Yes but it’s back loaded based on higher oil prices ( crystalbalogy surpreme )

Let me guess..Election Year…lol. What a joke. Balanced. Yeah right.

No budget could ever hope to be “perfect”! A more in depth analysis will certainly be done over the next few days and weeks. However, Ataloss and P Val, I thought that a couple of items listed might meet with your approval:

– Income splitting for families and expanded universal child care benefits.

– A new home accessibility tax credit so seniors and disabled people can stay in their homes. (to be used for such things as hand rails & ramps).

– Canadians caring for very sick or dying family members (starting in 2016) will be able to claim Employment Insurance (EI) for 6 months rather than the current 6 weeks.

– Starting in 2017 the Public Transit Fund will provide $750 million over 2 years, after that $1 billion.

Obviously you two are hell bent on whining about abso-freaking-lutely everything that our Government does, haha! At least you’ll soon have another 4 years to complain!

In the meantime, perhaps you two might take some time out of your exceptionally productive day to enlighten us as to what might make the “left wing” happy?

Or, can anything make you happy

Ok, so here’s there first quick analysis that I’ve seen so far! This from the Canadian Press”

As with all federal budgets, there are winners and losers in the latest document. Here’s a look at who gets goodies and who doesn’t.

Win: Seniors get lower minimum withdrawal limits for their registered retirement income funds and a new tax credit for home improvements to improve accessibility.

Lose: The federal public service, which is in contract negotiations, got notice that the government intends to save $900 million by revamping sick-leave policies, one way or another.

Win: Commuters caught in big-city gridlock will get major infrastructure dollars to help to start easing that congestion.

Lose: The military gets more money, but the extra cash doesn’t begin to flow for two years.

Win: In addition to previously announced new child-care benefits and income splitting for couples with children, families will also get increased benefits to care for gravely ill family members.

Lose: Tax dodgers will be up against a beefed-up tax-compliance program at the Canada Revenue Agency, which gets $58.2 million over five years to chase them down.

Win: Small businesses will see their tax rate drop in stages to nine per cent in 2019 from 11 per cent today.

Lose: Foreign aid gets no increase, despite a recent OECD report showing Canada’s aid spending is stagnant compared with that of other developed countries.

Win: Farming and fishing families will see their lifetime capital gains exemption rise to $1 million from $813,600 today.

Lose: Climate change doesn’t even merit a mention in the budget section entitled “Protecting Canada’s Environment.” The document promises money for species at risk and conservation programs, but nothing new on greenhouse gas emissions.

Win: The RCMP, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Canada Border Services Agency get $292.6 million over five years to fight terrorism and enforce the government’s new anti-terror law.

Lose: Adults who were looking for a fitness tax credit, promised by the Conservatives in 2011, will have to settle for a study of the issue by an expert panel.

Win: Manufacturers, who get a tax break on machinery and equipment.

Lose: The oil and gas industry, once the government’s favourite economic driver, gets no mention at all, besides some small tax breaks for the liquefied natural gas industry.

I think some of those items in the budget are good.

That said, what boggles my mind is why they were so hell bent on having a surplus. In order to get there, they had to chop the reserve fund from 3B to 1B, they had to sell off their GM shares and they are forecasting 2% growth. If anything falters even a bit, then they will basically be back into a deficit. That’s how close they are to a deficit.

For crying out loud, just run a small deficit and explain to people that it isn’t THAT big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. It wouldn’t fit the political message though and that’s the underlying tone here. Now they can campaign on the fact that they “balanced the books” and are “running a surplus” even though a few billion either way is essentially the same thing when looking at the dollar value of the federal budget.

What’s funny though, is that this is the first surplus for this government in the past eight years. Here are the facts for those that like those sorts of things:

2006 13.8B
2007 9.6B
2008 -5.8B
2009 -55.6B
2010 -33.3B
2011 -26.2B
2012 -25.9B
2013 -18.9B
2014 -16.6B

As an aside, those first two years are from when they took over from the Liberals after their 9 consecutive years of surplus budgets.

Hey wait, aren’t the Reformers supposed to be the fiscally responsible party with an economist at the helm?

Yup, balanced…by selling assets, the same thing the BC Libs are doing to “balance” their budget.

That would be like me balancing my household budget by selling the furniture. Works well in the short term (election year) but not so much in the long term.

I believe, I believe, right……BS

Hart Guy..

Good breakdown..productive thought here is a breath of fresh air on these forums..!

I don’t see anything good in that budget…really someone getting to collect more EI for compassionate reasons is nothing more than a POLICY change. We all have paid into that INSURANCE plan, and most of us will never see any of it back.

Jim13136, apparently there will be a reduction in the amount of EI premiums.

Posted on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 @ 6:36 PM by Jim13136

I don’t see anything good in that budget…really someone getting to collect more EI for compassionate reasons is nothing more than a POLICY change. We all have paid into that INSURANCE plan, and most of us will never see any of it back.

—————

And for that, you should be thankful. If your house doesn’t burn down do you expect to get your insurance premiums back or do you just thank your lucky stars you still have all your irreplaceable items?

