Consider this story from the Vancouver Sun. (H/T Andrew)
Excerpt:
Canadian ideals are shifting to the right, being taken over by a “unique strain of conservatism,” a poll from Preston Manning’s Calgarybased think-tank shows, the former Reform party leader said Wednesday.
This was the second year the Manning Centre for Building Democracy conducted the poll, which asked Canadians about their attitudes toward values and policies generally ascribed to Conservatives. Last year’s results indicated similar movements, with more people saying they don’t want government peddling grand views and having its hands in all aspects of society.
The only exception to this opinion is public safety and security policies, Manning said in an interview Tuesday.
Of those surveyed, 65 per cent said government should focus on current issues, and 67 per cent said government should decrease in size to do more.
Canada, it seems, has arrived at a point where its citizens have shifted their expectations for government, said Allan Gregg, the head of Harris Decima, which helped with the polling.
“(Government) is no longer the grand designer,” he said.
But the national shift isn’t necessarily being ascribed to Stephen Harper, who has been prime minister for slightly more than five years.
“This can’t be traced back the last two or three or four years,” said Andre Turcotte, president of Feedback Research Centre, which also helped with polling and interpreting the results. Instead, he said, this is something that has been happening since the late 1980s -around the same time the Reform Party began its rise.
Turcotte couldn’t speculate to whether it was by design or surprise, but he said that in 2008, Harper tapped into what many wanted out of government -being smaller and more focused on specific issues.
“As these conservative values become mainstream values, people will less and less identify them with Conservatives. People will just say these are Canadian values,” Manning said.
The poll was conducted from May 4 to 11, almost immediately after the election. A total of 1,000 interviews were conducted with randomly selected Canadians, resulting in a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points 19 times out of 20.
I blogged recently about how Canada’s economic numbers are vastly superior to the American numbers. I think the Canadians are learning what works by comparing what they’ve been doing (e.g. – corporate tax cuts down to half of our rate) compared to what we’ve been doing, (e.g. – massive bailouts and government spending). They know that they are better off than we are, and they know that conservative policies work – they’ve lived through it. That’s why a country that used to be liberal is now trending conservative. Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave them a five-year economics course and they gave him rave reviews as a professor, and a BIG promotion.
More than 150 economists back House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner’s call to match any increase in the debt limit with spending cuts of equal size, according to a letter released by the Republican leader’s office on Wednesday.
The letter will give Boehner an important talking point as he and his fellow House Republicans meet with President Barack Obama at 10 a.m. to discuss the debt limit and other fiscal issues.
“An increase in the national debt limit that is not accompanied by significant spending cuts and budget reforms to address our government’s spending addiction will harm private-sector job creation in America,” the letter said.
Signatories include Nobel laureate Robert Mundell of Columbia University and economists from schools like New York University and Georgetown University, as well as conservative think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute.
The Treasury Department has warned that the country could face a default that could push it back into recession and roil markets across the globe if it does not raise the $14.3 trillion debt limit by Aug 2. Treasury has been tapping federal employee pensions and other funds to pay the nation’s bills since it reached the current debt limit on May 16.
Republicans say they will not back any increase that does not include steep spending cuts and other limits to ensure that debt stays at a manageable level.
The Republican-controlled House on Tuesday defeated a bill that called for a debt-limit increase without conditions.
–What appeared to be a sustainable level of job growth seems to have faded hard in May. Yes nonfarm payrolls increased for the month, but that increase is actually a net-negative considering population growth that adds 75,000 – 85,000 workers to the labor force in an average month. Job growth is (was?) the only thing going for consumer incomes and spending, and this most recent result will throw said spending, responsible for 70% of economic activity, into a questionable state. –Guy LeBas, Janney Montgomery Scott
–There is no way to put lipstick on that pig: That was an extremely weak employment report. Nonfarm payrolls rose at the slowest pace since last September and private payrolls (+83,000) even posted their smallest increase since last June. One important factor behind the sudden deterioration between April and May was the swing in retail employment. The latter fell by 9,000 in May after still rising 64,000 in April. That pattern corroborates our view that the unusually late Easter lifted payrolls in April and were a corresponding drag in May… One sector that has to be highlighted here is “leisure & hospitality”. After creating 132,000 jobs (44,000 per month) between January and April, the sector cut 6,000 jobs in May — a monthly swing of -50,000 jobs. The reasons for this could be manifold: Households had to cut back on spending for arts, entertainment etc. amid soaring gasoline prices, or they were reluctant to visit restaurants amid higher food prices. –Harm Bandholz, Unicredit
–The slowdown in the pace of growth has clearly rattled the confidence of small and medium size firms that have been responsible for much of the hiring over the past few months.. Beneath the headline the data was just as dreary. Goods producers essentially slammed the brakes on hiring, with manufacturers culling 5,000 workers from the payrolls. Seasonal adjustments at the BLS likely accounted for the increase in hiring in the food and beverage sector, thus negating whatever McDonalds effect on retail hiring that might have occurred. The only real positives in the report were hiring by health care firms and in business services which modestly decelerated below their respective three month averages of 40,000 and 56,000 respectively. –Joseph Brusuelas, Bloomberg
–It is fairly clear that in the face of increasing uncertainty, against the backdrop of a deep recession and shallow recovery, firms decided to stop hiring. The bigger question remains whether this is a temporary hold or the pause before renewed layoffs on a broad scale. Looking at the underlying metrics of the economy, the June employment report will likely be worse than May. Going past the next the several months the economy is in the nexus of a temporary squall today created by the supply chain disruption and higher food and energy prices. All else being equal these issues will resolve themselves and the economy should rebound later in the summer. All else is not equal, however, as China is slowing, QE2 is ending, and no one really knows what fiscal policy is beginning. In sum, these factors will build increasing headwinds to growth whose full effect on real activity is unlikely to be felt for several more months.–Steven Blitz, ITG Investment Research
–The critical importance of continued labor market improvement cannot be overstated, as the wage and salary income that a labor market recovery, even a sub-par one by historical standards, provides to consumers will be key in providing fuel for ongoing economic growth in 2011. Therefore, today’s payroll figures, along with other evidence pointing to labor market woes in May (higher initial unemployment claims and a reduction in small business hiring plans being the two most important) are bad news indeed. To be fair, all was not terrible in this report, as the average workweek held steady from an upward revised 34.4 hour level in April and the manufacturing workweek increased to a robust 40.6 hours. –Joshua Shapiro, MFR Inc.
