• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • W
    July 02, 2010 - 13:34

    Add to that the increasing cost of construction, as we have seen recently. It will be cheaper to do the infastructure work now than later.

    = = =

    The necessary corollary to that, b from nl, is that it would have been cheaper to do the infastructure work earlier than it will be now.

    Yet there is example after example of projects that have been announced by Danny Williams-Government, year after year after year, and especially election after election... and yet still haven't actually been built.

  • Comment on the Comment
    July 02, 2010 - 13:33

    Chris I wish more people thought like you. The social assistance program has gotten way out of hand in this province and the situation needs to be addressed.

  • Taxpayer
    July 02, 2010 - 13:32

    Great symbolism the size of the box stands for the amount of thought that was applied to the budget.

  • Todd
    July 02, 2010 - 13:32

    Let's see if the trend of low-balling revenues continues. My bet is in September or October, there will be a review and the province's revenues will be higher than forecast. We might even have a balanced budget or even a surplus. Danny saves Christmas and public opionion polls will be sky high. Sound about right?

  • David
    July 02, 2010 - 13:31

    No one ever got tossed out spending money. Our money...more correctly, our credit.

    When will we accept that 50-year old politicians with 3-year report cards really aren't too fussed about the destruction they will have wrought in 20 years time?

  • Anna
    July 02, 2010 - 13:31

    Overall the budget was good but it was very wrong with the tax decrease for middle and high class tax brackets. They should be reversed and the middle class should have been given the 2.2 percent decrease and the higher tax bracket the .3 percent. The middle class cannot continue to pay the way for everyone. While the poor get all these tax and benefit brakes the rich get all kinds of tax and benefit brakes and the working fools in the middle class continue to get hammered with having to pay for their tax brakes and benefits. Our country will be just as bad as the countries like Afganistan and Irag when we get to be the same age and possibly long before because the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class is just disappearing and becoming the working poor who cannot afford to have a life.

  • chris
    July 02, 2010 - 13:30

    As much as the tax cut will benefit me I would rather have seen the tax cut directed at heating fuel and gas, this way I am still getting a tax cut along with everyone else ,especially the ones struggling to make it through each winter from the money they spend trying to keep themselves warm and the seniors who haven't had a raise in their government pensions. All Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will benefit.

    I think it is time now also for our government to start decreasing the number of people on social services , our economy is improving , there are businesses out there looking for employees and we have healthy bodied individuals walking around doing nothing and receiving money from Social services because they are not working.

    I think it is time to get these people out in the work force reducing the amount of money going out by the tax payers of this province to support them.

  • Frankie
    July 02, 2010 - 13:30

    Isn't it amazing! A couple of years ago when crude oil hit $50 USD per barrel, the Provincial Govt. were in their glee about how much extra revenue would be rolling in to the coffers ... now, if it drops below $83 USD per barrel they cry poor-mouth?? Something's wrong with that picture ...

  • Bob
    July 02, 2010 - 13:26

    How many times did he expense the shoes?

    Oh wait - he probably purchased a brand new pair of Ecco's for all of his friends and expensed them.

  • Joseph
    July 02, 2010 - 13:26

    I hope that Mr. Marshall's 2010 provincial budget (pardon the puns) has MORE 'SOUL' THAN 'TONGUE'!

  • b
    July 02, 2010 - 13:25

    Mike from Mount Pearl, NL writes: I think the reason for the deficit is to help stimulate the economy to also do catch up on infrastructure while we have the money. This province for years neglected maintenance and future planning for buildings and now we are paying for it. It's the same as owning a house if you don't do yearly maintenance all of a sudden you have 20 - 30,000 dollars with of work to do. I think this spending is needed and won't be regular thing.

    =================================

    Add to that the increasing cost of construction, as we have seen recently. It will be cheaper to do the infastructure work now than later.

  • Taxpayer
    July 02, 2010 - 13:24

    Laughable you are right. You know little about what went into the budget. Any work is done by the depts. NOT by the politicians. Once the politicians get at it anything goes.

  • Mike
    July 02, 2010 - 13:22

    I think the reason for the deficit is to help stimulate the economy to also do catch up on infrastructure while we have the money. This province for years neglected maintenance and future planning for buildings and now we are paying for it. It's the same as owning a house if you don't do yearly maintenance all of a sudden you have 20 - 30,000 dollars with of work to do. I think this spending is needed and won't be regular thing.

