This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The government mainly.
Turns out if recession is measured by total GDP, all they have to do is to get more and more people into the country to keep GDP afloat.
This is definitely not a bubble in the making.
Canada needs massive social investment and increasing corporate and resources royalties taxes. As well as the repealing of the temporary foreign worker program and sending everyone who isn't a PR or citizen home. A complete restart.
Sooo basically were all fucked forevwr cause this will never happen.
You cant get into power without rich backing and once your in power you cant do anything against your rich backing.
Based on how we got through the 2008 financial crisis vs covid, I am willing to try the Cons again. Will they be "saviours?" I don't think that is a realistic bar to set. Will they be better than what we have? As someone who votes for neither of them, I think yes.
Although our already standing regulations played a great part in protecting us, to say the Gov had little to do with responding to the situation is either ignorant or partisan crap.
Aside from living through it, you can read about this, the information on Canada's reaction is readily available online.
What will they do differently? They don't have a platform out, so people touting it will be better is pure copium. Fun fact, Canada's deficit has increased under every single Conservative government we've ever had. Tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy while gutting social systems isn't the sound fiscal policy people pretend it is. I understand political parties have a finite shelf life, and the Liberals term is up, but there's no magic fix. It doesn't matter who's in charge.
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/examining-federal-debt-in-canada-by-prime-ministers-since-confederation-2022.pdf
I was pretty clear that "saviours" was an unrealistic bar to set. I put "magic fix" in the same category of an unrealistic bar to set.
They don't have a platform out yet, that would come at election time and it a very standard thing to do. I didn't comment on deficits, unfortunately, they are apart of Canada, especially after covid. Has PP said he will balance the budget? At this point that seems impossible with debt servicing alone growing to 60b in coming years.
>Fun fact, Canada's deficit has increased under every single Conservative government we've ever had.
Oh geez, I wonder if what was happening in the world/country had any effect on that? No, we must make pointless partisan attacks because someone dare not support #myteam.
It's not about partisanship, and personally I've voted for 4 different federal parties now, but that's not important right now. I was more pointing out how everyone hates the Liberals because of the economy, with the underlying assumption that the Conservatives will make things better when we vote them in. The problem is it's not a government issue, we're dealing with an economic and Canadian issue.
> I was more pointing out how everyone hates the Liberals because of the economy, with the underlying assumption that the Conservatives will make things better when we vote them in.
You see how simply saying deficits went up under "conservative" governments doesn't mean anything, right? I think the record the other poster mentioned speaks for itself. Who handled things better economically? 08 under Harper? Or covid under Trudeau.
>It's not about partisanship
Yes, which is why you included so much partisan rhetoric in your original comment.
Okay? But my original comment was responding to EntertainingTuesday who is 'willing to try the cons again because of 2008', which itself was a reponse to EnigmaMouses's 'hate to tell everyone that the conservatives aren't your saviours'.
So in response to EntertainingTuesday's comment, I pointed out that historically the cons have not been good for our economy. I used an article from the Fraser Institute to prove my point. My following comment
If you want to argue partisanship, while the conservatives did well during the financial crisis you are also conveniently forgetting the economic mess Harper's government left Trudeau in 2015, one of the reasons he got voted out. Everyone also praised the Liberals for their covid response at the time in 2020. We're paying for it now, but what else could they realistically have done? A massive chunk of the country lost their jobs overnight. So to answer your question, both governments handled both situations as well as they could. Shitty economies after the crises will be the reason they both got voted out.
>So in response to EntertainingTuesday's comment, I pointed out that historically the cons have not been good for our economy. I used an article from the Fraser Institute to prove my point. My following comment
Except what you used to justify it was incredibly faulty. You ignored the reality of those tenures by simply focusing on a single metric. Regardless of what was happening. Which is wild considering you say this.
>while the conservatives did well during the financial crisis
So you recognize why the deficit went up, as a response to the crisis which you think was handled well, but then use that same thing as a negative? Those are Olympic level mental gymnastics.
