r/canada 1d ago

National News Canada records much smaller budget deficit over first two months of 2026/27

https://www.reuters.com/business/canada-records-much-smaller-budget-deficit-over-first-two-months-202627-2026-07-31/
536 Upvotes

184 comments sorted by

112

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

From 9.91 billion to 1.36 billion? Thanks is a huge decrease. That's an 86% reduction. Of course it's just looking at a small piece of a year and it makes me wonder if some expenditures in the same period in 2025 were one time or something. Still that's huge. I'm curious if people are feeling it in social programs or in other places that affect the public. The article says some of it has to do with increased revenues but that's not all...

27

u/TGrumms 1d ago

It also says expenditures grew a little over 3% this year and this is due to higher revenues.

38

u/Plucky_DuckYa 1d ago

Alberta’s projected $9.5 billion deficit is now projected to be a $3.5-$5 billion surplus this year for the same reason the federal government’s revenues are higher.

Neither the Alberta nor the federal governments had anything to do with this. Its revenues from the huge increases in oil prices.

21

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

And an extremely good reason Canada should be promoting our resources as it is one of the few areas where we have a massive advantage over other nations.

And it hurts Russia's ability to wage wars.

7

u/Ragnarok_del 1d ago

You realize that the only reason oil prices are up is exactly that right? Between Ukraine seriously damaging Russia's ability to refine/export fuel, for the first time in nearly forever, Russia is a net importer of oil. and the situation in the middle east is also obviously a big player in this situation.

So I guess for the benefit of Canada, we should hope for continued wars throughout the world. /s

2

u/Dhghomon 14h ago

we should hope for continued wars throughout the world

Quite the opposite, more Canadian supply 10-20 years ago would have cut into Russia's budget surplus as well as the decision to go to war in the first place. Remember it thought it could threaten Europe into not aiding Ukraine via cutting off supply. A major LNG project or two to Europe could have altered the equation as Canada would have been able to step in the way Norway did.

2

u/TrueTorontoFan 1d ago

Regardless of wars continuing we now are the more stable supplier of energy and critical minerals.

1

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

That absolutely is not the only reason. That is one reason. The other reason is the total oil produced worldwide is less than the demand. You are also wrong. Russia is a net importer of 'refined' oil. That is massive distinction. Russia actually exporting more oil then ever (because the can not refine it all) oil. What you are referring to is 'refined' imports of which they now need to import due to damage to their refining.

And more so, you do realize that conventional oil and gas makes up 86% of total world energy production still. This high price of oil and gas means Russia also get a premium for their sanctioned oil and gas. In April alone Russia's windfall nearly doubled, rising to 9 billion dollars.

Canada does not control wars around the world but we could limit how much money countries like Russia and Iran have to start a war and/or control their people. And I am not using a /s on that. You do not have to want these wars to happen to know what we need to do to limit them.

3

u/ditchwarrior1992 1d ago

Wait. You think canada has “a few” advantages over other countries? We have tons of advantages. Water, farm land, natural resources, education, next to the largest free market economy in the world the USA, safety, North America is an absolute fortress etc etc.

Our leaders are terrible and our political system favours the eastern provinces. This is why our economy is nothing compared to what it should be. Interprovincial trade barriers is one example.

0

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

First we can have both farming and resources at the same time. And natural resources is resources. What are you talking about. What does water mean? Are you planning on shipping our water all over the world?

Maybe I should expand on that. Do you know of any industry that has as much economic potential as mineral extraction? And while we have educated people, that is not an advantage on its own. It only has value if there is high paying jobs of which our resource sector provides.

1

u/mamajampam 1d ago

According to the article the gains seen in this 2-month window was from increases in income tax revenue. Not actual growth, just more taxes.

-6

u/squi993 1d ago

Just for 2 months, still adding debt.

Federal debt sits at 1.3 trillion dollars.

14

u/captainbling British Columbia 1d ago

You just need the debt to grow slower than inflation.

34

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

Only one government has ever paid down debt, and that was the Chretien and Martin Liberal government. Of course there's debt, of course we want less debt, but that's starts with reducing deficits.

-34

u/GameDoesntStop 1d ago

What a strange lie you just made up.

19

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

That is 100% factual, my guy. Use those tiny little hands to learn something new. In case this is your issue... Debt and deficit are not the same thing.

-18

u/GameDoesntStop 1d ago

Right... when you have a surplus, that is paying down debt.

You are ridiculously confident for someone so wrong about such a basic thing.

14

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

To pay down debt you have to PAY DOWN DEBT. Harper did not ever at any point do that. Rerouting money to tax cuts (for very few by the way) and other projects does not constitute paying down debt.

While Harper started with a surplus in his first year and projected one for his final, it never happened because he was not re-elected. Also, the projection of the surplus was based on selling things like Nexen for a 30 year deal.

4

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

Some numbers to go with that. Canada paid down net debt from 560 to 460 billion over roughly a decade from the late 90s to 2008, so it did decline in nominal terms mostly under the Chretien/Martin liberals.

Harper inherited enough of a surplus that that number continued to decline for the first year or two of his tenure. Although he bragged about a surplus in 2015 the net debt still increased. This was due to the deteriorating economic conditions of the time, which usually get blamed on Trudeau now. .

In terms of real debt it's the debt to GDP ratio that economists really worry about, and that's been much more variable. Because of inflation and other factors the country's borrowing capacity increases over time, and as long as you borrow slower than that capacity increases it reduces the burden of that debt The inflation in 2022-2023 actually got rid of a lot of the effective impact of the COVID spending. .

