# Canada in Bankruptcy



## Iamwhatiam (Jul 11, 2011)

I was reading online that Canada is operating in Bankruptcy.
Can anyone confirm this?

Our $ is not backed up by any metals and is created from thin air from the Federal Reserve Bank.
Can anyone confirm this?

Thanks
J


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

You wouldn't happen to be reading the fine material from the Canadian Action Party have you?

http://canadianactionparty.ca/campaigns/monetary-reform-bank-of-canada/

But yes, you're basically correct. Consider running for the hills. LOL.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

meet-up with v_tofu


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Elvis is still alive, dude.


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

LOL, where's Toronto.gal and her tinfoil hat when you need her?


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Suggestion to moderators : We need a separate section under General Topics called _Trolls, Frauds and Tax Evaders_.


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

I don't think any country has had their $ linked to any metals since the 70's....

And if you think of the country as business....it is common for businesses to carry debt, the ability of the business to sevice that debt has been the concern for some countries lately.


----------



## LondonHomes (Dec 29, 2010)

Iamwhatiam said:


> Our $ is .... created from thin air from the Federal Reserve Bank.


Why would you think that the Federal Reserve Bank would ship "thin air" to the Bank of Canada to make money with? 

The Canadian $ just the the US $ is backed by the governments ability to tax.
The ability is far more valuable then a stockpile of metal sitting in a vault some place.


----------



## Iamwhatiam (Jul 11, 2011)

*Okay...*

As much as jokes can be made - the question still remains ...

What is the evidence ...

Production and distribution

Federal Reserve Notes are printed by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP), a bureau of the Department of the Treasury.[8] The Federal Reserve Banks pay the BEP not only the cost of printing the notes (about 4¢ a note), but to circulate the note as new currency rather than merely replacing worn notes, they must pledge collateral for the face value, primarily in Federal securities.[clarification needed]
The Federal Reserve shreds 7,000 tons of worn out currency each year.[9] Federal Reserve notes, on average, remain in circulation for the following periods of time:[10

*Four cents a note is a nice markup.*

http://www.debtclock.ca/

The above site show's Canada's Federal Debt.

Examples of national bankruptcy

A failure of a nation to meet bond repayments has been seen on many occasions. In 1557 Philip II of Spain, defaulted on debt several times, had to declare four national bankruptcies - in 1557, 1560, 1575 and 1596 - becoming the first sovereign nation in history to declare bankruptcy, due to rising military costs as it had become increasingly dependent on the revenues flowing in from its mercantile empire in the Americas.[1][2] This state bankruptcy threw the German banking houses into chaos and ended the reign of the Fuggers as Spanish financiers. Genoese bankers provided the unwieldy Habsburg system with fluid credit and a dependably regular income. In return the less dependable shipments of American silver were rapidly transferred from Seville to Genoa, to provide capital for further ventures.
In the 1820s, several Latin American countries which had recently entered the bond market in London defaulted. These same countries frequently defaulted during the nineteenth century, but the situation was typically rapidly resolved with a renegotiation of loans, including the writing off of some debts.[3]
A failure to meet payments became common again in the late 1920s and 1930s; as protectionism rose and international trade fell, countries with debts denominated in other currencies found it increasingly difficult to meet terms agreed under more favourable economic conditions. For example, in 1932, Chile's scheduled repayments exceeded the nation's total exports.[3]

Denmark 1813: Danish state bankruptcy of 1813
*United States 1933: confiscation of gold in private hands (Executive Order 6102) to be later revalued from $20 per ounce to $35 per ounce.
United States again with the 1971 repudiation of the dollar-gold convertibility (the Nixon Shock) considered by many a de facto national bankruptcy.*
Russia: 1998 Russian financial crisis
Argentina: Argentine economic crisis (1999–2002)
Zimbabwe: Hyperinflation in Zimbabwe
Ecuador defaulted 2008 on one of its bonds[4

Does anyone know any differently?


----------



## v_tofu (Apr 16, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> meet-up with v_tofu


Oh hello my narrow minded suburban friend!


----------



## Iamwhatiam (Jul 11, 2011)

*Okay*

So basically the only way to find out is to write a letter to the government and ask them directly.

If they say "I can't comment on that" then that means "yes". 

That the just of it?


----------



## ddkay (Nov 20, 2010)

There was already another thread about this, not sure what happened to it.

