News Sections
Signs of recovery as Ottawa battles protectionism
CTV News Video
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(99)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Mon. Jun. 8 2009 7:55 PM ET
Ottawa is launching a two-front assault against a rising tide of protectionism which is threatening to take hold in towns and cities on both sides of the border.
In the U.S., Canadian trade commissioners have been ordered to personally lobby senators and congressmen to loosen restrictive Buy American provisions attached to Washington's massive stimulus plan.
International Trade Minister Stockwell Day said Monday that Ottawa will continue to press U.S. lawmakers to dial down the desire to buy local, which would shut out Canadian companies who are eager to take part in the historic U.S. recovery plan.
"Part of the ongoing strategy is to bring to the attention the negative effects of Buy America, and that's why you will see tomorrow on the Hill in Washington (our) trade commissioners from all over the United States fanning out," Day said Monday.
Meanwhile, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is warning Canadian municipalities to back away from retaliating against the U.S. with similar protectionist policies.
"We know what that means, that means trade wars and no one benefits from that in the long run, that's what led to the depression in the 1930s," Flaherty told CTV's Power Play on Monday.
Flaherty was responding to a weekend vote by municipal leaders barring contracts from U.S. firms that have stopped buying Canadian products under the U.S. Congress' policy.
By a vote of 189-175, politicians attending the Federation of Canadian Municipalities annual meeting in Whistler, B.C., voted Saturday to shut out U.S. bidders from city contracts.
Flaherty added that Ottawa is working hard to make ensure that governments at the state and municipal level in the U.S. stick to the Obama administration's official opposition to protectionism and to back away from new trade barriers.
Canada to lead the way in global recovery, says Flaherty
Flaherty also said there is reason to be cautiously optimistic that Canada's economy has stabilized after months of low confidence, shaky markets and tight credit.
Flaherty, in Montreal for the 15th annual International Economic Forum of the Americas, said Canada will lead the way when the global recovery occurs.
The finance minister said Canada is in the best shape of any G7 country even though the deficit is expected to pass $50 billion this fiscal year.
"I think we're stabilizing, that's the most important thing. And we're seeing some positive signs," he said, pointing to rising consumer confidence and an increase in housing starts last month.
Flaherty said Canada's economy could be on the road to recovery by the fall.
"There are some good signs that Canadians have a comfort level in our economy, they know we have an action plan, they know we're implementing it and they know, relatively speaking, we're well off in the world."
However, Flaherty said that job losses could continue in the short-term and that Canadians will continue to feel the pinch for the rest of the year.
Despite signs of recovery, Flaherty said that the job market is often slow to respond, but he noted that Ottawa's stimulus spending will help ease those losses.
"We need to have stimulus in the economy to employ Canadians."
Earlier Monday, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released a report indicating an "easing pace of deterioration in some major economies."
The report says the signals are the strongest in Canada, France, Italy and Britain.
OECD Secretary General Angel Gurria, also in Montreal for the conference, said Monday that world leaders must prepare for the permanent scars the current recession will leave behind.
"It (the economy) was in freefall up to this moment and now that has stopped," Gurria said.
He added that positive economic growth may come towards the end of 2009 or early 2010.
Gurria also said at present there is no choice but for governments to spend their way out of the recession.
"There has to be more debt on the books for awhile," Gurria said.
"As long as you know how you're going to go for a safe landing later."
With files from The Canadian Press
User Tools
Related Stories
Related Websites
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(99)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Comments are now closed for this story
Dan in Quebec
said
Jean-Marc
said
From those comments from General Gurria; it's no wonder people are worried about their futures. Does this mean more taxes to sustain socila programs in Canada and what about our pension plans...what is going to happen to that?
JM, Barrie
MCinNB
said
We are now nationalizing that debt with the governments spending their way out...the debt is still there, however.
I'm 36. My generation inherited the debt of my parents (Trudeau anyone) but that spending pales in comparison to what my kids will have to face. The debt costs coupled with the cost of keep the boomers with pensions and alive will be catastrophic to our economy.
It will be pain felt for a long time.
I apologize to my kids for what we have done. We've mortgaged their future to maintain our present.