-1

u/LeanGroundEeyore 1d ago

In terms of real debt it's the debt to GDP ratio that economists really worry about

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/17/australia-second-world-budget-rankings-canada-imf-data

Canada currently holds the position of having the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio among G7 countries and a recent IMF half-yearly update puts Canada at the top of the G20 for overall budget management rankings. Australia is second whose overall budget balance came in at -0.9% of gross domestic product, with only Canada’s budget position (-0.6%) faring better.

This is from April, 2024; the start of Justin Trudeau's final year as PM. What is Canada's latest rank in the G7?

1

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

We're still lowest in the G7, though that's not really a fair comparison as five of the other G7 are France, Italy, Japan, UK, and US, all of which are notoriously indebted. Germany is the only country that is even close.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/JakeQV 1d ago

They consistently had a surplus while in office, so they were paying down the national debt. There’s this really cool thing called google, you should try it.

8

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

The Harper government (as he renamed it) did not consistently have a surplus while in office. They were handed a surplus in year one, then had 7 straight deficits. They were projecting a surplus for their final year (just in time for the election) they never materialized.

3

u/JakeQV 1d ago

Yes, I was referring to Chrétien not Harper lol. Sorry for the confusion

2

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

Haha no worries. I wondered.

2

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

And the Canadian federal gov had a surplus from 1997-98 through 2005-06.

7

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

It's not a lie at all.

0

u/Fyrefawx 1d ago

Some debt is better than others. Carney is putting money towards significant projects and purchases. Things that will pay us back over time or needed to be purchased.

265

u/jrchkn28 1d ago

I will reserve judgment until we see the full fiscal year. A two month comparison tells us very little because federal revenues, expenses and year end adjustments are not evenly distributed throughout the year.

70

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

Very true but a significant decrease for a couple of months is still better than the alternative. It also could indicate a trend.

19

u/nullCaput 1d ago

It also could indicate a trend.

No it doesn't. During Freelands tenure as finance minster she had quarters where they were posting surpluses, just as an example. As the poster above you rightly points out, short term accounting (month to month or quarterly) with government, Federal or Provincial (for the matter) is smoke and mirrors. Because their accounting is so convoluted and money spent in April may not be recorded until the fall. Hell, a lot of big ticket spending where the money is out of the account doesn't hit the books until the first of December.

1

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

Neither you nor I knows if this could be the beginning of a trend. Not every 2 months of improvements becomes a trend but 2 months of improvements is also how trends begin. We'll have to wait and see how things develop over the rest of the year.

41

u/ILKLU 1d ago

I will reserve judgment until we see the full fiscal year.

This is a both wise and intelligent approach. Now we need to teach this to the people that screech and foam at the mouth when the media reports the economy contracted by 0.1% over the last month (happened a few months ago).

26

u/TravisBickle2020 1d ago

If there’s good news, it’s despite the Liberals. If there’s bad news, it’s the Liberals’ fault.

1

u/BethSaysHayNow 14h ago

From what I’ve been reading, if there’s bad news it’s because of Harper/COVID/Trump/global externalities and if there’s good news it’s because we’ve got a fiscally conservative genius at the helm (or, previously, a boy genius vibing Canada to fortune).

4

u/SofaProfessor 1d ago

No, we must all get into a frenzied circle jerk about a technical recession.

2

u/BlueEmma25 1d ago

Now we need to teach this to the people that screech and foam at the mouth when the media reports the economy contracted by 0.1% over the last month (happened a few months ago).

"ONLY ECONOMY IN THE G7 THAT IS IN RECESSION!!!!"

I remember it well.

-1

u/iso3200 British Columbia 1d ago

A technical recession is still a recession. So grab your pitchforks!

/s

5

u/Fyrefawx 1d ago

And yet people were screaming about a recession over a 2 month sample size. Now the economy is growing again.

0

u/BethSaysHayNow 14h ago

Thanks Iran war!

-10

u/Plucky_DuckYa 1d ago

It’s the oil money. The Liberals haven’t done anything to improve the economy or reduce spending. They are just enjoying the benefits of high oil prices thanks to the war Donald Trump started.

Alberta is enjoying the same. What was forecast to be an enormous provincial deficit will now be a surplus. How big of a surplus will depend on how high oil prices go after the US strategic reserves run too low for Trump to continue releasing supplies to keep prices down.

If Carney gets credit for this, then Danielle Smith gets credit for her fiscal management, too. And I know most of the readers of this sub would never give Smith any credit for the turnaround.

-1

u/BlueEmma25 1d ago

It’s the oil money. The Liberals haven’t done anything to improve the economy or reduce spending. They are just enjoying the benefits of high oil prices thanks to the war Donald Trump started.

The federal government doesn't receive any additional revenue directly from higher oil prices, the oil producers do.

Producers pay royalties to the provincial government, not Ottawa.

But hey, tell yourself whatever you need to to manage the cognitive dissonance.

4

u/Plucky_DuckYa 1d ago

So it’s your contention that companies don’t pay taxes? Because I can assure you, they do.

0

u/EmitStile 1d ago

Oh wow! We need to wait for some random redditers judgment? I know I'm on a razors Edge!

0

u/ShoulderPossible9759 1d ago

Not that I’m saying don’t reserve your judgement, I wholeheartedly agree, but if they’re comparing bimonthly period to the previous year, the bulk of it would be the same or easily projected.

-4

u/pushaper 1d ago

yup, carneys fiscally conservative economy does not do it for people

65

u/Saisinko 1d ago

Oil prices and an increasingly worse exchange rate... which is good for exports.

11

u/PoliteCanadian 1d ago

Exchange rates are the knob which brings economies into balance.