  • Living for today
    July 02, 2010 - 13:20

    Excellent budget for those of us that are living for today and not worried about tomorrow. Tom and Dan's plan of spending every cent we have now on government funded jobs will keep the illusion of a healthy economy alive. It's going to be a violent change when the revenues drop off suddenly - but why cross bridges before you come to them?
    No worries about the debt - it's like a credit card balance. As long as you make the minimum payments and have money left over to play with, no harm done. Overall a great budget for today. I don't think that I'll be sticking around when the bill comes for the party though! I thought that the baby shoes were pretty cute - the next generation are going to have a time managing our debt - looks good on 'em!

  • Nasty
    July 02, 2010 - 13:18

    Living for today from NL writes:
    I don't think that I'll be sticking around when the bill comes for the party though!


    I second that. It appears to provide much needed perks to the people, but if the people fail to take advantage of it while it lasts they are in for a very rude surprise. Seems Government has taken the forward thinking prospectus approach which we all know has no guarantee of solid returns on investment. The resources they base the numbers on are not infinite. The offshore is in the downside of productive viability and dwindling reserves. Putting all the eggs in one basket has never been a failsafe way to protect the future. Face facts here, we are back into the have not status, and see government acting like nothing is wrong to buy votes and secure their jobs. Running a deficit is never a progressive way to run a household, business, province or country. You would have thought they would have caught on to what they have been telling the population for years. Guess do as I say, not as I do is what the masters expect from the drones. Pity more people did not see through all that and make the right move.

    I say be very careful of what you wish for, it just might turn around and bite you harder then you thought if it all goes bad.

  • DB
    July 02, 2010 - 13:16

    Drew must be living under a rock if you work anywhere close to the construction industry you would know how much money is being spent on projects.As for the taxpayer you can't have it and spend millions on giving raises to everyone who thinks thery are worth Alberta wages.

  • Laughable
    July 02, 2010 - 13:14

    Most uneducated post of the day award goes to: Taxpayer from NL.

    Do you have any idea how complex preparing a budget for a province is? Do you really think it could be done with little thought?

    I don't agree with everything in the budget. However, I won't make a fool of myself and say that it was prepared without any thought either.

  • Drew
    July 02, 2010 - 13:13

    What infrastructure work ? Has anyone seen any of that stimulus money spent on infrastructure around here ?

  • Nasty
    July 02, 2010 - 13:12

    Manny if people took the time to think of the future based on fact rather then fiction they are destined for failure. If you noticed I did make mention of the few good points. But also have taken into consideration the percentage for failure as well. I would hate to see your over-draft balance if you think this is a progressive budget. No wonder you switched from Tax Dodger to Manny.

  • Manuel
    July 02, 2010 - 13:12

    Come on Nate, lets see your version of the budget and how your going to balance the books. Im very surprised you havent posted your budget that your team has done.

  • winston
    July 02, 2010 - 13:12

    baby shoes, wouldn't want to walk a mile in his shoes with that budget in tow.

  • Mike
    July 02, 2010 - 13:10

    To Taxpayer:

    Who said anything about maintenance being a one time cost? What I am saying is that we are so far behind that these cost are accumulated. Take a house for example , if I spend 2 or 3000 a year keeping it up thats a small percentage of income as opposed to if I do nothing for 10 years and end up having to spend 30 or 40 000 to bring my house to a presentable state. In that case I'd have to go into debt to play catch up. Same case with the Government at some point they will be a little caught up and the costs will lower. Sure we'll still have infrastructure spending but we won;t be building new ferrys and long term care facilities every year.

  • Living for today
    July 02, 2010 - 13:09

    Todd - you wonder if the trend of low balling the revenue will continue? Hmmm, the projections were made with Oil pegged at $83 / barrel. If you're confident that the price per barrel will increase beyond that benchmark, I suggest that you purchase a leveraged ETF on the market - you'll either make a killing or lose your shirt. In our government's case, they'll either luck out and get a balanced budget - or lose our shirts. I wish that I could play with other people's money like that!

  • Taxpayer
    July 02, 2010 - 13:08

    Where does Danny get these people from? The province goes into deficit and this is termed having the money . Then there are comments about maintenance being a one time cost. Next it is that the deficit is to stimulate the economy when TD bank said that the province would have a strong one this year. No wonder we have people who can't control their credit cards. They haven't any understanding of finance.

    With reference to balancing the budget Manual the deficit is 2.8% of the overall budget. If even you can't balance that then why aren't paying a visit to Al Antle to help you out.

