Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Is there a glimmer of hope dawning for 2010?

To all the "nervous nellies" who've been complaining that the Harper Tories aren't "conservative" enough for you... looks like a Happy New Year may be in store after all!
Flaherty's deficit plan: Take an axe and cut deep
'I've done it before,' in Harris-era Ontario
Published On Wed Dec 23 2009

OTTAWA–Faced with the largest federal deficit in history, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says he will start looking for programs to axe and government assets to sell off as soon as the economy recovers.

"It's necessary for restraint to happen" to rein in Ottawa's spending, Flaherty told the Toronto Star in a year-end interview.

"We get hundreds and hundreds of programs that just trundle along, growing at 3 or 4 per cent a year or more – ahead of the rate of inflation – and it takes some resolve to restrain that spending growth."

With a chuckle, he admitted that slashing government programs can prompt public outrage. "Every program has a group of people who believe strongly in that program," he said.

But "some programs should end," Flaherty insisted. "This assumption in government – that every time a program is created, the program should go on indefinitely – is mistaken. So some programs should just end because their usefulness has ended."
Note to commenters, I'm on the road for most of the next few days, so don't expect to see any comments published for a bit.

Labels: , ,

13 Comments:

  • At Wed. Dec. 23, 10:36:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Kevin said…

    It's a start but the status quo is not conservative. Deep cuts to useless government programs are. The government has become too large and need to be reigned in for the sake of the still free part of the economy.

     
  • At Wed. Dec. 23, 12:29:00 p.m. EST, Blogger Top Can Inc. said…

    Although I am concerned about the impending decision to start cutting programs, I am wondering why it took Flaherty almost 4 years to reveal his true self to us all.

     
  • At Wed. Dec. 23, 01:06:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Go Flaherty Go!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hopefully, the subsidies to political parties will be in there, as well

    Mike Wisniewski

     
  • At Wed. Dec. 23, 02:08:00 p.m. EST, Blogger CanadianSense said…

    I look forward to zero growth and cuts in some programs and the opposition from the cheap seats complaining about the cuts and the deficit in the same breath.

    NDP no HST, yes to a Carbon Tax!

     
  • At Fri. Dec. 25, 01:47:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Yes!!

    A Fedreral Common Sense Revolution!

    Bring it!!

     
  • At Sun. Dec. 27, 07:57:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    CC said:

    'To all the "nervous nellies" who've been complaining that the Harper Tories aren't "conservative" enough for you... looks like a Happy New Year may be in store after all!'

    ...

    Warning: from a certain point of view--possibly yours--I'm about to be obnoxious.

    ...

    When the Liberals came to power in the Fall of 1993--after about 9 years of Conservative rule--Canada (i.e., the federal government) had the second highest debt level (as a % of GDP) of the G7.

    When the Conservatives regained power in 2006, Canada had the lowest debt level (as a % of GDP) of the G7 countries.

    ...

    I say this based on information that can be found at the OECD website.*

    If you disagree with the data, or are unwilling to accept the above information as "fact", please let me know. I spent a ridiculous amount of time in early-mid December trying to find data that could be trusted--trusted by myself, and also by yourself (et al). One thing that worries me is our ability (as human beings) to live in separate epistemological universes, where we cannot agree on what should be considered basic facts.

    But I digress.

    From the data, I conclude that if any program spending cuts are necessary, it is because this government's economic irresponsibility.

    Not that I think they have done any of this unwittingly. Which is why, if I was a supporter of Harper, Flaherty, et al, I would not have been a "nervous nelly." I know (or, if you prefer, I "know") that they want to cut social programs; they want (from a certain point of view) to cut taxes; they have very specific idea about the government's role vis-a-vis the economy; they are intent on transferring public wealth into private hands... and if they come to power with no good reason to do so (e.g., with a balanced budget and surpluses) they will do their best to create a reason.

    Which is exactly what they've done.

    Grouchily,
    -Anon1152.



    On a completely different note, I hope you have had (and/or are having) a very Merry Christmas--and a safe trip home from Gagetown. (We just got back to Toronto ourselves, and already, it's back to work).





    *
    At least, metaphorically speaking.

    If you're interested in non-metaphorical math, my source for the debt figures is from the OECD.

    
http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=GOV_DEBT



    To get the information I am about to relate, I changed the chart somewhat (hiding and revealing data/variables to suit my purposes) by changing the "Country" selection and "Time Period" selection (located directly below the title "Central Government Debt"). I triple checked it. But sometimes that's not enough for me. So feel free to manipulate the displayed data yourself. If you're into that sort of thing.

