Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devin
I certainly agree paying down the debt is important, but not at the cost of our civil society, especially when it comes at costs paid by those least able - the poor (18.4% of all Canadian children live in poverty, according to the 2000 census, a figure I find personally abhorent - what kind of civil society allows this to happen?).
|
The % 'living in poverty' figure is a misnomer. There is a relative low income line which people call the poverty line.
But, the current poverty line has the problem that, if someone else gets a cheaper house, more people become poor.
Their situation didn't change, but because someone else has more disposable income, they went from not-poor to poor.
Quote:
You are correct that I did not mean to include debt servicing. I am only talking the wad of cash they blow on (voluntarily) submarines et al. But yes I did include debt servicing by accident when I went to a second source for the later forecasts. oops. Program Spending is forecast at $156 Billion for 05/06.
[SNIP]
Following at 3.5% increase, I am still missing $25 Billion.
Our numbers seem to be the same until we get to the growth. So explain to me how I get from $104B in 97 to $156B in 06 if I follow the rate of inflation.
|
In 1994 dollars, there was 118.7 B$ in program spending in 1994/1995 budgeted.
In 2002 dollars, there was 133.3 B$ in program spending in 2002/2003 budgeted.
Two things are going on here. First, the country is richer. About 31% richer.
The second thing is dollars are worth less. At 2% inflation per annum, 1994 dollars are worth 19.5% more than 2002 dollars.
Lets assume similar numbers -- 3.5% annual growth rate, 2% inflation rate.
97 dollars are worth 1.195 2006 dollars, in terms of what they can buy. This makes the 1997 budget 124.28 billion dollars in 2006 dollars.
Now, the 2006 Canadian economy is 36% larger than the 1997 economy.
156 is a 25.5% increase over 124.28.
The economy grows 36% and federal government spending grows 25.5%.
The situation is actually the exact opposite -- the feds are spending less money than they used to, as a portion of the economy.
Another reason why debt should be the #1 priority: we have low interest rates right now, and they will be going up. Ramping up and cutting spending is expensive and wasteful. You can pay off more debt one year and not the next without any such problems.
Spending programs are a multi-year commitment. Paying off debt isn't, it just gives multi-year rewards.
Quote:
|
However... I have a few debts of my own that I'd like to pay down.
|
Have some personal responsibility.
Your debts are your choice -- you freely chose to go into debt, knowing you'd have to pay it back. The debts the nation has are imposed on the citizens, even those who don't choose to go into debt.
Quote:
|
Nothing pisses me off more than giving up 42% of my income only to see the remain 58% eroded by sales tax every time I "stimulate the economy". Don't even get me started on property taxes!
|
Your average tax bracket is 42%? Nice! =)
Quote:
|
I could live with paying down the bebt, but forgive me if I'm a bit sceptical they'll do as they say.
|
They are paying down the debt. It has shrunk hugely over the Liberal's terms in office.
Quote:
|
pay it down. Do we have an estimate of when it can be free and clear? I've been out of the news loop for the week.
|
Alot would depend on the economic outlook.
Quote:
|
That's the last thing I want, nor is it the aim of most libertarians. I would suggest we lean more toward the values of "individualism".
|
Anarchy is the most unstable form of government. Someone siezes power, and it changes from Anarchy to (typically) some kind of feudalism.
edit: Seplling.