Marc - Toronto
said
Sid in Ottawa
said
Prof. Pye Chartt
said
What excitement in Montreal. Plenty of champagne and delightful little finger foods. Pressurized craniums in expensive suits, milling around, fashioning their self-importance and contemplating who to chat and share a theory with.
These folks predicted that the world was going to implode. It didn't...and it's not. Now, they want everybody to swallow the notion that the future requires an enhanced degree of socialism (social welfare) to balance the economic "scarring" that is, supposedly, taking place.
Yeah. Whatever. Put it in a brochure and mail it out to me. Maybe I'll read it when I'm bored and looking to brush up on my left-wing propaganda.
Peter 1951
said
SAA in SK
said
Mandosa
said
right...with the money we don't have. Oh well, we'll just leave it as debt to the next generation. They'll never notice.
Is there even a speck of national conscience left in this country anymore?
ADM Saskatchewan
said
Sean - Chatham ON
said
Rick in SK
said
"There has to be more debt on the books for awhile," Gurria said."
I can't wait to use this line on my loans officer... too bad I don't have one.
If you want to get out of this mess it will require saving some of our earnings, despite what these Keynsian know nothings say.
If you are still working, do what you can to keep your job. Consume less wealth than you produce (save some of your income), invest your savings in income producing investments, improve your work related skills (to increase your productivity), improve your education in general, be flexible in your work.
The government can help by getting rid of smothering regulations, not giving out subsidies or bailouts, getting rid of income taxes (both for companies and individuals), improving property rights, selling off all crown corps, privatising everything else that presently is done by the government.
Nick in Gatineau
said
Hold the Budget over a 10,000 foot drop and Force the House and Senate to pass a Budget without telling how much the total will be and by adding clauses whose totals they aren't even sure of. And then end up doubling and maybe tripling the 'Approved' amount.
Pass it or else no-one gets EI. That was the punch line wasn't it ?
The OECD says "As long as you know how you're going to go for a safe landing later."
Hope Flaherty reads OECD information sheets 'cause I've yet to see or hear anything that remotely resembles a plan of action for debt reduction.
Edb
said
This is what should terrify the general population. The rest is just smoke and mirrors.
Here come the "bilderburgers"
Ron Paul, we need you now more then ever!
Joe Sanity
said
"I wonder how much of this deficit was forced onto us by the threat of Coalition party being formed"
Some of it is for sure, how much we don't know for certain. What we do know for certain is 16 Billion of it (The difference in Flaherty's $34 vs. $50 Billion deficit prediction) is due to Reform/Conservative mismanagement. A Majority wouldn’t cure that, it would just let them make 4 more years of big mistakes…I’m thinking this IS a real good time to have them in a minority government.
Layton in Moncton
said
I figure that with dwindling reserves of easy to access liquid oil, combined with fewer and fewer new discoveries and oil fields coming online, that world oil production has peaked. With the TRILLIONS our Governments have borrowed to prop up the economy, if it isn't spent on renewable energy sources, a complete over haul of our central banking model and a planned and fair DEglobalization of manufacturing, we can expect to see fuel and food scarcity. Whats worse will be what happens when the debt needs to be repaid and the US debt to GDP is 1:1, that should be in about 8 to 10 years at current trends. That is called insolvency. The turn of the century was "as good as it gets".
Maureen
said
Doug BC
said
island girl
said
To MCinNB: Quit blaming the boomers for the debt. My generation had trailers and bachelor apartments for their first homes and drove total wrecks of cars. We gradually improved our standards by hard work. And I have never had a mortgage but have owned four homes by trading up.
MJ
said
You say the cost to keep the baby boomers with pensions and alive will be catastrophic to the economy. Who do you think has paid into the pension plans for the last 40+ years. Aren't we entitled to some of that back!!!
It was greed everywhere that got us into this mess.
And I don't believe most of what is said because they are only guessing! They don't have a crystal ball and know all the answers.
Phineas from BC
said
Unless you want a recession to speed things like suicide, and utter despare for the masses, you will have to pay a big chunk of money to keep society afloat.
Good for them, cause it will all work out in the end.
Ps if you dont want to pay for the boomers, move to a country that has a proper population pyramid.
