Friday’s release of the final accounting for `08/09 fiscal year doesn’t contain much we didn’t already know. Those of us in the reality based community have known for a year, thanks to Mike Watkins, that the Harper Conservatives would be running a deficit for that year. There is one thing however, that stands out on table 5 (Revenues as a percent of total). Personal income taxes accounted for a record 49.8% of federal revenues. By comparison, this number stood at 39.5% at the beginning of the Mulroney government 25 years ago.

Let me say that again: Holy crap!

The federal deficit will soar to more than $50 billion this fiscal year, setting a dubious record far eclipsing the bad old deficit days of the early 1990s.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced Tuesday that the government’s shortfall will be more than $16 billion higher in 2009-2010 than he forecast in January’s budget.

From $13 billion surpluses to a $50+ billion deficit in three years must set a new record for fiscal incompetence.

Shorter Deficit Jim: Come on, lets get this liberal, deficit spending, wealth redistribution orgy going.

Update: David Akin smacks down Deficit Jim’s and PMS‘ bald faced lies that the opposition is stalling their liberal, deficit spending, wealth redistribution orgy.

We all need to keep the pressure on the opposition to act.

Let’s say it one more time: The legislation has not yet been tabled nor will it be until March 26. Even if the entire opposition crossed the floor today and the House of Commons consisted of 308 Conservative MPs, there would be nothing for them to “act” on because, and I hate to belabour this point, the legislation will not be tabled until March 26.

It looks to me like the Cons are trying to put the liberal, deficit spending, wealth redistribution cart before the liberal, deficit spending, wealth redistribution horse. Par for the course for the Conservatives I guess, but you’d think that after 3 years of selling out their principles they’d have at least learned to get their ass covering propaganda right.

Can anyone explain to me why we’re about to get a budget that nobody–from one end of the political spectrum to the other–really wants?

It looks like some Liberals MPs aren’t getting jiggy with Iggy.

A Liberal MP says she will vote against the Conservative budget if it is not amended to resolve what she calls punitive measures against Newfoundland and Labrador.

Judy Foote, who represents the southern Newfoundland riding of Random-Burin-St. George’s, is telling people who have contacted her office about the budget that she now has enough “hard evidence” about the feeling of constituents.

Newfoundland and Labrador’s six Liberal MPs are being pressured to vote against the budget, should it not be amended to delete language that could see the provincial government lose about $1.6 billion in offset payments over the next three years.

Naturally the punderatti will claim this looks bad for Layton.

The boys from Mythbusters prove that you can in fact polish a turd. But why would you want to when all you end up with is a polished turd.

I only have one thing to say about the `09 budget right now. This is what you get when a government that doesn’t believe stimulus spending will work tries to craft a budget full of stimulus spending.

Don’t Laugh, They Really Are This Childish
Has it crossed anyone else’s mind that the reason the Conservatives are releasing details of Tuesday’s budget early is simply so they can get the opposition’s opposition on record. Then on budget day they’re going to go, Psyche! We’re totally doing the opposite and since the opposition didn’t like that they have to like what we’re actually going to do and vote for it. They’re so pwned! Now they have to admit we’re the bestest government evah. Sux 2 B U! LOL!

Dumber Than Homer Simpson
They’re talking about tax cuts. That’s nothing new, but this time they’re going to borrow money to cut taxes which means the debt will grow.

I’m against these tax cuts for the same reason I’m generally against tax cuts. I believe we should pay off the debt that drains $35 billion from government coffers first. Even Homer Simpson in a flashback episode recognized it made good sense to wait until the day his mortgage was paid off before saying adios to the nuclear power plant to take his lower paying dream job at the bowling alley.

Conservatives and rightwing liberals who can’t understand paying off the bills before reducing income is the fiscally responsible thing to do are dumber than Homer Simpson.

Get To Work, You Slackers
Tucked away in this pre-budget leak story is this juicy little nugget.

Finley said the money will be available to people who are eligible for Employment Insurance as well as those who are not — such as self-employed workers and stay-at-home parents who want to get back into the workforce.

