Canada to lead in growth: OECD.....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/stor...st-canada.html

“The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development predicted Tuesday that Canada will lead industrialized countries in economic growth during the first half of this year.”

OK, I will play...not the post with the reference to “Brownshirts”.....that's for sure....`

I guess you missed that..........

I think that was me.

What part did you find problematic?

Read some history before regressing to lurid graphics please.

Obviously thats just due to the groundwork provided by Paul Martin, some might say.

Others might say that their problem with the Harperitics has nothing to do with the economy. They might say that the influence on the economy claimed by politicians when things go well is exaggerated, that a good government's role is just to avoid dramatic actions and that Harper, due to his minority position, has been forced to avoid such actions.

Cooper: Harper’s ‘permanent campaign’ is paying off

By Barry Cooper, Calgary Herald April 5, 2011

http://www.calgaryherald.com/technol...322/story.html

“Conservatives are likely to win, barring major and, so far, unforeseeable errors, is that they really do understand that just about every significant political problem the country has faced over the past generation is a consequence of growth in the size of our government and the misguided policies of political parties that supported it`....

Besides, politics is about choice, so consider the alternatives. The Liberals have promised to end Canada’s tax competitiveness by raising corporate taxes. This always appeals to demagogues on the left, but as Duanjie Chen and Jack Mintz of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary explained with great clarity, it is economic folly.”

Yep.....not such a bad prof is Barry....

He's not without weaknesses though is he?

Consider this paragraph:

"They will pay for it by cancelling Canadian participation in the F-35 fighter jet program, which every defence analyst I have ever read supports. Worst of all, it is to be done “in partnership with the public service,” the same self-serving people who lie at the heart of our woes."

1. "Defence analysts" supporting weapons acquistions is like Mothers supporting schooling.

2. Weapons acquisition and deployment is conducted by the public service, presumably "the same self-serving people who lie at the heart of our woes".

I note that the author is himself a member of the public service and wonder how he avoids being self-serving and at the heart of our woes.

All in all, I thought the turd slinging graphic better reasoned.

And they would be in large part correct.

The additional factor is the infrastructure and other stimulus spending over the last 2 years which H***er was forced to adopt to avoid defeat in a non-confidence vote after his ludicrous Economic Statement in the fall of 2008.

Oh, and the price of oil.

Hitler?

Most western economies have had a pretty good run for 20 years or so whatever governments have been in power. In general left leaning goverments will seek to redistribute wealth and right leaning governments seek to reward those that they consider to generate the wealth, as long as either don't do anything too drastic then for most people it won't make a huge difference either way. If the liberal government of the 90s and early 2000s did run budget surpluses and reduce borrowing then that is to their credit certainly. However, as far as the theory goes that the minority government has been constrained by the rest on the economy that seems a bit thin - I noticed last night on the news they were highlighting that a lot of the liberal proposals are no different to what was in the conservative budget that they supposedly were dead set against. I don't see Harper doing any that drastic on the economy with a majority. They can trumpet the lastest good growth projections for Canada and against that background generally the electorate generally isn't going to rock the boat. The plane business is a storm in a teacup.

I can't decide if the liberals precipitated the election thinking the economy was going to be picking up or conservatives did thinking the economy was going down, so that in 6 or 12 months time each would be in a weaker position. Either way they would both have been capable of it and would do the same in each others position given the opportunity.

On the social issues those that don't like Harper just don't like him no matter what he says. There's no great logic to it but it is what it is. I think their hostility is misplaced as he will be pragmatic more than anything having to give the most conservative in party some sort of reward if he gets in but not enough to alienate those in the middle.

One pundit I heard on the radio the other day said it's not like the choice on offer is between night and day but rather it's between pepsi and coke. Only a zeolot for either side would claim otherwise.

You seem to be implying that the stimulus spending was due to liberal prompting, not Conservative economic stewardship?

The conservatives seem to be happy enough to take the credit. Do you have a reliable source that shows that Harper was against it in the first place?

On the other hand it has rather run up the budget deficit. Overall I think it was a decent idea, but now Im confused as to whose it was.

I think the whole H***er and Brownshirts thing while clever is all a bit "playground" for my taste.

If the economy was in such great shape after 15 years or so of careful liberal management why was the stimulus spending needed?

Cos the bottom dropped out of the world, and particularly the US economy due to the credit issues. Liberal backed bank lending controls saved Canada from the worst of it.

The world? India and China seem to be doing ok.

Chinas economic growth dropped a massive amount because no one was buying anything. Their exports were down billions.





In either case the Canadian economy is going to suffer to some extent if the US econony is down, just through the lack of demand for canadian resources, never mind the service industries. Manufacturing here is also tied to the heath of the US.

Keeping jobs and shoring up confidence via investment in Canadian infrastructure was a decent move.