While the Liberals were recently touting their success in raising literacy rates among our school age children, they were just as aggressively down-playing the three-year drop in numeracy rates.
The conspiracy theorists here at the NB Conservative are wondering if maybe lower numeracy scores aren't one of the objectives of the provincial Liberal party. After all, why would Liberals want New Brunswickers to be good with numbers? If more people understood the size of the provincial deficit this year they would be a lot more pissed off about it.
In December, the Graham Grits are going to produce a follow-up budget to the last deficit balloon they released only 7 months ago. All accounts are that it is going to be full of rosy predictions and very light on difficult choices.
Of course the fewer the number of people who understand just how bad their number are the better for them. So don't count on any extra budget money going towards math education.
Showing posts with label deficit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deficit. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
What Did You Expect?
After a week of traveling around New Brunswick, the Finance Minister has announced some surprising news - all the people who came to the pre-budget meetings want the government to spend more money.
These meetings were not recorded or televised so we will have to take his word for it. But from the sounds of things there were plenty of union reps at all the stops encouraging more spending on government programs.
Then again, Mr. Byrne, what did you expect?
The Liberal government put out a pre-budget questionnaire that asked people how soon they would like to see the deficit paid off: 3 years from now, 4 years from now, or 5 years from now.
That's right - they told the public that balancing the books immediately was not even an option.
So when you tell people in advance you want to keep spending and borrowing more money that we have - why would people come to your meetings with ideas for spending less?
These meetings were not recorded or televised so we will have to take his word for it. But from the sounds of things there were plenty of union reps at all the stops encouraging more spending on government programs.
Then again, Mr. Byrne, what did you expect?
The Liberal government put out a pre-budget questionnaire that asked people how soon they would like to see the deficit paid off: 3 years from now, 4 years from now, or 5 years from now.
That's right - they told the public that balancing the books immediately was not even an option.
So when you tell people in advance you want to keep spending and borrowing more money that we have - why would people come to your meetings with ideas for spending less?
Monday, March 30, 2009
The New Newfoundland
Newfoundland has long been the basket case of Canadian provincial economies. The fish disappeared and they're so far from markets that transportation costs are a killer. A few years ago, hope dawned in the form of offshore oil and gas. Then this recession hit, and the price of oil went from flirting with $147 a barrel at its height to over/under $50. Ouch, imagine the kind of hit your revenues take when your major export's price drops by two thirds.
Last week, Newfoundland came out with their provincial budget and the deficits are back, they're predicting $750 million in red ink next year. That sounds pretty bad.
But wait a minute, isn't New Brunswick forecasting in the order of an $800 million deficit? What gives? How can we be doing even worse than Newfoundland? Has there been a drop of anything we export in the order of the precipitous fall in oil prices?
The answer is no, despite some laughable spin we'll get into another time. So what does this mean? There's an essential difference in our deficit and Newfoundland's: there's can be largely explained by market changes, ours cannot. Theirs is a direct result of a fall in energy prices. Ours is a direct result of government mismanagement.
Move over, Newfoundland, there's a new King of the Hobos in town. In three budgets, we've taken over the title of Confederation's poor cousin. Even more disgustingly, we've done this while spinning a bunch of PR BS about self-sufficiency. We're going the wrong way, both in absolute terms and relative to our neighbour provinces.
It's true that this recession is kicking everyone, but even in a situation like this, it makes a difference how you manage. Shame Graham is quick to note that $300 million of our deficit is due to hits in the pension fund. It sounds good, until you realize the deficit is $800 million. What Graham is really saying is: EVEN IF THE ECONOMY HAD STAYED STRONG, THE LIBERAL GOVERNMENT HAS MANAGED SO POORLY THAT WE'D BE A HALF A BILLION IN THE HOLE.
Quick question: if there was a forest fire approaching a village, which house do you think is most likely to come out intact: the one with a built-in sprinkler system, or the one which has already been set on fire by the owner before the main fire even arrives?
Last week, Newfoundland came out with their provincial budget and the deficits are back, they're predicting $750 million in red ink next year. That sounds pretty bad.
But wait a minute, isn't New Brunswick forecasting in the order of an $800 million deficit? What gives? How can we be doing even worse than Newfoundland? Has there been a drop of anything we export in the order of the precipitous fall in oil prices?
The answer is no, despite some laughable spin we'll get into another time. So what does this mean? There's an essential difference in our deficit and Newfoundland's: there's can be largely explained by market changes, ours cannot. Theirs is a direct result of a fall in energy prices. Ours is a direct result of government mismanagement.
Move over, Newfoundland, there's a new King of the Hobos in town. In three budgets, we've taken over the title of Confederation's poor cousin. Even more disgustingly, we've done this while spinning a bunch of PR BS about self-sufficiency. We're going the wrong way, both in absolute terms and relative to our neighbour provinces.
It's true that this recession is kicking everyone, but even in a situation like this, it makes a difference how you manage. Shame Graham is quick to note that $300 million of our deficit is due to hits in the pension fund. It sounds good, until you realize the deficit is $800 million. What Graham is really saying is: EVEN IF THE ECONOMY HAD STAYED STRONG, THE LIBERAL GOVERNMENT HAS MANAGED SO POORLY THAT WE'D BE A HALF A BILLION IN THE HOLE.
Quick question: if there was a forest fire approaching a village, which house do you think is most likely to come out intact: the one with a built-in sprinkler system, or the one which has already been set on fire by the owner before the main fire even arrives?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)