[Lemmy]

What saved our economy was our banking sector. The stimulus pumped a little wind up our skirts, but it wasn't needed and we'll be paying for it for decades.

[Scape]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You don't dish out BILLIONS in project overnight just to coincide with "construction" season. That would be irresponsible. Had they done that, Harper would have been slammed for lack of accountability, etc etc. You know it and I know it.

And Baird knew it but has apparently forgotten:

$1:

John Baird in 2009:
“It’s not up to his government to closely monitor how money intended for road, sewer
and other projects is actually spent, suggests the federal minister in charge of infrastructure.
“‘It’s not big government’s role and Ottawa to centrally manage everything,’ Baird said
when asked how his department is monitoring spending.” (Canadian Press, July 29, 2009)

John Baird in 2006:
“There’s only one taxpayer, and my job is to ensure that there’s accountability. My job is to ensure there’s due diligence. My job is to ensure taxpayers are protected, and I take that very seriously.”
(John Baird, CBC Radio − The House, October 14, 2006)
“Going forward, the government will make responsible spending the norm by requiring that all new and existing programs go through a systematic and rigorous examination. This will ensure that this government only approves funds that are actually needed to achieve measurable results, in a way that is effective and that provides value for money. Our new expenditure management system will be built on the principles of fiscal discipline, managing the results, and maximizing value for money… Canada’s new government will ensure significantly greater transparency, accountability, and value for money in all federal spending. We will settle for nothing less.” (John Baird, Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, October 17, 2006)

The Gas tax has been in place all along. If this was an emergency that required $10 Billion to save our economy then that fire hose must be turned on before the house burns to the ground rather then let the flames rise to a good tempo that everyone is screaming for action. You know that we have never done a spending package like this before intended to shore up the economy. Now that the government has committed to such levels of spending it doesn't get to just pass the cash to its buddies, we can't afford cronyism on that scale and expect the economy to sort itself out.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Second, many of these projects need approval(s), environmental assessments and permits.

These are projects on the minicpal level that have already BEEN aproved but need funding. AKA the Victoria’s Johnson Street Bridge bridge:

Victoria council not abandoning bridge project despite funding rejection

There are THOUSANDS of such projects in BC alone that have already been approved and have the cities and towns already ponying up half the cash, they are just waiting on the feds and they have said NO.

Check out the Non-construction Gallery

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

To say that they're just "throwing money" at their own ridings is misleading and false.

Have a look for yourself

You can see that the findings were on target:

$1:

• In Ontario, the Conservatives promised 15% more dollars on average to their own ridings ($13.1 million) from the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund (ISF) and the Recreation Facilities fund (RinC) combined, compared to $11.1 million average for Liberal-held ridings.

• In British Columbia, Conservative ridings garnered more than fourteen times as much funds as opposition ridings ($11.3 million to $800,000) from the ISF.

• In Quebec, Conservative ridings received 2.68 times more projects per riding on average than opposition ridings.

• In the stimulus program for rehabilitation of community and recreation centres, the $500-million RInC, eighteen out of the top twenty ridings by number of projects granted in Ontario are held by Conservatives.

• Industry Minister Tony Clement, the minister responsible for the RInC program in Ontario, gave his own riding the second most projects with 28, four times the provincial average.

• The average RInC grant for Conservative ridings in Ontario was $2.1 million, 33% higher than opposition ridings.

• In the RInC program, Rob Merrifield, Minister of State for Transport secured $1.4million for his riding and Jim Prentice, Minister of the Environment secured $1.7 million. These 2 ministers had 2 out of the top 3 ridings receiving funding, 5-6 times the average riding funding.

• In the $1.2-billion Building Canada Fund, in the Communities component for cities and towns under 100,000 population, Conservative ridings in 5 electorally competitive provinces (NS, Ontario, PEI, BC, MB) received an average of $8.8 million, compared to just $5 million for opposition-held areas.