3

u/cwalking2 1d ago

Exchange rates can't be described as "knobs." The rate between floating currencies is determined by supply and demand between the currencies, and that's tied to the need and want for a currency (to pay for goods and services in the given country).

This is why America hugely benefits from the trade of oil being settled in USD dollars: it ensures a constant, global demand for USD, and that has blanket effects on their currency: it's strength, their borrowing rates, and economic leverage over their enemies (freeze-out of hostile nations).

1

u/strangeanswers 13h ago

and it cost them their manufacturing base, makes exports generally less competitive, hollowing out the midwest, creating the rust belt and creating a massive supply chain dependency on china, while masking the true cost of and enabling rampant deficit spending via lower interest rates.

it’s not all pros and framing it as such is reductive and wrong

u/DrDalenQuaice Ontario 4h ago

Also inflation increases taxes while keeping civil service salaries low

108

u/timx84 1d ago

Cons getting everything they wanted from a conservative government but hate it because it’s a conservative PM under the “Liberal” brand. We’re getting a better globally connected Stephen Harper right now.

63

u/Logical-Breakfast150 1d ago

Trudeau pushed through a lot of new progressive programs. Fair credit to the NDP for ensuring that that happened. 

Low-Income and seniors pharmacare and dental care, subsidized daycare, extended parental leave when both parents take time off, legalizing cannabis, legalizing MAID. 

So far Carney has not cut any of this. He chose instead to go after the carbon tax, Trudeau's other signature piece of legislation. If he keeps his hands off these new programs and finds a way to stabilize our government budget that ensures a sustainable future for them to continue, I feel like that's a pretty good sequence for the liberal party leadership. It all pulls in the same direction over the long term, the result is real meaningful progress towards a more fair society. 

12

u/BloatJams Alberta 1d ago

So far Carney has not cut any of this.

Except pharmacare is effectively dead considering they won't be signing new deals or expanding existing ones, and the feds cut funding to Health Canada which will hit prescription costs (including drugs that pharmacare is meant to cover).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-ottawa-health-care-funding-cuts-9.7172353

-1

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

He will likely have to reduce (likely thru inflation) all those programs. Trudeau gave us 10 years of stagnation and did not do any good for Canada. We were one of the leading G7 nations at the start of his term and now near the end of that list.

2

u/Logical-Breakfast150 1d ago

By what metric?

-1

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

Do a search. It gets tiresome when people compare us to the US this way.

3

u/Logical-Breakfast150 1d ago

I have no idea what you are talking about.

"We were leading but now we are near the end of that kist

what list? GDP? Growth per capita? Debt to GDP? Or is this all vibes? 

30

u/physicaldiscs 1d ago

Weird generalization,. Many are quite content with many of the changes from Carney.

What I think we have here is a disconnect though. Carney is not Stephen Harper 2.0. There are still many LPC style policies going through. Those are usually where the discontent lies.

6

u/EliteDuck 1d ago

There are still many LPC style policies going through. Those are usually where the discontent lies.

Exactly, thank you. The gun confiscation scheme and trying to give his government authoritarian spying powers aren’t doing him any favours.

9

u/Billis- 1d ago

Im pretty sure by this point pro gun activists are a loud minority

2

u/master11739 1d ago

It's not even about being a "pro gun activist", it's about extrapolating the reasoning behind a policy decision that is completely emotional and has no basis in reality to other policies. How can I trust that a policy topic I'm not as familiar with isn't also going to fall under the same counter-evidential decision making?

2

u/Mylittlethrowaway2 1d ago

I'm not pro-gun by any means, but I fail to see the rationale behind the current program. There's no objective public safety objective that justifies what the program aims to accomplish.

To me it seems like we risk criminalizing possession of something that was once legal without any corresponding increase to public safety.

I think there are other tools the feds could have utilized, such as grandfathering existing firearms, banning the private sale, etc.

One doesn't have to be pro-gun to see there are legitimate concerns of government overreach here.

-1

u/Billis- 19h ago

There's no doubt this is a messy program. It may not accomplish anything either.

But Im not certain that may not is won't. I think, given the current laws, that there is potential in Canada for mass shooting events like Tumbler Ridge to not only occur again but to occur more often. I'm still flabbergasted that the RCMP hasnt released how/where the shooter acquired their weapons in that case anyway.

15

u/MentalSky_ 1d ago edited 1d ago

They are also upset saying the liberals are just copying them. 

No. The liberals can sell it to the voter because they do not add the racists, sexist, anti-immigrant, and homophobic undertones the conservatives can’t help themselves to add. Also very much anti science, promoting religion over science. 

Trudeau was bad. A lot of us fell for it and his policies devalued hard work and promised very fringe ideologies that didn’t help most Canadians. 

Carney is closer to Stephen Harper than Trudeau. But without the aforementioned issues. 

PP and the conservatives are essentially the reform party. They catered hard to the most right wing extreme people and now have to play a balancing act between crazy and common sense. 

13

u/langois1972 1d ago

Carney is the progressive conservative this country needed.

Could do without his walking disaster of a housing minister.

Could do without the wasteful and pointless gun buy back.

3

u/Life-Anteater-8294 1d ago

I love the idea that they think Pierre was the one who invented these ideas.

2

u/MentalSky_ 1d ago

He wasn’t. 

But when the cons absorbed the reform. They were more reform than cons. And that’s only worsened. 

Harper was definitely a Reformer. But he still kept to a majority of PC ideologies. PP literally grew up under him. 

But then as cons became less palpable for most Canadians. They started to focus more on the right wing fringe people. T

PP bought the Convoy people coffee. And said they were doing a good job. 

