Saving the economy will need more spending, even if some efficiencies in government is fine. Don’t hear about anything about economic boosting other than dead ender energy pipelines.
Canada total spending is $450B
But $120B of that is discretionary excluding transfer payments.
So we’re looking at a whole of government reduction of $18B for 15%. Transport Canada spends $25B on roads.
Stop subsidizing inefficient personal vehicles by making people absorb the real costs of them and we can make that cut in seconds.
I’m going to sound like a moron asking this, but if the country makes over 2 trillion per year, and we are only spending 4 some-odd billion per year, shouldn’t we be able to get out of debt while staying afloat over time?
I have a really hard time believing these cuts aren’t going to hurt services. They’re saying they aren’t going to lay off public servants, which suggests to me that it’ll be the actual service delivery that’ll take the hit.
They’re absolutely saying it will hurt services.
Cutting off your leg is tough but doable.
What’s this guy’s deal, man. I thought he was supposed to be an economist?
What’s this guy’s deal, man. I thought he was supposed to be an economist?
Do Economists never cut spending?
Dont worry, he wont be cutting the Bank of Canada’s funding, nor the billions in mortgage bonds the Bank of Canada is buying to inflate home values for his stock portfolio. It will be the less important things like health transfers and child benefits.
Doable is a real word now?
@Mongostein @slykethephoxenix earliest recorded use is from the 15th century, but it’s likely from the 12th.
Now that’s interesting
As an allophone: it isn’t?
I don’t even know what an allophone is
Language evolves constantly. If people use a word and can understand its meaning and context then it’s a perfectly cromulent option.
I don’t disagree. I’ve been saying it since like… 2005. Seeing the CBC use it feels weird though. 🤷♂️