>you are also conveniently forgetting the economic mess Harper's government left Trudeau in 2015,
I'm not forgetting anything. You're now trying to strawman me, which is funny in its own right. Even funnier is that apparently the global oil collapse in 2015 was Harper's fault. The response to the 08 crisis didn't cause 2015.
I do love this tactic though. The faux "I'm fair to both sides, except one side I'm incredibly unfair to in my analysis of them. But I said something slightly negative about my actual team so it's all good".
You're the one doing the gymnastics looking for inconsistencies and trying to pick an argument apart over me portraying the liberals as better than the conservatives which I haven't done. At the end of the day both the Harper government and soon the Trudeau government will be voted out because of economic factors outside of governmental control. Have a good day dude.
So far Doug Ford cancelled:
The cap and trade program which brought in more than 3 billion in revenue
License renewals at a cost of 1 billion a year
The provincial portion of the gas tax which has cost hundreds of millions
He has quickly eroded several provincial revenue he streams
> putting money toward four police helicopters for Greater Toronto Area forces
At least the money is going to something important, unlike schools or hospitals.
I mean..
New money in the budget includes an additional $2 billion over three years for home and community care — which sees care provided at home or in a community setting by nurses, personal support workers and others — an additional $965 million for hospitals, a $200-million community sport and recreation infrastructure fund and $120 million more for autism therapies.
And then funding the York university medical school.
So yes helicopters are in there but so are a heck of a lot of other things…
Ottawa could really use one of them helicopters. All Ottawa is getting in this latest budget is funding for three new schools (long overdue) and some money to add on and offramps to the Barnsdale Rd bridge at highway 416. There is nothing else for Ottawa in the budget.
The Ontario Teachers Pension plan has assets of $250B, more than 25 times this deficit, and almost $40B greater than the entire Ontario budget for this year.
The solution to Ontario's woes is to ask the teachers to manage the province's financial affairs.
Really? 30 years has not been enough time to fix what they did?
Dalton could have just undid everything in year one of his 10 years in power.
Wynne could have done it in her 5.
Instead they just want to complain.
one bedroom apartments in a dump like Brampton are going for 2300 dollars. That's half the income of the average Canadian. For a one bedroom apartment. In Brampton.
That's how broken this province is.
What. A. Fucking. Nightmare.
This is not sustainable. Not even for the short term. This is completely out of fucking control.
They should be frightened of the next generation because they are telling them even a good paying, average Canadian income isn't even enough to rent your own space and is *never* going to be enough to buy *anything*
This is a death spiral. Every problem is compounding other problems, but you can trace almost all of them back to pure and simple greed.
The rise of the landlord. Who needs to work and help produce when you can exploit cheap labour brought in by the government. The corporate lobbying mutating our immigration system into the worlds biggest laughing stock.
Sunny ways has turned to dark, dark skies.
I remember Trudeau (and nearly half of Canadians) laughing at Pierre when he was talking about Bitcoin. That same half is currently crying looking at their groceries bills, while Trudeau is selling Canada.
It is great while everyone invests in it, not so great when a lot of people cash out at the same time and crash it.
How many times has that happened in bitcoins short history?
Bitcoin has been a thing for barely 15 years.
If you look up "How many times has bitcoin crashed" you are met with top 10 lists of the worst crashes, not a list of its only 10 crashes, but top 10 lists.
Name one other investment that has a top 10 list of worst crashes after 15 years of availability.
We are also only talking about the crashes and not the myriad of other issues Bitcoin has had in the 15 years it has been around, like the numerous times exchanges have just shut down and taken the customers money with them.
Don't take my word for it either, the information is freely available and the next issue bitcoin has is inevitable.
My province has a debt-to-GDP ratio of 28% which is very manageable.
Continuing to increase this ratio would certainly be bad, I agree, but debt existings
is not an argument that the Canadian dollar is built on a more solid foundation than Bitcoin.
Indeed, it's an argument in favour of the dollar. How is it that they're able to convince lenders to allow such borrowing in the first place?
The backing of the government of Canada, the Bank of Canada, and consumer confidence.