Now what were the economic reasons for those discrepancies? That's pork barrel politics plain and simple and they didn't need an environmental study to get it.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

When all is said and done, we have an economy on the rise, directly attributed to this stimulus (according to the Bank of Canada) regardless of how fast it's being pushed out and when the money really kicks in towards the end of 2009 and into 2010 things will get even better and places all around Canada will have new facilities, new roads and new jobs.

No, it is not the stimulus as the bulk of the projects have yet to be started. Unemployment has gone from 6% in January to nearly 8.5% in May and personal bankruptcies have doubled in that same time frame from 6,000 to 11,000. The demand for the stimulus was intended to soften that blow and it is far to early to see what the reaction will be to our economy will be when the program of spending was designed over two years. The BOC interest is inflation and what is driving that up is the debt not the stimulus.

Government to reveal new timetable for reducing deficit in weeks: Flaherty

When the government has no credibility on a when we will return to a surplus and no plan that will fuel inflation via speculation.

[OnTheIce]

Scape Scape:

Now that the government has committed to such levels of spending it doesn't get to just pass the cash to its buddies, we can't afford cronyism on that scale and expect the economy to sort itself out.

Well, if the "cronyism" is happening as you and other Liberals proclaim, how do you explain the economy sorting itself out?

Scape Scape:

Second, many of these projects need approval(s), environmental assessments and permits.

There are THOUSANDS of such projects in BC alone that have already been approved and have the cities and towns already ponying up half the cash, they are just waiting on the feds and they have said NO.

Unfortunately, not every project all over Canada was approved.

And while many of these projects are "approved" there's a lot of other work that needs to be done like getting together the staffing to carry out some of these projects.

Most municipalities don't have a dozen or so constructions crews on standby waiting for projects to start. These people need to be hired and contracts need to be tendered.

Scape Scape:

No, it is not the stimulus as the bulk of the projects have yet to be started. Unemployment has gone from 6% in January to nearly 8.5% in May and personal bankruptcies have doubled in that same time frame from 6,000 to 11,000. The demand for the stimulus was intended to soften that blow and it is far to early to see what the reaction will be to our economy will be when the program of spending was designed over two years. The BOC interest is inflation and what is driving that up is the debt not the stimulus.

The Bank of Canada disagrees. Back in July when they declared the recession over, they attributed it directly to governments monetary stimulus as well as other factors.

Scape Scape:

When the government has no credibility on a when we will return to a surplus and no plan that will fuel inflation via speculation.

If that's your theory, than governments all over the World and many of our Provinces have zero credibility.

By saying that, you're ignoring the fact that it's very hard to predict financial outcomes during and after a recession....as it is in fact, a prediction.

Ontario's Liberal government just got a taste of how hard it was when originally predicting a balanced budget announced a 6+ billion dollar deficit for this year.

[Scape]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

Now that the government has committed to such levels of spending it doesn't get to just pass the cash to its buddies, we can't afford cronyism on that scale and expect the economy to sort itself out.

Well, if the "cronyism" is happening as you and other Liberals proclaim, how do you explain the economy sorting itself out?

How do you define that? The calm currently is the same as when the coyote steps off the cliff before the sudden drop, he numbers are not sustainable and the reason for the stimulus is still there.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Most municipalities don't have a dozen or so constructions crews on standby waiting for projects to start. These people need to be hired and contracts need to be tendered.

That's the idea of stimulus, to get unemployed and underemployed to work to put money back into the economy.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The Bank of Canada disagrees. Back in July when they declared the recession over, they attributed it directly to governments monetary stimulus as well as other factors.

Source please. I have tried to find that report but can reference it.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

When the government has no credibility on a when we will return to a surplus and no plan that will fuel inflation via speculation.

If that's your theory, than governments all over the World and many of our Provinces have zero credibility.

If they fudge the numbers on a consistent basis then they end up with a credit rating like Burma because the speculation undercuts the currency. Everyone knows the market has ups and downs, no one know how it will react but they do forecast and those forecasts are banked upon to be at least in the ballpark. So far the predictions of this government have gone radically off to the point that their very credibly is in question. They have no idea when or if they will return to surplus. It's not the voters, it's Bay street that is calling the government credibility into question here. The same people who underwrite the governments debt. When they are off by BILLIONS on a consistent basis people are going to notice and that will have an effect on the bottom line.

