PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

[BurlOak]

This has been one of my biggest frustrations with this government:

https://nationalpost.com/news/polit...have-the-promised-economic-benefits-borne-out

They ran on a pledge to run small deficits to fund infrastructure for stimulus. They constantly seem to botch infrastructure and run larger deficits to fund everything but infrastructure. Trudeau is the anti-Martin.

Although Martin didn't fund much infrastructure either.
If you want a champion of infrastructure, I think you meant to refer to Harper.
If I recall correctly, the entire Martin and Chretien government funding about $40M for the design of the Spadina extension. Nothing for Sheppard subway.
Harper funded $300M for Sheppard (SELRT), $700M for Spadina construction, $700M for SSE, and $2,600M for SmartTrack (that one is a bit dubious since it was a pre-election pledge).

 

[innsertnamehere]

And Trudeau has dumped a ton of money into Toronto, far exceeding Harper.

Martin and Cretien held office when transit ridership was at record lows. Also, the City of Toronto has gone from losing population in 2003 to growing by 58,000 people in 2017. Of course in 2003 and 2004 (when the city grew by only 730 people), they weren't going to be funding big subway projects. All the GTA's growth was in the suburbs. So highway expansions it was - that was at the time of the 407 opening (the final two portions opening in 2002), making suburban travel a lot easier. transport infrastructure was doing fine.

now Toronto has just under 1/2 of the GTA's growth (or at least it did in 2017), so it needs infrastructure. Big time.

 

[kEiThZ]

Although Martin didn't fund much infrastructure either.

I was referring to the fiscal management bit.

At least Chretien/Martin funded what they said they would fund and erred on the side of fiscal conservatism. While I agreed that with Trudeau in 2015, that there needed to be investment in infrastructure, and that small deficits were excusable for this, their fiscal and infrastructure policies have been a disaster.

I feel duped. Infrastructure seems to have been an excuse to run large deficits on social program they didn’t have cojones to raise taxes to pay for.

 

[picard102]

a disaster.

How so?

 

[BurlOak]

How so?

Jobs data in today.
Looking at the numbers
Canada gained 185k jobs, or an increase in workforce of 0.9%.
USA gained 2.6M jobs, or an increase in workforce of 1.7%.

That' a huge under-performance.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/190104/dq190104a-eng.htm?HPA=1&indid=3587-2&indgeo=0
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/04/economy/december-jobs-report/index.html

Over Trudeau's entire time.

Canada gained 700k jobs, or an average increase in workforce of 1.3% per year.
USA gained 6.9M jobs, or an average increase in workforce of 1.6% per year.

Again - lagging the USA. This will be the economic boom that passed Canada by.

A reminder that under Harper, Canada averaged about 1.1% increase in workforce per year. Which if you ignore economic times is not good. Compared to the USA rate of 0.5%, it was amazing.

 

[Northern Light]

Jobs data in today.
Looking at the numbers
Canada gained 185k jobs, or an increase in workforce of 0.9%.
USA gained 2.6M jobs, or an increase in workforce of 1.7%.

That' a huge under-performance.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/190104/dq190104a-eng.htm?HPA=1&indid=3587-2&indgeo=0
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/04/economy/december-jobs-report/index.html

Over Trudeau's entire time.

Canada gained 700k jobs, or an average increase in workforce of 1.3% per year.
USA gained 6.9M jobs, or an average increase in workforce of 1.6% per year.

Again - lagging the USA. This will be the economic boom that passed Canada by.

A reminder that under Harper, Canada averaged about 1.1% increase in workforce per year. Which if you ignore economic times is not good. Compared to the USA rate of 0.5%, it was amazing.

Hmmm.

So, the adjusted unemployment rate (Canada and the US calculate these differently)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...r-jobless-rate-use-us-metrics/article4104657/

Would be US 5.0% vs Canada at 5.6%

However, to determine the relative strength of the economy you would want to consider the labour force participation rate.

In the US that number is 63% vs Canada at 65%.

The result is that Canada's employment rate is 61.7% vs the US at 60.6%; who is lagging whom?

 

[BurlOak]

You want to talk participation rate?