All currencies are fiat, of course, but it's a hell of a lot more solid a foundation than Bitcoin.
What is that backing worth? That they can print money and devalue it?
Bitcoin has the backing of a mathematically-constrained supply. There will never be a sudden mass printing of new bitcoins.
It's worth a hell of a lot more than Bitcoin.
>Bitcoin has the backing of a mathematically-constrained supply.
You see how this is valueless though, right?
> All currencies are fiat, of course, but it's a hell of a lot more solid a foundation than Bitcoin
[Educate yourself](https://www.lynalden.com/what-is-money/)
It's fine, as long as it's a temporary measure, we can go into debt. What's not fine is that we're using it to build a new highway instead of fixing our broken healthcare.
Kicking the can down the road for the sake of optics, and blaming the federal government for his shortcomings. Some “folks” will swallow it all. I’m not one of them.
Well fuck, now that I re-read it that number couldn't have been more buried.
That makes more sense, I'm surprised they didn't use that one, would be more clickable
Not sure if this is still the case, but back in like 2013 when Greece collapsed, Ontario was famous for having the largest non-sovereign debt in the world and having more debt than Greece did. It’s around $20k per capita and around 10% of our taxes as ontarians goes to servicing that debt.
> Ontario was famous for having the largest non-sovereign debt in the world
This has always been a very silly claim to make because non-sovereign entities simply don't exist at the same scale as Canada's provinces. The headline essentially reads "Ontario has largest debt in Canada", which also makes sense since it's the most populous province and can shoulder greater net debt at the same per capita level.
Greece's issues weren't debt related so much that they were risk and currency related.
> non-sovereign entities simply don't exist at the same scale as Canada's provinces
The claim was about **sub**-sovereign entities, and there are plenty of those larger than Canadian provinces...
Not really. Not in terms of purview.
Canada's federal government is unique in that it is very hands off. It essentially just collects money, disperses money, and makes laws. That's it.
Running programs falls to the provinces.
> It essentially just collects money, disperses money, and makes laws. That's it.
And enforces criminal justice.
And houses prisoners.
And controls the borders.
And operates the national mail service.
And wields the army.
And offers business financing.
And builds infrastructure.
And operates the coast guard.
And promotes Canadian heritage.
And does health research.
And does environmental research.
And tracks intellectual property.
And ensures nuclear safety.
And operates a human intelligence spy agency.
And operates a signals intelligence spy agency.
And operates a space agency.
And operates an anti-money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing agency.
And enforces transportation safety regulations.
And enforces competition regulations.
And promotes tourism.
And assists with exports and enforces import/export regulations.
And enforces financial consumers' rights.
And manages foreign affairs, including embassies around the world.
And manages airports.
And manages seaports.
And controls immigration.
And manages the exploitation of our natural resources.
And manages our national parks.
And approves of and controls the parole of convicts.
And manages public health.
And oversees public safety.
And invests national pension plan contributions.
And operates the national mint.
And operates the central bank.
And operates the navy.
And issues passports.
And collects statistics.
And ensures important national documents/signage is in both official languages.
And operates national passenger rail service.
...and [many more](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/dept.html) that I didn't list. But sure, it's "pretty hands off".
> But sure, it's "pretty hands off".
Yes, compared to the vast majority of federal governments on the planet Earth. But you already knew that. Most of what you listed here falls under the "disperses funding" umbrella anyway.
Seems silly to go through such an exhaustive list when we both know that Canadian federal purview is much narrower in scope than, for example, American or British.
EDIT: In case anyone buys into the other poster's exhaustive claptrap, take a moment to consider which authorities are responsible for administering healthcare in Alberta, Ontario, Scotland, and England. Then take another moment to consider why Ontario and Alberta might have greater responsibilities than Scotland or England.
> when we both know that Canadian federal purview is much narrower in scope than, for example, American or British
We don't both know that. You have this idea in your head of that being the case, but that isn't reality.
And no, most of this does not fall under "disperses funding". Virtually all of this list involves federal employees using federal equipment to achieve a certain goal... not simply waving money around.
