Let's Randall Deey be honest. Would you support a party that ran on a platform of real spending cuts and elimination of some of your entitlements, accompanied by fundamental economic changes whose benefit was years away?
Probably not, and that's one of the biggest reasons why Canadian governments are doing such a poor job of cutting spending and making the big decisions that will strengthen our economy. Political parties and voters have developed a superficially beneficial co-dependency.
We want our government services and handouts and politicians are all too eager to please us, knowing we will please them in return by reelecting them.
Consider the recent evidence. In what was generally praised as a tough budget, the federal government identified $5.2 billion in savings. The money won't be saved long, though. Total spending is still going up this year, and every year after that. The only thing that really affects people in this budget is a delay in the Old Age Security eligibility age, to take effect in 2023. Even with that, government will continue to dole out old age payments to retirees making six figures.
In Alberta, two opposition parties are locked in a bidding war for votes. Will Albertans prefer a $300 "resource dividend" or free tuition fees? The group offering the $300 vote attractor is the Wildrose Party, which positions itself as more conservative than the governing PCs. The Alberta budget is not yet balanced.
In B.C., the Liberal government has taken a tough line on public sector compensation and balancing the budget. Good work, but the party is 20 points behind the NDP in the latest poll.
In Ontario, the province with the worst deficit problem of all, the government is delivering a home renovation program for seniors and a 30-per-cent tuition cut. Even with that generosity, post-secondary students are complaining because the tuition deal doesn't benefit everyone. The latest budget has drawn the ire of public sector unions, but it will only reduce the deficit from $15.3 billion to $15.2 billion this year. Balancing the books will take six years, if all goes well.
Too many Canadians still believe in the fundamental miracle of government, that we can all get out more than we put in. Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath played to that this week when she proposed a tax on high income earners so "everyday folks" could have lower home heating bills, more government day care and higher disability pension payments. It was a classic populist proposition. If the rich pay more, we can all have something for free.
In Canada, we are stuck at this juvenile level of thinking, accepting the idea that the purpose of government is deliver what are usually referred to as "goodies."
While we fuss over our entitlements and the threat of making tiny sacrifices to limit the debt we are loading on future generations, the big issues go unaddressed. What moves do Canadians and their governments need to make to give us a shot at economic growth and decent jobs in the future?
This is a subject that is creatively addressed in a timely, but predictably ignored, study this week from the Human Resources Professionals Association. It combines the ideas of business, academic and government leaders with some serious number crunching and invites us to look ahead to 2025. The choices Canadians make in the next few years will determine whether we reach that year in great economic shape, they argue.
Scenario No. 1, which the report dubs "the lost decade," takes the trends of today and extends them to 2025. Productivity and investment in technology continue to lag, other countries race ahead economically while Canada plods along, risk aversion limits business investment, the economy features both a skilled worker shortage and a lack of jobs for other workers. Contract and temporary jobs are the norm.
The middle ground is "unsustainable prosperity." In this scenario, only the health care and resources sector prosper, leaving Canada with a lopsided economy with great jobs for some but a large reservoir of educated but underemployed people.
Their preferred future, the "northern tiger," relies on a number of key policy decisions. Post-secondary education needs to be better aligned with actual job demands. We need to increase the percentage of immigrants who will be quickly employable, something the federal government is tackling. Canadian businesses need to invest in technology and fight to be best in the world. The report's bottom line is that we need a diverse economy that uses all the skills we have, not a narrow, resource-based economy that leaves many out.
Achieving those kinds of goals would involve business and government working together to take big decisions, many of which would not have immediate payback for shareholders or voters. This would be extremely uncharacteristic behaviour.
Right now, we have a country where some provinces are booming and others are struggling. Despite increasing levels of education, youth unemployment is high. Our immigrants have a tough time finding meaningful work. If we want that to change, we will need to start thinking about something bigger than what government can do for us, right now.
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Randall Denley
Probably not, and that's one of the biggest reasons why Canadian governments are doing such a poor job of cutting spending and making the big decisions that will strengthen our economy. Political parties and voters have developed a superficially beneficial co-dependency.
We want our government services and handouts and politicians are all too eager to please us, knowing we will please them in return by reelecting them.
Consider the recent evidence. In what was generally praised as a tough budget, the federal government identified $5.2 billion in savings. The money won't be saved long, though. Total spending is still going up this year, and every year after that. The only thing that really affects people in this budget is a delay in the Old Age Security eligibility age, to take effect in 2023. Even with that, government will continue to dole out old age payments to retirees making six figures.
In Alberta, two opposition parties are locked in a bidding war for votes. Will Albertans prefer a $300 "resource dividend" or free tuition fees? The group offering the $300 vote attractor is the Wildrose Party, which positions itself as more conservative than the governing PCs. The Alberta budget is not yet balanced.
In B.C., the Liberal government has taken a tough line on public sector compensation and balancing the budget. Good work, but the party is 20 points behind the NDP in the latest poll.
In Ontario, the province with the worst deficit problem of all, the government is delivering a home renovation program for seniors and a 30-per-cent tuition cut. Even with that generosity, post-secondary students are complaining because the tuition deal doesn't benefit everyone. The latest budget has drawn the ire of public sector unions, but it will only reduce the deficit from $15.3 billion to $15.2 billion this year. Balancing the books will take six years, if all goes well.
Too many Canadians still believe in the fundamental miracle of government, that we can all get out more than we put in. Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath played to that this week when she proposed a tax on high income earners so "everyday folks" could have lower home heating bills, more government day care and higher disability pension payments. It was a classic populist proposition. If the rich pay more, we can all have something for free.
In Canada, we are stuck at this juvenile level of thinking, accepting the idea that the purpose of government is deliver what are usually referred to as "goodies."
While we fuss over our entitlements and the threat of making tiny sacrifices to limit the debt we are loading on future generations, the big issues go unaddressed. What moves do Canadians and their governments need to make to give us a shot at economic growth and decent jobs in the future?
This is a subject that is creatively addressed in a timely, but predictably ignored, study this week from the Human Resources Professionals Association. It combines the ideas of business, academic and government leaders with some serious number crunching and invites us to look ahead to 2025. The choices Canadians make in the next few years will determine whether we reach that year in great economic shape, they argue.
Scenario No. 1, which the report dubs "the lost decade," takes the trends of today and extends them to 2025. Productivity and investment in technology continue to lag, other countries race ahead economically while Canada plods along, risk aversion limits business investment, the economy features both a skilled worker shortage and a lack of jobs for other workers. Contract and temporary jobs are the norm.
The middle ground is "unsustainable prosperity." In this scenario, only the health care and resources sector prosper, leaving Canada with a lopsided economy with great jobs for some but a large reservoir of educated but underemployed people.
Their preferred future, the "northern tiger," relies on a number of key policy decisions. Post-secondary education needs to be better aligned with actual job demands. We need to increase the percentage of immigrants who will be quickly employable, something the federal government is tackling. Canadian businesses need to invest in technology and fight to be best in the world. The report's bottom line is that we need a diverse economy that uses all the skills we have, not a narrow, resource-based economy that leaves many out.
Achieving those kinds of goals would involve business and government working together to take big decisions, many of which would not have immediate payback for shareholders or voters. This would be extremely uncharacteristic behaviour.
Right now, we have a country where some provinces are booming and others are struggling. Despite increasing levels of education, youth unemployment is high. Our immigrants have a tough time finding meaningful work. If we want that to change, we will need to start thinking about something bigger than what government can do for us, right now.
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Randall Denley
No comments:
Post a Comment