Paul Martin was the finance minister who plucked the federal government from the brink of fiscal chaos. It was a tough time for all including the provinces, even the Canadian Forces, but he balanced the budget and paid down $90 billion of our national debt. He kept the bankers in line and when he handed the reins to Harper he bequeathed a full treasury ready to absorb the brunt of the great collapse of 2008.
Put simply, Martin pulled our fat (yours and mine) out of the fire. Which is why he deserves to be heard on the mess we're in yet again and where we're headed.
The public has grown used to the Harper government’s mantra on deficits, but should be startled by what they hear from New Democrats, he said.
“That Tom Mulcair is now a student of Stephen Harper’s economy makes absolutely no sense,” said Martin.
“Where is the conscience of those who belong in the NDP? How can the NDP party — those who’ve worked it for all these years — stand for the fact that the party is now holding hands with the Conservatives and saying that our goal in the next mandate is to do absolutely nothing?”
“The current Conservative government has ground the economy down so far, trapping our most vulnerable of citizens in the process, that the next government has to act and that the NDP doesn’t understand that boggles the mind. Conservative obsession with eliminating the deficit down to the final decimal point is more than short-sighted. It’s yesterday’s war.”
Further evidence of how Mulcair and Harper are on the wrong page with their babble about balancing budgets comes from a new poll that finds Canadians believe their country is in a recession and support the federal government running a deficit to stimulate the economy.
Anyone who reads this blog knows I've been pretty tough on young Trudeau but I will give him credit for his commitment to a major, 3-year infrastructure programme. Sure he'll run a deficit but that's not the point. It's like bad cholesterol and good cholesterol. Harper's "throw a deck on the cottage" stimulus budget of 2009 was bad cholesterol. It was money squandered, gifted away, with no lasting return. Infrastructure spending, of the sort Harper didn't have the vision or courage to implement, is good cholesterol. It's money invested in public assets - highways, bridges, overpasses, power grids - that bolster the economy and reap returns for decades.
Of course, with this latest poll, the bearded chameleon may change his colours as effortlessly as he has on other situations in the past.
Showing posts with label Infrastructure spending. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Infrastructure spending. Show all posts
Saturday, August 29, 2015
Saturday, March 14, 2015
Here's One Way to Fund Badly Needed Infrastructure Projects
It's the Colorado way - weed. Since legalizing the production, sale and recreational use of marijuana the state has been raking in a tidy sum in new excise taxes.
Colorado's marijuana users are helping to buy new roofs, boilers and security upgrades for public schools across the state as the first round of special pot taxes gets allocated later this year.
The state's voters in 2012 legalized pot sales – and taxed them heavily – in part because the constitutional amendment promised that $40 million dollars a year would go toward school construction across the state. In the first full year of sales, however, the state expects to collect only about $17 million in special school taxes levied on the marijuana industry. Still, it's better than what the state collected the year before: nothing.
"The people who were smoking marijuana before legalization still are. Now, they're paying taxes," Gov. John Hickenlooper said.
Colorado's marijuana users are helping to buy new roofs, boilers and security upgrades for public schools across the state as the first round of special pot taxes gets allocated later this year.
The state's voters in 2012 legalized pot sales – and taxed them heavily – in part because the constitutional amendment promised that $40 million dollars a year would go toward school construction across the state. In the first full year of sales, however, the state expects to collect only about $17 million in special school taxes levied on the marijuana industry. Still, it's better than what the state collected the year before: nothing.
"The people who were smoking marijuana before legalization still are. Now, they're paying taxes," Gov. John Hickenlooper said.
The state expects that tax revenue to go nowhere but up as new permits are issued. Just think, that money used to go straight into the pocket of organized crime. One other thing to remember when considering these numbers - Colorado is a state of just barely 5-million people.
Tuesday, October 08, 2013
Harper is Letting Canada Crumble
It's an urgent, trillion-dollar threat that Harper thinks we should throw $50-billion dollars at over ten years. Hint: He should have made a $50-billion down payment on it in his stimulus budget in 2009.
Stephen Harper is thinking of funding a $50-billion/10-year infrastructure programme. That money won't even keep up with the pace of deterioration much less rebuild Canadian infrastructure to meet the challenges of climate change over the century ahead. At least Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
In June, while Calgary was flooding, the World Council on Disaster Management held its annual convention in Toronto. One expert in attendance, Dr. Saeed Mirza, emeritus professor at McGill, warned that Canada's aging infrastructure was in dire need of upgrading and replacement. He estimated we were looking at expenditures in the neighourhood of a trillion dollars and far more than than if we continued to put it off.
In January, 2009, the Brookings Institute made the case for similar, massive infrastructure spending in the United States.