We’re in serious trouble, and the Democrats are oblivious.
WALLACE: Congressman West, as we saw in the special election up in New York state this week, where the Democrat beat the Republican and Medicare was a big issue, as we see in the national polls a lot of people, especially seniors, don’t want to see Medicare changed this way.
WEST: Well, I think when you look at Paul Ryan’s plan, first of all, there is no change for anyone who is a senior 55 years and above. But as I sit here right now, I’m 50 years of age. And we already know that the board of trustee has said, you got 13 years and something very bad is going to happen with Medicare. So, what is going to be there for myself when I get 63 to 65?
So, I think the thing that we see is at least there’s a plan out there to try to have some type of reform.
And there was a great article by Mr. Stanley Druckenmiller in The Wall Street Journal back in the 15th of May that talked about the fact that the financial markets, a lot of these, you know, bond markets are looking to see: are we going to have some type of long- term viable solution and plan as we go forward?
WALLACE: But let me pick up on that, Congressman Edwards, because the knock against the Democrats is you don’t have a plan, that congressional Democrats didn’t pass a budget last year. Senate Democrats aren’t offering a budget this year — President Obama talks having an independent panel of medical experts who are going to find $20 billion of cuts somewhere. At least they’ve got a plan.
EDWARDS: Well, I think it’s not true that we don’t have a plan. And, in fact, when we passed the Affordable Care Act last year, we put in some real markers for Medicare that in fact reduced Medicare costs. We invested in preventive care for seniors because we know that the real drivers of Medicare are these long-term costs for chronic care that happens at the — you know, at the end of life.
You know, Republicans are very interesting because in their budget what they would do is repeal preventive care. Prescription drug coverage — we also closed the donut hole there, which is costing seniors a boatload of money and is not very efficient on the system.
So, to say that Democrats don’t have a plan I think is incorrect. I mean, in fact, the plan is to preserve and protect Medicare for future generations. And Republicans want to dismantle that.
WEST: Yes, but I think as you sit here and look at the two of us, one of us has voted to cut Medicare. When you look at the fact you voted for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which had $500 million of cuts of Medicare. And we also have this independent payment advisory board, these 15 bureaucrats, that are supposed to control the cost of Medicare. I mean, that’s something that really does scare seniors.
What we are talking is something that does not affect any senior, anyone 55 years and above. We’re talking about something that does put in some type of viable plan to sustain Medicare for the future, because as we know, it was put out three weeks ago, it won’t be there.
EDWARDS: Well, the congressman thinks the seniors are only interested in what’s good for them. And what we know about seniors, whether they’re in south Florida or in Maryland, is that they actually care about what happens with that next generation. They care about whether we’re going to cover preventive care and prescription drug.
WEST: But if you don’t have a plan, there is nothing for the next generation.
EDWARDS: And that they are — and that they are not sent in the private market to negotiate with insurance companies. We know that that would be a failure. And that’s exactly what the Republican plan calls for. I can’t negotiate on —
WALLACE: Let me move on to another thing, because the biggest difference, it seems to me, looking at your two positions on how to deal with the deficit is over taxes.
Congresswoman Edwards, you have a big plan to increase revenues. And let’s put it up on the screen. You would raise tax rates for the wealthy. You would raise the estate tax. You would tax capital gains and dividend as ordinary income and you would end tax subsidies for oil and gas companies.
So, raise taxes in the middle of a weak recovery?
EDWARDS: Well, let’s be clear — raise tax on the wealthiest 2 percent who have run away with the store for the last 10 years and haven’t put money back into the economy. I mean, that’s a fact, because if that trickle-down theory had worked, our economy would be in good shape right now.
And so, we do — I do subscribe to a plan that says, you know what? Middle income earners, you’ve already shared a fair burden of your taxes. But the wealthiest 2 percent have not.
And there’s no excuse whatsoever for continuing taxes for people who make over $500,000 a year.
WALLACE: Congressman West, you got something there?
WEST: Yes. I got a very interesting article which was written on the 26th of May by Steven Moore for The Wall Street Journal that talks about — we are talking about a 62 percent top tax rate and the absolutely abysmal effects that it will have on this economy.
And one of the great things he says here is, in the end, “The Tax Foundation recently noted that in 2009, U.S. collected a higher share of income and payroll taxes, 45 percent, from the richest 10 percent of tax files than any other nation, including some such socialist welfare states.”
So, I think that we are already getting a lot of the juice from those top brackets. But go back and look at history, Donna, when we looked at Coolidge and Harding. It took those marginal tax rates down to 29 percent. And the percentage of revenues for GDP grew. But after them came Hoover and Roosevelt who took it from 24 percent up to 83 percent, and the percentage of revenues decreased. Even John F. Kennedy, when he came in and saw a 91 percent marginal tax rate said that was too high. He took it down to 71 percent.
He seems to have all the facts and figures at his fingertips! Just like William Lane Craig, except he’s a former Army Lt. Colonel.
WINTERY KNIGHT 