Go ahead.
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:32
#47
Arthur, for some reason your link didn't work; however I found the story on the homepage.
Tue, 2016-03-22 20:38
#48
alan smithee
Tue, 2016-03-22 21:15
#49
http://behindthenumbers.ca/2016/03/22/what-regime-change-means-in-budget...
Armine Yalnizyan of the CCPA feels the budget is a recipe for a structural deficit. She feels that its intent is to reduce the federal contribution to the economy over time.
It appeals to those who worry about runaway federal spending by increasing, then lowering, the federal contribution to the economy, ending its first fiscal plan in the year 2020-21 with federal spending at one of the lowest rates in the past 65 years—15.1% of GDP, slightly higher than 2014-15’s all-time low level of 14.2%.
Without question there will be more people coming to the largest urban centres in the coming years. There is a growing urgency in the need to have a plan on how to house and move people. A national immigration plan without a national housing plan and national transit plan simply downloads the costs of nation-building onto the provinces and municipalities, levels of government for which the costs of borrowing are much higher.
This is a penny-wise and pound-foolish approach. The federal debt-to-GDP ratio may fall to 30.9%, the lowest level in almost 40 years, but Canadian taxpayers in provinces and cities across the land will be saddled with far higher costs.
One thing is for sure: there is no way we can tackle issues like population aging and climate change without a bigger federal role. That may be true of the true deficit burden we risk passing to our children–the infrastructure deficit, which defines our current and future quality of life, and capacity for growth.
Tue, 2016-03-22 21:46
#50
White Cat
http://behindthenumbers.ca/2016/03/22/five-things-to-watch-for-in-the-fe...
Five things to watch for in the federal budget
1) Size mattersFor my entire professional life I’ve watched the federal government shrink its contribution to the economy.
Where will regime change take us?
Today, at 14.2% of GDP, the federal government is the smallest it has been in relation to the Canadian in the last 60 years. It peaked at 24.9% in 1982-83, a combination of a large contraction of the Canadian economy and big outlays on jobless benefits.
Yeah, that's for sure. The federal government has been steadily downloading costs onto the provinces since the Chretien Liberals came to power -- bringing in spending cuts, transfer cuts, unemployment insurance cuts and corporate tax cuts Mulroney could only dream of.
Of course, things have drifted steadily rightwards over the intervening decades, with Junior being the most right-wing Neo-Liberal yet.
[IMG]http://i66.tinypic.com/2rz3ym8.jpg[/IMG]
![http://i66.tinypic.com/2rz3ym8.jpg[/IMG]](http://i66.tinypic.com/2rz3ym8.jpg[/IMG]){kind=link}
The above is from Kevin Milligan, one of Canada's many "centrist" market fundamentalist economists. (They all snigger at any label like "free market", "neoliberal", "neoclassical", etc. -- 'Oh those lefties like to use the word "neo" a lot! Ha ha ha!') He worked for Team Trudeau designing the election platform and elements of this budget.
Here he is claiming there is no fiscal imbalance using an accounting trick that differentiates between cash transfers and tax points.
[IMG]http://i65.tinypic.com/j7sp38.jpg[/IMG]
![http://i65.tinypic.com/j7sp38.jpg[/IMG]](http://i65.tinypic.com/j7sp38.jpg[/IMG]){kind=link}
Lying sack of shit.
These economists are not like politicians: they are politicians. Every word that comes out their mouths is a filthy lie. Everything they do is motivated by a financial agenda: i.e., some form of bribe taking. (Economists get paid twice what other social scientists get paid. That's because they're whores pretending to be social scientists. Just like journalists are back alley strawberries on their knees doing a lot more than praying they don't get their pink slips...)
Tue, 2016-03-22 22:09
#51
White Cat
BTW, I think this column is bullshit:
Trudeau's first budget is about direct investments not tax gimmicks
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/karl-nerenberg/2016/03/trudeaus-first-bu...
Notice that Trudeau didn't undo any of Harper's pre-2015 $50-billion-a-year in tax cuts. In fact, he increased the deficit with upper-middle-class tax cuts.
Trudeau plans to "splurge" $20-billion over 2 years on infrastructure. That's half of Harper's 2009-2010 $40-billion "Economic Action Plan."
Trudeau will increase infrastructure spending from $65-billion over 10 years by $60-billion, or $6-billion a year. Harper's corporate tax cuts are $15-billion a year of "dead money" down the memory hole each and every year. If he undid this nonsense, he would free up an additional $9-billion a year.
But instead, he has to borrow all $15-billion a year (to put into the offshore bank accounts of the rich,) plus another $15-billion a year on top.
Should he be praised for this?
I'm sure the Allied forces could be praised for only premeditatively mass murdering 500,000 civilians during WW2, instead of 20 million like Hitler. They could be commended for burning alive women and children instead of putting them in concentration camps to suffer long drawn-out deaths.
But the fact remains: a lesser evil does not translate into a good deed.