"Major infrastructure projects of the past - such as the interstate highway system in the 1950s - were associated with steep increases in productivity. This productivity has receded in recent decades as investments have lost direction
and failed to focus on key areas. Without a national strategy for infrastructure, we are not experiencing the economic benefits of transformational programs like the interstates, the social benefits of iconic programs like rural electrification, or the sustainability benefits of air and water pollution control programs of the 1970s and 1980s."
It was Mark Twain who coined the line about how, to a man who has only a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Harper has that same lack of focus, a chronic inability to distinguish between spending and investing. That much was plain in his 2009 stimulus budget that I termed at the time his "pinata budget."
Too timid or ideologically hidebound to take the responsibility for investing the stimulus funding on something that would be useful to the country, he gave it away to those who were ready to put a new deck on the cottage. It was a colossal waste of money. A subsequent study concluded the money, all of it borrowed, was squandered so poorly that Canada lost out on 150,000 potential jobs.
The Harper government knows Canada is facing an infrastructure crisis but it's not about to tell the public any time soon, not while it still can kick that can down the road. What it knows only surfaced through access-to-information demands from the media.
The country and the very government responsible to protect it are falling apart on Stephen Harper's watch. He's digging us a very, very deep hole.
Stephen Harper is thinking of funding a $50-billion/10-year infrastructure programme. That money won't even keep up with the pace of deterioration much less rebuild Canadian infrastructure to meet the challenges of climate change over the century ahead. At least Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
In June, while Calgary was flooding, the World Council on Disaster Management held its annual convention in Toronto. One expert in attendance, Dr. Saeed Mirza, emeritus professor at McGill, warned that Canada's aging infrastructure was in dire need of upgrading and replacement. He estimated we were looking at expenditures in the neighourhood of a trillion dollars and far more than than if we continued to put it off.
In January, 2009, the Brookings Institute made the case for similar, massive infrastructure spending in the United States.
"Major infrastructure projects of the past - such as the interstate highway system in the 1950s - were associated with steep increases in productivity. This productivity has receded in recent decades as investments have lost direction
and failed to focus on key areas. Without a national strategy for infrastructure, we are not experiencing the economic benefits of transformational programs like the interstates, the social benefits of iconic programs like rural electrification, or the sustainability benefits of air and water pollution control programs of the 1970s and 1980s."
It was Mark Twain who coined the line about how, to a man who has only a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Harper has that same lack of focus, a chronic inability to distinguish between spending and investing. That much was plain in his 2009 stimulus budget that I termed at the time his "pinata budget."
Too timid or ideologically hidebound to take the responsibility for investing the stimulus funding on something that would be useful to the country, he gave it away to those who were ready to put a new deck on the cottage. It was a colossal waste of money. A subsequent study concluded the money, all of it borrowed, was squandered so poorly that Canada lost out on 150,000 potential jobs.
The Harper government knows Canada is facing an infrastructure crisis but it's not about to tell the public any time soon, not while it still can kick that can down the road. What it knows only surfaced through access-to-information demands from the media.
The country and the very government responsible to protect it are falling apart on Stephen Harper's watch. He's digging us a very, very deep hole.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
IMF Calls on Cameron Tories to Change Course
Yet Cameron has now run afoul of that bastion of radical socialism, the International Monetary Fund. The IMF is crying "enough already" and pleading with Cameron to reverse course if only to boost the British economy.
It said the £10bn-worth of spending cuts and taxes planned for the coming year would be a "drag on growth" and urged the government to do more to stimulate the economy.
The fund's deputy managing director David Lipton said Britain should bring forward investment on infrastructure and defer some near-term spending cuts to kickstart the economy.
"In a range of policy areas, the government should be more supportive of growth. What is important now is not to make a mistake today and presume that all will be well with the economy some years from now. I think it's important to get started on infrastructure projects that will support the economy." He said that would allow the government to push back some of the cuts and bring forward more supportive measures.
The UK could suffer higher unemployment and lose economic capacity permanently if it ignores the fund's advice, he warned.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Tories Gaming Infrastructure Spending
Nearly two out of five Canadians who could bother to show up at the polls voted for them so that explains why 75% of federal infrastructure spending since 2007 has gone to ridings held by Conservative MPs. From CBC News:
The Opposition party's analysis of the $1 billion dispensed from the Building Canada fund found 21 of 26 projects receiving money are in ridings that elected Conservative MPs, Liberal infrastructure critic Gerard Kennedy said.
Kennedy told the House of Commons during Thursday's question period that it leaves the majority of Canadians living in opposition ridings "massively shortchanged."
"Will the minister agree to stop punishing people who did not vote Conservative and to use infrastructure funds to create jobs fairly for all Canadians?" Kennedy said.
