Author Topic: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit. (Read 2761 times)

JMT · « **Reply #210 on:** January 05, 2018, 10:20:41 am »

All of this economic growth is really starting to get annoying.

Queefer Sutherland · « **Reply #211 on:** January 05, 2018, 05:15:29 pm »

America's S&P 500 and Dow Jones continue to hit all-time record highs in a very long bull market. In 2008 the US markets hit the **** & so did Canada's. Trudeau gov has had a pretty modest effect at best. But credit for not screwing it up.

What I am glad to see is cooling real estate markets back to sanity.

Queefer Sutherland · « **Reply #212 on:** January 31, 2018, 07:33:11 pm »

JMT, if you give credit to Trudeau for the Canadian economic growth, that means you would give Trump the same credit for the US record economic growth (also based on defecit spending) since he took office, right?

msj · « **Reply #213 on:** January 31, 2018, 11:31:27 pm »

And yet the US is now expected to the first sustained increase to its net debt since the GFC (2007-2009) despite the good times: https://www.wsj.com/articles/treasury-plans-to-increase-size-of-debt-auctions-1517408688

Check out Kansas State to see what happens when Republicans get in charge and start implementing the voodoo economics.

The Republicans are going to squander the good times - just watch them.

JMT · « **Reply #214 on:** February 01, 2018, 09:36:09 am »

Quote from: Moonlight Graham on January 31, 2018, 07:33:11 pm

JMT, if you give credit to Trudeau for the Canadian economic growth, that means you would give Trump the same credit for the US record economic growth (also based on defecit spending) since he took office, right?

I definitely give him some credit, though, he's been there for less time.

msj · « **Reply #215 on:** February 01, 2018, 09:39:56 am »

Reading David Rosenberg this morning who says (to parapharse): what country would not be growing at $1 trillion in additonal debt when the unemployment rate is near 4%? In fact, the treasurery is looking at $441 billion of additional debt in this quarter alone.

I wonder, if Trudeau came out with a deficit target of, say, $90 billion, how many would support that?

$20 billion is a rounding error and can be sustained. 90 would definitely be a concern at this point in the economic cycle.

There is nuance here for those who want to see it.

I also wonder where are the US deficit hawks, what the heck is the US “spending” their debt on, and when will the US start to see real inflation?

msj · « **Reply #216 on:** February 08, 2018, 10:00:20 pm »

According to economist Kevin Milligan the US is now projecting a defict of 5.6% of GDP for 2019.

This would imply a deficit of $122 billion if Canada were to follow the Republican’s lead.

That is 6 times higher than our current deficit.

Again, why is the US running deficits this high?

Again, whatTF are deficit hawks in Canada complaining about?

Squidward von Squidderson · « **Reply #217 on:** February 08, 2018, 10:18:43 pm »

Quote from: msj on February 08, 2018, 10:00:20 pm

Again, whatTF are deficit hawks in Canada complaining about?

Cuz Trudeau was a school teacher.

SirJohn · « **Reply #218 on:** February 11, 2018, 11:19:41 am »

Quote from: msj on February 08, 2018, 10:00:20 pm

According to economist Kevin Milligan the US is now projecting a defict of 5.6% of GDP for 2019.

This would imply a deficit of $122 billion if Canada were to follow the Republican’s lead.

That is 6 times higher than our current deficit.

Again, why is the US running deficits this high?

Again, whatTF are deficit hawks in Canada complaining about?

So you're saying because the US is bad we should ignore what happens in Canada?

kimmy · « **Reply #219 on:** February 11, 2018, 12:44:13 pm »

That seems to be the argument, yes.

But can we take a moment to consider how laughably bad the US figure is? That's hilarious! It's astounding. It's stunning. For the past 8 years these idiots have been crying "Obama is spending muh grandchildren's future

" and so on... and now that they're in charge their fiscal ineptitude makes Obama look like Ebenezer Scrooge by comparison. Holy ****, what a bunch of clowns.