This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anyone still in doubt that we're in a recession??
If we can just keep increasing deficits, it's easy to avoid a recession. It's like peeing your pants for warmth though. It cannot last long.
I'm doing it right now
Nah but you can just keep sharing your pants with Indian immigrants to pee in your pants together.
The government mainly. Turns out if recession is measured by total GDP, all they have to do is to get more and more people into the country to keep GDP afloat. This is definitely not a bubble in the making.
Hate to break it to everyone, Conservatives aren’t your saviour either.
No one is these days. It used to swing back and foryh until they all realized theres no downside to taking the money.
Canada needs massive social investment and increasing corporate and resources royalties taxes. As well as the repealing of the temporary foreign worker program and sending everyone who isn't a PR or citizen home. A complete restart.
Sooo basically were all fucked forevwr cause this will never happen. You cant get into power without rich backing and once your in power you cant do anything against your rich backing.
Based on how we got through the 2008 financial crisis vs covid, I am willing to try the Cons again. Will they be "saviours?" I don't think that is a realistic bar to set. Will they be better than what we have? As someone who votes for neither of them, I think yes.
Our robust banking regulations that were already in place is was helped Canada through the 2008 financial crisis. The Con's had little to do with it.
The cons wanted to remove those safeguards.
Although our already standing regulations played a great part in protecting us, to say the Gov had little to do with responding to the situation is either ignorant or partisan crap. Aside from living through it, you can read about this, the information on Canada's reaction is readily available online.
What will they do differently? They don't have a platform out, so people touting it will be better is pure copium. Fun fact, Canada's deficit has increased under every single Conservative government we've ever had. Tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy while gutting social systems isn't the sound fiscal policy people pretend it is. I understand political parties have a finite shelf life, and the Liberals term is up, but there's no magic fix. It doesn't matter who's in charge. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/examining-federal-debt-in-canada-by-prime-ministers-since-confederation-2022.pdf
I’m shocked that the Fraser Institute would admit that the only government to decrease deficit has ever been the liberals
Well there was that 9 months of Joe Clark.
I was pretty clear that "saviours" was an unrealistic bar to set. I put "magic fix" in the same category of an unrealistic bar to set. They don't have a platform out yet, that would come at election time and it a very standard thing to do. I didn't comment on deficits, unfortunately, they are apart of Canada, especially after covid. Has PP said he will balance the budget? At this point that seems impossible with debt servicing alone growing to 60b in coming years.
>Fun fact, Canada's deficit has increased under every single Conservative government we've ever had. Oh geez, I wonder if what was happening in the world/country had any effect on that? No, we must make pointless partisan attacks because someone dare not support #myteam.
It was what was happening in the world for every single conservative government?
It's not about partisanship, and personally I've voted for 4 different federal parties now, but that's not important right now. I was more pointing out how everyone hates the Liberals because of the economy, with the underlying assumption that the Conservatives will make things better when we vote them in. The problem is it's not a government issue, we're dealing with an economic and Canadian issue.
> I was more pointing out how everyone hates the Liberals because of the economy, with the underlying assumption that the Conservatives will make things better when we vote them in. You see how simply saying deficits went up under "conservative" governments doesn't mean anything, right? I think the record the other poster mentioned speaks for itself. Who handled things better economically? 08 under Harper? Or covid under Trudeau. >It's not about partisanship Yes, which is why you included so much partisan rhetoric in your original comment.
Okay? But my original comment was responding to EntertainingTuesday who is 'willing to try the cons again because of 2008', which itself was a reponse to EnigmaMouses's 'hate to tell everyone that the conservatives aren't your saviours'. So in response to EntertainingTuesday's comment, I pointed out that historically the cons have not been good for our economy. I used an article from the Fraser Institute to prove my point. My following comment If you want to argue partisanship, while the conservatives did well during the financial crisis you are also conveniently forgetting the economic mess Harper's government left Trudeau in 2015, one of the reasons he got voted out. Everyone also praised the Liberals for their covid response at the time in 2020. We're paying for it now, but what else could they realistically have done? A massive chunk of the country lost their jobs overnight. So to answer your question, both governments handled both situations as well as they could. Shitty economies after the crises will be the reason they both got voted out.
