Author Topic: Economics Culture  (Read 1778 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5900
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #75 on: February 28, 2020, 07:59:59 pm »
The thing is - the inflating bubble is really good for the economy and makes middle-class homeowners feel better about having no savings.  I suspect their back pocket plan is "sell the house, pay off the visa and move to Nepean" or Kingston.

It's all going to crash very soon.  There can't be this much actual money in the world to drive these things.  Somebody is in debt, and in trouble...

I don't know. With interest rates so low there has to be a lot of money out there looking for a place to be productive.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4024
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2020, 09:15:18 pm »
weakAndy/CPC keep nattering on about a, 'broken Canada'... but never bring the receipts... never properly speak to the metrics! Like, for example, per StatsCan - foreign investment in Canada being up 19% in 2019 (over 2018's figures):


Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5092
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2020, 09:47:30 pm »
The thing is - the inflating bubble is really good for the economy and makes middle-class homeowners feel better about having no savings.  I suspect their back pocket plan is "sell the house, pay off the visa and move to Nepean" or Kingston.

It's all going to crash very soon.  There can't be this much actual money in the world to drive these things.  Somebody is in debt, and in trouble...

The market always corrects itself.  They've been waiting for a correction for a decade+, hasn't happened.  We'll see.  Every other person has an investment property in Toronto and Vancouver.  Over-speculation virtually always drives bubbles/recessions, been going on for centuries.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4024
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #78 on: February 29, 2020, 02:03:53 pm »
weakAndy/CPC keep nattering on about a, 'broken Canada'... but never bring the receipts... never properly speak to the metrics! Like, for example, per StatsCan - foreign investment in Canada being up 19% in 2019 (over 2018's figures):


waldo... do you have more? Why yes - yes I do!


Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7928
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #79 on: February 29, 2020, 03:15:24 pm »
It would be useful for me in anti-anti-Trudeau posts to have a useable link, Waldo - do you have one.

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4024
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #80 on: March 01, 2020, 12:47:46 pm »
It would be useful for me in anti-anti-Trudeau posts to have a useable link, Waldo - do you have one.

oh, we're talking again, are we! RawData @ https://doi.org/10.25318/3610002501-eng ... now pissOffAgain!  ;D
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7928
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #81 on: March 01, 2020, 01:22:21 pm »
Huh ?  ??? Sorry you aren't allowed to be mad at me.

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4024
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #82 on: March 08, 2020, 06:18:29 pm »
per UBC Econ Prof Kevin Milligan: Don’t Worry About the Federal Deficit --- Politicians often argue that government debt will cause hardship for future generations. They’re wrong



Quote
But won’t taxes have to rise? At the risk of belabouring the analogy: if our children are saddled with the mortgage we take out now, won’t they need to raise funds to pay it down? No. When debt growth is modest and interest rates are low, the economy grows faster than the cost of servicing debt. This (though politicians would have you believe otherwise) is Economics 101: what matters is not the absolute size of the debt but its size relative to the country’s economy overall. As with the financing of your home, there isn’t such a thing as a “big” or “small” mortgage per se—it entirely depends on your income. Economists use the debt-to-GDP ratio, which measures a country’s debt burden relative to its national income, to assess this for Canada’s economy. When we think of the fiscal—or moral—consequences of our debt policy on the next generation, the debt-to-GDP ratio is the right guidepost. And a responsible fiscal policy ensures that the debt-to-GDP ratio does not grow, not that we have no debt, or run no deficits, at all.
.
Over the five years from 2009 to 2014, Canada added $158 billion to the federal debt—which sounds like a lot, but our economy’s size was closing in on $2 trillion at the time, so the crucial debt-to-GDP ratio didn’t move much. We did add $71 billion of debt over the last four years—but the debt-to-GDP ratio actually fell by 1 percent over that period, since the economy grew more quickly than the debt did. Debts rise and fall, but there is no inexorable march to crisis that is unleashed by allowing some degree of discretion on deficit spending or the debt that ensues. We should just accept that the debt battle has been won and move on.

