Author Topic: Canadian Budget 2017  (Read 4853 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,329
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #25 on: March 24, 2017, 02:59:29 »
I realize now that for me, what's just a discussion, is real life for many of you.  I guess I didn't understand how that would impact your perspective on some pretty forceful outside views.

Yup.  Some of us will spend our entire life's work, or most of it, in uniform.

Quote
On (some) military matters, I should probably shut up most of the time (and indeed, I do most of the time, but I should shut up more often), because even if I can't verify who you are, you're most likely who you claim to be.

Even those of us who've spent or will spend decades in uniform are limited in the areas we will become SMEs in.  I have strayed out of my lane, so have many others on here;  as long as you see your heading off the shoulder and can crank it back over between the lines, IMO its no big deal.

I did quite a few years in Army DEU.  Despite that...I know nothing (from experience) about how the artillery works, or Engineers, or how to set up and run a Brigade Command Post.  Someone who knew how to run a Bde CP in their sleep wouldn't be able to do the job I did.  That's why we have SMEs.   As Air Force now, I have a general idea about how some things work, but what I really know and can speak about is the LRP dry sensor and crew/Sqn level stuff.  Point...we all have our limits on what we can actually know, competently, and speak about from the BTDT perspective.   I've crossed my lanes before, I've been put back in place on the thread itself or via PM.  It happens.

Quote
When I said that there was basically no new taxes, I meant just that.  It wasn't meant to be a confrontational or controversial statement.  It was simply my view that all of that tax increases (none of which I will pay [okay, I'll pay the alcohol and tobacco ones, but not as an end consumer]) amounted to nothing when compared with the size of the budget and the economy.  If you disagree, that's fine - it's simply my assessment.

And, you're not alone.  I don't agree with the public transit tax credit change (aren't we supposed to be encouraging a smaller carbon footprint, etc?) but on what I will call non-essential items, I'd rather see that stuff taxed than things that can really hurt people in tight spots;  diapers or something that could make things tough for a single parent.

I'll give you an example of something you said that made me think "wtf";  in the FWSAR discussion when you made a comment that basically said the RCAF cooked up the requirements to "get the plane that they wanted".  Maybe the better way to think of it was the RCAF SAR professionals, SMEs...they gave the requirements to the bean counters that would enable them to do the job they do now, but better, faster and safer than they do it now.  Capabilities are something we will normally (always?) want to see go UP, not DOWN.  I've flown up North before.  I know how long it takes to get there at the speed we can go in an Aurora.  The new SAR bird will be slower than that.  That could, someday, literally be the difference between life and death for someone.  As an operator at the unit level...I care about capabilities and limitations and I will always push for increased caps and decreased lims.  That doesn't mean I want a shiny new plane, I want the capabilities that come with it; better endurance, better speed (time to LKP is important!), better serviceability, whatever.   Its not just 'we want this nice shiny plane!!!".

Accept that some people here are SMEs and figure out who they are, then you'll have a better sense of who is talking and who is talking from knowledge and experience.  You don't see me posting too much on anything that has to do with sailing, because the only sailing I've ever done was on Marine Atlantic.    8)
« Last Edit: March 24, 2017, 06:59:25 by Eye In The Sky »
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 129,117
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,361
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #26 on: March 24, 2017, 05:57:16 »
JMT,  I have been rude and boorish towards you and for that I do apologize.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 69,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,377
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #27 on: March 25, 2017, 12:06:39 »
Number 5 is interesting re Gun Control.

https://www.therebel.media/_fakenews_top_5_things_missing_from_media_party_coverage_of_trudeau_budget

March 23, 2017
#FakeNews: Top 5 things missing from Media Party coverage of Trudeau budget

Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Editor, The Devils' Blast, the Annual Chronicle of The Royal Winnipeg Rifles

http://www.royalwinnipegrifles.com/regimental-association/the-devils-blast/

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,196
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #28 on: March 25, 2017, 13:29:43 »
The budget may reference that treaty, and we may as well be a party to it, but the implementation all the way from shipper to "end user" will require some sort of domestic statutory implementation. If they think they are going to sneak that in by stealth (e.g.- a regulation and not a statute), they will have one hell of a fight on their hands.
The purpose of the treaty is to create country of origin, manufacturer and arms dealer/ broker accountability to prevent the flow of weapons into the hands of rogue nations and terror groups, not to impose registries like the former gun registry.
You're right. I Never  Met A Motherfucker Quite Like You, or someone as smart as you.  Never ever will, either.

Offline QV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 228
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #29 on: April 19, 2017, 09:05:51 »
With the distinct lack of defence spending in this budget, do you think Trump's latest comments on NAFTA and the Canadian dairy industry are the US administration's opening salvo? 