Joyce
said
Katt QC
said
Rufus
said
First of all, Canada has not been hit nearly as hard as many other countries. Secondly, trillions of dollars, that kept people around the world working, has vanished. Poof. Those people still have to eat, and with no jobs that's not going to be easy. Many are working at very reduced wages, many are working and haven't been paid for weeks or months. "Spending" is the only option (short of forcibly shrinking the population).
Spare me the ignorance of such right-wing polyp inspectors.
This too shall pass
said
This too shall pass.
Rick in NB
said
It would be nice to see some spending. According to the mayors at the Big City Mayor's Convention the Harper government hasn't released any money yet. This is the construction season and Flaherty has not given one penny of the promised stimulus money. How can Harper blame Liberal badgering for the deficit spending when the conservatives have done nothing to help Canadians in this recession.
Dig your head out of the sand and show us the money.
Gord. Robson, Nova Scotia
said
"WE MAY FIND IN THE FUTURE...."
The MOST IMPORTANT WORDS HERE are"MAY FIND".
NOBODY KNOWS THE FUTURE this is something that we all should have LEARNED.
CANADA IS NOT TO BLAME FOR WHAT HAPPENED! NOT even the LIBERALS or the CONSERVATIVES
!
Mr. GURRIO does not know the future! Yes the world will be different but to what extent NO POLITICIAN KNOWS!
ALL THE HEADS OF BANKS ARE TELLING US DIFFERENT things and so are all the so called
"EXPERTS" on TV!
WE SHOULD NOT BLAME THE CONSERVATIVES they just happened to be in power when this HIT. NO PARTY could have done any better!
Jay-TO
said
Concerned Canadian
said
They give advice to countries around the world concerning how to use market forces to improve economic conditions. It is usually right wing, not left wing arguments that utilize their data.
Research the advice they have given the New Zealand government concerning their economic recovery prospects, for example, and you'll see that they recommend increased privitization and cuts to social services. These are usually considered right, not left, economic arguments.
Nor can I see any evidence in this article that the OECD is calling for more "socialization." Unless, of course, you're arguing that any stimulus plan is by definition "socialism"?
But that's even more confusing. Here you are arguing that there is no global recession, that "the world is not going to implode".
I hope you're right, but didn't you argue last week that "the stimulus plan is not working" and that "there are no signs of an improvement in the global recession?"
But if there is no global recession, was Mr. Harper incorrect to pass the stimulus budget? Does this make him, like the OECD, a "socialist"?
And if there is a global recession, aren't you wrong to tell us there's no problem?
Wasn't there a global economic crisis? Haven't the stimulus plans by Mr. Harper and Mr. Obama helped us?
Please figure out what position you are taking, and get back to us. But choose one. You can't have it both ways.
bunny
said
BMIA
said
We are so bloated that most of our tax dollars are wasted. Our bureaucracy is inefficient and ineffective and even with the advent of computers we've become bogged down in bureaucracy meanderings and red tape (2-billion-dollar gun registry boondoggle is just one example of inefficiency and ineffectiveness and wanton over-spending and ignorant planning and scope).
Until we can fix bureaucratic wastefulness we will be increasingly taxed and at the same time become increasingly bogged down in debt.
Nick in Gatineau
said
The Conservatives refused to listen to the Coalition.
The Conservatives leader travelled to Europe where he attended meeting with the OECD. The OECD told its membership (which includes Canada) that spoending on Infrastructure, amassing deficits and debt was the way to go.
Upon his return from those meetings he was adamant that spending on Infrastructure, amassing deficits and debt was the way to go. All the while blaming Liberals for forcing the issue.
The Coalition was simply ahead of the game on what the OECD was going to say and do. So one can say that the Coalition knew what to do whereas the Conservatives were clueless until they were told what to do by the world body.
And the Conservatives say they listen to opposition parties.
That deaf ear cost us twice as much as it should have.
Then the Conservatives held Canadians hostage by adding things to the Budget and refusing to remove them but in gross disrespect forced it to pass due to EI clauses - forcing the Coalition to pass a seriously disfunctional budget.
JohnNada1776
said
No Magic Here
said
Bill in BC
said
socialism and libralism don't work, especially in tough times.