Not to be outdone by the likes of Gerard Kennedy, Liberal interim leader Michael Ignatieff puffed himself up, leapt to his feet, and went after Stephen Harper, claiming, "I'm an impatient man." Oh dear.
"I can't help but find I'm an impatient man," Ignatieff told the House. "Can the prime minister assure us that his infrastructure spending will benefit all Canadians, no matter where they live or who they vote for?"
The Opposition party's analysis of the $1 billion dispensed from the Building Canada fund found 21 of 26 projects receiving money are in ridings that elected Conservative MPs, Liberal infrastructure critic Gerard Kennedy said.
Kennedy told the House of Commons during Thursday's question period that it leaves the majority of Canadians living in opposition ridings "massively shortchanged."
"Will the minister agree to stop punishing people who did not vote Conservative and to use infrastructure funds to create jobs fairly for all Canadians?" Kennedy said.
Not to be outdone by the likes of Gerard Kennedy, Liberal interim leader Michael Ignatieff puffed himself up, leapt to his feet, and went after Stephen Harper, claiming, "I'm an impatient man." Oh dear.
"I can't help but find I'm an impatient man," Ignatieff told the House. "Can the prime minister assure us that his infrastructure spending will benefit all Canadians, no matter where they live or who they vote for?"
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Clear-Headed Thinking on Infrastructure
The Brookings Institute has published an op-ed piece, Memo to the President: Invest in Long-Term Prosperity, that offers some sage advice (to president Obama) on infrastructure investment, tips that would make good reading for Ottawa too:
Given your economic recovery platform, with action on education, energy and related topics, your administration has the opportunity to get the infrastructure investment right. This is critical because:
Roads, transit, rail and ports speed the movement of goods and people within and across markets, facilitating greater business investment, enhancing agglomeration economies, promoting labor-market flexibility and opening new domestic and international markets.
Improved infrastructure will assure a reliable energy supply, allowing firms to reduce operating costs, make sound long-term decisions and take full advantage of other infrastructure investments.
Investments in infrastructure can support sustainable growth by reducing traffic congestion, linking transit to dense residential and employment nodes or supporting clean-fuel technologies.
Major infrastructure projects of the past—such as the interstate highway system in the 1950s—were associated with steep increases in productivity. This productivity has receded in recent decades as investments have lost direction and failed to focus on key areas. Without a national strategy for infrastructure, we are not experiencing the economic benefits of transformational programs like the interstates, the social benefits of iconic programs like rural electrification, or the sustainability benefits of air and water pollution control programs of the 1970s and 1980s.
In the absence of a unified strategy, special interest and congressional politics spread funding around the country like peanut butter on a slice of bread, with no effort to advance national priorities or use cost-benefit analysis to optimize our investments.
To achieve such goals as job creation and a green economy—and the even broader aims of productive, inclusive and sustainable growth—we need to reform as we invest. Getting it done right is more important than getting it done fast.
In the short term, you should ensure that infrastructure reform is part of the agenda, improve the White House policy structure on infrastructure issues and develop a national infrastructure bank. In the intermediate term, you should articulate a bold national vision on infrastructure, empower state and local governments and commit to evidence-based decisions.
Emphasize Infrastructure Reform: A crucial first step is to restrict substantial funding from the recovery package to investments that:
secure and rebuild the system
help transition to a clean, efficient, energy-independent future
give some direct funding to metro areas, not just states and
create millions of green jobs.
Establish a National Infrastructure Bank:
Permanent and independent, this bank would provide financial assistance for innovative infrastructure projects of true national significance, acting where national uniformity is needed or the scale and geographic reach of a problem requires national attention. It would give priority to public-private partnerships that stimulate market-led advances in energy efficiency and transit-oriented development.
Bank-funded projects might unblock major ports and gateways, develop a smart electric grid, modernize air traffic control, upgrade rural telecommunications and broadband networks, and improve and expand intercity passenger rail. Small-scale or local projects should be funded through an enhanced Community Development block grant program.
While America's situations and her needs naturally differ from Canada's there's enough commonality of interest and benefit to make this report relevant to Ottawa. Whether it's Harper or an Ignatieff-led coalition, getting the infrastructure programme done right is indeed more important than getting it implemented quickly. It's also critical for Canada to ensure that the money path is tightly focused with full emphasis placed on restricting funding to projects that have the highest prospect of return to the economy in the future.
Read the entire report here:
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/0112_prosperity_memo.aspx?emc=lm&m=221447&l=49&v=988309
Given your economic recovery platform, with action on education, energy and related topics, your administration has the opportunity to get the infrastructure investment right. This is critical because:
Roads, transit, rail and ports speed the movement of goods and people within and across markets, facilitating greater business investment, enhancing agglomeration economies, promoting labor-market flexibility and opening new domestic and international markets.