-k

JMT · « **Reply #220 on:** February 11, 2018, 03:53:58 pm »

Quote from: SirJohn on February 11, 2018, 11:19:41 am

So you're saying because the US is bad we should ignore what happens in Canada?

No - the point is that the Canadian totals are fiscally sound. The US totals aren’t even close.

SirJohn · « **Reply #221 on:** February 11, 2018, 07:14:03 pm »

Quote from: JMT on February 11, 2018, 03:53:58 pm

No - the point is that the Canadian totals are fiscally sound. The US totals aren’t even close.

And Canadian totals are heading in the same direction, which is the real point.
You run deficits when you need to, not just because you want to bribe people with their own kids' money.
"Don't worry, we'll only run deficits for thirty years' was NOT the Liberals' campaign promise.

Omni · « **Reply #222 on:** February 11, 2018, 07:52:31 pm »

Quote from: SirJohn on February 11, 2018, 07:14:03 pm

And Canadian totals are heading in the same direction, which is the real point.
You run deficits when you need to, not just because you want to bribe people with their own kids' money.
"Don't worry, we'll only run deficits for thirty years' was NOT the Liberals' campaign promise.

You fix infrastructure when you need to fix infrastructure. You've maybe heard of the old adage about "pay ne now or pay me later"?. The Canadian economy is chugging along pretty well and spending on only help it along and of course more jobs create more taxes to help refill the government coffers.

msj · « **Reply #223 on:** February 11, 2018, 08:40:57 pm »

Quote from: kimmy on February 11, 2018, 12:44:13 pm

That seems to be the argument, yes.

No, I am clearly on the record stating that Canada’s deficit is a rounding error. We could run 15 to 20 billion deficits forever and have no fiscal crisis.

It is a rounding error so long as it stays below at this level or below for the next several years.

Countries go on forever and countries own infrastructure that lasts for decades (even centuries) so for most people they attribute, wrongly, their household finances to how governments should be run. But that is for another thread....

Quote

But can we take a moment to consider how laughably bad the US figure is? That's hilarious! It's astounding. It's stunning. For the past 8 years these idiots have been crying "Obama is spending muh grandchildren's future " and so on... and now that they're in charge their fiscal ineptitude makes Obama look like Ebenezer Scrooge by comparison. Holy ****, what a bunch of clowns.

-k

Fully agree here.

Canada needs to be careful because we now face a risk of higher inflation in the US which can bring higher interest rates which can sink our debt/property bubble quickly (granted, we deserve this to happen but that too is for another thread).

Canada also faces trade risk with the latest attack on NAFTA so that also could be a problem for us.

Both, or one or the other, could certainly lead to a recession in Canada which would inflate our deficit as revenues declined and stabilizing mechanisms (EI for example) kicked in.

That is a good argument for why Canada should be closer to a $0 deficit right now in preparation for the bad times that could be around the corner.

SirJohn · « **Reply #224 on:** February 12, 2018, 02:35:14 pm »

Quote from: Omni on February 11, 2018, 07:52:31 pm

You fix infrastructure when you need to fix infrastructure. You've maybe heard of the old adage about "pay ne now or pay me later"?. The Canadian economy is chugging along pretty well and spending on only help it along and of course more jobs create more taxes to help refill the government coffers.

I have no issue with fixing infrastructure. That isn't what we have a deficit for. We have a deficit for program costs not capital expenditures, of which there are few enough anyway. Most of the Liberals so-called infrastructure spending isn't even on infrastructure.

Canadian Politics Today

News:

Author Topic: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit. (Read 2761 times)

JMT

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

Queefer Sutherland

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

Queefer Sutherland

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

msj

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

JMT

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

msj

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

msj

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

Squidward von Squidderson

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

SirJohn

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

kimmy

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

JMT

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

SirJohn

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

Omni

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

msj

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.

SirJohn

Re: Remember the $30B deficit? Well, it turns out that it's actually a $20B deficit.