GP
said
Pye guy first, regulation is not socialism. History has repeatedly shown us that regulation in all sectors is required in order to mitigate a human beings baser instinct to pray on the weaker and to keep greed in check. It’s called a Social conscience not Socialism. Serious Pye man you have got to check your history out, suggest you start with the discussions the founding fathers had when the Declaration of Independence was written. There are some truly profound and thoughtful examinations of the free market system. Ultimately they determined that without regulation the strong would pray on the weak and greed would eventually consume and overwhelm everything good/right with a free market system. Sounds pretty accurate to me. We want to have regulation that is sufficient to not hinder innovation and risk taking while also being sustainable.
Rick in SK, there is no evidence that suggests privatizing crown corporations reduces costs or improves services to the end users. In fact inserting a layer of profit in public services has resulted in two things, a higher rate of cost increases that eventually becomes much greater than what the public sector could provide, and two, reduced services. The considerations used to determine if outsourcing is viable are very subjective, however to date, there have been very few (if any) instances where any cost savings or improved services have been realized. The only perceived advantage is the governments get to take those cost off their books and pass them on to the end user directly then claim no responsibility for the result...while insiders get rich.
Jay-TO
said
VIC
said
Canadians are all innocents would never understand the Tories economy solution. Jobless and Hopeless!
Back to the 80s, Katt, when Mulroney ruled.
said
Hava in Manitoba
said
Roger T
said
Red X
said
cam
said
I guess we should expect with the Americanization of the country the dumbing down of many Canadians would ensue.Just did not think it would happen so quickly.
Get out the dictionary folks,it is embarrassing!
Bill in BC
said
you have forgotten what country you are in. This is Canada.
Or are you Michael Ignatief? Here on vacation?
This is not the US, nor the socialist paradise the NDP dream of. The social concience you talk of, is not the matter under discussion. Social concience isn't a nany-welfare state; it is however a society that treats its people fairly and responsibly, where the people act responsibly in return.
your point on crown corporations; you fail to recognise several things. Crown Corps exist to provide a service no private company exists to provide, or to provide a service at a price that the private companies cannot meet -when it is in the public interest to do so. (See Crown Arsenals in WW2). The trudeau regime (spit!) created many crown corps to take over public services such as the post office. Big mistake and we are paying for it ever since.
It's not the "pye guy" that needs a lesson in Canadian History and politics, but yourself. I may not always agree with him, but at least he gets his facts (and country) right.
Rick in SK
said
I guess you have not heard of the Potash Corp of SK or Cameco?
If the "public sector" (government employees) are so darn efficient, lets nationalize the agricultural/food industry in Canada, it would be great right? Soon our taxes would be at near %100 of our income and we would be waiting in line for kraft dinner.
No government lackey can make better choices for spending my money than I can.
Prof. Pye Chartt
said
That, when the economic dust settles, it will be proven that the stimulus packages fearfully employed by nervous politicians (which, largely, have yet to be plugged into municipal, state/provincial, and federal sockets) will be shown to have only minor and, arguably, inconsequential impact on our collective recovery, and that natural positive economic forces will have shouldered much of the rebound.
Well, if this turns out to be the case, at least we'll have all this glorious debt to look fondly upon for years to come.
Jim in Ontario
said
Retired in Burlington
said
Pedro
said
Spence in Ontraio
said
In response to some of the other earlier posts, do you guys remember what Harper's budget update before Christmas looked like? The first thing was he denied we were in a recession, second he wanted to remove public funding for the political parties which would have financially crippled the other parties (this could have had the effect of a possible conservative party quasi dictatorship because at the time the other parties couldn't campaign very easily without that money) and third he wanted to take away the right for public servants to strike for a few years. I think there were also further arts funding cuts, but I might be wrong on that one. All in all a pretty stupid move that more or less forced the opposition parties together since it would have hurt them financially and gone against what they stand for politically.
Another issue is the idea of removing social program or regulation of markets. I have no reason to trust a completely free market. Too much deregulation was what killed the US economy besides the wars. Cutting social programs is not necessarily a good idea. Many social programs do a lot of good for people and are a measure of how well a country actually cares for its people.
simon
said
Independently Minded
said
We didn't see "real" growth for 5 years (the onset was in 1990). The spending was largely focused on EI payments, there was no need for massive bailouts and stimulus spending like we are seeing now.