Ha ha! Finley just told the stay at home slackers to get off their lazy, bonbon eating ass and become productive members of society. That’s gotta sting.

Who Was Behind The Wheel
A rational person who came across the scene of a car that had crashed into a telephone pole would likely believe that the driver of the vehicle was responsible for steering it there. Conservatives on the other hand would argue otherwise. They’d claim it was someone else’s fault or try to tell you that the driver of the vehicle shouldn’t be faulted because an automobile can’t even be steered. Don’t let them fool you. We all know who steered us in the direction of the telephone pole we’re going to crash into on Tuesday.

Harper Days
Stagflation, devaluation, Harper Days,
Deficits, tax cuts, Harper Days,
No work, no hope, Harper Days,
Budget day, time to pray,
A coalition will rescue you.

These Harper Days put us in a bind (oh Harper Days)
These Harper Days prove voters are blind (oh Harper Days)
These Harper Days are yours and mine, Harper Days.

Conservative Party shill Tim Powers asks about Jack Layton;

How can any rational and responsible political leader announce their intention to vote against a document sight unseen?

While Dan Gardner notes;

I just heard a Conservative radio ad in which two women sound scared as jackrabbits about the economy. The ad then says urgent economic measures are now before Parliament and people should urge their MPs to pass the budget.

So… here is the Conservative Party of Canada suggesting, in effect, that people should be scared as jackrabbits about the economy. And that people should support unknown economic policies which are decidedly not before Parliament.

So apparently conservatives think it’s irrational to vote against a budget sight unseen but rational to vote for a budget sight unseen.

Phrase of the Day: Coalition Government.

As Mark at Section 15 points out, the $1.95 per vote that each party gets is not the only public funding political parties in Canada receive.

Will Harper likewise withhold the huge tax credit given to those who donate to political parties? That’s a huge “subsidy” as well — one that benefits the Conservatives the most.

The first $400 donated results in the feds reimbursing $300 (75%). The next $350 reimburses 50% ($175), and the next $525 reimburses 33.33% for $175.

Donating the max of $1275 results in the feds reimbursing the donor one-half of the amount: $650.

Using an average of 50% as basis for the amount rebated to donors from the taxpayer, here’s where the 3 main federal parties stand on how much additional public funding they received from individual donations last year.

Conservatives: $8,495,383
Liberals: $2,268,983
New Democrats: $1,989,868

As you can see, the Conservatives receive four times the amount of public funding from individual donations that the Liberals and NDP receive.

But this isn’t the end of public funding. Every riding association that garners at least 10% of the popular vote is entitled to a 60% rebate of their expenses from the taxpayer. Using an average of $60,000 which translates into a rebate of $36,000 as the basis for the amount rebated to each riding association from the taxpayer, here’s where the 3 main federal parties stand on how much additional public funding they will receive from the 2008 election.

Conservatives: $10,800,000
Liberals: $9,756,000
New Democrats: $8,748,000

Combined with the $1.95 per vote each of these parties will receive their total public funding comes out to:

Conservatives:$29,295,363
Liberals: $19,724,983
New Democrats: $15,637,868

Now here’s the catch. Under the current system the Conservatives would receive 48.5% more public funding than the Liberals. Under the new system where the $1.95 per vote is removed however, the Conservatives would receive 60.5% more public funding than the Liberals.

Harper’s move to eliminate the $1.95/vote public funding is not only an attack against the opposition parties it’s also an attempt to insure that the Conservative’s are even bigger pigs at the taxpayer funded trough when compared to the opposition parties.

The HarperKhans are going after public funding of political parties, just as I predicted they would.

Currently, the major federal parties get $1.95 per vote on an annual basis. In the last election, roughly 14 million eligible voters cast their ballots, which translated to $27 million in taxpayers’ money for the parties each year.

Under the new proposal, this is how much the parties stand to lose:

Conservatives: $10 million
Liberals: $7.7 million
NDP: $4.9 million
Bloc Quebecois: $2.6 million
Green Party: $1.8 million

Undoubtedly the NDP and Bloc will vote against this while the Liberals will roll over and pee on their bellies.