Used responsibly (i.e. with means to repay) debt can be used to create prosperity. How many businesses would be around if they didn't have access to capital, access to loans? How many businesses fail because of their inability to repay their loans?

The model for sovereign debt breaks when debt growth is permanently outpacing GDP growth. Then you get an excess of liabilities, you get a deficit, and eventually you default.

It should be obvious debt is not infinitely sustainable by design, no country can't perpetually borrow and produce positive GDP growth for the minimum payments, unless GDP becomes measured in a different way than it is today.

In Canada's case, 33% of our GDP is collected tax revenue, so a debt-to-GDP ratio over 33% is probably unhealthy (our actual ratio is 77%), yet still relatively healthy compared to basket cases like Japan where tax revenue is 28% of GDP and public debt is 227% of GDP.


----------



## ddkay (Nov 20, 2010)

Also stop reading sites like debtclock.ca and watching fearmongering Fox News and YouTube videos

How cany anyone consider them any more credible than Gene Ray

These people are thinking, but they're thinking the wrong way. Is it really a problem? What is your solution? Countries can't increase taxes in one full swoop without rampant opposition and tax evasion. Countries could stop spending in one full swoop (default), but that would trigger a global depression, and in the most extreme scenario war and reparations. Our government already acknowledges the deficit. They obviously think Canadians and the rest of the world will be capable of producing enough in the future to cover our debt. The PC were elected into office to "improve the economy". So how does writing to government, telling them to solve it, or let someone else know they should solve it, solve anything more from here?

If you want to be educated on how a system actually works, if you want to pick its faults, you need to learn from people who have a clue wtf they're talking about, and that usually doesn't include all-debt-is-bad protesters and perma-bull Wall Street economists.


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

Iamwhatiam said:


> So basically the only way to find out is to write a letter to the government and ask them directly.
> 
> If they say "I can't comment on that" then that means "yes".
> 
> That the just of it?


There is a big difference between, having debt, being able to service that debt, and being bankrupt, whereas the debt cannot be repaid.

You seem to be confused between the two.


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

Cal said:


> I don't think any country has had their $ linked to any metals since the 70's....


The Swiss franc was linked to gold until 2000.


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

Iamwhatiam said:


> I was reading online that Canada is operating in Bankruptcy.
> Can anyone confirm this?
> 
> Our $ is not backed up by any metals and is created from thin air from the Federal Reserve Bank.
> ...


I also read online that the Loch Ness monster and Ogopogo are a couple. It must be true then! Sorry 

All fiat currencies are "backed" by the gov't that issues them. Therefore, the CAD, like other fiat currencies, depends on that elusive intangible: confidence. If investors believe the promises of the Canadian gov't, they'll buy Canadian debt and push up the value of the CAD. The Cdn economy has less debt than other G8 countries, and our resource-based economy is likely to be profitable in a more populous world. Right now, global investors have great confidence in the loonie; it's been rising vs. the USD. Our central bank has much more credibility than the Fed, and Canada has no problem issuing debt to foreign buyers. 

This wasn't always the case. In decades past, Canada has needed to issue Canadian bonds (actually debentures) denominated in USD because investors had little faith in the future strength of the CAD. Canada can re-pay bond investors because the law allows it to "print" money even if tax revenues fall short. The currency, obviously, would be worth less.

If you're worried about the value of the CAD, you can protect yourself with precious metals, multinational dividend paying stocks, and currency ETFs. Personally, I think the CAD will continue to do well in the intermediate term.


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

Larry6417 said:


> The Swiss franc was linked to gold until 2000.


Fair enough.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Yes. Go take your beef jerky and shotgun to your cabin in the woods. I'll come get you when it's safe to come back. Just drop off your now-worthless banknotes at my place on your way out of town.

Cheers.


----------



## SixesAndSevens (Dec 4, 2009)

to the poster : It is easy to say let's go back to the gold standard.
but what you don't realize is that that will cause an immeidate confiscation of all personal gold by the various governments.
there just isn't enough gold in the US or Canada or Europe to back all the outstanding units of various fiat currencies, not to even begin mentioning China and Japan.
all governments worldwide will immediately confiscate all personal gold and pay you back in (then worthless paper money).
it will be a return to the dark ages i.e. pre 1929.

and what will that solve even then?
did we not have depressions and recessions and hyperinflation and wars back then.