The principle difference was that the banks and oil companies still paid their fair share as well as the wealthiest 1% and yet they STILL were profitable and became more wealthy. Funny how that worked.
This is the "Great Recession" folks, uncharted waters and if we were to follow ultra-right wing ideology, Canada would be come a banana republic with a class system of the landlords and the peasants as the middle class would disappear and most major business would go bankrupt.
You know, the breeding ground for the economically bankrupt Communist ideology. Which transfers the power from one class to another class with the same political oligarchical structure...
THAT would be SO MUCH BETTER!! (Smell that? That's sarcasm!)
I am not so much concerned about the spending as I am about the lack of disclosure to the "boss" by this government.
Canadians are prepared to bite the bullet with deficits "when we know where the money is going".
So far I am not confident we are seeing that transparency.
Now municipalities are asking for extensions on stimulus money, that was supposed to be out he door within 120 days, because the projects have started and there is no federal money!
My concern is that this government is willing to keep Canadians out of work, so that they can take unspent stimulus money and put it back in the bank to make it seem as though they have paid down the deficit, when in fact they simply didn't spend it as they told us they would.
Mike in Richmond Hill
said
Red X
said
I believe Canadian can see that Harper & Flaherty are pulling a fast one(see polls)
Keith Fox
said
Saskatechewan will have the
largest population and economic growth in the next
decade since both provinces
joined Confederation. Both
provinces are blessed with
natural resources that are
going to be in high demand
throughout North America and
are starting to be developed
right now. Both provinces
lead Canada right now with
the lowest unemployment. It
is good for Canada to see
these provinces doing well
and if you are unemployed
come to our provinces as we
are looking for workers and
will be for a long time. You
might even become Roughrider
or Blue Bomber fans. To other
parts of North America times
will get better once the
stimulus packages are put
into action. There is no
reason why NAFTA can not work
to make North America one of
the best economies in the
world.We just have to work
together.
Concerned Canadian
said
You could be right (no pun intended). We could find ourselves gradually pulling out of this recession over time. The OECD is essentiually saying the same thing, only pointing out that there may be some consequences. So you are, in effect, agreeing with them.
As for what it is that will bring us out of this- we'll never know. It is impossible, I think, to separate the traditional market forces from the impact of the stimulus plan, because the point of the stimulus plan is to help the market recover, isn't it? But as the market recovers, it will boost the rest of the economy, and the cycle will kick start again.
So as the stimulus kicks in and the market recovers, which is the cause and which is the effect?
The consequence of this, of course, is that right wing ideologues will always be able to maintain the illusion that there never was a recession caused by deregulation, and the stimulus plan never helped get us out.
And so they are able to remain cocooned from reality yet again.
Reece
said
GP
said
We use the Declaration of Independence as the example because no such discussions every happened here in Canada (we inherited it from the US), and because the US invented the Free Market System. It is a relevant and applicable example and therefore important to understand in the context of this discussion. It has nothing to do with what nationality you are...we need to think past the simple differences here.
Matt
said
"Who do you think has paid into the pension plans for the last 40+ years. "
Nobody, that's who.
Sure you've paid _some_ money in.
But when you look at the amount you paid in, the incredible debt you made and the amount of money required to pay the benefits you've promised yourself, it just doesn't add up.
If you wanted big pensions, you should have funded them, you didn't.
Now I'm not heartless, I'm not going to insist that you starve because you didn't plan for your future. But don't go expecting us to pay off your debt, give you pension incomes higher than our working incomes, and not leave an even bigger mess for your grandchildren.
Sheeple counting
said
So, the economy is recovering, we've "granted" the archaic auto industry a huge amount of taxpayer money and we will bail out Air Canada and all will be well?
I don't think so. Especially when we know that plans such as CPP are not sustainable but we allow the CEO to take millions in bonus!
Amazing
Robert in Calgary
said
Robert in Calgary
said
Alex (Toronto)
said
In November Flaherty talked about a surplus, in March about a $34 billion deficit, and now it's $50 billion. We need less misplaced optimism, more humility, less propaganda, and more actual work to spend the money to create the jobs needed to restart the engine of the economy. The popularity of the Liberals in Ontario is largely a legacy of Flaherty's mismanagement of the provincial economy, which the rest of Canada is also learning about now.