Update: “This means war.”

“This is huge. This is so audacious and outrageous,” said Pat Martin, an NDP MP from Winnipeg. “This means war.”

I’ve been against a 3 party (NDP-Bloc-Liberal) coalition government in the past simply because it has always felt to me that creating one was nothing more than an attempt to circumvent democracy. However, in light of this latest attempt by the Harperkhans to once again use the levers of government to attack our democracy I think the three opposition parties should begin formal discussions in order to do just that.

Update II: Reaction from some of the right whingers. It’s predictable.

“The Conservatives are dealing a massive body blow to Canada’s left wing parties, perhaps even their death blow.”–Blogger Right As Rain.

“Lessee if the Libs have no money to fight any election Harper has a majority no? Gotta love it!”–Commenter Joe at Small Dead Animals.

“In this, the Conservatives aim to level a strategic blow to the Liberals…”Blogger Stephen Taylor.

Update III: An “I Support Public Campaign Financing” facebook group has already popped up and I’m hearing a somewhat credible rumour that the NDP, Liberals and Bloc are or have already held a teleconference to discuss the possibility of forming a coalition government.

One thing I’d like to see the NDP do during the new session of Parliament is stop playing defense so often when it comes to budget cuts and start hitting back by proposing cuts of their own. And here’s the first one to help them get the ball rolling.

The Conferance of Defense Associations: This military advocacy group receives $100,000 per year from the Department of National Defense to lobby the government on their behalf. This is money the government of Canada cannot afford to spend as we head into Flaherty’s “technical recession” and it should be the first item on the chopping block.

A tale of two “conservatives”.

“Conservative” #1 on the budget.

Looks good to me.

“Conservative” #2 on the budget.

So you can imagine my shock, on opening the budget, to find that the new-look, skinflint minister plans to spend every bit as much as he forecast in last year’s bacchanalia, plus a little more. Last year, he was “the biggest spending finance minister in Canadian history.” This year, he still is.

So which one of these two “conservatives” is the real conservative?

FYI: For the second time in two years the Conservatives have cut StatsCan’s budget.

Don’t believe the media. This budget sucks for Canadians. Take the Tax Free Savings Account for instance. It will cost you money. The dopes in the media are touting this example of what you’ll “save”.

As an example, an individual contributing $200 a month to a TFSA for 20 years, at a 5.5 per cent rate of return, will earn about $11,045 more in savings than if the investment had been made in a taxable savings vehicle (unregistered account).

The problem is, that unless you already max out your RRSP every year you’d lose money in this scenario.

For example, an individual who earns $30,000/year contributing $200 a month to an RRSP for 20 years would realize an approximate tax saving–at today’s income tax rate–of $10,000. But that’s not all you’d lose. As per the example the media is touting, if that $10,000, or $500/year were reinvested into the RRSP it would give you an additional $2,000 in income tax savings. But that’s still not all you’d lose. That $12,000 dollars would also generate additional interest–at a return rate of 5.5%–over the 20 years of approx. $2,800 for a total of $14,800.

But we’re still not finished counting the losses. In the TFSA scenario, the $200/month at a rate of 5.5% would give you $88,300 after twenty years. The RRSP scenario on the other hand, would give you $110,300 after twenty years. This amounts to a staggering $22,000 or an overall total of $36,800 lost.

But Rob, sez you. What about the tax paid on the RRSP money when it was withdrawn. Well, sez I, let’s calculate the amount paid.

Let’s say our $30,000 income earner retires and has a pension of $20,000/year. In order to maintain their $30,000 income level they’d need to withdraw $10,000/year from their RRSP. The difference in income tax paid would be approx. $2,000/year. Over 11 years–the length of time the RRSP would last–the amount of tax paid would be $22,000. This reduces the amount saved to $14,800 which is still $3,800 more than you’d save under flim flam Flaherty’s silly scheme. And that’s based on today’s tax rate. If income tax rates continue to drop in the future you’d lose even more money.