  • W
    July 01, 2010 - 20:23

    Add to that the increasing cost of construction, as we have seen recently. It will be cheaper to do the infastructure work now than later.

    = = =

    The necessary corollary to that, b from nl, is that it would have been cheaper to do the infastructure work earlier than it will be now.

    Yet there is example after example of projects that have been announced by Danny Williams-Government, year after year after year, and especially election after election... and yet still haven't actually been built.

  • Comment on the Comment
    July 01, 2010 - 20:22

    Chris I wish more people thought like you. The social assistance program has gotten way out of hand in this province and the situation needs to be addressed.

  • Taxpayer
    July 01, 2010 - 20:21

    Great symbolism the size of the box stands for the amount of thought that was applied to the budget.

  • Todd
    July 01, 2010 - 20:20

    Let's see if the trend of low-balling revenues continues. My bet is in September or October, there will be a review and the province's revenues will be higher than forecast. We might even have a balanced budget or even a surplus. Danny saves Christmas and public opionion polls will be sky high. Sound about right?

  • David
    July 01, 2010 - 20:19

    No one ever got tossed out spending money. Our money...more correctly, our credit.

    When will we accept that 50-year old politicians with 3-year report cards really aren't too fussed about the destruction they will have wrought in 20 years time?

  • Anna
    July 01, 2010 - 20:19

    Overall the budget was good but it was very wrong with the tax decrease for middle and high class tax brackets. They should be reversed and the middle class should have been given the 2.2 percent decrease and the higher tax bracket the .3 percent. The middle class cannot continue to pay the way for everyone. While the poor get all these tax and benefit brakes the rich get all kinds of tax and benefit brakes and the working fools in the middle class continue to get hammered with having to pay for their tax brakes and benefits. Our country will be just as bad as the countries like Afganistan and Irag when we get to be the same age and possibly long before because the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class is just disappearing and becoming the working poor who cannot afford to have a life.

  • chris
    July 01, 2010 - 20:18

    As much as the tax cut will benefit me I would rather have seen the tax cut directed at heating fuel and gas, this way I am still getting a tax cut along with everyone else ,especially the ones struggling to make it through each winter from the money they spend trying to keep themselves warm and the seniors who haven't had a raise in their government pensions. All Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will benefit.

    I think it is time now also for our government to start decreasing the number of people on social services , our economy is improving , there are businesses out there looking for employees and we have healthy bodied individuals walking around doing nothing and receiving money from Social services because they are not working.

    I think it is time to get these people out in the work force reducing the amount of money going out by the tax payers of this province to support them.

  • Frankie
    July 01, 2010 - 20:18

    Isn't it amazing! A couple of years ago when crude oil hit $50 USD per barrel, the Provincial Govt. were in their glee about how much extra revenue would be rolling in to the coffers ... now, if it drops below $83 USD per barrel they cry poor-mouth?? Something's wrong with that picture ...

  • Bob
    July 01, 2010 - 20:13

    How many times did he expense the shoes?

    Oh wait - he probably purchased a brand new pair of Ecco's for all of his friends and expensed them.

  • Joseph
    July 01, 2010 - 20:13

    I hope that Mr. Marshall's 2010 provincial budget (pardon the puns) has MORE 'SOUL' THAN 'TONGUE'!

  • b
    July 01, 2010 - 20:11

    Mike from Mount Pearl, NL writes: I think the reason for the deficit is to help stimulate the economy to also do catch up on infrastructure while we have the money. This province for years neglected maintenance and future planning for buildings and now we are paying for it. It's the same as owning a house if you don't do yearly maintenance all of a sudden you have 20 - 30,000 dollars with of work to do. I think this spending is needed and won't be regular thing.

    =================================

    Add to that the increasing cost of construction, as we have seen recently. It will be cheaper to do the infastructure work now than later.

  • Taxpayer
    July 01, 2010 - 20:10

    Laughable you are right. You know little about what went into the budget. Any work is done by the depts. NOT by the politicians. Once the politicians get at it anything goes.

  • Mike
    July 01, 2010 - 20:06

    I think the reason for the deficit is to help stimulate the economy to also do catch up on infrastructure while we have the money. This province for years neglected maintenance and future planning for buildings and now we are paying for it. It's the same as owning a house if you don't do yearly maintenance all of a sudden you have 20 - 30,000 dollars with of work to do. I think this spending is needed and won't be regular thing.