Randyrocker
said
Ken - Calgary
said
Time for you to find another job, Jim.
Marco, Newmarket
said
JB in Calgary
said
This article talks about lack of employment, investment and research and development. If that is the case the only way to increase these is to get the debt gone. Then there would be money for investment in research and the development of whats found would increase employment.
I wish the entire stimulus package went to revamping our health care system. Get all medical files digital and stop people from over using the system. People going to 5 different doctors is rediculous and a major strain on the system. We are pumping billions into our health care and it's not working.
The billions saved by correcting the health care system might be enough to pay off the debt within 10 years.
Shelley
said
We are in infrastructure & so far the only projects out there are from last years money & there is 16 bidders for every project. That big announcement aboout infrastructure money is a big joke. It is too late for this season. We are already in June. With all the MNR, Coast guard & Dept of Oceans & fisheries regs. & the fact that all instream work for bridges is narrowed into July-Sept it is not possible for the projects to be designed & called.
MARG MM
said
Personally, a Government that is "cautiously optimistic" works for me. Better than one that goes around saying "the sky is falling" without any idea of how to fix it.
Today the news is that housing starts are up, the world bank says Canada is leading the way to recovery. Sounds like good news to me.
I guess the Liberals are just waiting to get into power as the recession ends, so they can take credit, and then start lining their pockets, and those of their friends.
Dunny from Manotick
said
Sure the world is going through a big shakup right now and establishments are being forced to re-examine how they are doing business like never before. With good people, some luck and hard work Canada will come out of this ahead of the game in the near future. Canada and Canadians will prevail.
OK, now let's tax the hell out of the banks profits.
Paul in Brantford
said
The low end of the middle class will pay the freight !!!!!!
This mess was created from banker greed in the United States sub prime Mortgage.
Bill in BC
said
Again, "like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target".
The free market system originated in 16th century England, not the US.
The declaration of independance-while an interesting document-is only applicable to the US as the conditions that spawned it existed NOWHERE ELSE. In context, again you miss it, the declaration is a look at conditions in the (1174-1780) United States, and cannot be applied elsewhere-including 21st century America. You claim we inherited the DOI from the US, wrong. Our constitution is entirely different document, with a different evolution. If you doubt me, remember that Canadians are not the descendants of traitors and rebels. We retain our parliamentary structures and the monarchy for good reasons-the most important beign that the WORK FOR US. Do not make the mistake common in the press of trying to apply US structures to Canada, they don't fit.
The market downturn was triggered (not entirely caused by-there is a difference) by the removal of commonsense regulatory measures from the US financial markets and structures. We retained ours, and therefor suffered by comparison only collateral damage. The US is in FAR WORSE shape than we are.
The relevancy of the finalcial markets is obvious. However, don't treat it as the bible/koran/torah/.... when looking at this economic spike. There remains more than sufficient cause for optimism as our economic begins to recover.
Here endith the lesson.
L.A.
said
Won't get CONNED again!
said
Prof. Pye Chartt
said
Thanks for the feedback...both times. (I know you cannot resist.)
I disagree with you, in terms of whether we'll ever know the de facto impact of these stimulus packages. As a business person with an academic background in economics, the idea that this simple answer will always remain illusive strikes me as a tad silly. (Rather, respectfully, I believe your position is merely typical of wishful left-wing ideological thinking.)
Frankly, given that much/most of this money hasn't hit the "street" yet (witness, most recently, CTV's weekend article about Canadian municipal mayors crying for their cash) shear common sense dictates that natural economic forces are behind much of the recovery thus far. You can't argue against that.
As for the OECD, I'm not sure I understand where you get the idea that we essentially agree. Fundamentally, I disagree with their assertion that a recovery from this economic downturn, as significant as it is/was, requires "unlimited" government spending. I believe this is a crock cooked by misguided left-wingers (and politically frightened right-wingers).
Furthermore, I disagree with the notion that, federally, we have to keep expenditures on autopilot for years to come. (This hollow call is typical of the OECD.)
Lastly, in fairness, if you've truly been paying attention, and not just thumbing through the left-wing playbook to perfect a skill of weaving partial truths and partisan biases into a neat little argumentative basket of liberal talking points, you'd know that I've always been consistent in my posts.
