Why is the federal government obsessed with capital spending?
Reclassifying profit subsidies as capital spending might be fun, but it is not serious policy and it will not result in the investment Canadians need.
Reclassifying profit subsidies as capital spending might be fun, but it is not serious policy and it will not result in the investment Canadians need.
Every conversation we are having about regulations and barriers to trade or productivity are complex. That complexity means that following the rhetoric on deregulation has unintended consequences as much as regulations have.
Increased automation of back office, management, and sales services are not guaranteed to have positive outcomes for companies or society. However, some negative outcomes are rather well known at this point and work should be done so they are avoided.
There are massive differences in the industrial strategies from the left and those promoted by the new conservative movement circling Trump. It is essential for the movement's leadership to articulate the difference for workers. A right wing version industrial policies will only lead to war, domestic conflict, stagnant wages, inflation, and capital profiteering from misery.
An issue arises when we look at taxes inevitably raised to pay the debt or for the increased spending. There is some strange thing that happens where people expect not to have to pay for things that the government does. Many think every tax dollar they pay is extra spending, even if they suddenly do not have to pay the directly out of pocket higher price in the private market any more. Math is hard and net savings are not obvious to people. The left should start talking about state revenue generation as an alternative.