  • Living for today
    July 01, 2010 - 20:03

    Excellent budget for those of us that are living for today and not worried about tomorrow. Tom and Dan's plan of spending every cent we have now on government funded jobs will keep the illusion of a healthy economy alive. It's going to be a violent change when the revenues drop off suddenly - but why cross bridges before you come to them?
    No worries about the debt - it's like a credit card balance. As long as you make the minimum payments and have money left over to play with, no harm done. Overall a great budget for today. I don't think that I'll be sticking around when the bill comes for the party though! I thought that the baby shoes were pretty cute - the next generation are going to have a time managing our debt - looks good on 'em!

  • Nasty
    July 01, 2010 - 20:00

    Living for today from NL writes:
    I don't think that I'll be sticking around when the bill comes for the party though!


    I second that. It appears to provide much needed perks to the people, but if the people fail to take advantage of it while it lasts they are in for a very rude surprise. Seems Government has taken the forward thinking prospectus approach which we all know has no guarantee of solid returns on investment. The resources they base the numbers on are not infinite. The offshore is in the downside of productive viability and dwindling reserves. Putting all the eggs in one basket has never been a failsafe way to protect the future. Face facts here, we are back into the have not status, and see government acting like nothing is wrong to buy votes and secure their jobs. Running a deficit is never a progressive way to run a household, business, province or country. You would have thought they would have caught on to what they have been telling the population for years. Guess do as I say, not as I do is what the masters expect from the drones. Pity more people did not see through all that and make the right move.

    I say be very careful of what you wish for, it just might turn around and bite you harder then you thought if it all goes bad.

  • DB
    July 01, 2010 - 19:56

    Drew must be living under a rock if you work anywhere close to the construction industry you would know how much money is being spent on projects.As for the taxpayer you can't have it and spend millions on giving raises to everyone who thinks thery are worth Alberta wages.

  • Laughable
    July 01, 2010 - 19:54

    Most uneducated post of the day award goes to: Taxpayer from NL.

    Do you have any idea how complex preparing a budget for a province is? Do you really think it could be done with little thought?

    I don't agree with everything in the budget. However, I won't make a fool of myself and say that it was prepared without any thought either.

  • Drew
    July 01, 2010 - 19:51

    What infrastructure work ? Has anyone seen any of that stimulus money spent on infrastructure around here ?

  • Nasty
    July 01, 2010 - 19:49

    Manny if people took the time to think of the future based on fact rather then fiction they are destined for failure. If you noticed I did make mention of the few good points. But also have taken into consideration the percentage for failure as well. I would hate to see your over-draft balance if you think this is a progressive budget. No wonder you switched from Tax Dodger to Manny.

  • Manuel
    July 01, 2010 - 19:49

    Come on Nate, lets see your version of the budget and how your going to balance the books. Im very surprised you havent posted your budget that your team has done.

  • winston
    July 01, 2010 - 19:49

    baby shoes, wouldn't want to walk a mile in his shoes with that budget in tow.

  • Mike
    July 01, 2010 - 19:46

    To Taxpayer:

    Who said anything about maintenance being a one time cost? What I am saying is that we are so far behind that these cost are accumulated. Take a house for example , if I spend 2 or 3000 a year keeping it up thats a small percentage of income as opposed to if I do nothing for 10 years and end up having to spend 30 or 40 000 to bring my house to a presentable state. In that case I'd have to go into debt to play catch up. Same case with the Government at some point they will be a little caught up and the costs will lower. Sure we'll still have infrastructure spending but we won;t be building new ferrys and long term care facilities every year.

  • Living for today
    July 01, 2010 - 19:45

    Todd - you wonder if the trend of low balling the revenue will continue? Hmmm, the projections were made with Oil pegged at $83 / barrel. If you're confident that the price per barrel will increase beyond that benchmark, I suggest that you purchase a leveraged ETF on the market - you'll either make a killing or lose your shirt. In our government's case, they'll either luck out and get a balanced budget - or lose our shirts. I wish that I could play with other people's money like that!

  • Taxpayer
    July 01, 2010 - 19:43

    Where does Danny get these people from? The province goes into deficit and this is termed having the money . Then there are comments about maintenance being a one time cost. Next it is that the deficit is to stimulate the economy when TD bank said that the province would have a strong one this year. No wonder we have people who can't control their credit cards. They haven't any understanding of finance.

    With reference to balancing the budget Manual the deficit is 2.8% of the overall budget. If even you can't balance that then why aren't paying a visit to Al Antle to help you out.