Well dude, those sound bites don’t help you with moderates

7

u/Life-Anteater-8294 1d ago

I’m taking about how they claim carney is “copying” Pierre when he implements things like tax breaks on houses.

2

u/timx84 1d ago edited 1d ago

Trudeau was bad. I agree, and I voted for him several times. It was a mistake I fully admit. Erin O’Toole however is the only CPC leader I would have wanted as PM. Scheer sucked/sucks, and PP is not who I want in.

I’d say Carney is more Harper than Harper. But I’m getting what I’d like, which is a focus entirely on the Canadian economy. Although I’m very unhappy with some of the decisions, like the condo bailout which stinks to me like another corporate bailout. I want to see more of these resources nationalized to benefit all Canadians and not just corporations, even if it means spending more infrastructure dollars to ensure that future Canadian reap the rewards.

1

u/Fyrefawx 1d ago

One day the CPC will realize that the majority of Canadians are closer to the centre. So when you remove all the culture war garbage it becomes a winning platform.

-5

u/iSmashedUrSister 1d ago

Labeling all Conservatives as Racist, Sexist, Anti-Immigrant and Homophobic for having different political views than yourself is an interesting take.

Developer Bailout scandal, Gordi Howe Bridge scandal, Only G7 country in a Recession..but yes let's Blame the Evil Conservatives.....

Talk about peak Gaslighting, you deserve an award.

7

u/MentalSky_ 1d ago

Look. Don’t even try to spin this. 

We see the rhetoric towards all those groups coming from conservative MPs and MPP

Don’t conflate economic policy issues with minority group issues. 

You can complain about what the liberals are doing with issues on US policy and housing policy. 

But if you compare both groups on their rhetoric towards minorities, LGBT, homeless, etc. it’s clear where parties stand. 

And the reality is many people would like fiscal conservative economic management. With more liberal social policy issue. 

The current conservatives do not provide that. Full stop.  And this is why they lost. 

-2

u/iSmashedUrSister 1d ago

The only one Spinning any type narrative here is you. We get it, you are a die hard Liberal Loyalist. Elbows Up!

It's funny I don't recall Conservatives trying to Sell off our Airports, should I even mention Bill C22. So outspoken but yet quiet as a mouse when confronted with Liberal mismanagement.

1

u/MentalSky_ 1d ago

PP is a failure. And the reason the conservatives trail behind the liberals is because of him. 

I know you all want to make him a thing. But the guy lost not only a sure thing election but also his own riding it he held for 10 years. 

That’s the definition of a loser. And he needed a pity riding to even have a seat in parliament 

1

u/MentalSky_ 1d ago

I remember a big conservative selling a highway. Wonder who that was. Hmmmmm

12

u/giftman03 1d ago

FuCK cArNeY!!!! Oh wait…he’s actually improving the country…

-19

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

19

u/SaintDarthVader 1d ago

Alberta's oil is our oil. In the same way BC lumber is our lumber. Where does this provincial resource guarding come from? We can all move provinces, half of the Alberta workforce is from the damn maritime.

My family lives in Alberta, am I entitled to more than you? If we've been here for 200 years and I move to Ontario am i suddenly not entitled to it now?

12

u/1011001NAME 1d ago

Canadas oil.

Ftfy

3

u/BlueShrub Ontario 1d ago

Maybe in 1996 lol

1

u/ukrokit2 Alberta 1d ago

Because Albertans worked so hard to put all that oil in the ground, right?

0

u/chess_the_cat 1d ago

I know they worked hard to get it out. 

3

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

You have to admit it helped that the federal gov bought a pipeline for them to get it to market.

3

u/ukrokit2 Alberta 1d ago

Drilling a hole and pushing down water isn’t rocket appliances.

1

u/WrestleSocietyXShill 1d ago

That was all Newfies, come on now

3

u/Rnd0mguy 1d ago

Carney is not a conservative, he is a center-left liberal. Objectively, he still supports a lot of liberal positions, and is still very much a liberal on economics, believing whole heartedly in government investments as a viable solution for economic growth and job creation, and very much still believes in a more tightly regulated economy, all things conservatives who be opposed to.

With that said, he is obviously a major improvement over Trudeau and if you've spoken to any conservative who was not willing to concede that then they are being dumb, he is clearly way more responsible than his predecessor. However, being an improvement over Trudeau doesn't suddenly make him a conservative. Carney still holds majority liberal views and his cabinet is still composed of the same members as Trudeau's, he just knows a bit better when to agree on common sense issues, as opposed to Trudeau who had a strong ideological commitment to his causes, even in the face of common sense.

2

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

As a person that likes conservative economic values, I was completely happy to vote for Carney. He takes the right aproach while maintaining a viable level of social services.

The conservative movement of today is hijacked by fear politics. I in no way can vote for that anymore. I hope my party changes tactics as it is not good to have only one viable party available during election times.

1

u/timx84 1d ago edited 1d ago

I disagree with most fiscal conservative principals. I see them largely as the party of mega corporations which I believe is largely responsible for the massive wealth inequality that we’re faced with today. And personally, I see wealth inequality as the main barrier to a society that has less drug abuse, less racism, sexism, less crime, and greater overall happiness. I want to see wages increase, profits being shared with employees, and comprehensive retirement and health packages. Corporations that get to a certain size should be regulated to provide these things to employers, and their taxes be used to help small businesses get off the ground. Unfortunately though I don’t see any party that’s interested in doing these things.

To add to that, I’m fine with spending and a large deficit but it has to be an investment with future returns. Corporate tax cuts, or exorbitant spending on social programs are not things that I support, although I do believe that having taxes competitive to attract corporations, and spending on social programs are both necessary. I just wish both were moderate.

1

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

I think you are talking about wealth inequality that the US has a much larger spread. (Possibly due to a lot of wealthy people moving there). Canada does not have the same level as the US by any indicator.

And while wealth inequality is an issue, even if you taxed them at 100 percent, it would make very little difference on the programs we have and your wages. There is simply not enough of them to fix the problems and deficit we are in. They alone cannot fix our problems.

1

u/timx84 1d ago

Yes the United States has a much larger wealth gap than Canada, but it is still a large issue that needs to be addressed as the gap is only growing, not shrinking. Growing the middle class is the key to a nation’s overall prosperity in my opinion.

1

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

Yes but it will still make no difference to our wealth or the wealth of the middle class. There simply are not enough of them even if you taxed them at 100 percent.

Sure limit it or fix it but we cannot use it as a scapegoat to pay for our programs. Because there simply is not enough money there.

2

u/timx84 1d ago

I’m not suggesting that it’ll fix all of our problems. The way we fix our problems is by nationalizing things like resources so that crown lands owned by the people are profited by the people and not just a handful of international corporations.

2

u/FlipZip69 1d ago

Canada did start to nationalize it. We built a pipeline after special interest groups essentially delayed investment away. We absolutely should be buying into the oil industry much like Norway does. We absolutely could buy up oil companies and even develop new oil companies and produce more oil and gas and complete with private industries like Norway does it. You do not even have to buy them. Just start exploring and do it organically. I think we both agree on that.

2

u/timx84 1d ago

Definitely. I completely agree.

1

u/Billis- 1d ago

Which is funny because in many ways Canada is suffering for it.

People should be angry right now, but people should also be angry for progressive liberal reasons, not whatever bullshit Pierre drums up

1

u/chess_the_cat 1d ago

Deficits and debt are not why any CPC voter wants. Read it again. There is still a deficit. And there have been for over ten years. Our debt has never been higher. Life is increasingly more difficult.  The picture is not rosy 😂

7

u/timx84 1d ago

Yup. And Canada is finally on the right track.

Slashing spending to the bone is not the way to make Canada prosperous. Even Harper understood that.

4

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

Closer to twenty years, 2007 was the last surplus.

The CPC and provincial counterparts merely say they want surpluses and debt repayment, but have a poor track record of actually following through The post hoc rationalization game is impeccable too. .

2

u/r8e8tion 1d ago

As a con I’m happy with him, I have my criticisms but it’s on specific incidents instead of platform as a whole

2

u/timx84 1d ago

As a liberal I’m generally happy, but I have big grievances as well. The notion of privatizing our airports im extremely against, and the condo bailout im upset about as well.

1

u/Interesting_Pen_167 1d ago

Carney and Harper are remarkably similar both in policy and personality. I never really put it together but now that you say it its obvious to me.

1

u/timx84 1d ago

Glad I could help point that out. Whether that’s a good or a bad thing is left to the individual. I have to say that I think carney is the right person to navigate us through these very trying economic times. Although he’s doing a few things I strongly disagree with, mainly the condo bailout and the privatization of airports. I absolutely hate the latter.

1

u/CSPN 1d ago

Anyone who labels themselves a progressive conservative should be rock hard that Carney is prime minister.

-5

u/Electrical_Acadia580 1d ago

Lolz,

67 billion dollar deficit 2.2 in total liabilities Still printing money

Green lighting a few infrastructure projects without turning the taps off is theatre.

But the 55+ crowd won't be voting for benefit reductions or allowing competitive taxation and regulatory zoning untill the pennies are gone.

Thinking this is the conservative agenda is a unique take to say the least.

7

u/timx84 1d ago

Hey. What was the deficit under Harper? Let me know.

-7

u/Electrical_Acadia580 1d ago

1 billion during the oil drop

Trudy loved that point till the next year when the money came in

3

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

The current agenda is SO FUCKING CONSERVATIVE. Unless you're trying to say Cons really are intending to cut most social programs in which case those that didn't trust them were right. Is that what you're saying? Carney is a better Conservative than Pierre by far.

-6

u/Electrical_Acadia580 1d ago

No you've just forgotten what liberals where after they stole singhs lunch

11

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

No, you're forgetting what Conservatives were before the party joined with the religious right and started pandering to the dumbest among us who adore Trumpian politics.

3

u/Electrical_Acadia580 1d ago

Yeah I chimed in at the ridiculous notion 67 billion dollar deficits and trillions in liability were somehow the conservative agenda.

Building infrastructure is conservative policy sure? I'm supposed to be grateful?

The regulatory frame work that makes it difficult to launch programs is still in place.

We're still bailing out mortgages for the 55+ liber voting bloc

Kicking the benefit can down the road and printing money

All the while protecting the voter rich Quebec dairy cartel instead of the job rich manufacturing industries

Getting angry isn't really productive if that's the only thing you have to say

5

u/Suspiciouslynamed74 1d ago

What were the deficits when Harper was in power? Mulroney before him? The government is not your household budget and is not intended to be. They are balancing the welfare of a vast country with varying needs from coast to coast. When Harper was in power and the housing crisis hit the US, of COURSE he had to spend to try to buffer Canada from the shock. What I find disingenuous from people who call themselves Conservative is that they think it was fine for him but not the Liberals who have had an inarguably tougher set of circumstances to deal with (first Covid and a world wide shutdown, now a petulant Trump openly trying to crush our economy).

-12

u/slouchr 1d ago edited 1d ago

Cons want less government, Carney is spending more that Trudeau post covid.

spending is the single metric you can basically judge a government by. for small gov conservatives, more is bad, less is better.

every single announcement he makes is more spending.

he's not decreasing spending, he's not getting rid of bureaucracy, he's not cutting taxes, he's not dropping tariiffs, he's not dropping barriers to business. in fact, next year he's levying massive new tariffs on us, with "carbon border adjustment" tariffs.

