本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Evaluating Harper's economic performance
Prudent spending, he says? The Conservative leader may have the right ideas, but he's not delivering on all of them, writes Randall Denley.
Randall Denley, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Sunday, September 14, 2008
People worried about Canada's economic future and their own jobs have been offered complex election promises by the Liberals and NDP, but so far the Conservatives have come up only with broad principles. The two opposition parties imagine an active, interventionist government pulling on the economic levers to create jobs. The Conservative approach is much more modest.
Conservative leader Stephen Harper says he places his faith in free enterprise, free markets, and free trade. "We can't guarantee your job," he said in response to Ford's announcement of another 500 job cuts in Oakville this week. NDP leader Jack Layton is promising to spend $8 billion over four years to help create 40,000 jobs and an "energy economy." Liberal Stéphane Dion claims that his Green Shift policy will create jobs, keep the budget balanced, cut taxes, put money in your pocket and build the "strongest, greenest economy in the world."
These competing claims can't be properly weighed in the space of a single newspaper column, but the economy is the critical issue in this election campaign. Let's start by looking at what Harper has done in office and then return to a fuller examination of the parties' plans.
"Our plan is low taxes, debt reduction, prudent spending and positioning Canada in a competitive global economy," Harper said this week. The Conservative leader's prescription is the correct one, but he's not really delivering on it.
Harper refers to prudent spending, but that's hardly the case. Harper's budgets have forecast big increases in government spending, then exceeded those targets. Their first budget called for a substantial 5.4-per-cent spending increase. The actual figure was 7.5 per cent. The next budget forecast 5.6 per cent more spending and came in at 6.9 per cent. That's faster spending growth than under Liberal Paul Martin. So far this fiscal year, federal spending is growing at an 8.4-per-cent rate. Where's the discipline?
Harper has lowered the GST by two points and created various small, gimmicky tax breaks, but he hasn't made any significant progress on cutting personal income taxes. Harper did get the lowest tax rate down by half a percentage point, but that only reversed an increase he had made the year before.
The top federal rate of 29 per cent is hardly what one would call low. In a report to clients this week, BMO Nesbitt Burns economist Michael Gregory linked Canada's sagging productivity and high taxes, saying that they discourage people from working harder and longer because so much of that extra money goes to the taxman. This is a self-evident point that politicians are afraid to make. High taxes on the so-called rich are popular with those who earn less, but they discourage extra effort on the part of society's most economically productive members. That's bad for all of us.
Harper has done better on debt reduction, trimming the national debt by $27.4 billion while in office. Unfortunately, the shrinking surplus has reduced projected debt reduction to just $2.3 billion this fiscal year. Liberals are casting the diminished surplus as an example of bad economic management, but the criticism is off the mark. Taking in far more than a government needs each year is simply over-taxation, not good management. Harper was right to reduce the surplus, even if his particular tax cuts were not the most effective.
Harper does deserve credit, though, for introducing the $5,000 tax-free savings account, which kicks in next year. It's important for government to encourage saving and investment and the current policy of taxing even puny interest from Canada Savings Bonds did just the opposite.
Positioning Canada in a competitive global economy is one of the most important things a government can contribute to, but in Harper's term in office, it has been difficult to discern any direction for the economy. What kind of economy should we have, besides resource extraction?
So far in this campaign, Harper has announced a cut in the tax on diesel and jet fuel. If it has any effect, it will be to lessen the pressure for new, fuel- efficient technologies. Dion keeps stressing the point that his economic policies are right for the 21st century while Harper's are better suited to the 19th. The diesel tax cut supports that point.
Both Dion and Jack Layton are asking the right question. What should Canada's economy look like in the 21st century? We don't know Stephen Harper's answer to that question yet.
Be wary of political parties claiming they can "create" jobs. Businesses create jobs. What government can do is set direction, work with business, use the tax system to give incentives for hard work and risk-taking, and help Canadians understand what they need to do to compete and succeed in the world. Those are fair measures by which to evaluate the competing economic plans.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Prudent spending, he says? The Conservative leader may have the right ideas, but he's not delivering on all of them, writes Randall Denley.