What are we at now, 0.88 % GDP for defence spending?  Is that a record low?

Offline Lightguns

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 24,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,021
  • I live for trout and deer
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #30 on: April 19, 2017, 09:35:28 »
The budget may reference that treaty, and we may as well be a party to it, but the implementation all the way from shipper to "end user" will require some sort of domestic statutory implementation. If they think they are going to sneak that in by stealth (e.g.- a regulation and not a statute), they will have one hell of a fight on their hands.
The purpose of the treaty is to create country of origin, manufacturer and arms dealer/ broker accountability to prevent the flow of weapons into the hands of rogue nations and terror groups, not to impose registries like the former gun registry.

The only thing that treaty will do is increase the cost of firearms and weapons systems to end user.  If ISIS wants a gun, ISIS will get a gun regardless of where in the world ISIS is.  Marking "made in Canada" as a means of keeping firearms away from rogue orgs is as bright as registering guns to keep them away from criminals.  The parliament hill shooter's lever-gun was marked "made in the USA", do they have any idea of where and how he got it?  NK, China and Russia are going to continue to make unmarked guns for those rogue nations from the factories they have set up for that specific purpose.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2017, 10:17:01 by Lightguns »
Done, 34 years, 43 days complete, got's me damn pension!

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,121
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #31 on: April 19, 2017, 09:56:31 »
What are we at now, 0.88 % GDP for defence spending?  Is that a record low?

That's according to the Senate - it may be calculated differently by NATO, who expects Canada to be at 1.0% this year.

As for Trump - he hasn't managed to get much done yet other than talk.  I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it.

It's also worth noting that the Canadian dairy industry gets no subsidies and uses no hormones.  The US is the opposite.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 164,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,703
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #32 on: April 19, 2017, 09:59:15 »
With the distinct lack of defence spending in this budget, do you think Trump's latest comments on NAFTA and the Canadian dairy industry are the US administration's opening salvo? 

What are we at now, 0.88 % GDP for defence spending?  Is that a record low?

Not sure they're linked, QV.  I'm thinking POTUS' comments are more liked a sawed-off shot gun than a hunting rifle.  Interestingly, w will likely not hear about things like soft-wood lumber inequities that many even within the US begrudgingly acknowledge are lop-sided.

Regarding the budget, like others, I have less issue with a VAT-like element of taxation n consumption, but so to am I concerned that some incentives (public transport credit, for example) that would directly support greener travel are eliminated.  This is counter-intuitive to the LPC's greening agenda.  I am also concerned about the weakness of the plan to return to a balanced budget -- that the new mantra appears to be "so long as the deficit is a reasonable small proportion of GDP, it's not a bad thing."  I seems that the PM and Co.'s mind is made up already that deficits will be around for a long time to come.  Canada would do well to look at Quebec's journey towards the cliff-edge of deficit unsustainability, and see what they did to get back to a position away from that precipice...good on Qc for getting back to sustained balanced budgets as they try to recover from their debt position.

Regards
G2G

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,121
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #33 on: April 19, 2017, 10:05:49 »
Not sure they're linked, QV.  I'm thinking POTUS' comments are more liked a sawed-off shot gun than a hunting rifle.  Interestingly, w will likely not hear about things like soft-wood lumber inequities that many even within the US begrudgingly acknowledge are lop-sided.

Regarding the budget, like others, I have less issue with a VAT-like element of taxation n consumption, but so to am I concerned that some incentives (public transport credit, for example) that would directly support greener travel are eliminated.  This is counter-intuitive to the LPC's greening agenda.  I am also concerned about the weakness of the plan to return to a balanced budget -- that the new mantra appears to be "so long as the deficit is a reasonable small proportion of GDP, it's not a bad thing."  I seems that the PM and Co.'s mind is made up already that deficits will be around for a long time to come.  Canada would do well to look at Quebec's journey towards the cliff-edge of deficit unsustainability, and see what they did to get back to a position away from that precipice...good on Qc for getting back to sustained balanced budgets as they try to recover from their debt position.

Regards
G2G

After this year, the debt to GDP ratio will again begin to shrink.  That is the exact opposite of unsustainable (though a balanced budget is certainly the preference in my view).

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 164,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,703
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #34 on: April 19, 2017, 10:08:13 »
That's according to the Senate - it may be calculated differently by NATO, who expects Canada to be at 1.0% this year.

Agree.  Until the "method of accounting" is confirmed, the %GDP can be all over the place.  I for one, would like to see a more specific break down of what money goes where, including for specific "whole-of-Alliance" benefit, not just the logic/justification of "We, [insert country name here] are a Mediterranean country so 100% of our Coast Guard is a NATO contribution."