• Canada has fallen from 65.9% to 65.4% since Trudeau elected (-0.16% /yr.).
• USA has gone up from 62.5% to 63.1% since Trudeau elected (+0.19% /yr.).

Once again - another statistic showing USA doing better than Canada since Trudeau elected (USA 0.35% better than Canada).

• Under Harper, Canada fell 67.2% to 65.9% (-0.13% /yr.).
• USA fell 66.1% to 62.5% (-0.37% /yr.)

Once again - another statistic showing that Canada didn't do great in absolute terms (but better than Trudeau on this statistic), but did much better than the USA (Canada 0.24% better than USA)..

(values determined by interpolation)
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/labor-force-participation-rate
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate

 

[picard102]

A reminder that under Harper, Canada averaged about 1.1% increase in workforce per year. Which if you ignore economic times is not good. Compared to the USA rate of 0.5%, it was amazing.

This is far from a disaster.

 

[jje1000]

Canadians today feel worse about their finances than they have in 3 years, poll shows

Ask many Canadians how they’re doing today, and you might meet someone who feels worse about money than they have in three years, suggested a year-end Ipsos Public Affairs poll conducted for Global News.

The poll revealed a pessimism among Canadians about their financial situation for 2019.

It found 71 per cent of respondents feeling “good” about their personal finances, compared to 80 per cent last year and 75 per cent in 2016.

The poll also had 61 per cent of respondents saying they had a “good” financial situation.

That was down from 66 per cent who said the same last year, and 62 per cent who said so in 2016.The poll found 64 per cent of respondents felt good about their savings going into next year, down from 72 per cent in 2017 and from 65 per cent in 2016.

Just under 60 per cent felt good about the economy going into 2019, which was down from 65 per cent in 2017 — but it was also up from the 58 per cent who felt positively about the economy in 2016.

That compared to 41 per cent who were pessimistic about the economy.

After years of low rates, the Bank of Canada began raising its trend-setting interest rate in July 2017; it’s since grown from 0.5 per cent to 1.75 per cent.

At the same time, household debt remains close to record highs, with the household debt-to-income ratio hitting 177.5 per cent in the third quarter.

Bricker said the Liberals offered people economic hope in the last election.

But this time?

“They’ve had three years of that and they’re not feeling more hopeful,” he said.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4776242/canadian-finances-pessimistic/



Also interesting how there's been a recent string of people suing the Federal government following the Khadr case:

After 17-year deportation fight over alleged terrorism ties, Toronto man sues federal government for $34M

https://nationalpost.com/news/polit...s-toronto-man-sues-federal-government-for-34m

 

[kEiThZ]

It's not just about the number of jobs but the quality of employment. And I suspect that a large part of why Canadians are "feeling" worse off is because those employment numbers don't tell the whole story. They aren't getting paid as well. And are loaded up with debt. Right as the US looks like it's going to slow down.

 

[Northern Light]

It's not just about the number of jobs but the quality of employment. And I suspect that a large part of why Canadians are "feeling" worse off is because those employment numbers don't tell the whole story. They aren't getting paid as well. And are loaded up with debt. Right as the US looks like it's going to slow down.

I think you're on point.

Though its worth saying that Trudeau's gov't per se is not the cause.

This has been an ongoing issue for almost a generation now that work is and has felt less secure, that the proportion of those seeking F/T employment but stuck in P/T has grown, and that wage growth, particularly in lower and lower-middle income jobs has been damn near stagnant.

There are a host measures that could address this (with varying degrees of effectiveness).

But the bulk would be provincial jurisdiction in Canada.

 

[kEiThZ]

Though its worth saying that Trudeau's gov't per se is not the cause.

Not the cause. But he did offer up a message that he could improve things. And I think his policies are decidedly short term. All those cash payments to families are great in the short term. But does nothing to improve productivity and eventually quality of life down the road.

This has been an ongoing issue for almost a generation now that work is and has felt less secure, that the proportion of those seeking F/T employment but stuck in P/T has grown, and that wage growth, particularly in lower and lower-middle income jobs has been damn near stagnant.

