7 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

To be fair, a number of countries have raised their minimum retirement age past 65 due to increased life expectancy and rising costs.

Because they thought that was more palatable than you know, actually taxing the rich.

5 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

France, Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, US.

I can't find when they raised their Old age security plans.... nor which governments did that.

4 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

Because they thought that was more palatable than you know, actually taxing the rich.

You do the the difference between a fact and an opinion, don't you? The facts are that the last Conservative government wanted to raise the retirement age and that many nations have done so due to rising costs and populations living longer (also facts). You on the other hand, blame it on governments not wanting to tax the rich, which is your opinion. Wanna B Fanboy, made a good point based on facts that they might have not had to so, if they hadn't cut the GST 2 % points which I believe led to a loss of 14 billion in revenues.

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

They are busy trying to pretend there is still a deficit - when there isn't.  They have been corrected twice by the auditor general:

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/manitoba-numbers-game-561473592.html

And what is the primary reason that they have a 9 million surplus?  Increased transfer payments from Ottawa.

Yes, there is now a surplus and they have said they will spend it on education and health care amongst other things, I assume you don't have a problem with that? 

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Nice job missing the point. Not the first time, though.

Your political bias is almost as embarrassing as your comments in the climate change thread.

lol, insults as usual, can't attack the post so you attack the poster, keep it up though you entertain me. 

58 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

The same party that upped the minimum retirement age by 2 years because we can't afford the 2% GST cut? 1% per year seems to be the going rate- that's awesome.

 

Wrong again, the advisory council makes those recommendations, just like they are doing again, but keep spinning. The only difference is that Harper listened to his while Trudeau is too stupid to even understand why it would be done. 

https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/02/06/growth-council-suggest-spending-to-upgrade-skills-for-job-market.html

 

15 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Yes, there is now a surplus and they have said they will spend it on education and health care amongst other things, I assume you don't have a problem with that? 

What does that have to do with the increased transfer payment from the Liberals? That was his point... why bring the other stuff- it has NOTHING to do with his point. So, say thank you to Justin Trudeau and move on.

7 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

What does that have to do with the increased transfer payment from the Liberals? That was his point... why bring the other stuff- it has NOTHING to do with his point. So, say thank you to Justin Trudeau and move on.

Maybe because the article he posted doesn't mention the federal transfer payments at all. 

23 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Maybe because the article he posted doesn't mention the federal transfer payments at all. 

You didn't read the article.  

"The increase was driven by strong growth in personal and corporation income tax and sales tax revenues (the PST had yet to be lowered), and major federal transfers. Some government businesses, most notably Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Public Insurance, made more money than anticipated."

 

55 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Yes, there is now a surplus and they have said they will spend it on education and health care amongst other things, I assume you don't have a problem with that? 

They are still reporting a deficit - I have a problem with that.  

"Commenting on the results Thursday, Fielding said the government is now in "striking distance" of balancing its books."

Just now, Mark H. said:

You didn't read the article.  

I did read the link, it talks about the accounting practices of the province versus the AG. 

1 minute ago, pigseye said:

I did read the link, it talks about the accounting practices of the province versus the AG. 

I have provided additional info - directly from the article. 

Just now, Mark H. said:

They are still reporting a deficit - I have a problem with that.  

It's based on the accounting practices used and I'm not an accountant but if you read it you can see where the difference's are, trust funds etc. I don't think I would want the rainy day fund put into general revenues either, that's supposed to be untouchable for emergencies only. 

44 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Wrong again, the advisory council makes those recommendations, just like they are doing again, but keep spinning. The only difference is that Harper listened to his while Trudeau is too stupid to even understand why it would be done. 

https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/02/06/growth-council-suggest-spending-to-upgrade-skills-for-job-market.html

 

How am I wrong? The growth council didn't raise the old age security... they just made a suggestion... 

 

And yeah the difference is Harper did and Trudeau didn't. Who is spinning what here?

Do your post make sense in your head before you type them out? Please continue, it entertains me to no end.

Just now, wanna-b-fanboy said:

How am I wrong? The growth council didn't raise the old age security... they just made a suggestion... 

 

And yeah the difference is Harper did and Trudeau didn't. Who is spinning what here?

Do your post make sense in your head before you type them out? Please continue, it entertains me to no end.

You are claiming that lowering the GST is somehow to blame for raising the retirement age...…….that couldn't be farther from the truth! 

11 minutes ago, pigseye said:

It's based on the accounting practices used and I'm not an accountant but if you read it you can see where the difference's are, trust funds etc. I don't think I would want the rainy day fund put into general revenues either, that's supposed to be untouchable for emergencies only. 

Money stashed into a rainy day fund should not be a reason to still have a deficit.  Unless, of course, it’s politically convenient to still have one. 

1 minute ago, pigseye said:

You are claiming that lowering the GST is somehow to blame for raising the retirement age...…….that couldn't be farther from the truth! 

That is a classic conservative move by Harper. Starve the Beast to justify cuts to social programs.

Shave off 2% of the GST, and then move on to cuts because we can't afford nice things any more. Classic conservative playbook. How do you think Sheer is going to pay for his boutique tax credits for the rich? Cutting personal taxes? Gotta come from somewhere.

Just now, Mark H. said:

Money stashed into a rainy day fund should not be a reason to still have a deficit.  Unless, of course, it’s politically convenient to still have one. 

I'm not going to argue the accounting of it, or their motives. Pallister promised health care spending and new schools, now he has to deliver. 

Just now, wanna-b-fanboy said:

That is a classic conservative move by Harper. Starve the Beast to justify cuts to social programs.

Shave off 2% of the GST, and then move on to cuts because we can't afford nice things any more. Classic conservative playbook. How do you think Sheer is going to pay for his boutique tax credits for the rich? Cutting personal taxes? Gotta come from somewhere.

Spin spin spin how can you even stand up? Link please or we'll just consider this your opinion. 

20 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

You didn't read the article.  

"The increase was driven by strong growth in personal and corporation income tax and sales tax revenues (the PST had yet to be lowered), and major federal transfers. Some government businesses, most notably Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Public Insurance, made more money than anticipated."

 

No wonder I missed it, it's 3 words. But yes the transfer payments definitely helped get them back to balance now we'll see if they can balance the budget with the needs of Manitobans, the next 4 years will be the legacy of this government. 

3 minutes ago, pigseye said:

No wonder I missed it, it's 3 words. But yes the transfer payments definitely helped get them back to balance now we'll see if they can balance the budget with the needs of Manitobans, the next 4 years will be the legacy of this government. 

To be determined.  And everything will change depending on what happens tonight. 

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

lol, insults as usual, can't attack the post so you attack the poster, keep it up though you entertain me. 

Nice try. I "attacked" your content, not you. Maybe make better contributions to the discussions and it won't be so easy. Just a thought.

And remind me again: who's the one getting in his blue panties in a wad over a harmless, albeit accurate image posted on a forum? Consult a mirror.

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

Spin spin spin how can you even stand up? Link please or we'll just consider this your opinion. 

Oh, man... The richness of this comment.

Lol at a few people trying to debate with my post about the NDP bankrupting the country and getting the middle to upper class to pay for it.

It's not even a topic for debate. It's pretty black and white that they would do it.

27 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Lol at a few people trying to debate with my post about the NDP bankrupting the country and getting the middle to upper class to pay for it.

It's not even a topic for debate. It's pretty black and white that they would do it.

Increasing the tax on the ultra weathly?

How is this a bad thing?

Libs within a dozen seats (give or take) of a majority. Popular vote is almost even.  The B.C. vote will be HUGE tonight.