Randall Denley, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Sunday, September 14, 2008
People worried about Canada's economic future and their own jobs have been offered complex election promises by the Liberals and NDP, but so far the Conservatives have come up only with broad principles. The two opposition parties imagine an active, interventionist government pulling on the economic levers to create jobs. The Conservative approach is much more modest.
Conservative leader Stephen Harper says he places his faith in free enterprise, free markets, and free trade. "We can't guarantee your job," he said in response to Ford's announcement of another 500 job cuts in Oakville this week. NDP leader Jack Layton is promising to spend $8 billion over four years to help create 40,000 jobs and an "energy economy." Liberal Stéphane Dion claims that his Green Shift policy will create jobs, keep the budget balanced, cut taxes, put money in your pocket and build the "strongest, greenest economy in the world."
These competing claims can't be properly weighed in the space of a single newspaper column, but the economy is the critical issue in this election campaign. Let's start by looking at what Harper has done in office and then return to a fuller examination of the parties' plans.
"Our plan is low taxes, debt reduction, prudent spending and positioning Canada in a competitive global economy," Harper said this week. The Conservative leader's prescription is the correct one, but he's not really delivering on it.
Harper refers to prudent spending, but that's hardly the case. Harper's budgets have forecast big increases in government spending, then exceeded those targets. Their first budget called for a substantial 5.4-per-cent spending increase. The actual figure was 7.5 per cent. The next budget forecast 5.6 per cent more spending and came in at 6.9 per cent. That's faster spending growth than under Liberal Paul Martin. So far this fiscal year, federal spending is growing at an 8.4-per-cent rate. Where's the discipline?
Harper has lowered the GST by two points and created various small, gimmicky tax breaks, but he hasn't made any significant progress on cutting personal income taxes. Harper did get the lowest tax rate down by half a percentage point, but that only reversed an increase he had made the year before.
The top federal rate of 29 per cent is hardly what one would call low. In a report to clients this week, BMO Nesbitt Burns economist Michael Gregory linked Canada's sagging productivity and high taxes, saying that they discourage people from working harder and longer because so much of that extra money goes to the taxman. This is a self-evident point that politicians are afraid to make. High taxes on the so-called rich are popular with those who earn less, but they discourage extra effort on the part of society's most economically productive members. That's bad for all of us.
Harper has done better on debt reduction, trimming the national debt by $27.4 billion while in office. Unfortunately, the shrinking surplus has reduced projected debt reduction to just $2.3 billion this fiscal year. Liberals are casting the diminished surplus as an example of bad economic management, but the criticism is off the mark. Taking in far more than a government needs each year is simply over-taxation, not good management. Harper was right to reduce the surplus, even if his particular tax cuts were not the most effective.
Harper does deserve credit, though, for introducing the $5,000 tax-free savings account, which kicks in next year. It's important for government to encourage saving and investment and the current policy of taxing even puny interest from Canada Savings Bonds did just the opposite.
Positioning Canada in a competitive global economy is one of the most important things a government can contribute to, but in Harper's term in office, it has been difficult to discern any direction for the economy. What kind of economy should we have, besides resource extraction?
So far in this campaign, Harper has announced a cut in the tax on diesel and jet fuel. If it has any effect, it will be to lessen the pressure for new, fuel- efficient technologies. Dion keeps stressing the point that his economic policies are right for the 21st century while Harper's are better suited to the 19th. The diesel tax cut supports that point.
Both Dion and Jack Layton are asking the right question. What should Canada's economy look like in the 21st century? We don't know Stephen Harper's answer to that question yet.
Be wary of political parties claiming they can "create" jobs. Businesses create jobs. What government can do is set direction, work with business, use the tax system to give incentives for hard work and risk-taking, and help Canadians understand what they need to do to compete and succeed in the world. Those are fair measures by which to evaluate the competing economic plans.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net