[kEiThZ]

I'm reading this correct, the Trudeau government has funded the military higher than Harper?

They have. But the share spent on equipment has fallen effectively leading to rust out accelerating. Hence the crisis in the military.

Also, some of it is accounting magic, with the Liberals choosing to change definitions and refusing to report past spending with the same metrics.

Will add future promises aren't worth much. The previous Liberal defence policy has defence spending in the current year much higher than it actually is. Always easy to kick the can down the road with a new policy.

 

[kEiThZ]

Gotta say, if that was the best the LPC have, they are toast. This budget isn't moving much in any timeframe that will matter to anyone worried about a specific issue. Be that housing, productivity, taxes, etc

 

[afransen]

I strongly support tax and rebate as the most economically efficient way to send a price signal. But I gotta admit public support isn't there. So consumer carbon taxes are dead after the next election. Unfortunately, the only way to force change that is politically palatable may be regulation, like the ICEV ban. We'll need to simply ban new gas home heating and offer incentives to replace gas furnaces.

Technically tax and rebate is a less efficient mechanism. The rebate is for political expediency. The more economically efficient approach would be to use carbon tax revenues to reduce other taxes, like income tax.

 

[kEiThZ]

Technically tax and rebate is a less efficient mechanism. The rebate is for political expediency. The more economically efficient approach would be to use carbon tax revenues to reduce other taxes, like income tax.

And that's the approach taken in BC. People forget that provinces have the choice. It's just that 8 of 10 provinces refuse to have compliant plans and fell onto the federal backstop.

 

[afransen]

Defense:

View attachment 556969


A massive upward surge in budget, but not until next year.............bu then 3 successive years of less than inflationary increases....

View attachment 556976

View attachment 556977

Not sure what, if anything varies or adds detail to the pre-budget announcement

Canada's GDP should be right around CAD$4T in 2030, so $50B in spending on the military is still only 1.25%.

 

[afransen]

A fiscal chart, I will explain below:

View attachment 556979

First year (left) is 2023-2024, second column form left is current year and so on.

In Plain English:

Top Row is Annual Deficit
Middle Row is Annual Deficit as a percent of GDP
Bottom Row is Debt (total on which we pay interest) as a percentage of GDP

Even plainer English:

We'll keep spending more than we earn, but our debt will grow less quickly than our income. Assuming no recessions or other adverse events in the next half decade.

 

[kEiThZ]

Canada's GDP should be right around CAD$4T in 2030, so $50B in spending on the military is still only 1.25%.

Tanking the economy while keeping spending the same. One way to meet our commitments. Lol.

Also, these absolute dollar discussions never take into account inflation which impacts the military substantially.

 

[Admiral Beez]

As Most of the deficit is being driven by OAS growth ($69B last year) and healthcare support for Boomers.

But any government actuary would have forecasted this exposure. We can’t act like we’re surprised now. The Feds should have been either increasing the allocated funds and/or decreasing the benefits before now. It’s government incompetence and procrastination that got us here, not Canada’s seniors.

 

[lenaitch]

Measures to combat auto theft:

View attachment 556965

An odd line item for a budget. Like most other proposed Bills that show the government of the day is 'taking X seriously', many of proposed new offences are already covered by existing criminal law.

Theft + violence = Robbery
Links to organized crime - already in there
Proceeds of crime - already in there.

I don't know the Radiocommunication Act that well, but regulatory changes are typically a Cabinet decision. They could have done that after lunch on any scheduled Cabinet day,

 

[jje1000]

Gotta say, if that was the best the LPC have, they are toast. This budget isn't moving much in any timeframe that will matter to anyone worried about a specific issue. Be that housing, productivity, taxes, etc

The big noise coming out of this seems to be taxes (2/3rds capital tax is the new sound-byte), spending, and deficits.

 

[evandyk]

The capital gains change does make a material difference to a small number of pretty rich people, so it’s no surprise it’s getting media attention.

It will probably have some impact on estate planning, but that’s only planning, not actually paying the tax.

 

[kEiThZ]

But any government actuary would have forecasted this exposure. We can’t act like we’re surprised now. The Feds should have been either increasing the allocated funds and/or decreasing the benefits before now. It’s government incompetence and procrastination that got us here, not Canada’s seniors.

Well yes. It's a known problem. And the Boomers kept voting in governments who kicked the can down the road and are now hoping austerity gets delayed till after they are gone. But every dollar borrowed to pay OAS today is going to cost a Millennial $2-3 down the road.

I don't know the Radiocommunication Act that well, but regulatory changes are typically a Cabinet decision. They could have done that after lunch on any scheduled Cabinet day,

They are trying to look like they are doing something. This is why they recently banned Flipper Zero (a hobbyist tool). I bought one to play with just before the ban. I knew they were going for signalling over substance.

The big noise coming out of this seems to be taxes (2/3rds capital tax is the new sound-byte), spending, and deficits.

They are trying to trap the Conservatives by hoping to make the CPC look like they are all about the rich and corporations. Personally, I don't think the average voter really cares anymore. The Liberals have to deliver results and they aren't. Home prices are already starting to rise again.

 

[Northern Light]

Gotta say, if that was the best the LPC have, they are toast. This budget isn't moving much in any timeframe that will matter to anyone worried about a specific issue. Be that housing, productivity, taxes, etc

To this point.

What we've talked about before, that need to reduce the cost of housing and to increases its availability is immediate.

The only way to tackle that at all in 12 months or less is reducing the number of people living in Canada.

The only way to do that is to cut foreign students, and TFWs and reduce tourists as well by severely restricting short-term rentals.

The only one they've move in any real way is students, they could have been more aggressive, but the move is there; but on TFWs there's been virtually no action; and none to speak of on short-term rentals.

Now, strictly speaking, the above are not budgetary measures; but the budget being a political document that invariably includes non-budget items ought to have said something if either action were in the near-term offing.

 

[Richard White]

The only way to do that is to cut foreign students, and TFWs and reduce tourists as well by severely restricting short-term rentals.

Can they even restrict STRs or is that a jurisdictional issue?

I assumed that STRs would be municipal or at most, provincial.

 

[Northern Light]

Can they even restrict STRs or is that a jurisdictional issue?

I assumed that STRs would be municipal or at most, provincial.

It would probably be an assertion of POGG powers (Peace, Order and Good Government); keep in mind, provinces govern real estate, but Canada (Federally) imposed restrictions on foreign buyers of same.

The Feds could certainly prohibit foreign ownership of STRs, but I imagine could make an assertion on the broader question. How the provinces would feel about that........is a fair question. On the other hand, virtually every province is claiming a housing crisis, I'm not sure they would want to come out and assert a right to STRs, that would be interesting politics.

The Feds also have taxing power, and could simply impose a 100% surtax on STR earnings that would probably render them non-viable.