It's also worth noting that the Canadian dairy industry gets no subsidies and uses no hormones.  The US is the opposite.

Are you sure about that, jmt?  Perhaps "direct" (as in an identifiable transfer of funds) subsidies, but I'm not so sure that there aren't notable credits that, at least to the Americans (and even between the Ontario and Quebec dairy associations) are credits that preference regional dairy production.  Family friends of ours dairy farm in Southern Ontario and the issue of credits, inter-Provincial and international dairy quotas, etc. comes up in conversation often.  I would say that if the Americans look at Canadian dairy in general the way that Ontario and Quebec look at each other, then I'm not surprised we hear what we hear from Trump.

Regards
G2G

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 164,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,703
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #35 on: April 19, 2017, 10:12:28 »
After this year, the debt to GDP ratio will again begin to shrink.  That is the exact opposite of unsustainable (though a balanced budget is certainly the preference in my view).

Agree. 

That said, if there were the two factors being considered (surplus/balance/deficit, and debt:GDP ratio), my preference would be to see responsible Government put the emphasis on the former (working off debt) rather than the latter (ensuring growing debt 'isn't so bad.').  Just my preference though...I know that there are many, many more "bad offenders" in the Debt:GDP world, but I don't think that justifies one's own nation's current policy alignment.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 69,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,377
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #36 on: April 19, 2017, 10:49:06 »
jmt18325:
Quote
As for Trump - he hasn't managed to get much done yet other than talk.

Care to backup that statement? Obama care at present is a given.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Editor, The Devils' Blast, the Annual Chronicle of The Royal Winnipeg Rifles

http://www.royalwinnipegrifles.com/regimental-association/the-devils-blast/

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 129,117
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,361
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #37 on: April 19, 2017, 11:46:28 »
Agree.  Until the "method of accounting" is confirmed, the %GDP can be all over the place.  I for one, would like to see a more specific break down of what money goes where, including for specific "whole-of-Alliance" benefit, not just the logic/justification of "We, [insert country name here] are a Mediterranean country so 100% of our Coast Guard is a NATO contribution."

Are you sure about that, jmt?  Perhaps "direct" (as in an identifiable transfer of funds) subsidies, but I'm not so sure that there aren't notable credits that, at least to the Americans (and even between the Ontario and Quebec dairy associations) are credits that preference regional dairy production.  Family friends of ours dairy farm in Southern Ontario and the issue of credits, inter-Provincial and international dairy quotas, etc. comes up in conversation often.  I would say that if the Americans look at Canadian dairy in general the way that Ontario and Quebec look at each other, then I'm not surprised we hear what we hear from Trump.

Regards
G2G

Listening to a talking head on the radio on the way in today re the milk wars.  He said that what's griping the US is that they have a hard time getting milk and products into Canada as we do have barriers so to speak barring that and therefore Trump is not totally out to lunch in this regard.  They have an over supply of milk that is low priced and they want into our market, which is protected to a certain degree.  The EU have made headway with loosening the red tape to get more exposure into our market.  You just have to compare what we pay for milk and cheese here and what they pay for milk and cheese south of the border to see that there is an imbalance of sorts in the market.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,121
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #38 on: April 19, 2017, 15:46:04 »
jmt18325:
Care to backup that statement? Obama care at present is a given.

What has he accomplished so far?  His executive orders have been either general statements, or have been stopped by the courts.  His bluster of Syria and North Korea got very little done.  I don't care - it's not my ball game.  I'm only saying this in relation to us.  I wouldn't set my hair on fire over his comments.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 184,690
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,812
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #39 on: April 19, 2017, 17:11:49 »
Agree.  Until the "method of accounting" is confirmed, the %GDP can be all over the place.  I for one, would like to see a more specific break down of what money goes where, including for specific "whole-of-Alliance" benefit, not just the logic/justification of "We, [insert country name here] are a Mediterranean country so 100% of our Coast Guard is a NATO contribution."

Are you sure about that, jmt?  Perhaps "direct" (as in an identifiable transfer of funds) subsidies, but I'm not so sure that there aren't notable credits that, at least to the Americans (and even between the Ontario and Quebec dairy associations) are credits that preference regional dairy production.  Family friends of ours dairy farm in Southern Ontario and the issue of credits, inter-Provincial and international dairy quotas, etc. comes up in conversation often.  I would say that if the Americans look at Canadian dairy in general the way that Ontario and Quebec look at each other, then I'm not surprised we hear what we hear from Trump.