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5900
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #83 on: March 08, 2020, 06:29:42 pm »
per UBC Econ Prof Kevin Milligan: Don’t Worry About the Federal Deficit --- Politicians often argue that government debt will cause hardship for future generations. They’re wrong



Which is bullshit. As I have already stated, 26 billion in revenues go to service the federal debt each year. Even if that stays the same and we don't borrow any more, by the time they are 80, a child born today will see over two trillion in federal revenues (tax dollars) go to pay interest on money that was borrowed and spent before they were born. If you don't think that is inheriting a financial burden, you and the professor have rocks in you heads. That is simple arithmetic and what this debt to GDP bullshit is really about.

No fiscal obligation maybe but obviously the borrow and spenders without paying it back see no moral obligation either. The professor may have a problem with sticking his kids with his personal debt but he has no issue with sticking them with a ton of government debt to service for the rest of their lives.

That 26 billion deficit the government was forecasting for this year will seem like peanuts after protestors and Covid-19 get finished trashing the economy.

« Last Edit: March 08, 2020, 06:50:24 pm by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4024
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #84 on: March 08, 2020, 07:13:40 pm »
Which is bullshit.

well... there's you... and then there's the Econ Prof (and his 144 published papers as lead/co-author)





Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5900
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #85 on: March 08, 2020, 07:45:02 pm »
well... there's you... and then there's the Econ Prof (and his 144 published papers as lead/co-author)



There is me that can use a calculator. We spend 26 billion a year servicing federal debt. 26 X 80 = 2,080. That's $2,080 billion spent in interest on money that was borrowed and spent before they were born. All he is saying is future generations will be able to afford the payments. Fiscal reality maybe, but morally bankrupt.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5092
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #86 on: March 08, 2020, 08:01:29 pm »
Why do these debt/deficit proponents only point to the same economist?  Is Kevin the only economist in Canada?

What really needs to be shown is if it's better for Canada's economy in the long-term to run deficits and pay the interest payments on that debt, or if it's better to tax Canadians more to balance the budget and save on the interest payments, or if it's better to cut some of this spending to achieve a balanced budget, or if it's better to actually run a surplus and pay down our debt?

And under what economic conditions for any of these scenarios?

I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #87 on: March 09, 2020, 08:50:40 am »
As I have already stated, 26 billion in revenues go to service the federal debt each year. Even if that stays the same and we don't borrow any more, by the time they are 80, a child born today will see over two trillion in federal revenues (tax dollars) go to pay interest on money that was borrowed and spent before they were born.

$26 billion today is more than the federal debt stood when I was born. We also have to consider that the GDP of Canada was $41 billion at the time, so inflation must be taken into account. The interest on the money may increase over time, but inflation cannot be ignored. That $2 trillion in 80 years has no comparison to $2 trillion today.

You are right that money is being spent servicing debt since before people were born, such has always been the case. I did the calculation a few years ago, and if we had no debt in the year I was born, we would have no debt today. While there were a few years where our deficit was larger than the cost of servicing the debt, most years it has been smaller.

We spend 26 billion a year servicing federal debt. 26 X 80 = 2,080. That's $2,080 billion spent in interest on money that was borrowed and spent before they were born. All he is saying is future generations will be able to afford the payments. Fiscal reality maybe, but morally bankrupt.

Morally bankrupt if future generations do not inherit the benefits our society has created. We all benefit to some extent on the investments of previous generations, the real question is to what level.

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5900
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #88 on: March 09, 2020, 09:11:47 am »
$26 billion today is more than the federal debt stood when I was born. We also have to consider that the GDP of Canada was $41 billion at the time, so inflation must be taken into account. The interest on the money may increase over time, but inflation cannot be ignored. That $2 trillion in 80 years has no comparison to $2 trillion today.

Morally bankrupt if future generations do not inherit the benefits our society has created. We all benefit to some extent on the investments of previous generations, the real question is to what level.

You are counting on infinite growth and inflation to render your debt less costly.

What benefits? They end up paying for services others consumed and infrastructure that no longer exists.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Economics Culture
« Reply #89 on: March 09, 2020, 09:53:10 am »
You are counting on infinite growth and inflation to render your debt less costly.

Your $2 trillion estimate also relies on the exact same inflation driven growth.

What benefits? They end up paying for services others consumed and infrastructure that no longer exists.

I agree that services should never be financed, at least not for longer than say 12 months. Yes, infrastructure ages. That does not mean that they are still paying for that specific infrastructure. Am I still paying for WWII?