Press For Truth.ca
In a nut shell: the Conservatives raided the contingency fund. It
will be cut by $6 billion over the next three years. That's where a lot
of this “surplus” comes from.
It's also dependent on low interest
rates. Let's get this straight: a budget surplus doesn't eliminate the
existing debt, nor this system where if all debts were paid off, central
bank fiat would cease to exist. There is literally not enough money
floating around in the system to pay off all the trillions owed to
This is why COMER advocates interest-free loans
through the BoC and the gradual weaning off of the international
monetary system (ruled by Bank of International Settlements [BIS]). Of
course, this is neither the time nor place to get into the pros and cons
of this approach, the bright side is that it gets the Bank of Canada in
the news because if there's one thing to take away from this budget
it's that the entire thing is only possible because the BoC continues to
finance the federal government's debt. That's why central banks are
never mentioned in elections. For one, the power-elite who control these
banks have bought and paid for every major politician and second,
politicians love central banks. It's a printing press that allows the
Left to establish a welfare state without raising taxes and it funds the
wars of the Right also without raising taxes. When interest rates raise
to reflect true market levels, the federal government has the most to
The budget is a hoax. No, not that kind of hoax. I mean
it's a giant distraction from real issues like central banks and debt
based on paper created by a power-elite. But nevertheless, even within
the propaganda we can find snippets of what mainstream news should be
covering. There is controversy, mostly among the Left, about
Tax-Free-Savings-Account or TFSAs. The idea is that they are saving
accounts for rich people only and will cost the government money - your
money - in the future, prompting Joe Oliver to call the situation a
problem for “Stephen Harper's granddaughter.” Of course, the big problem
is not for Harper's granddaughter but his daughter and even for Harper
himself if he lives for another 30 years. And that problem is all the
unfunded liabilities and debt that the governments of the past have
promised to baby-boomers. There is no money, it's a giant ponzi scheme
that we're going to live to see collapse. Will the result be more
government intervention and tyranny, or will we return to a free market?
Share this information and help make the latter option more likely.
In the budget there are some “winners” for the conservative audience.
Like reducing the amount the taxpayers have to fork over for the “sick
leave” of public bureaucrats. Now, don't get me wrong I'm not trying to
pin person against person. People produce value for each other through
exchange, but so long as we're forced to pay for things like education,
health-care and environmental protections, there will be no honest
exchange. There's no objective measure for us, as taxpayers, to tell if
bureaucracies are doing their job in the most cost-effective and
efficient way. The way only to create that result is through the use of
free prices and voluntary exchange. So any reduction of the public
sector or public sector entitlements is great news but within context of
this budget... Well, clearly ending the wars and reducing the military
budget should be dealt with before getting to the public sector. The
warfare state is issue #1, with the welfare state taking the #2
position. But first things first: end the wars and central banks. Which
of course, isn't in this budget. So those petty political points for
minutely reducing the public sector only serve to divide and conquer us.
Get people arguing over the apparent “necessity” of the public sector
instead of the actual issues: wars, central banks, debt, the global
Joe Oliver says it
will help the Middle Class. Justin Trudeau says he'll come up with a
better plan to help the Middle Class (one that involves increasing taxes
on the top 2%). But who is the Middle Class? It doesn't exist. It's an
arbitrary income bracket created by politicians. There are only two
classes: those who create wealth and those who steal it. All governments
belong to that second class.
This budget also contains hypocrisy to a mammoth degree.
Joe Oliver said, "For generations Canadian families have understood the
path to prosperity,... Don't compromise tomorrow by spending recklessly
today. Don't pile on debt you can't afford. And invest sensibly for a
secure future.” The Conservatives, Oliver said, have the same
principles. Barf. They “stimulated” the economy in 2009 with a bunch of
new debt, have hiked spending on military and wars ($360 million to
fight ISIS this year, plus annual hikes of 3 per cent for National
Defence) and then they “balance the budget” using accounting tricks and
relying on the Bank of Canada's low, artificial, interest rates.
A full list of what's in this budget can be seen here. Interesting takeaways:
SIRC, the CSIS watchdog, sees budget doubled to $5 million.
$94.4 million over five years for cyber security.
$18 million this year to fight terrorism – rising to $91 million in five years.
But at least Ottawa sold its remaining shares in General Motors.
Governments should not be in the business of prompting up failed
There's also promises of money to be spent after
the Fall election, creating the incentives for Canadians to vote
Conservative. The budget is, surprise surprise, just another political
campaign ad like everything else this government has done (and has now
set a precedent that Trudeau and the Liberals can repeat).
NDP finance minister Janice MacKinnon said "Many economists questioned
why the government needed to balance the books this year,'' and she was
serious. Apparently having the “best” debt-to-GDP ratio means that the
government should "“spend more to stimulate economic growth."” And this
is why the NDP are irrelevant. But the Liberals have talked about
spending more on infrastructure as well. Justin Trudeau said,
“Whether it is infrastructure investments that will help people get to
and from work on time .... We are also looking at fiscal measures as
well that will help the middle class.”
As if politicians weren't
already out of touch with reality, “infrastructure investments” won't
mean Canadians getting to work on time. In fact, it's the opposite.
“Infrastructure investments” are the make-work projects that –- since
the first stimulus in 2008/09 –- have plagued the country with
construction. Every city street, every major highway. It's the
intentional destruction of resources. Instead of finding market
solutions to infrastructure that was never built to last (there goes the
argument that bureaus look at long-term well-being while businessmen
worry about short-term profits), the government will divert resources
from the free economy and put them into these never-ending make-work
projects that are cutting up our roads and city blocks, creating more
congestion and making everyone late for work or school. Clearly, with
that statement like that, Justin is out of touch the average “middle
class” voter whom Liberal deputy leader Ralph Goodale defines as someone
making between $44,700 to $138,586 a year.
The budget is a
farce. It's a political tool and will now be used as a basis for the
upcoming election. I guess H.L. Mencken was right,
"Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods."