• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2021 federal budget and the CAF

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
448
Points
980
Page 288-289 are the gameplan:
"The federal government has no tolerance for sexual misconduct or gender-based violence in the Canadian Armed Forces."

It's a pity that the federal government still lacks the same level of intolerance for the same things attributed to certain prime ministers:

Woman who accused Justin Trudeau of groping her at music festival speaks out
The incident referred to in the editorial did occur, the woman says
Andrew Buncombe 07 July 2018

A woman who accused Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of groping her almost two decades ago has broken her silence – saying she stands by her account but considers the matter closed.

 

Lumber

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
38
Points
530
It's a pity that the federal government still lacks the same level of intolerance for the same things attributed to certain prime ministers:

troll.jpg

And, to not be accused of the same, I'll actually add something to the conversation:

I think the CSC project, in mostly its entirety, is safe in the long term, post-covid reality. If big spending is what the LPC thinks is what the doctor ordered, what's better that $70B spent in Canada, supporting Canadian jobs.

edit: spelling
 
Last edited:

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
469
Points
880
what's better that $70B spent in Canada


$50B spent elsewhere to get the same stuff, giving the foreigners 50 billion Canadian dollars to (ultimately) spend in Canada and giving us $20B to spend on other stuff. $70B gets spent in Canada, but we get the ships AND $20B more worth of stuff.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
920
Points
910
$50B spent elsewhere to get the same stuff, giving the foreigners 50 billion Canadian dollars to (ultimately) spend in Canada and giving us $20B to spend on other stuff. $70B gets spent in Canada, but we get the ships AND $20B more worth of stuff.
Normally, I am with you Brad. But not on warships.

If you don’t build them domestically, you also don’t get to refit and maintain them domestically and there is usually a catch on the IP as well. So- yeah, upfront purchase price might look better, but the O&M will kill you down the road.

So, you probably don’t get the $20B to spend on other stuff. You give that to a foreign yard, too, eventually.
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
146
Points
630
haven't we learnt our lesson yet? If we don't make it we can't control it which is one of the reasons for our poor showing in the vaccination process.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
347
Points
910
haven't we learnt our lesson yet? If we don't make it we can't control it which is one of the reasons for our poor showing in the vaccination process.
We have also learned if we try to force our selves to make it, we don't do it right. There is nothing wrong with buying off shore if local industry cannot make a product of sufficient quality and cost. How much money did we waste trying to make combat boots in Quebec before we gave up and got BOOTFORGEN?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,224
Points
1,060
Wasn't BFG just a temporary stopgap?
Animated GIF
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
146
Points
630
We have also learned if we try to force our selves to make it, we don't do it right. There is nothing wrong with buying off shore if local industry cannot make a product of sufficient quality and cost. How much money did we waste trying to make combat boots in Quebec before we gave up and got BOOTFORGEN?
that is because we tried to make it in Quebec and long after we had lost most of our quality shoemakers to China
 

QV

Sr. Member
Reaction score
112
Points
480
Not shocked to see this government is going to spend billions a year on child care forever. Is child care really the responsibility of the federal government?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,224
Points
1,060
Not shocked to see this government is going to spend billions a year on child care forever. Is child care really the responsibility of the federal government?

No... and that's the thing, apparently. As a result, this is likely another crazy Utopian idea dreamt up by the Chateau Generals in Ottawa that will die in the trenches before the troops 'hit the bags'.

And, by the way, if the pandemic proved the greatest need is for health care dollars, why are they pushing for transit and child care? It's all too bizarre to contemplate, of course:

Budget 2021: Welcome back, standard operating procedures​

Paul Wells: The budget focuses on the sort of things a government like Canada's should be working on right now. But the big bet is on childcare—and the devil is in the details.

"Since it became clear the premiers were unanimously and reasonably calling for increased health transfers, they’ve had three answers from Ottawa: “No;” “we’ll give you $3 billion a year for public transit;” and “we’ll give you $8 billion a year for daycare.” No federal government is ever obliged to do what provincial governments demand. But child care will mostly be administered by provincial governments, so the disagreement over the best use of the next transfer dollar is not merely academic. It’ll directly affect the tone, and perhaps the success or failure, of necessary negotiations on program design."

 

ModlrMike

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
332
Points
930
Not shocked to see this government is going to spend billions a year on child care forever. Is child care really the responsibility of the federal government?
It is if you believe in cradle to grave government.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
368
Points
880
Childcare is 1800-2000 dollars a month in some places.

More than people make after taxes for many jobs.

This leads to people staying at home to raise kids rather than join or rejoin the workforce. Mostly women.

So the only question I have is does more people entering the workforce and being productive that way give us more economic benefits than the billions spent on childcare.

Looking at the Quebec model, one can argue yes.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
771
Points
1,010
Childcare is 1800-2000 dollars a month in some places.