Our elected brain-trust in North America (comprised of liberals and conservatives) has desperately tried to sell us on the idea that our economies are/were on the edge of utter collapse. I've always believed this was fear-inducing nonsense. Similarly, I believe that the prescriptive cure of massive "rescue" spending is largely bogus.
Cheers.
Concerned Canadian
said
I don't follow your logic here- I'm merely pointing out that disentangling the effect of the stimulus from the natural recovery of the market will be extremely difficult. This has nothing to do with "left-wing wishful thinking"- after all, if it could be shown that the stimulus package was what caused the recovery, that would support what Mr. Harper has done, wouldn't it?
But I think that it is more likely than not that we'll never be able to pin a recovery on any particular economic event. That's all I'm doing here- making a supposition, not making the premise of an argument. I honestly don't know how we'd do it- do you?
Perhaps someone will be able to point to a key economic event, but that's unlikely. But on what are you basing the claim that the recovery will be due to the market and not the stimulus package? There has been a certain amount of recovery, but it's fighting the impact of what could have been a complete collapse. Even the economists under George Bush opted for a stimulus package.
As for the OECD, I was mostly just teasing you. I couldn't see where they were calling for "socialism", but for a long drawn out impact of this recession. They're just making a prediction about the shape the recovery will take. Nor did they call for "unlimited spending" but for some spending until the recovery is well underway:
"Guerria said at present there was no choice but for governments to spend their way out of the recession." "There has to be more debt on the books for a while."
"For a while" is not forever.
Charlie
said
Like if your guy was the Finance Minister according to your comments he would have run around yelling that the sky is falling, the world is coming to an end and sell everything for there is no confidence!
Of course a responsible minister has to be positive - alot rides on the direction of the government. But then the only thing the Liberals seem worried about is how fast they can get EI.
Thank goodness we have adults running this country vs your lot.
Independently Minded
said
"Would anybody agree with some sort of tax that was solely made to pay off the debt?"
We already have...
Mulroney brought it in back in 1990 and called it the GST!
Now Mr.Harper as reduced the revenue generated from it by 200 Billion a year, to buy our votes in the last election. Couple that with a loss of tax revenue from the Banks, Big Oil and the wealthy - that's a significant loss of money to pay down debt or cover deficits.
Apparently though, Mr.Flaherty expects them to be able to get out of deficit in 4 years based solely on the strength of an economic recovery???
How do you figure sir? If you reduce your revenue, how exactly do you expect to recover the loss? New business? From where???
Most economists consider that very very optimistic thinking.
I am so sick of this government or any for that matter attempting to buy my vote with "my own money"!!
Let's see some transparency and fiscal responsibility in this government for a change and less vote pandering.
If they were doing such a great job the votes would come automatically, don't you think?
Flaherty can't be believed.
said
Phatphing
said
The debate should be about choosing individual freedom and free markets over state coercion and socialism.
Canadians need to start reading Fredric Bastiat, Henry Hazlit and Fredrich Hayek to understand how far down the road to Serfdom they've come.
Bring the Ron Paul Revolution north to this land of willing serfs.
Ted
said
Patriot
said
Nick in Gatineau
said
God knows our politicians have already taken on the cartoon persona.
Prof. Pye Chartt
said
Thanks for the follow-up.
For the record, note that I'm not interested in what particular politicians (of whatever ideological stripe) or economists think or say most of the time. Rather, I'm more interested in the truth...as determined by intelligence, common sense, and/or apparent facts.
It's clear that you will always cling to your ingrained political and ideological conviction that the government is our best, most loving, and most knowing friend, and that were it not for the grand and unquestionable social welfare services it provides by the truckload, we'd all be living like cavepeople...calling ourselves right-wing Conservatives or Republicans.
Yeah. I get it.
Forgive me if I'm more of an "independent" thinker.
Cheers, my friend.
A big hearty GUFFAW!
said
I wasn't aware that we had travelled in time back to 1917 Russia and the Bolshevik revolution....Get real. None of that socialist wet dream applies to Canada.
Nick in Gatineau
said
Does this come from Stephen Harper's copy of Emanuel Moulnier's catalog of anti-democratic personalism ? Sorry, democracy is not just 'a bump in the road...'