----------



## v_tofu (Apr 16, 2009)

ddkay said:


> *Used responsibly (i.e. with means to repay) debt can be used to create prosperity.*


And that's the keyword right there. None of the QE1, 2, TARP, bailouts where the billions of dollars created were eve close to being used responsibly.

The elitist scums in power continue to line the pockets of their friends and help those out that were over leveraged, while the middle class continually degrades into poverty. Increasing the size of government while diminishing the rights and liberties of the common folk.

With that being said, I think Canada is on the right track for economic growth. The cons have a 5 year plan to reduce the deficit (at least on paper anyways), keeping our land sovereign from Islamic terrorists with F35's, and scrapping the wasteful paperwork and government $$ of the useless gun registry.

If you have the time, this mini documentary on the economic collapse of Argentina shows what went wrong in 2001 and how it is so similar to the current events in Greece 10 years later, and perhaps the US.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH6_i8zuffs


----------



## v_tofu (Apr 16, 2009)

SixesAndSevens said:


> to the poster : It is easy to say let's go back to the gold standard.
> but what you don't realize is that that will cause an immeidate confiscation of all personal gold by the various governments.
> there just isn't enough gold in the US or Canada or Europe to back all the outstanding units of various fiat currencies, not to even begin mentioning China and Japan.
> all governments worldwide will immediately confiscate all personal gold and pay you back in (then worthless paper money).
> ...


Why would it cause an immediate confiscation of all persona gold?

Yes, Roosevelt did order gold to be returned, but remember, most did so because times were different back then, and felt it was their patriotic duty to do so. They didn't have police barging through everyone's home with metal detectors and search warrants.

Not enough gold to back the currencies? Well, not at the current price But when, not if, gold hits 8 or 9 thousand dollars an oz... well then.. i think we have some sound money.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

v_tofu said:


> keeping our land sovereign from Islamic terrorists with F35's,


Huh?!?

You're kidding, right? The F-35s have nothing to do with terrorism. You don't need a stealth interoperable jet to drop some bombs on guys in caves.

We don't know what threat it is that requires us to buy the F-35s. All we know is that those threats are lapping. On our shores. Right now. Crawl under your bed and hide.

For the record, I think we should be buying new aircraft, and I wouldn't even be opposed to spending more than planned. I just think the procurement process was a clusterf**k, that these jets are not well-suited to defending Canadian airspace, and that we are probably going to get very poor value for money once cost overruns are factored in (on track to cost double previous estimates with Congress threatening to pull the plug).


----------



## LondonHomes (Dec 29, 2010)

v_tofu said:


> And that's the keyword right there. None of the QE1, 2, TARP, bailouts where the billions of dollars created were eve close to being used responsibly.


The direct effect of printing all that money with the QE1 & QE2 programs is that the US dollars is now worth less than before (hence the rise of the $ CDN). With QE1 & QE2 every American got a pay cut which should have been 1 of the goals of the program since it is Macro Economics 101.

Of course what happens is if the government prints too much new money the value of it continues to fall until it's worthless and the economy crashes with Hyper Inflation. Responsible governments will not let this happen thus a fiat currency is perfectly fine.


----------



## K-133 (Apr 30, 2010)

Iamwhatiam said:


> Our $ is not backed up by any metals and is created from thin air from the Federal Reserve Bank.


My concern is how the Federal Reserve Bank can make use of the thin air that occupies space belonging to NASA. NASA clearly owns to rights to that which occupies its space.

How can an economy be built on the perceived value a piece of metal? It isn't about the fabrication of value from nothing, but the perception of value among people. Sounds the same, but it really is different. At least until energy becomes abundant and free. This creates a baseline for the trade of goods and services. If something is perceived to have value among one or more individuals, then it has value in the system. In the current case, a country and what it produces is perceived to have value and therefore the country as a whole has value. The currency which it creates is the token representing a portion of its value, and also has a perception of value of its own.

When you buy a stock in a company, you are buying nothing more than a perceived value relative to the perceived value of the company. When you put money into your bank, you are again buying nothing. They've traded you your tokens for nothing but a perception of value in their pile of computer data.

The economic system has evolved from direct trade of goods and services, to trade of Earth made tokens, to trade of man made tokens, to the trade electrical signals. So I guess the nothing that is a perception of value is really just converted into electrical signals. Therefore the Reserve Bank should have no patent infringement suits with NASA.