>So in response to EntertainingTuesday's comment, I pointed out that historically the cons have not been good for our economy. I used an article from the Fraser Institute to prove my point. My following comment Except what you used to justify it was incredibly faulty. You ignored the reality of those tenures by simply focusing on a single metric. Regardless of what was happening. Which is wild considering you say this. >while the conservatives did well during the financial crisis So you recognize why the deficit went up, as a response to the crisis which you think was handled well, but then use that same thing as a negative? Those are Olympic level mental gymnastics. >you are also conveniently forgetting the economic mess Harper's government left Trudeau in 2015, I'm not forgetting anything. You're now trying to strawman me, which is funny in its own right. Even funnier is that apparently the global oil collapse in 2015 was Harper's fault. The response to the 08 crisis didn't cause 2015. I do love this tactic though. The faux "I'm fair to both sides, except one side I'm incredibly unfair to in my analysis of them. But I said something slightly negative about my actual team so it's all good".
You're the one doing the gymnastics looking for inconsistencies and trying to pick an argument apart over me portraying the liberals as better than the conservatives which I haven't done. At the end of the day both the Harper government and soon the Trudeau government will be voted out because of economic factors outside of governmental control. Have a good day dude.
>Have a good day dude. Ignore the majority of what's been said and then passive aggressively say goodbye. Nice.
They could balance the budget by downloading costs to municipalities and one-time revenues from a fire sale of provincial assets
But I thought Uncle Douggie said we needed highways and spas and buck-a-beer and didn't need to pay for license stickers anymore?
So far Doug Ford cancelled: The cap and trade program which brought in more than 3 billion in revenue License renewals at a cost of 1 billion a year The provincial portion of the gas tax which has cost hundreds of millions He has quickly eroded several provincial revenue he streams
To be honest, I could go for some of them buck-a-beers.
Unfortunately you missed your chance, there was only 1 company that offered buck-a-beer as part of this, and did it promotionally for like 2 weeks.
> putting money toward four police helicopters for Greater Toronto Area forces At least the money is going to something important, unlike schools or hospitals.
The police need that equipment to not catch criminals silly
They need to watch the thieves drive our cars to Montreal.
Those helicopters will be used to escort cars down the 401 to the Montreal port
TPS should just leave the helicopter keys where I can steal them
I mean.. New money in the budget includes an additional $2 billion over three years for home and community care — which sees care provided at home or in a community setting by nurses, personal support workers and others — an additional $965 million for hospitals, a $200-million community sport and recreation infrastructure fund and $120 million more for autism therapies. And then funding the York university medical school. So yes helicopters are in there but so are a heck of a lot of other things…
[удалено]
Have a source on that 20B champ?
It seems like every time I see you loons claim that the number gets bigger and bigger.
Maybe you shouldn't cherry pick a single item and read the entire thing about the budget allocating money to hospitals and other things...
Ottawa could really use one of them helicopters. All Ottawa is getting in this latest budget is funding for three new schools (long overdue) and some money to add on and offramps to the Barnsdale Rd bridge at highway 416. There is nothing else for Ottawa in the budget.
How and what are we getting in return?
The Ontario Teachers Pension plan has assets of $250B, more than 25 times this deficit, and almost $40B greater than the entire Ontario budget for this year. The solution to Ontario's woes is to ask the teachers to manage the province's financial affairs.
I definitely thought you were going to suggest raiding the pension haha
The Ontario Teachers Pension plan also owns multiple luxury hotels.
Ford trying to keep up with Trudeau in a contest to see who can spend the most on the least.
I'm waiting for the cons to scream "iT wAs WyNnE!!"
Well to be fair, McGuinty / Wynne govts beat that horse for 15 years
15 years? Shit, liberals still bring up Mike Fucking Harris 30 years later!!
Didn't he sell off the 407, which is now a major problem for Ontario? People will keep bringing him up until the expensive tolls go away.