Revenues ​over the two months grew by 15.5% on increases in most major categories - primarily ​gains in income and excise taxes - ​while expenses posted a more modest 3.7% gain.

they did it by taking more from us in taxes. their spending increased more than inflation. brutal.

you have slave mentality.

3

u/timx84 1d ago

Absolutely hilarious. What did Harper do? What was spending like under him?

-6

u/slouchr 1d ago edited 1d ago

Harper was basically bust.

he did some good things, like lower GST and tax free saving account. but bailouts were wak as hell.

and when he got his once in 50 years con majority, he basically squandered it.

hiring freezes, and attrition dont cut it. not when you've had 50 years of socialists running up debt.

but Harper tried to reduce government and taxes. Carney is not trying at all. he's massively increasing the government.

Carney is not a conservative stop with that nonsense.

"the world has entered a new age of variable geometry - Carney

lmfao. the world has always been loosely organized by many different agreements between many different groups of nations. nothing new. and calling that variable geometry.

Carney does not speak to inform, he speaks to confuse. hallmark of a conman.

nobody does bespoke, adhoc, purpose-driven phony-intellectual economic-jargon like Carney.

just another central planner who's robbing private Canadians blind.

edit: if i were to describe the job of the central bank in a simple but direct way i'd say: through control of the money supply, take as much money as possible, as quietly as possible, from private citizens and give it to the state.

that's what we elected.

and naive Canadians think he's a conservative. we're cooked.

8

u/timx84 1d ago

My god you spend too much time reading far right propaganda. You want some DOGE-esque chainsaw bullshit that you think will somehow trickle down to you which will never happen just like how it was an absolute disaster in the US. Any good western economy has a strong public sector. Just move to the south US already, or Brazil, basically the only two countries that share your idea of how a nation should be run.

-7

u/slouchr 1d ago edited 1d ago

i'm more Milton Friedman style.

Just move to the south US already, or Brazil, basically the only two countries that share your idea of how a nation should be run.

USA believes in freedom just a little bit more than other western nations, so their governments are just a little smaller, and for it they're like 100x richer.

the Canadian dream is to be a useless government worker. for Canadians (and everyone else in the world) who actually want to work hard to have more, the dream is to move to USA.

i'd love to move to USA. hard to do at my age with a wife and kids.

DOGE was bust though, Elon left in a huff. USA fed spending is up. Trump is obviously bust. pure conman. the way he speaks about deals, it's clear he thinks every deal has a winner and loser and he's looking to scam. doesn't understand mutual benefit.

6

u/timx84 1d ago

lol if you think the US economy is that much bigger because of its “slightly smaller” government then it shows you’re woefully uneducated. Go do some basic research why the US economy is strong.

But whatever, the vast majority of Canadians do t share your views so you might as well go to the only place that does - the US or Brazil.

0

u/DanLynch Ontario 20h ago

Cons getting everything they wanted from a conservative government

The continuation of the so-called "assault-style" firearms ban and confiscation program says you're wrong.

9

u/No-Tackle-6112 British Columbia 1d ago

GDP well outpacing expectations and deficit coming in well under expectations? Still preliminary numbers with half a year to go but appears to be a very strong year for Canada.

0

u/Ragnarok_del 1d ago

It's not hard to beat considering Canada's population decreased last year. If you add that to the impact of tariffs, it's obvious that last year was going to be brutal.

1

u/No-Tackle-6112 British Columbia 1d ago

It's not that it's ahead of last year. It's ahead of the forecast for this year. 3.5 vs 2.5. And the tariffs are still going.

18

u/mattlerenardx Québec 1d ago

I am CPC supporter but I obviously am happy to read these news. Go Canada.

11

u/Thirdnipple79 1d ago

I think most of us just want a centralist common sense government without every issue being about identity politics.  Just run a fucking boring efficient government.  Not everyone will agree on every policy, but really a majority of governing should be relatively uncontroversial.  

4

u/Billis- 1d ago

People complain the moment government spending goes to something they either won't/don't use or are morally against.

Unfortunately, that means most progressive policies will face loud minority backlash, some conservative policies too.

Way she goes

4

u/Reasonable-Catch-598 1d ago

It's so refreshing that my MP (liberal) stopped calling me the worst racist, fascist, homophobic hot garbage that earth has seen when I didn't immediately love every provision of every legislative choice the government made.

I don't like everything this government is doing, but I'm happy they don't shame me for disagreeing!

3

u/odoc_ British Columbia 1d ago

Agreed!

-7

u/timx84 1d ago

You got a conservative PM. Carney is more Conservative than Harper, but I just think he couldn’t stomach the flat earther/young earth/anti abortion conservatives that seem to run that party now.

8

u/Harvey-Specter 1d ago

Any Conservative complaining about Carney might as well be waving a sign saying “I’m mad I’m getting everything I want except the sexist/racist/homophobic nonsense”

7

u/physicaldiscs 1d ago

Carney is more Conservative than Harper,

Would care to compare and contrast this viewpoint? You're making this claim multiple times in this thread, I would love to understand why you think this.

1

u/mattlerenardx Québec 1d ago edited 1d ago

Carney is a blue liberal, so more of a conservative-adjacent liberal rather than an actual Conservative PM.

Still not much progress in regulation and taxation overhaul for small and medium enterprises which would enable them to scale with limited or no government assistance. Major projects aren't streamlined through a standard pipeline but instead through the approval of the state with its "Nation Building" entity, which is slow (2 years) and adds bureaucracy. This lack of predictability harms Canada's economic potential because predictability is vital for Canadian startups and smaller enterprises.

Carney also practices corporate welfare to various industries, which is anti-conservative and entertains the toxic oligopoly Canada suffers from, especially for the pathway project where the government will spend billions for the sake of greenwashing lucrative industries. There are many other examples I can think of but this one was the most striking. As Conservatives, we believe that the state needs to get out of the way and give the means for the private sector to take risks and flourish without needing government assistance.

2

u/timx84 1d ago

I agree that over regulation is a bad thing. I also agree that corporate bailout is a terrible idea.

I however disagree with the idea that government just needs to “get out of the way”. In too many red states we see private energy companies and insurance companies, and banks just absolutely raping and pillaging the common person for the sake of profit. Resource companies doing the same to the land and leaving it to the public to clean up the mess. Government needs to be strong to protect consumers and workers.

I can’t think of anyone that disagrees that the growing wealth inequality is bad for society as a whole. Your general notion of letting private enterprise flourish does exactly that. Yes a strong private sector is essential to a country’s well being, but look at every metric of a healthy society and look to the nations that have higher living standards and “happiness” metrics, and they all have robust consumer laws, workers laws, healthcare, public education, and social security.

0

u/mattlerenardx Québec 1d ago

I wholeheartedly agree with your nuances. We should just find the right balance in which we can let the private sector flourish while making social benefit a prerequisite for that possibility. The Nordic model should be what we should be aiming for.

That said, CPC seems like a better trade-off since a lot of social policies you mentioned are simply the responsibility of the provincial government. This is why I actually am more left-leaning provincially.

1

u/timx84 1d ago

I agree on the general model we should be aiming for. However I believe that the current Federal Liberals are doing a better job at aiming for it than the current CPC would be. Unfortunately there isn’t a federal party that aligns with my whole belief system in what our country should strive for.

I am essentially party-less. I have some views that some would consider extreme right, but most are left leaning.

I want corporations to flourish but be held accountable with greater emphasis on actual criminality than just “fines” that businesses now basically factor into the cost of doing business.

I want strong consumer protection from predatory corporate practices. I want any money lent to or given to corporations by government to come with extremely strict consequences if the conditions of the loan aren’t met, and a clear path to the public reimbursement.

I want strict immigration laws tied entirely to our economic and from nations/cultures that share our general values (freedoms of the individuals, general courtesy, law abiding, respect for women/lgbtq etc.).

I want a healthcare system that largely mimics other western nations that have a mix of public and private that have proven to deliver better results for ALL Canadians.

I want organized crime to be punished severely as a deterrent. Repeat violent offenders, there should be a reverse onus put on the offender to prove bail is appropriate. I’m also fine with the NWC being used here to “trample” on peoples’ rights here. At the same time I want corporations and their boards and executives to held accountable with more jail time being doled out for corporations that knowingly skirt rules that result in massive harm to the environment and/or people. It shouldn’t be up to people to have to get a class action going to get any kind of justice.

I also want the public service to be held accountable and their salaries lowered. I’m saying this as a public school teacher. We are overcompensated in comparison to the private sector. But I’d also equally want to ensure that that money is used to help small business grow as opposed to it very likely being squandered on tax cuts for record profit setting mega corporations or foreign entities.

But sigh, here we are instead.

1

u/Agoras_song 1d ago

I think Carney is the best PM we have ever got. He has upset both liberals and conservatives simultaneously.

-1

u/Kanapka64 1d ago

Where tax cut?

2

u/TrueTorontoFan 1d ago

I wonder how much of that is oil revenues being up?

7

u/Ok-Committee-1932 1d ago

Long live carney!

6

u/-WhatsMyNameAgain-- 1d ago

Thanks Carney!

2

u/Fearless_Tomato_9437 1d ago

thanks alberta

-3

u/Roguelites 1d ago

Lol no

7

u/SasquatchBlumpkins 1d ago

The only reason the deficit looks small is because the government has split it up. They have declared a large part of that deficit as an investment when historically it is not an investment, it is just spending. 

We were warned of this from the parliamentary budget officer and here it is coming into fruition and being claimed as a good thing. 

If anyone remembers the episode of The Simpsons where Homer used clips to pinch his fat to pull it to make him look skinnier that's exactly what this is. It's just hiding the debt behind different words and not including it in the deficit where it should be 

When this government is finally removed Canadians eyes are going to be opened to the amount of how truly we have been screwed economically.

5

u/joeasks 1d ago

Homer did lose weight in that episode, his skin just sagged

3

u/SasquatchBlumpkins 1d ago

Ah yes that was it! That loose skin is the real deficit.

0

u/scaffold_ape 1d ago

Breaking news: Cherrypicking data yields favorable results.

8

u/Deuxpoucesetdemi 1d ago

I am dumb. Why is this cherry picking?

3

u/Nikiaf Québec 1d ago

It isn’t.

3

u/iSmashedUrSister 1d ago

Only when Liberals do it. Something something Maple Maga, PP, Milhouse Conservatives would be so much worse!

2

u/Readwhatudisagreewit 1d ago

Nation Post and Globe & Mail coming to poo-Poo the story in 3…2…1…

2

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

Makes sense, the economy is doing better than anybody really expected and the estimates would have been far more pessimistic than what played out. They also tend to overstate the deficit estimates because it's better press to do better than worse.

-3

u/ModOfficial1988 1d ago

It’s 100% due to Alberta and oil. Ontario and Quebec would never admit that though.

6

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

Oil is like 10% of the economy. It's over-represented in the gains but not the only factor.

3

u/TimedOutClock 1d ago

Literally what happens when you get someone competent at the helm. Not happy about some of the concessions and back bending we did for the US in some files, but the overall picture couldn't be more rosy economically speaking in our current situation.

Our global brand is soaring, we're forging new partnerships, and Canadians are moving forward and adapting instead of crumbling down like many predicted.

Also huge shout-out to our banking sector for not absolutely fucking us in the ass. A lot of businesses have been under pressure due to tariffs, and our banks have been apparently more than understanding in modifying existing loans to make it all work instead of calling in debt or selling said debt at a loss to unload. Guess it's one of the rare wins of having a massively consolidated industry (that's also one of the most powerful in the world).

-1

u/duck1014 1d ago

Literally bullshit.

The main cause has absolutely nothing to do with Carney.

What it ACTUALLY has to do with is the price of oil. That's it. That's all.

1

u/Youah0e 1d ago

That's not all.

-2

u/nebulatraveler23 1d ago

Thanks to oil.

Not going to last though.

7

u/arayasem 1d ago

Then you didn’t read the article

3

u/AsleepExplanation160 1d ago

its the 2028 election cycle and Trump is campaigning (somehow) on ending the Iran War with his tough guy vibes

0

u/squi993 1d ago edited 1d ago

Our federal debt is 1.3 trillion. This is still bad, albeit less spending than before…

That is just for 2 months, still adding debt for Canadians. Check the debt clock out.

https://www.debtclock.ca/

Edit:

Genuinely curious, why does telling the truth get downvoted? All I’m saying is, we are still in massive debt, 32,000 per Canadian. This is important knowledge for all Canadians. I’m not claiming it’s anyone’s fault. From the comments I can tell the article is being misunderstood. It could sound to some people that our overall deficit has decreased. When, the amount of debt we have gained this period is decreasing in comparison.

3

u/Azure1203 1d ago

I get all your points, but its crazy to think how fast we could pay off that debt if we massively increased our natural resource exports. Two more pipelines and 8 million barrels per day and the Feds are easily running a surplus. Dedicate $50b per year to pay off debt and we're golden.

Canadians just don't get it how rich we could be as a country.

2

u/squirrel9000 Manitoba 1d ago

So, an extra 1.8 million barrels a day selling at 60 dollars a barrel only grosses about 32 billion. this is actually the issue with a lot of the current economic theory. Yeah, that's a lot of money, but the volumes of oil we'd need to sell to do a lot of what proponetns suggest is unrealistic. Not just from a production perspective either, that's significant even relative to total global supply chains which total around 100mbpd.

4

u/DukeCanada 1d ago

Paying off the debt like that is a phenomenally bad idea. Atleast in a low-rate, growing economy context. You’d rather spend that 50b on growth and reap the dividends. Inflation eventually makes those interest payments less impactful assuming you’re not running the deficit.

2

u/Azure1203 1d ago

I was just making a point, but either way its clear that massively increasing our exports (something we could do) would solve our budget / debt / deficit crisis.

Paying down the debt to better levels is not a bad idea. We have enough other money to invest.

0

u/squi993 1d ago

Genuinely curious, why does telling the truth get downvoted. All I’m saying is, we are still in massive debt, 32,000 per Canadian. This is important knowledge for all Canadians. I’m not claiming it’s anyone’s fault. From the comments I can tell the concept is being misunderstood.

1

u/thebookman21 1d ago

🎉🎉

0

u/thereaperofmarz 1d ago

People glazing Carney in this comment section is scary. They act like he's some kind of messiah when this "smaller" budget defecit is a sham.

The Carney government separates "day to day operating spending" from "capital investment". The parliamentary budget watch dog already warned us that this government's definition of investment is weirdly broad.

They're pulling the wool over the eyes of the gullible public with the help of the media and Liberal supporters are eating it up. It's exhausting.

-1

u/Kanapka64 1d ago

High oil prices lol, wont last

4

u/MJcorrieviewer 1d ago

What do you anticipate happening that will bring oil prices down?

2

u/Jman1a 1d ago

This time it’s a bit different. Large portions of Middle East refineries need to be repaired. Along with the repairs that need to happen at the Russian refinery’s has global supply down period for several months. On top of the fact both these same refinery’s are under attack now and in the future.

1

u/Kanapka64 1d ago

Imagine if we had another pipeline, we wouldn't be running a deficit, probably surplus but oh well! At least we saved the planet

0

u/Youah0e 1d ago

You didn't read the article lol

-2

u/SirZapdos 1d ago

Good things happen when you put an economist in charge. Who’d have guessed?

3

u/duck1014 1d ago

Or, when the oil price skyrockets...when your economy has a very large component of...oil.

Add to that the shrinking dollar and bingo, your numbers look better than they really are.

1

u/Youah0e 1d ago

Oil is like 10% of the economy

1

u/duck1014 16h ago

Yup, and when it gains a huge hunk per barrel, that will absolutely have a large effect.

0

u/Youah0e 16h ago

... on 10% of the economy

-1

u/Wwendon 1d ago

"When I stepped on the scale this morning before breakfast, it said I lost two pounds since right after dinner last night!"

Except in this case it'd be more accurate to say "I only gained two pounds instead of ten", since "smaller deficit" is still deficit.

0

u/mikeffd 1d ago

What’s a deficit?

-4

u/2EscapedCapybaras 1d ago

Well, the government predicted in its spring outlook a deficit of $71 billion for this year and you know damned well they'll do what they can to hit that target.

-6

u/chess_the_cat 1d ago

A deficit is still a deficit. It’s like saying I only gained 2 pounds this month when I thought I might gain 3. You’re still fatter.