Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker
So, the new provincial budget has been announced. The government now suspects our deficit will be $1 billion less than they announced previously (I suspected that was a union contract negotiation ploy, releasing such terrifying numbers). That said, we're still slashing 1,200 positions.
I'm deeply curious what you all think, especially if you agree with these measures.
I'm under the impression that such austerity measures always fail, usually spectacularly, and often turn a recession into a depression. That said, our economy is booming... this problem is limited to government's inability to balance its books.
I think high-paying public sector jobs are a major component of any healthy economic engine. We see what happens when the lower and middle classes are gutted for the benefit of the rich in the United States. I don't want that to continue happening here.
The idea that wealth trickles down is offensive at face value and also, it seems, incorrect. The wealthy hoard their money. The poor spend it. The more money the lower and middle classes have, the more money that changes hands, and the healthier our economy.
So I think a strong public sector benefits us all.
But, then, where do we balance the books?
What do you all think?
|
Exactly! Capitalism functions via consumerism, which necessitates at least a modest amount of socialism and regulation, otherwise the middle-class falls into poverty due to pressure from monopolising corporations and the rich, who can afford political lobbyists.
Deficits are obviously not exclusive to Newfoundland and Labrador. Even Alberta is running deficits.
The following are contributing factors to struggling economies:
- Student debt (which is at an historic high in Canada);
- Non-student personal debt (also at an historic high in Canada);
- Low-wage jobs (which are what most newly created jobs are, today, in every province);
- Inflation (everything is getting more expensive);
- Low tax rates on (and high subsidies for) corporations, especially ones that are already high-profit;
- The same low tax/high subsidy issue for rich individuals, as the top income brackets usually hoard their wealth and hide it offshore whenever possible;
- And in terms of corporate hoarding: they DO NOT invest here, because they prefer to invest in countries that have cheap labour and minimal human rights;
- Urban sprawl;
- Propping up dying communities that no longer have the industries to support their existence;
- Too many municipal governments, when amalgamation should be considered;
- Having no such thing as a maximum wage...
Every low-density residential neighbourhood and low-density industrial park that is approved makes deficit-fighting that much more impossible...because with infrastructure and public services that must service that sprawl: you're stuck paying for it in the long-term. That long-term payment increases with inflation!! And let's not forget that: (a) the aging babyboomers will need a LOT of healthcare, and (b) young people aren't overly healthy and will also need lots of healthcare... There are predictions that the generations born today will live shorter lifespans than their parents.
Cutting better-paying public jobs is certainly not the way to reduce the deficit, not in the short-term -- not in the long-term.