[Proculation]

Aren't you supposed to be conservative, OnTheIce ? What's conservative about spending, spending and spending ?

[OnTheIce]

Scape Scape:

How do you define that? The calm currently is the same as when the coyote steps off the cliff before the sudden drop, he numbers are not sustainable and the reason for the stimulus is still there.

How do I define that? Positive growth in our GDP, the markets regaining their pre-recession status...

Scape Scape:

That's the idea of stimulus, to get unemployed and underemployed to work to put money back into the economy.

Exactly. However, combined with all these other factors, you have to find these people, train them and then get the jobs rolling. You don't just hand some guy a hard hat and throw him to the wolfs and hope he fends for himself.

Scape Scape:

Source please. I have tried to find that report but can reference it.

It's on the CBC, CTV all of the major news sources covered the press conference on that day.

Scape Scape:

So far the predictions of this government have gone radically off to the point that their very credibly is in question. They have no idea when or if they will return to surplus. It's not the voters, it's Bay street that is calling the government credibility into question here. The same people who underwrite the governments debt. When they are off by BILLIONS on a consistent basis people are going to notice and that will have an effect on the bottom line.

Considering our budgets during the Chretien/Martin era were consistently off by billions, perhaps the way out government forecasts it's financial's should be in question.

Proculation Proculation:

Aren't you supposed to be conservative, OnTheIce ? What's conservative about spending, spending and spending ?

Being conservative minded doesn't mean you ignore the reality of the World economy.

[Proculation]

$1:

Being conservative minded doesn't mean you ignore the reality of the World economy.

So why are doing it ? Keynesians economics never worked. It only brought debt and unemployment in the long run.

[Scape]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

How do you define that? The calm currently is the same as when the coyote steps off the cliff before the sudden drop, he numbers are not sustainable and the reason for the stimulus is still there.

How do I define that? Positive growth in our GDP, the markets regaining their pre-recession status...

Yet the fundamental underpinnings of the GDP growth and the TSX are when unemployment has spiked and the personal bankruptcies have skyrocketed. When a ship sinks like the Titanic the bow or stern will jut up sharply, this does not mean the ship is extra seaworthy. This stimulus is intended to be a band-aid to keep business from closing shop and putting long term jobs out of work and it is based on the idea that construction jobs will trickle down money to the rest of the economy but those jobs have yet to start and wont start until at least March 2010 and will only be for 1 season. So again, how do you define that? We are in coyote territory here and if we are not careful here we are in for a very sharp reality adjustment.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

That's the idea of stimulus, to get unemployed and underemployed to work to put money back into the economy.

Exactly. However, combined with all these other factors, you have to find these people, train them and then get the jobs rolling. You don't just hand some guy a hard hat and throw him to the wolfs and hope he fends for himself.

Your not understanding the reason for stimulus. They already have staff trained, there is a huge gap in how much the Canadian economy can produce and how many orders are being placed. When there is a large gap, business have to lay off vast numbers of long term workers in order to balance the books. The stimulus is intended as a stop-gap to allow private industry to keep these people on the books until the markets create demand to sustain the employment on a long term basis. We are not looking to hire new people and train them from scratch, we are trying to keep the people we have now but are idle.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

Source please. I have tried to find that report but can reference it.

It's on the CBC, CTV all of the major news sources covered the press conference on that day.

Again, source please. If your using this as context then produce the report you are sourcing.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Scape Scape:

So far the predictions of this government have gone radically off to the point that their very credibly is in question. They have no idea when or if they will return to surplus. It's not the voters, it's Bay street that is calling the government credibility into question here. The same people who underwrite the governments debt. When they are off by BILLIONS on a consistent basis people are going to notice and that will have an effect on the bottom line.

Considering our budgets during the Chretien/Martin era were consistently off by billions, perhaps the way out government forecasts it's financial's should be in question.

During a time of surplus? I have gone over that point before with you..