More than people make after taxes for many jobs.
Maybe in some Montessori schools. And I doubt that people putting their kids there worry about the cost

Average is more like what you see in the article below.

Ottawa promised $10-a-day child care in the 2021 federal budget. How would that work? A guide


This leads to people staying at home to raise kids rather than join or rejoin the workforce. Mostly women.

So the only question I have is does more people entering the workforce and being productive that way give us more economic benefits than the billions spent on childcare.
Depends. Newton's Third Law. More people in the workforce means more commuting, more money spent on infrastructure and heating and cooling, more fuel consumption, more greenhouse gases and emissions, more green taxes collected in order to meet compliancy targets, more offsets. We may have an answer in 20 years.
Looking at the Quebec model, one can argue yes.
Considering since 1957, Quebec has received about 50% of federal equalization payments, I wouldn't hold that up as a model.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
920
Points
910
Childcare is 1800-2000 dollars a month in some places.

More than people make after taxes for many jobs.

This leads to people staying at home to raise kids rather than join or rejoin the workforce. Mostly women.

So the only question I have is does more people entering the workforce and being productive that way give us more economic benefits than the billions spent on childcare.

Looking at the Quebec model, one can argue yes.
What about parents (of either gender- I make no judgement there) that want to stay at home and raise their own kids?

too bad, so Sad?
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
368
Points
880
What about parents (of either gender- I make no judgement there) that want to stay at home and raise their own kids?

too bad, so Sad?
How are they missing out on anything? They are still saving money at the end of the day.

Childcare in the Quebec system isn't free, its just affordable.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
368
Points
880
Maybe in some Montessori schools. And I doubt that people putting their kids there worry about the cost

Average is more like what you see in the article below.

Ottawa promised $10-a-day child care in the 2021 federal budget. How would that work? A guide



Depends. Newton's Third Law. More people in the workforce means more commuting, more money spent on infrastructure and heating and cooling, more fuel consumption, more greenhouse gases and emissions, more green taxes collected in order to meet compliancy targets, more offsets. We may have an answer in 20 years.
That may explain the money in the budget for public transit. Thinking ahead.
Considering since 1957, Quebec has received about 50% of federal equalization payments, I wouldn't hold that up as a model.
Considering that Quebec put universal childcare in 1997, and going from there, they have had more women in the workplace and higher workplace participation than Ontario in the years following.


  • After four decades of similarity, fertility rates have been slightly higher in Quebec than in Ontario since 2005. In 2016, Quebec’s total fertility rate was 1.59 children per woman, while Ontario’s was 1.46.
  • The difference was mostly driven by women in their twenties, who tend to have more children in Quebec than in Ontario. This is partly because the proportion of women in their twenties who are in a couple is higher in Quebec (39%, versus 28% in Ontario in 2016).
  • As fertility rates increased in Quebec, the labour force participation of women aged 15 to 44 also increased, exceeding that of women in Ontario after 2003. In 2016, the participation rate of women was 81% in Quebec, compared with 75% in Ontario.
  • Most of the relative increase in female labour force participation in Quebec occurred among women with young children. Between 1996 and 2016, the labour force participation rate of women whose youngest child was under the age of 3 increased by nearly 20 percentage points in Quebec, compared with a 4 percentage point increase in Ontario. The Quebec–Ontario difference was smaller among women without children under the age of 13.
  • Changes in the composition of the population of women aged 15 to 44 and differences in real wage growth for this population do not explain the divergent trends observed in female labour force participation in Quebec and Ontario after 1996. At the same time, the costs associated with child care and housekeeping services grew less in Quebec than in Ontario over the period.

Interestingly enough, Quebec has been performing better economically since 2010, able to produce balanced budgets with the help of equalization, but also even without the equalization payments, their deficits were smaller as a percentage of GDP than Ontario. While there are many factors at play here beyond childcare, having 6 percentage points more women in the workforce has to be a net benefit for Quebec.

And if we can duplicate this nationally, that will show up later on.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
920
Points
910
How are they missing out on anything? They are still saving money at the end of the day.

Childcare in the Quebec system isn't free, its just affordable.
Presumably, they are not being “subsidized” to be at home.

We do all agree that daycares, at $10.00/day/kid, will be subsidized by some taxpayer, somewhere, right?
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
368
Points
880
Presumably, they are not being “subsidized” to be at home.

We do all agree that daycares, at $10.00/day/kid, will be subsidized by some taxpayer, somewhere, right?
I don't understand why you think parents who stay at home are somehow losing out on money. Currently a parent outside Quebec spends 15-20k annually on childcare. A parent staying at home spends nothing.

Under a Quebec model a parent spends 3k annually on childcare. A parent at home spends nothing.

So what is the parent at home losing out on?

And yes, while all taxpayers are paying for it, there is a corresponding increase in tax revenues by people who are now working, who are earning money, and spending that money in the economy. So it evens out? Or better yet, Canada comes out ahead?
 
Top