Part of it is the decimation of manufacturing. And a good chunk of it is the fact that successive governments at the federal and provincial level always take the easy way out and focus on real estate and resource extraction. There's no core economic strength in Canada today beyond these sectors. And any other sector that is doing well (eg. finance) is reliant on these two sectors.

Instead of working to build a high skilled, high wage economy, we built a moderate productivity, moderate wage economy, on the backs of real estate and resource extraction. And as the commodities supercycle hits the skids, the flaw in this plan is going to become obvious.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...-canada-faces-a-serious-productivity-problem/

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/c...trump-canadas-still-lags-in-advanced-industry

https://business.financialpost.com/...oductivity-blaming-tax-burden-and-regulations

Had Trudeau actually done what he pledged to do (invested in infrastructure massively) and pushed forward a rethink on training and education, we would have had a chance. The 2020s are going to be miserable for Canada. Especially if those predictions on EVs taking off come true.

But the bulk would be provincial jurisdiction in Canada.

There's a lot that could be done nationally though. Where's our investment in strategic infrastructure like a national smart grid or HSR in the Corridor and Southern Alberta? That would have improved connectivity and by extension productivity. Where's our education and training revamp and national HR strategy? Where's the 100% write offs for businesses that reinvest in people and plant? Why do we have 10 different carbon pricing plans instead of a single national carbon tax? All these things shape our national employment scene. And this government, like the last one has just ignored everything in favour of handing out cash. Harper did that with tax cuts. Trudeau does it with direct deposit.

In a time period where we need real coherent strategic vision, we get leaders who can't think beyond bribing voters. Perhaps that's the fault of voters. But it will come back to bite us in the six in a few years.

 

[TrickyRicky]

I'm really not sure why Conservative pundits are always pushing the US boom Canada bust economic theme. Outside energy Provinces the economy of Canada has been doing relatively well based on the headline numbers (we could fill 100 pages debating about negative structural trends in the economy). I suspect much of the US outperformance is do to the worse starting position they were facing having been much more severely impacted by the Great Recession

I'm also not buying the Trudeau is the worst evil known to man theme. Seems like a level of fury entirely out of proportion with the facts on the ground. Don't get me wrong I've always disliked Trudeau but that dislike pre-dated the previous Federal Election and I still voted Liberal in that election. I also by the way voted PC and I guess by extension for Ford during the last Provincial election even despite also greatly disliking the man. I'm also fully aware that the incredibly damaging Liberal brain trust responsible for me having no choice but to vote in Doug Ford of all people is squarely behind much of Trudeau's somewhat damaging policy; however, the question is how good is the PC or NDP alternative balanced against the capacity of Canada to absorb the bad policy decisions of the incumbent Liberals? Right now I would say Canada as a whole has more capacity than Ontario has to absorb this kind of bad policy and that I'm not hearing or aware yet of anything particularly attractive coming from the PC or NDP or Green alternatives at the moment.

 

[Northern Light]

Not the cause. But he did offer up a message that he could improve things. And I think his policies are decidedly short term. All those cash payments to families are great in the short term. But does nothing to improve productivity and eventually quality of life down the road.



Part of it is the decimation of manufacturing. And a good chunk of it is the fact that successive governments at the federal and provincial level always take the easy way out and focus on real estate and resource extraction. There's no core economic strength in Canada today beyond these sectors. And any other sector that is doing well (eg. finance) is reliant on these two sectors.

Instead of working to build a high skilled, high wage economy, we built a moderate productivity, moderate wage economy, on the backs of real estate and resource extraction. And as the commodities supercycle hits the skids, the flaw in this plan is going to become obvious.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...-canada-faces-a-serious-productivity-problem/

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/c...trump-canadas-still-lags-in-advanced-industry

https://business.financialpost.com/...oductivity-blaming-tax-burden-and-regulations

Had Trudeau actually done what he pledged to do (invested in infrastructure massively) and pushed forward a rethink on training and education, we would have had a chance. The 2020s are going to be miserable for Canada. Especially if those predictions on EVs taking off come true.