----------



## Iamwhatiam (Jul 11, 2011)

*...*

The question is ...
Why doesn't Canada create it's own currency ... the government has the power to do that.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You mean, like a Canadian dollar?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> You mean, like a Canadian dollar?


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

Iamwhatiam said:


> The question is ...
> Why doesn't Canada create it's own currency ... the government has the power to do that.


You're joking, right?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Huh?!?
> 
> You're kidding, right? The F-35s have nothing to do with terrorism. You don't need a stealth interoperable jet to drop some bombs on guys in caves.
> 
> ...


Everybody has their say on fighter jets when really most don't have a fraction of the full picture of what they are for, what the threat can be, or what the real pros/cons are. Interoperability and high tech means half the jets can do the same job with half the maint/fuel/training etc. Stealth is overrated and it's a design feature, it's not a significant cost. These jets will last 30+ years, so really there are many other military expenses that are just as big and it's a shame that people don't put so much interest into them all

The whole point of the JSF was that it was developed for export in collaboration with countries who would potentially buy it. Canada invested in the program from the start so that people who actually know what we need could be involved and so that we could get some of the economic spinoffs. It's the next best thing to developing our own aircraft which would not be cost effective at all. The JSF is made by multi-national corps with the participation of many countries instead of just one. This is not a clusterfuck, this is exactly how it should be. Also, the JSF in itself was a competition that several companies competed for, 2 fighters were built over 15 years ago and the F-35 was chosen...

The Euro fighter was a similar project. Working with them now and it's no better for Canada. Seeing as we don't need them right away I'm not sure why we'd buy older tech that we have no part in. Many lessons were learned from the Euro fighter that people aren't aware of. Besides that there is the Gripen that is a splendid fighter but not designed for our needs at all. Super Hornet is an acceptable jet but it's only an interim fighter that would have to be replaced. Waiting for the JSF makes the most sense financially and for the military as well. People who say it isn't the right jet for Cdn airspace have no concept of the job and there is no better fighter for the cost. You could design a better fighter for a specific task, but the JSF is designed to do many tasks relatively well


----------



## v_tofu (Apr 16, 2009)

Iamwhatiam said:


> The question is ...
> Why doesn't Canada create it's own currency ... the government has the power to do that.



i think a celine dion based currency would be amazing.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Cute! "In Divas we trust" 

Get the jets, build the jails, lower the corporate taxes to stimulate investment in Canada, raises the taxes to pay for the shortfall.
"oh Canada, we stand on guard for thee"
.....
..and the rockets red glare with those smart bombs bursting in air..
gave proof thru the (shock and awe) night..that our F35 jets were still there..


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

*Too funny!*

If David Bowie can have his own bonds, why can't Celine Dion have her own currency?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowie_Bonds


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Larry6417 said:


> You're joking, right?


Of course he is!
Haven't you realized he's a troll?
This is the second or third time he's posting this using different ID.


----------



## Syph007 (May 2, 2011)

Someone needs to watch a documentary called Money as debt. It explains how banks USED to have all paper notes backed by gold, but this is no longer the case. Most money is birthed by banks as debt. So when joe shmoe takes out a loan for x dollars, that money is just created into the economy.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Syph007 said:


> Someone needs to watch a documentary called Money as debt. It explains how banks USED to have all paper notes backed by gold, but this is no longer the case. Most money is birthed by banks as debt. So when joe shmoe takes out a loan for x dollars, that money is just created into the economy.


What you describe here has nothing to do with gold-backed vs. fiat currency.

It is the money multiplier effect.
This has been around since the begining of the banking system.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/multipliereffect.asp


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

HaroldCrump said:


> Of course he is!
> Haven't you realized he's a troll?
> This is the second or third time he's posting this using different ID.


If he's a troll, at least he's an _entertaining_ troll. _Canada should get its own currency!_ Why stop there?  Why don't we get our own flag and anthem too?


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

Syph007 said:


> Someone needs to watch a documentary called Money as debt. It explains how banks USED to have all paper notes backed by gold, but this is no longer the case. Most money is birthed by banks as debt. So when joe shmoe takes out a loan for x dollars, that money is just created into the economy.


That's fractional reserve banking - old hat as Harold mentioned. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

Speaking about this country as though it's a foreign entity and spoken of in the third person, almost sounds like something I'm Howard would say.