I, too, appreciate Hart Guy’s breakdown, though I disagree on a couple of points, mostly on the value of income splitting to the average Canadian, which as I understand it, only benefits those making really high wages.
Like others, I’m appalled at raiding the cookie jar known as the contingency fund, which is supposed to be for true emergencies, not to make the fiscal policies of any political party look kosher just in time for an election.
I am also not a huge fan of spending so much to fight “terrorists” – the country is spending millions on bombing people in the Middle East, who then have a justifiable beef with Canada and try their best to foment discord over here, even if it means mostly inadvertently stirring the pot for an extremely small number of psychologically disturbed religious nuts who run amuck and hurt others. This is what we use to justify spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars on in the name of national security? Sorry, this is a manufactured crisis and just another election trick.

They can table whatever they want to try and make themselves look good prior to an election. Trouble is Braindead voters fall for this chit!

Lets take a realistic look at this..

Win: Seniors get lower minimum withdrawal limits for their registered retirement income funds and a new tax credit for home improvements to improve accessibility.

Keep the seniors on the poverty level.. lets make it worse by making them have to keep their spouses at home because the cant afford to go into a home

Commuters caught in big-city gridlock will get major infrastructure dollars to help to start easing that congestion.

yes lets every tax payer pay for those who choose to live in the big cities so they can get around better.

The RCMP, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Canada Border Services Agency get $292.6 million over five years to fight terrorism and enforce the government’s new anti-terror law.

yes..look at the terrorism we have.. the new anti terror law… aka we can do what we want when we want law..

Lose.. all the provinces with the huge transfer cuts..

Lose.. every canadian with anti terror law

Lose.. everyone harper has put in the senate

Lose.. harper saying he will cut MPs but is actually increasing by over 30

Lose.. harpers war mongering.. costin millions and lives

Lose the environment

Lose the oceans

Everything is about perception. Many only see the negative. Many also see the positive. From my perspective, I choose to see the positive and how it impacts me and my family and those I care about. I think this is a good budget. (From my perspective)

The increase in the TFSA is great news.

P Val, you’re contempt for all things “right wing” is causing you to make ridiculous statements! I’ll touch on just a couple as it’s time to hit the hay!

Yes, it’s a win for seniors as they will have a lower minimum withdrawal limit for their RRIF withdrawals. If they don’t need the income from their RRIF in any year, they will now be required to withdraw a smaller minimum. This will allow them to limit or reduce the taxes that they might have paid prior to this change. The lower limit will also allow them to leave more in their RRIF for future needs, especially for seniors who are worried that they may outlive their savings! This is a great and growing concern amongst healthy seniors!!

This does nothing to keep seniors on the poverty level, rather it gives them more control over when and how much they withdraw from their RRIF. The new tax credit for home improvements to improve accessibility will help seniors stay in their own homes longer, and away from the senior’s care home environments that you have previously criticized. Perhaps you are letting your personal family situation cloud your logic!

P Val, you then comment that “commuters caught in big-city gridlock will get major infrastructure dollars to help to start easing that congestion. yes lets every tax payer pay for those who choose to live in the big cities so they can get around better.”

The reality in case you aren’t aware, is that the VAST majority of our Canadian population lives in our major urban centres. Yes, major infrastructure dollars will be spent to support and appease the VAST majority of our citizens. You and I may grumble that we pay taxes and the bulk of our taxes go south to the lower mainland, but the reality is that the money flows to where the people are! The only way for us to solve this is for us to choose to also live in the big cities. Me, I’d rather stay up north, even though I think that most of my taxes go south, and east for that matter!

Good Night!

Hart Guy,

Some of your analysis is missing information and therefore somewhat disingenuous.

Lose Bigger: The military gets more money, but the extra cash doesn’t begin to flow for two years. You left out the part that they took a $2.1 billion cut to it’s operating budget to help balance the Conservative books, and it will take a decade just to get back what was taken away.

Win (but only for a few): In addition to previously announced new child-care benefits and income splitting for couples with children. Those without children are given the middle finger. Plus this will only benefit the top 15% of families, and does little to nothing for the middle and lower income families, the largest chunk of Canadians.

Win (but only for a few): TFSA limit increased to $10,000. Once again, no middle or lower income family will have that kind of cash laying around each year. Carrots for the rich, but little benefit to others. Makes for nice sound bites.

Win (maybe eventually): Commuters caught in big-city gridlock will get major infrastructure dollars to help to start easing that congestion. This goodie doesn’t kick in until late 2017.

Lose: Small businesses will see their tax rate drop in stages to nine per cent in 2019 from 11 per cent today. This is an inefficient use of tax dollars as it encourages business to stay small to get the tax cut. Once the business earns more than $500,000 and have capital more than $15 million, the tax cut is null and void. There are 700,000 businesses in Canada currently able to claim this tax goodie. Why would they ever want to grow?

Lose: The Conservatives cracked open the piggy bank contingency fund and snagged $2 billion a year for three years to balance the budget. That is supposed to be for emergencies. Are we in one?

Brother Gecko…”new child care benefits will only benefit top 15% of families, and does nothing for middle and lower income families….

Hey! My Son’s family with 2 kids under 6, 75,000 household income, a big mortgage, car payments, and no savings to speak of, will be very happy to know that, ACCORDING TO YOU…they are in the top 15% of family wage earners in Canada.

Some people will complain no matter what governing party is in place until they win the lottery..

@ Brother Gecko, re: your comment to me “Some of your analysis is missing information and therefore somewhat disingenuous.”

Sorry if I didn’t make it clear to you and to anyone or everyone else, but the analysis wasn’t mine! As I stated in the first line of my post:

“Ok, so here’s there first quick analysis that I’ve seen so far! This from the Canadian Press”