     
  • At Sun. Dec. 27, 11:01:00 p.m. EST, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Hey 1152, BUT, don't forget how the Liberals got the debt levels down so fast... MASSIVE cuts to transfers to the provinces. We've already said we're not going down that road again.

     
  • At Sun. Dec. 27, 11:17:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    That is true. (The massive cuts to the provinces). And I can't say I was (or am) in favour of the way that was done. But those cuts to the provinces weren't the magic bullet as (some) people now suggest. And it did take a few years to get out of deficit. And the American economy and low Canadian dollar helped.

    But the pain didn't last as long as (I'm sure) many suspected. And they put the government on relatively sound fiscal footing. Which the current government has benefitted from. I don't want that to be forgotten.

    The current government seems to be telling me that I can forget about worrying, because they can eliminate the deficit without asking me (1) for more money; or (2) to have less money spent (on me). I find that... suspicious.

    And, as I suggested earlier, I find it suspicious that they came to power without deficits, created a situation in which they would be more likely (e.g., by cutting the GST 2 points), started spending a great deal of money, and now are talking about cutting spending... as if the financial problem wasn't (at least in part) created by them in the first place.

    -Anon1152

     
  • At Tue. Dec. 29, 11:12:00 a.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    but the flip side, CC, is that the gov't shouldn't overcommit this soon. Something not good, politically, may need to be done to balance the books.

    Mike Wisniewski

     
  • At Mon. Jan. 04, 07:05:00 p.m. EST, Blogger JML said…

    If it weren't for past governments Canada would not have fared so well during the recesssion, which Mr. Harper and Mr. Flaherty didn't recognize was coming. And we would be better off today if Mr. Harper hadn't frittered away money by the reduced GST from which few people benefitted.

    I find it ironic that the most Christian people are the ones who support wars. Who did Jesus kill? Well we're killing lots of innocent people in Afghanistan, and creating a more unsafe world. However, those people don't count do they, because they're not of your faith. Bring the troups home!

    I've never been ashamed to be a Canadian until now. We elected this secretive, mean-spirited, bully as a Prime Minister, and a spineless group of cronies. If you bunch aren't spineless then you should be ashamed because it looks like the only reason you want to serve is for personal and political gain, not for the improvement of life of all Canadians. I mean ALL Canadians not just the wealthy.

     
  • At Mon. Jan. 04, 07:07:00 p.m. EST, Blogger JML said…

    I just left a comment but I'm sure you won't approve it. Why? Because you don't have a legitimate argument against your government's racism and elitist attitudes.

     
  • At Tue. Jan. 05, 09:35:00 a.m. EST, Blogger CanadianSense said…

    JML,

    Where do your earn your income?

     
  • At Tue. Jan. 05, 09:38:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    No, I hadn't approved it because my life doesn't revolve around blogging.

    1) I'm not racist, rich, nor elite. If you're looking for the rich elitists, try looking at your local Liberal Party membership.

    2) Please provide documentation for your incorrect and wild accusations that we're "killing lots of innocent people". For the record, it's the Taliban who are killing schoolteachers for the heinous crime of, wait for it... educating little girls.

    3) If I've gained ANYTHING from my affiliation with the Tories, then I missed it somehow... because I'm not in it for myself. Nor am I in this for the wealthy. I'm in this because I believe that conservative principles are in the best interest of the vast majority of Canadians. I believe that no one should be left behind, and I believe in a strong social safety net for those who are truly in need. I also believe that it's a direct result of decades of Liberal rule that we have a large number of the messes we have on our hands... for example,

    a) the soaring costs of Healthcare due to a lack of fiscal restraint in wages and benefits

    b) an over-reliance on the State to meet needs, such that we now have problems with generational welfare (take a good look at the problems in Great Britian if you want to know where we're headed with that)

    c) a top heavy slew of Statist social programs that use loads of money in overhead costs, while delivering fewer and fewer dollars to folks who are truly in need.

    For the record, I support INCREASING benefits to folks on welfare, disability, and pensions. However, in order to do that, we have to streamline the system, reduce the layers of red tape, and get the cheats off the system... of which there are THOUSANDS. Have you ever dealt with any of the public social programs? I HAVE. So did my mother, you should have heard the stories she told. There are far to many people "working the system", and taking away from people in need.

    When people like you get your head on straight, and try to work WITH us in fixing these problems, instead of demonizing us every time we even talk about reforming our social programs, THEN we can move this country forward... TOGETHER.

    I find it so ironic and laughable when anyone on the left accuses us of not being willing to work cooperatively to address real needs and problems. Actually, no, I don't find it laughable... I find it disgusting.

    Address my comments and behave in your reply, or you better believe that I won't post it. You've been warned.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home