Feodal laws translate to slavery no matter how you look at it. A return to serfdom is a return to slavery.
I don't bow to kings or queens. Sorry. Birthright doesn't give you the right to believe you are better. I really don't care about birthright, I care about a person's mind, a person's capabilities. The moment you begin to believe that a person has the right simply because their great, great, great grandfather slaughtered 10,000 women and children, you have lost touch with the realities of life in today's day and age.
There is no way in hell that I will bow to King Harper.
Red X
said
Also the other G7 countries are larger populations and economies so statistically we're in better shape though dependant on the decisions made in the U$(see GM)
Concerned Canadian
said
Just for the record...
I certainly don't believe in big government. I taught the novel 1984 for years as a means of addressing the issue of government control of our lives. But democratic socialism isn't communism. By the way, there's an excellent article in today's Vancouver Sun dealaing with the role that mixed economies have played historically. You might be interested in seeing how these ideas have played out in different cultures over the last 2000 years or so.
Other than that, your response had nothing to do with the points I made, and the questions I asked, but is simply an ad hominem attempt to beg the question.
That speaks volumes.
Adam, Kingston
said
WestofTheRockies
said
We didn't agree to anything.
The GST was not introduced to soley to pay off the debt. Not even close. It was introduced to replaced the existing Federal Tax structure and was designed to introduce fairness in collection of Federal Tax while reducing administration costs(both to governmment & business).
Reduced income from GST by 200 Billion/year? The total budget is only 236 Billion. We're getting by on 36 Billion?
The Conservatives are bribing us? How's that? I suppose you would be first in line to give up some government service(s) so the government would a balanced budget.
You can't have your cake & eat it too.
Check your facts before you pontificate.
James B.
said
The Canadian Government should ban weak sentences, and ban weak judgements. The Canadian Government should create a law that sends many people to jail. The judges in Canada unfortunately give weak sentences. Judges in Canada are useless. The Canadian Government should start by protecting us instead of encouraging criminal behaviour in this country.
Jim Flaherty is right in some areas, but I do believe the United States can do things to protect their citizens. They want to have a good economy.
KRB
said
Flaherty, stop borrowing money for your cronies.
said
Remarkable
said
Layton, Ignatieff and what's his name all wanted the Feds to spend us into oblivion, to take us out of recession.
Now, they are whining that we are running a deficit. Geez I hate politicians and they wonder why Canadians don't like them.
They are there forone thing and that is entitlement to free food and living off of the taxpayers dollar with huge expense accounts.
Prof. Pye Chartt
said
Thanks for the continued follow-up. (You're getting even speedier with your responses. I consider that a sign of enthusiasm for debate...or, an indication of frustration and annoyance with yours truly.)
Anyway, with all due respect, I don't recall you asking anything concerning my stated positions or opinions that weren't politically rhetorical or responsively benign. Sorry. I usually endeavor to answer genuine questions.
As a matter of fact, on this very point, I've noted that while artfully implying that the stimulus packages are, indeed, having a legitimate impact upon our economies, and can be attributed to the recovery that is gaining both momentum and press, you are fond of refusing to acknowledge that most of the stimulus money has yet to hit ground zero and, therefore, cannot be duly credited thus far.
How do you reconcile this fact with your politically camouflaged position (or vice versa)? Just curious.
P.S. This marks but one question I have posited to you in our exchanges that you've talked around with eloquent verbosity. (Be mindful of pointing a finger.)
This explains where Flaherty gets his orders.
said
The "Request for Services Contract" was drawn up 18 days after Ari Fleischer, former spokesman for George W. Bush, began assisting the Prime Minister's Office in mid-March.
observer Natty, ON
said
WestofTheRockies
said
So other than the G.M. & Chrysler deal who are the "corporate buddies" who exactly are you refering to.
You are suggesting the government let them fail?
WestofTheRockies
said
"The "Request for Services Contract" was drawn up 18 days after Ari Fleischer, former spokesman for George W. Bush, began assisting the Prime Minister's Office in mid-March."
So what's your point? Do you have a written contract with your employer or is it verbal as most are?
If your employer asked you to sign a "Request for Services Contract" today would that be an issue?
At least this Prime Minister is making an effort to communicate about Canada with our largest trading partner, instead of hiding in Ottawa.