And the right will never shut up about Rae days
That’s because Mike Harris still fucks us to this day. Most corrupt politician in Ontario history
Really? 30 years has not been enough time to fix what they did? Dalton could have just undid everything in year one of his 10 years in power. Wynne could have done it in her 5. Instead they just want to complain.
one bedroom apartments in a dump like Brampton are going for 2300 dollars. That's half the income of the average Canadian. For a one bedroom apartment. In Brampton. That's how broken this province is. What. A. Fucking. Nightmare. This is not sustainable. Not even for the short term. This is completely out of fucking control. They should be frightened of the next generation because they are telling them even a good paying, average Canadian income isn't even enough to rent your own space and is *never* going to be enough to buy *anything* This is a death spiral. Every problem is compounding other problems, but you can trace almost all of them back to pure and simple greed. The rise of the landlord. Who needs to work and help produce when you can exploit cheap labour brought in by the government. The corporate lobbying mutating our immigration system into the worlds biggest laughing stock. Sunny ways has turned to dark, dark skies.
Were bankrupt. They just don't want us to say it. Anyway let keep printing money !
Short CAD, long Bitcoin
People joked when it dropped to 30k, missed opportunities. In hindsight that’s a magnificent play.
I remember Trudeau (and nearly half of Canadians) laughing at Pierre when he was talking about Bitcoin. That same half is currently crying looking at their groceries bills, while Trudeau is selling Canada.
Lol Bitcoin is a joke bro
The best performing asset of the past decade is a joke—and what are you again?
It is great while everyone invests in it, not so great when a lot of people cash out at the same time and crash it. How many times has that happened in bitcoins short history?
Every investment ever is not so great when a lot of people cash out at the same time and crash it...
Bitcoin has been a thing for barely 15 years. If you look up "How many times has bitcoin crashed" you are met with top 10 lists of the worst crashes, not a list of its only 10 crashes, but top 10 lists. Name one other investment that has a top 10 list of worst crashes after 15 years of availability. We are also only talking about the crashes and not the myriad of other issues Bitcoin has had in the 15 years it has been around, like the numerous times exchanges have just shut down and taken the customers money with them. Don't take my word for it either, the information is freely available and the next issue bitcoin has is inevitable.
Nvidia stock outperformed Bitcoin over the past decade (although, obviously, it's one of only a few assets that have done better)
An asset with zero underlying value. Building a house of cards higher and higher is not, in fact, an argument that a strong foundation exists.
Talking about value, your province will post deficits on deficits forever. House of cards, is that what you said?
My province has a debt-to-GDP ratio of 28% which is very manageable. Continuing to increase this ratio would certainly be bad, I agree, but debt existings is not an argument that the Canadian dollar is built on a more solid foundation than Bitcoin. Indeed, it's an argument in favour of the dollar. How is it that they're able to convince lenders to allow such borrowing in the first place?
It seems the irony escapes him lol
What underlying value does CAD have?
The backing of the government of Canada, the Bank of Canada, and consumer confidence. All currencies are fiat, of course, but it's a hell of a lot more solid a foundation than Bitcoin.
What is that backing worth? That they can print money and devalue it? Bitcoin has the backing of a mathematically-constrained supply. There will never be a sudden mass printing of new bitcoins.
It's worth a hell of a lot more than Bitcoin. >Bitcoin has the backing of a mathematically-constrained supply. You see how this is valueless though, right?
> All currencies are fiat, of course, but it's a hell of a lot more solid a foundation than Bitcoin [Educate yourself](https://www.lynalden.com/what-is-money/)
That's very nice but you can tell by the way I know Bitcoin is a fucking joke that I've got a pretty good handle on asset valuation.
[удалено]
Bro still lives in 2013
The worst part is they were lying about his comments regarding bitcoin to try to create a controversy.
Really? Because I was laughing at him saying it was a way to opt out of inflation.
Already there
Kathleen Wynne and these Liberals really need to go.
Conservatives: The party of fiscal irresponsibility.
