While it is always possible that unforseen events will make it impossible to reach the long term debt-to-GDP ratio of 25%, I still admire the government for relentless looking to reduce debt and taxes. Look at the positive impact for the economy and the Looney.

Incidententally, I have found a site that tries to measure the total debt of Canada (including territories and localities). Its http://www.ndir.com/SI/education/debt.shtml

Not my site, but it reminds me of US government profligacy, since our clock is going in the opposite direction.

My thoughts on this budget – while the net effects of tax cuts will be roughly the same as previously enjoyed under the Liberals’ November fiscal update, the Conservative plan is exceptionally complicated, with its weaving together of changes to rates, personal amounts, new tax credits, etc. as a appeal to multiple social policy avenues. As a result, it isn’t easy to calculate one’s net gains, as many pundits are already agreeing.

Ironically, a little-covered story announced that in the minutes following the 4:00 EST announcement, an ‘Option 2′ plan was erroneously published to the Finance Ministry site. It contained a similar total tax reduction, but instead just cut the middle rates by a single percent. Wow. Easy, and perhaps too similar to proposed Liberal changes.

In fairness to those without children and other demographic groups not benefiting by targeted reductions, I have to suggest that a general rate cut (along the lines of the quickly-yanked Option 2) would also have been more equitable, though I clearly understand why it didn’t make the cut.

I disagree that giving money directly to parents is not a good plan. The Tory plan is roughly the same as the Liberal plan (in dollar terms) except that the Liberals planned to take about the same amount of money to create government-run child care spaces. That would have created 1 child care space for every 20 needed (I am not an expert on this and I am going by what I read in the media). We still would have the same problem with not enough childcare spaces.

Also, note that one income families with a stay-at-home spouse will get the entire $1,200 tax-free. For a family making $60,000 that is equivalent to a 2% tax cut. That is quite significant, in my opinion.

My first child is due in late August, so we’ll benefit from the outset, and while no one is going to complain about an extra hundred dollars per month, the real difference that it is going to make to our budget is minimal.

It’s minimal for me because we can already afford for my wife to stay home and look after our son and any future children we have. $100 extra per month will mean that my already well-off kids will have an even better future, because I’ll probably put the resulting extra cash into one of our existing investments.

It’s minimal for families where both parents need to work because the real cost of health care outside of Quebec is ridiculously high. It will ease the blow a little bit for each individual family, but it won’t be nearly as effective as it would be if pooled and cheap health care were made available.

It’s being made available under the geis of giving parents a choice, but what it is really doing is shooting out smoke. It’s not a good plan.

I like the fact that capital gains on property/stocks donated to charities aren’t taxed any more.

Link.