Regards
G2G

US Dairy firms in Canada - Zero

Canadian Dairy firms in the US -

Saputo of Montreal  http://www.saputo.com/en/Our-Products/USA-Sector
Agropur of Longueil http://www.agropur.com/en/profile/plants/

Agropur is particularly interesting as it is protected by Canadian Co-Operative laws but all the Co-Operative members are in Quebec.  This despite buying up processing facilities in the rest of Canada and the US.  They don't solely process their own milk.  They are shareholders in a multi-national corporation based in Quebec.  The Western Co-Ops were all bought up by Saputo. 

Quote
Agropur looking for growth in U.S. while defending Canada’s quota system

Damon van der Linde | February 10, 2016 | Last Updated: Feb 11 9:19 AM ET

Agropur has been an outspoken defender of Canada's supply management system, which sets a quota for how much milk can be imported tariff free in order to protect farmers including the co-op's 3,367 (Edit to add Quebec) members from foreign competition.

MONTREAL — Canada’s second-largest dairy producer, the farmer-owned Agropur Cooperative, says it sees the company’s growth not here in the country, where it has defended the protectionist supply-management system when threatened with free-trade deals, but in the U.S. where it can import to international markets including north of the border.

“It’s certain that development for us will come primarily from the United States,” said Agropur CEO Robert Coallier during a news conference following the company’s annual general meeting in Montreal on Wednesday.

“This year we became one of the five largest makers of cheese and dairy ingredients in the United States. We have achieved the critical mass to become a major player.”

The Longueuil, Que.-based company reported a 26 per cent revenue increase in the past year, totalling $5.9 billion. Of that, 44 per cent of revenue came from U.S. operations.

Related
$4.3 billion TPP compensation for Canada’s dairy industry is not a done deal: Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland
Butter shortage forces Canada’s dairy commission to import 8.8-million pounds of butter as cream supply dries up

Agropur has been an outspoken defender of Canada’s supply management system, which sets a quota for how much milk can be imported tariff free in order to protect farmers including the co-op’s 3,367 members from foreign competition.

It spoke out against the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal allowing countries including New Zealand and the U.S. greater access to Canada’s dairy market amid slow-growing domestic consumption.

Dairy from Europe, New Zealand, the United States and other countries will gain access to 5.5 per cent more of the Canadian market once the TPP and  are ratified and fully take effect.

Critics say Agropur is hedging its bets by advocating for a system that protects its members while setting up shop in the U.S. and taking advantage of being able to import foreign dairy protein.

But the company says it’s only keeping up with other two major Canadian dairy players, Saputo Inc. and Parmalat, which also have U.S. operations.

“Agropur is making a case for how supply management is not working,” said Sylvain Charlebois, a professor in the Food Institute at the University of Guelph. “Agropur feels compelled to compete against Saputo and other companies, so that’s why they have to bring in cheaper protein from abroad,”

The company says it produces 30 per cent of Canadian dairy while importing 12 per cent of milk protein — proportionally less than its competitors. 

In August 2014, Agropur acquired Davisco Foods International operations, doubling its U.S. operations and increasing total milk supply by 50 per cent.

For 2015, Agropur reported a 10.2 per cent increase in EBITDA to $306 million and processed more than 5.7 billion litres of milk at its plants across North America.

“Agropur is a well-managed business, but politically they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place right now because of supply management,” Charlebois said.

Along with its dairy farmer ownership, Agropur also has high-powered backers in Quebec, including the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec.

Last December, the co-operative received $300 million from a team investors led by Quebec’s public pension fund manager, putting the group’s total contribution at $770 million.

Nice work if you can get it.  Government protected fortress at home. Freedom to sally forth at will.

http://www.foodincanada.com/features/the-big-cheese/

And Saputo is also in Australia

http://www.saputo.com/en/Our-Products/International-Sector/Dairy-Division-Australia
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 184,690
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,812
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #40 on: April 19, 2017, 17:19:26 »
Oh, and by the way, I will put the quality of American fluid milk up against Canadian fluid milk any day.  As for cheese - Canada could be making a killing selling Real Canadian Cheddars like Balderson's into the States and overseas.  The Yanks can't make a decent cheese for love nor money.  Canada has the ability to raise more dairy cattle than it currently is and could export the surplus on the open market.  Even Quebec would benefit.  I know of plants shut down in Quebec (and elsewhere) due to lack of supply.  That is why the same companies that want to keep American money out of Canada were having to import milk proteins and butter to meet even local demand.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 363,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,568
Re: Canadian Budget 2017
« Reply #41 on: April 19, 2017, 17:32:23 »
...and don't get me started on "colouring butter = OK; colouring margarine = not OK" in Quebec...
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html