Improved infrastructure will assure a reliable energy supply, allowing firms to reduce operating costs, make sound long-term decisions and take full advantage of other infrastructure investments.
Investments in infrastructure can support sustainable growth by reducing traffic congestion, linking transit to dense residential and employment nodes or supporting clean-fuel technologies.
Major infrastructure projects of the past—such as the interstate highway system in the 1950s—were associated with steep increases in productivity. This productivity has receded in recent decades as investments have lost direction and failed to focus on key areas. Without a national strategy for infrastructure, we are not experiencing the economic benefits of transformational programs like the interstates, the social benefits of iconic programs like rural electrification, or the sustainability benefits of air and water pollution control programs of the 1970s and 1980s.
In the absence of a unified strategy, special interest and congressional politics spread funding around the country like peanut butter on a slice of bread, with no effort to advance national priorities or use cost-benefit analysis to optimize our investments.
To achieve such goals as job creation and a green economy—and the even broader aims of productive, inclusive and sustainable growth—we need to reform as we invest. Getting it done right is more important than getting it done fast.
In the short term, you should ensure that infrastructure reform is part of the agenda, improve the White House policy structure on infrastructure issues and develop a national infrastructure bank. In the intermediate term, you should articulate a bold national vision on infrastructure, empower state and local governments and commit to evidence-based decisions.
Emphasize Infrastructure Reform: A crucial first step is to restrict substantial funding from the recovery package to investments that:
secure and rebuild the system
help transition to a clean, efficient, energy-independent future
give some direct funding to metro areas, not just states and
create millions of green jobs.
Establish a National Infrastructure Bank:
Permanent and independent, this bank would provide financial assistance for innovative infrastructure projects of true national significance, acting where national uniformity is needed or the scale and geographic reach of a problem requires national attention. It would give priority to public-private partnerships that stimulate market-led advances in energy efficiency and transit-oriented development.
Bank-funded projects might unblock major ports and gateways, develop a smart electric grid, modernize air traffic control, upgrade rural telecommunications and broadband networks, and improve and expand intercity passenger rail. Small-scale or local projects should be funded through an enhanced Community Development block grant program.
While America's situations and her needs naturally differ from Canada's there's enough commonality of interest and benefit to make this report relevant to Ottawa. Whether it's Harper or an Ignatieff-led coalition, getting the infrastructure programme done right is indeed more important than getting it implemented quickly. It's also critical for Canada to ensure that the money path is tightly focused with full emphasis placed on restricting funding to projects that have the highest prospect of return to the economy in the future.
Read the entire report here:
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/0112_prosperity_memo.aspx?emc=lm&m=221447&l=49&v=988309
Thursday, January 08, 2009
In My Face, Please!
The greatest economic minds in the world (the folks who were dismissed as loonies by the uber-right during the Reign of Greed) are of one mind when it comes to countries, particularly the United States, digging out of the recession/borderline depression that looms today - major infrastructure spending.
The idea is to get money flowing, get people working by investing in infrastructure. It's all about investing in things that will pay dividends to taxpayers in the future. It's about roads and bridges, public utilities and schools - the sorts of things have have been largely neglected in the wake of the fiscal lunacy impanted by Ronald Reagan.
Canada, too, is supposed to be getting into the infrastructure game but our Furious Leader's plan is to spend a pittance in relative terms compared to the U.S. In part that's because Canada's position is stronger than America's but that's only part. A good deal of the difference is Harper's ideology that always understates the problem we're actually facing.
Be that as it may, it's important that infrastructure projects have the broadest public exposure. The idea, in part, is to restore public confidence and that can only be helped by ensuring that as many people as possible see what's going on, see the projects underway, become persuaded that the economic engine isn't grinding to a halt.
Infrastructure projects have to be selected on their overall merits, obviously, but one of those considerations ought to be public awareness.
The idea is to get money flowing, get people working by investing in infrastructure. It's all about investing in things that will pay dividends to taxpayers in the future. It's about roads and bridges, public utilities and schools - the sorts of things have have been largely neglected in the wake of the fiscal lunacy impanted by Ronald Reagan.
Canada, too, is supposed to be getting into the infrastructure game but our Furious Leader's plan is to spend a pittance in relative terms compared to the U.S. In part that's because Canada's position is stronger than America's but that's only part. A good deal of the difference is Harper's ideology that always understates the problem we're actually facing.
Be that as it may, it's important that infrastructure projects have the broadest public exposure. The idea, in part, is to restore public confidence and that can only be helped by ensuring that as many people as possible see what's going on, see the projects underway, become persuaded that the economic engine isn't grinding to a halt.
Infrastructure projects have to be selected on their overall merits, obviously, but one of those considerations ought to be public awareness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)