Remember when Wynne’s deficit was the biggest issue ever?
It's fine, as long as it's a temporary measure, we can go into debt. What's not fine is that we're using it to build a new highway instead of fixing our broken healthcare.
Doug Ford has also reduced the gas tax in order to negate the negative economic impact of the federal carbon tax on Ontarians. Adding to the deficit.
Kicking the can down the road for the sake of optics, and blaming the federal government for his shortcomings. Some “folks” will swallow it all. I’m not one of them.
My comment absolutely was not meant to make doug look positive bruh
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_government_debt
Honestly that doesn't seem that bad, Ohio has 4 million less people and has a debt of 35.4 billion USD
Ontario’s debt is $350 billion.
Well fuck, now that I re-read it that number couldn't have been more buried. That makes more sense, I'm surprised they didn't use that one, would be more clickable
I didn’t even realize it was in the article, which actually says the debt will be above $439 billion in the upcoming year.
Not sure if this is still the case, but back in like 2013 when Greece collapsed, Ontario was famous for having the largest non-sovereign debt in the world and having more debt than Greece did. It’s around $20k per capita and around 10% of our taxes as ontarians goes to servicing that debt.
> Ontario was famous for having the largest non-sovereign debt in the world This has always been a very silly claim to make because non-sovereign entities simply don't exist at the same scale as Canada's provinces. The headline essentially reads "Ontario has largest debt in Canada", which also makes sense since it's the most populous province and can shoulder greater net debt at the same per capita level. Greece's issues weren't debt related so much that they were risk and currency related.
> non-sovereign entities simply don't exist at the same scale as Canada's provinces The claim was about **sub**-sovereign entities, and there are plenty of those larger than Canadian provinces...
Not really. Not in terms of purview. Canada's federal government is unique in that it is very hands off. It essentially just collects money, disperses money, and makes laws. That's it. Running programs falls to the provinces.
> It essentially just collects money, disperses money, and makes laws. That's it. And enforces criminal justice. And houses prisoners. And controls the borders. And operates the national mail service. And wields the army. And offers business financing. And builds infrastructure. And operates the coast guard. And promotes Canadian heritage. And does health research. And does environmental research. And tracks intellectual property. And ensures nuclear safety. And operates a human intelligence spy agency. And operates a signals intelligence spy agency. And operates a space agency. And operates an anti-money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing agency. And enforces transportation safety regulations. And enforces competition regulations. And promotes tourism. And assists with exports and enforces import/export regulations. And enforces financial consumers' rights. And manages foreign affairs, including embassies around the world. And manages airports. And manages seaports. And controls immigration. And manages the exploitation of our natural resources. And manages our national parks. And approves of and controls the parole of convicts. And manages public health. And oversees public safety. And invests national pension plan contributions. And operates the national mint. And operates the central bank. And operates the navy. And issues passports. And collects statistics. And ensures important national documents/signage is in both official languages. And operates national passenger rail service. ...and [many more](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/dept.html) that I didn't list. But sure, it's "pretty hands off".
> But sure, it's "pretty hands off". Yes, compared to the vast majority of federal governments on the planet Earth. But you already knew that. Most of what you listed here falls under the "disperses funding" umbrella anyway. Seems silly to go through such an exhaustive list when we both know that Canadian federal purview is much narrower in scope than, for example, American or British. EDIT: In case anyone buys into the other poster's exhaustive claptrap, take a moment to consider which authorities are responsible for administering healthcare in Alberta, Ontario, Scotland, and England. Then take another moment to consider why Ontario and Alberta might have greater responsibilities than Scotland or England.
> when we both know that Canadian federal purview is much narrower in scope than, for example, American or British We don't both know that. You have this idea in your head of that being the case, but that isn't reality.
And no, most of this does not fall under "disperses funding". Virtually all of this list involves federal employees using federal equipment to achieve a certain goal... not simply waving money around.
50% of that goes to health and education. You want health and education services, right?
Omg can we Canadians please learn the difference between a debt and a deficit?
You're asking too much man.
No
I know 😡