There's a lot that could be done nationally though. Where's our investment in strategic infrastructure like a national smart grid or HSR in the Corridor and Southern Alberta? That would have improved connectivity and by extension productivity. Where's our education and training revamp and national HR strategy? Where's the 100% write offs for businesses that reinvest in people and plant? Why do we have 10 different carbon pricing plans instead of a single national carbon tax? All these things shape our national employment scene. And this government, like the last one has just ignored everything in favour of handing out cash. Harper did that with tax cuts. Trudeau does it with direct deposit.

In a time period where we need real coherent strategic vision, we get leaders who can't think beyond bribing voters. Perhaps that's the fault of voters. But it will come back to bite us in the six in a few years.

I don't disagree with you that longer-term strategic thinking and investment are required.

I would certainly favour a national smart-grid; and I'm a proponent of HSR over the medium term, though governments of all stripes have let us down by not having a proper coherent, incremental where possible, plan on this file for ages.

I would argue that Canada, Ontario in particular does have a broader mix of industries; the levels of employment in tech are increasingly among the highest in the world; and our financial giants are global players, not solely reliant on Canadian oil/mining or real estate, even if those are disproportionate in their exposure mix.

I would like to see further action on domestic residential real estate, but I confess to a measure of sympathy with a gov't trying to finagle a soft landing.

On resources, moving AB away from an over reliance on oil will certainly take provincial cooperation.

Otherwise I think the only industries we're over weight in, in terms of natural resources would be in fisheries, largely in Atlantic Canada.

I would like to see moves their to allow modern fleets and not simply stick to nostalgic owner-operated boats with a fish processing plant in every outport.

Executing that latter shift would require buyouts, relaxed regulation of some sort, but also investment to help wind down some no longer sustainable outports, and to help bail out provinces under a perpetual debt swamp.

That last one could be messy, but it is necessary, I think, the future of that region.

Investments in greater education and training would be great, but again this is provincial, and I think requires plans at that level that Ottawa can perhaps assist with financially.

 

[kEiThZ]

I'm really not sure why Conservative pundits are always pushing the US boom Canada bust economic theme. Outside energy Provinces the economy of Canada has been doing relatively well based on the headline numbers (we could fill 100 pages debating about negative structural trends in the economy). I suspect much of the US outperformance is do to the worse starting position they were facing having been much more severely impacted by the Great Recession

These pundits always do this when there's a Republican government in the US and a Liberal one here. That's to be expected. That said the productivity gap is real, has been present for decades and is a huge factor in why Canadians are poorer than our Southern neighbours (their wealth and income distribution issues aside).

I'm also not buying the Trudeau is the worst evil known to man theme. Seems like a level of fury entirely out of proportion with the facts on the ground. Don't get me wrong I've always disliked Trudeau but that dislike pre-dated the previous Federal Election and I still voted Liberal in that election.

I don't buy the Trudeau is evil argument. Just as I never bought the Harper was evil argument. With Trudeau, at least for me, what I have is disappointment. I expected smart, strategic thinking from a cabinet that includes a Rhodes Scholar, an astronaut, veterans, etc. Instead, what we've gotten is a Liberal version of Harper's government. Centralization in PMO, some weird concept that every problem has something to do with diversity, attempts to solve virtually every social problem by cutting a cheque... I expected some actual intellectual heft and discourse. Clearly, I expect too much out of government.

Investments in greater education and training would be great, but again this is provincial, and I think requires plans at that level that Ottawa can perhaps assist with financially.

It's not just money that matters. And part of the problem we have in this country, is this mentality demonstrated right here, that all the feds can do is bring money to the table. How about an actual national framework and strategy for education and training? Grants should follow that. Research funding should perhaps be tied to some of that. And while constitutionally education is a provincial responsibility, there's no reason why the feds can't set national standards and tie institutional funding to certification against those standards.

Lastly on this one. It's incredibly frustrating how professions are governed in Canada. We're a country of 37 million. Why the hell do we need ten professional associations for each profession? Yes, it's provincially governed. By I don't see why the feds can't cajole the bigger professions (engineering, law, medicine) to establish national professional associations/colleges, like accountants have done in Canada. I want to see the feds jump into this one even if it pisses off the provinces.