« Tuesday Night - Matthew Passion | Main | Scenes From the Imperial Capital »

Wednesday, November 28, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"...a chance to present themselves as the acceptable, progressive face of fiscal conservatism – or, more accurately, the conservative face of progressivism."

How can you possibly be 'progressive' yet be 'fiscally conservative'? 'Progressive' in todays world means funding every damn 'entitlement' program out there.

"People like free stuff. People also don't living in a country that's going broke. When you get into the latter position then the default urge for free stuff is reduced."

The last sentence of that statement is simply not true. Look at the trainwrecks of Europe and the US. The Western world will fall on their collective sword of making sure that 'free stuff' promised by the Government will keep coming. When the 'free stuff' stops, Greece comes to Toronto.

Richard Anderson

I was referring to Canadians. Once it became clear the party was over in the early 1990s people did demand and get balanced budgets. This hasn't happened yet in Ontario because the electorate doesn't realize the province is broke. Ontarians often conflate the federal and provincial governments, while being obsessed with the United States. Because we are doing relatively well federally, certainly compared with America, the incompetence of the Dalt is being given a pass.

When Ontario hits the wall, a downgrade or warning from Moody's, and the electorate will begin to turn. The question is where. Timmy Hudak doesn't have much in the way of guts.


Although you were referring to Canadians, we are not worlds away from the rest of the West, and the early 1990's might as well be a different planet. Things and people have changed; and so has the Media. Talk of balanced budgets and cuts only gets you labelled a racist right-wing neo-Mike Harris, and the 'free stuff' keeps coming so Team Blue/Orange/Red/Green gets elected, and stays elected.

Maybe it's because I don't have faith in my fellow Canadians like you do.


“their reckless fiscal policies”

What’s reckless? We’ve been in a global recession followed by sluggish growth that unfortunately caused our Federal debt to go up from 28% to 33% and is now easing down. It’s not pretty but it’s not reckless.

Here’s a long boring attempt to explain what has happened.

That debt increase was caused by a 6.5% fall in Revenues combined with stimulus spending….an 18% surge in overall Fed spending in 09/10. That surge was part of a 2.5% GDP stimulus boost that all industrial countries agreed to in an effort to ward off the meltdown. It would have been more than 2.5% had the infamous coalition of Iggy/Dion, Layton and Duceppe had their way in trying to convince Canadians they should form a government right after Conservatives were elected in the Fall of 2008. Harper had no choice on the stimulus and at least we got some bricks and mortar as opposed to topping up unionized Teacher’s Pensions a la Obama’s stimulus.

The debt level is still “conservative” and is projected to get back below previous lows by 2017. Compare that to the USA or European trajectories. Also our Federal take out of the real economy has unfortunately shot up from pre-recession levels of 14.5% to 17.5%. But as with the debt, it will get back down over the next few years. Compare that to the US Feds shooting up from Clinton/Bush years of below 20% to almost 25% under Obama and that’s before ObamaCare kicks in.

Health care is a big part of the problem and a program is in place to fix Ottawa’s transfers to no more than growth in GDP, but that restrictive formula doesn’t kick in until 2017 …and you can bet that pragmatic policy won’t kick in at all if Conservatives lose in 2015.

Calgary Centre almost went Liberal. …less than 30% voted …that scary disengagement does not exactly play to conservative principles of pushing for limited government.

If Martha, the dull boring conservative Liberal candidate, were to get elected leader and if she promises some conservative principles beyond marketing boards that are rural thus won’t cost Liberals any seats to implement and if she sets more aggressive targets for GDP debt levels and if she sets GDP portions of the Federal take on the economy below the 12% Conservatives are aiming for ...in other words saying you believe in balancing the budgets faster doesn’t make you conservative if you plan to balance them by taxing more and growing the size of the government take..... then after all those “ifs” being assured, I’ll vote for Martha. That kind of scenario should push Conservatives to the right in the next round.

Otherwise, a more realistic scenario is to find those “locked up” Conservatives and get them out of the closet…both Federally and more urgently in Ontario. The trick is to try and inform voters of economics…too bad Martha wasn’t as exciting on economics as Justin is on ….whatever.


"If you're looking for conservatives in Canadian politics, look in the Conservative Party. Deep, deep in the Conservative Party. They're in a locked room, bound and gagged. Our goal should be to unlock the door, not to chase Liberal mirages."

No. No. No. The CPC is sterilized, end of story. There is only going to be one source of different fiscal policy in this country and its going to the party that feels the need to survive: the Liberals. The CPC is gone. Just gone. It is populated by mindless loyalists like nomdeblog. These people will believe ANYTHING to justify their loyalty to Father Steve. Steve is their Obama.


"But as with the debt, it will get back down over the next few years"

TL; DR version: it's okay when we do it.

"What’s reckless?"

FACT: spending was way out of hand before the recession

FACT: federal government was on track for deficit before the recession

Do you ever interface with reality? Is there anything you won't sink to to justify loving Big Conservative Government?


With “mindless” accusations, you are pushing pretty close to ad hominem territory there Cy and I’m drawing a line there if you ever want to debate again.

Meanwhile, you place far too much emphasis on political leadership....you are not alone. But I haven’t fallen for Steve, I admittedly do fall in line because I think he’s the most economically sensible representative of where the collective heads of Canadians are at this point...which is a lot further right than the USA...at least we want balanced budgets and will get one in the foreseeable future in Ottawa.

But you keep searching for Godot to lead a fractured, diverse country. Leaders don’t lead whole countries very much, that’s a myth. They can only incrementally nudge them along. Because the voters frankly aren’t paying very much attention....too busy working hard to pay taxes.

Steve is the best nudger on the stage. But if we can find a better one and if it’s Martha Hall Findlay ...then I’m open to hear her thoughts on nudging.


Any objective analysis shows that Steve is nudging us to statism. That is reality.

The only people worth having are those that can lead. It would happen more often if conservatives were willing to impose discipline but they are too short-sighted and frankly stupid to do so. Your concession of Harper's inability to lead is an admission of his uselessness, 'tallest midget in the G20' notwithstanding.

"at least we want balanced budgets and will get one in the foreseeable future in Ottawa."


This is why I throw ad homs at you. They may be ad homs but they are true. You're willing to believe ANYTHING.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

June 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30