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

Is this the CMF's version of "Where's Waldo?" Decide which troll is actually Howard?


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

In all fairness, I would never have considered I'm Howard a troll. He was many other things, but he did contribute, and sadly, I think he really believed in the things that he said. I'm Howard would say ignorant things, this guy just said some stupid things... there is a difference


----------



## Larry6417 (Jan 27, 2010)

You're right. I shouldn't imply that Howard was a troll. I'm actually sad he's gone. He injected a bit of colour to the forum, even if he was sometimes off colour.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

i think it's possible, from the language signature, that iamwhatiam is howard.

not saying iam def is howard but cannot rule this out.

on the other hand the soy pudding seems to be another person entirely.


----------



## Causalien (Apr 4, 2009)

I believe, from the geopolitical analysis, that Canada needs to arm up for the potential conflict in the rush for arctic resources. The biggest contender will be Russia and sadly, we are the buffer between them and the US and we can't ask the US to send fighter jets to escort Russian planes out every time they infringes on our airspace.

Whether you like it or not, resources are getting scarce with 1/4 of the earth population waking up and wanting a middle class life. While, at the same time, Global warming is melting arctic ice, bringing more usable land.


----------



## ddkay (Nov 20, 2010)

We could always invite the Taliban to live there and protect it, they won't mind the North so much once its warmer


----------



## LondonHomes (Dec 29, 2010)

Causalien said:


> and we can't ask the US to send fighter jets to escort Russian planes out every time they infringes on our airspace.


A little too late for that one. NORAD is already setup and has been running for a few years now.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't think anyone is suggesting we not have the capability to support the demonstration of our sovereignty over our territory. But if it comes to a shooting war with Russia over our Arctic territory, we're going to lose without support from the USA/NATO.

And we have been intercepting Russian aircraft for decades. The psychodrama that the government invented for it a couple years ago with bizarre. It is utterly routine, and not some sudden panic. That was your Minister of Defense trying to scare you so that you'd vote for his party. Edifying, aint it?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Any claims to the Arctic will be fought against the US and Denmark in addition to Russia.


----------



## jmlz1987 (Jun 8, 2011)

Been a while gents, but had a good read on this one.

Coming from someone in the Forces currently, I am not so much biased with my POV about military procurement but for the safety of the men and women I serve with. From the clusterfunks of the Comorant project placed to replace the oh so aging Sea King, as well as the befuddlement of the previous JSS plans, have set the military back from the great standard we held with our equipment for a generation. Not to side with any specific political party, but our government in power right now is taking steps (to the much dislike from the general Canadian populous) to ensure our military can and will be able to respond to not only domestic issues, but remain on the world stage as a leader in humanitarian missions (aid or peacekeeping)

My ship is currently 42 years old and is failing, fast. Every time we are tasked on a cruise/sail, we require extensive maintenance to ensure we can even sail out of port. This requires long hours from civilian crews (paid per hour), and rush orders on parts that at times don't even exist in our supply system. 

Not to mention the ship we have currently has no sea-lift capability, and that has been an issue over time. (there was a case of a frigate chasing after a hired civilian cargo ship moving back assets from Bosnia) Also, hiring ships to tow costs a lot.

I know I've digressed from the original story, but I have not found a better place to place my two cents about these issues other than this troll thread. Cheers


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

agree with kcowan. Other nations are circling the highest of the high arctic. Even in the southern arctic, the US can be remarkably aggressive about forcing its presence in the waterways.

does canada have sovereign rights in the high arctic ? all the way to the north pole ? it's hard for history to say. There's no human settlement, really.

way i see it, canada has as much right to the high circumpolar arctic as any other nation. And i'm canadian, so i don't want to see other nations grazing next to our turf.


----------



## Iamwhatiam (Jul 11, 2011)

*I'm not Howard*

I didn't realize this was a stand up comedy forum ... else I wouldn't have joined and no I'm not Howard ... I don't know who he is and I don't care to do any searches on here to find out.

Anyone who says Canada should not make it's own currency to offer to the people at decent interest rates is a traitor as far as I'm concerned. Sell your soul to the FED It'll land you in hell for sure ... you now know in advance.

All I was looking for was how can I confirm that Canada is in bankruptcy and apparently that translated here means "don't answer the question" I'm some kind of tax evader, troll or Howard the duck.

Regardless I think I've narrowed it down to "the Receiver General" and after sending out emails asking the question to the GOV guess what I got as a response? 

NO response and you know what NO response means ... just like an ostrich bury your head and hope the question goes away because the answer is yes but so long as no confirmation is given - then it can't be yes or no. 

How sad.

Once again - is there anyone here that can show that Canada is operating in bankruptcy?

Smart *** replies - please find another thread.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Iamwhatiam said:


> Once again - is there anyone here that can show that Canada is operating in bankruptcy?


Can you present any evidence that Canada is bankrupt?
As far as I can tell, we have some of the best resources in the world, such as oil, natural gas, gold, silver, uranium, you name it.
Our currency is amongst the strongest in the world right now.
Our employment situation is amongst the strongest in the world (not that there isn't room for improvement).

If fiat currencies become worthless tomorrow, we have more than enough energy to sustain our nation, more than enough land to grow all our food and more than enough gold and resources to buy whatever we cannot produce.
What are you getting all bent out of shape for?


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

I don't know about Howard the duck, but I think that most gov't agencies would think that you are a quack upon recieving your emails.

I don't mean that in an insulting way. Just a little humour.

Take a step back from your fear/concern. Compare Canada to other countries, and their monetary systems/currencies/valuations.

Canada isn't operating in bankruptcy, just operating with debt. Managable debt. When the ability to pay that debt, or sell assets to finance the debt becomes a problem, then you should worry. Although if that happens we will all have alot to worry about, won't we.


----------



## financialnoob (Feb 26, 2011)




----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

A country becomes bankrupt when it can no longer finance its debt. Canada is not close to having that happen.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The Canadian government will never run out of Canadian dollars to repay its debt. They own the printing press, and can make as many as they want to, should it come to that. 

The Canadian government (as well as Ontario and a few others) also have some small USD borrowings, as well as real return bonds. They might have to default on those.


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/klaxon.htm

LOL


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Federal government debt reaches the 1 trillion dollar mark for the first time. Not a good mark for the Liberals to reach and not good if interest rates were to rise.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-market-debt-1.4590441


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

The government is bankrupt but it doesn't matter. It has been running on the slick trick, the quick fix and the gimmick since before you were born. Just when you think you know all the scams another layer comes to light. When one scam blows up they quickly replace it with another one. How long can this go on? Well when one party pooper pointed out that in the long run his policies must be ruinous, Maynard Keynes replied "in the long run we are all dead". This wisecrack is what passes for wisdom in economics. But in fact he was correct, he and his contemporaries are all dead and their grandchildren had to deal with the fallout of his blunders just as we will have to deal with theirs. The chance of any country being allowed to put their economy on a sound basis is nil.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I believe I debt/GDP ratio was worse during and after the post Mulroney era. We were well able to move forward. 

Interesting though. If you look at Canadian and US Governments over the years, the Conservatives and the Republican have incurred the most debt. Opposite to what one would expect.


----------



## Nerd Investor (Nov 3, 2015)

ian said:


> I believe I debt/GDP ratio was worse during and after the post Mulroney era. We were well able to move forward.
> 
> Interesting though. If you look at Canadian and US Governments over the years, the Conservatives and the Republican have incurred the most debt. Opposite to what one would expect.


Because when the debt is created by a tax cut no one complains.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

The challenge in Canada is not simply the Federal debt. It is the combinaton of Federal and Provincial debt.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

The biggest challenge would be rising interest rates.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

new dog said:


> The biggest challenge would be rising interest rates.


The biggest challenge are Liberals on all levels who destroying country


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Ontario Libs just offered free daycare...........check and checkmate for Doug Ford ?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

sags said:


> Ontario Libs just offered free daycare...........check and checkmate for Doug Ford ?


Yet more deficit. Ontario taxpayers can (potentially) be so gullible. Not that it is not a laudable goal but they better drop something else to pay for it.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

sags said:


> Ontario Libs just offered free daycare...........check and checkmate for Doug Ford ?


Don;t know what they offered, but they cancelled Tuition Tax credit.... do you think students will be happy?! My kids are mad!

_Ontario Health Minister Eric Hoskins resigns... His departure will be a blow to Wynne's cabinet, as he is the fourth senior minister to announce he will not run in the election. _ rats are escaping from sinking ship


----------

