When people with the least room to absorb hardship are still willing to sacrifice for Canada, the rest of us should probably take a hard look in the mirror.
Canada is in a real bind. We're a massive country geographically with a relatively puny population that doesn't generate a ton of money. We can't afford to pay for the current costs of running the country, yet we're being pressured to spend more and more we don't have to spend. Arctic defense, submarines, fighter planes, universal health care, tariff industry bail outs. All of these things are being paid for with additional debt. I hate to say it Fred, but we're in a heap of trouble and I can't see any solutions on the horizon.
I think we've got the best guy working on it though as our Prime Minister. I can only imagine if we had PP in there. Everybody deserves a home, on a safe street talk. Of course we do. But it takes discipline to have the things you want. The things that matter in old age. You have to give up the trips and all the things you are supposed to have, because you have a budget. Too many people are living in a dreamworld until reality sets in. That is not a pretty picture. Same thing in a country. But right now, we are in a pickle.
The only card that Carney has to play on this front, is the insistence that as much of the "production" as possible must happen in Canada -- so yes, a ton of $$$ is needed to pay for this, but the economic multiplier effect is that if most of that money is ploughing into factories, jobs here in Canada, then those industries/workers SPEND that money buying houses here, cars, other manufactured goods, etc., etc., etc. so more employment happens, which means more GDP, which means more taxes to the government -- and well, hopefully it starts to balance out (to what the extent that needs to happen on a macroeconomic basis). And to echo Carol-Ann's comment: Canada is fortunate right now to have the world's most regarded macroeconomist as a PM (this transcends normal politics -- doesn't matter if he's Liberal, Conservative, NDP or what. The Liberal party just happened to have a vacancy at the time . . . .). And he's doing wonders with building a weak hand (of cards) into a stronger one.
Forgot to add: That's how the USA bought itself out of the Great Depression -- find an economically destitute area of the country, then go and build a military base there (and Interstate highways, etc., etc.). You get the advantage of the base, but it kickstarts local economies.
And then those (defence) economies start selling to other countries (Canada with Sweden with the GlobalEyes, then Gripens (it won't just be Bombardier building the Canadian contract -- we'll likely be building some of the Ukrainian ones, too). Same thing with our drone manufacturing (once it gets up and running), among other things.
Oh - I forgot about the food insecurity stuff too. Do we end up creating an export market for food as well as for our own supply?? Right now, we (and Australia) sure could corner the beef market . . . . (Japan was kicking our tires for wagyu beef - which they normally would import from USA. But now . . . . .??)
I feel the same trepidation. To me, the solution is to tax all of us fairly, including, especially including, the wealthy. I have long thought that a flat income tax, let's say 10 or 15%, ought to be applied to everybody above a minimum untaxed level, with no loopholes, no hiding income offshore, and everbody pays it, no exceptions. That could potentially pay off all of our national debt, provide enough funding for healthcare, education, defense, etc. Currently, the weathy do not pay their fair share of taxes. It's time they did.
While I agree with you Leslie that our country needs a lot of revenue to pay for all the things that are screaming for more money, the reality in Canada is that the top 10% of earners are already paying an effective tax rate of 35% to 45%. According to A.I. top Canadian earners pay a rate about 10% higher than Americans, but the top .01% of Americans use a pile of tax loopholes to effectively pay as low as 8%. I don't think that Canadians have the ability to cheat on their taxes the way Americans are allowed to.
I'm not sure that I would trust A.I. for ANY reliable statistic; I'd rather trust Stats Can for that kind of information. But there are plenty of American and other wealthy people operating businesses in Canada and they certainly do not pay sufficient tax here (this would be corporate taxes now). As for wealthy Canadians, well, I myself pay easily over 25% of my earnings in income tax, between federal and provincial. I am certainly not wealthy, though certainly not poor either. If I were earning over $500,000 a year, I would GLADLY pay 50% of my earnings to Revenue Canada, since I could readily live on $250,000 a year. After all, that sum ($250,000) is far, far more than I earn as a gross income right now, and much more than most Canadians could even hope to earn. So, I still think that income tax on wealth needs to be higher.
I agree, there will be a bill one way or the other. I will be more than happy to pay it provided that I can (I'm retiring this year), and that it works to keep Canada together. My father's family, on his dad's side, have been in Ontario since the later 1780s. I'm very attached to this marvelous country.
Ouch. I think I’m going to have to sit with this one awhile. It brings a variety of truths and stresses together that paint a difficult picture to focus on. Thank you for sharing.
The Canadian mindset is very Nordic in nature and probably has to do with the longer time of darkness and conversely, the lesser time of lightness. Be that as it may, we have always assumed that the North is ours, everybody knows that and we live in a rules based world. However we are now confronted with the reality that not all nations agree to live by rules; some nations have gone rogue.
Our reaction is to reconsider and to look to protect what is ours. In the face of threat we take steps to protect ourselves, giving rise to a sudden resurgence of declarations of sovereignty, of finding new partners to have our backs and of heightened awareness of the risks. We strike individually at the threat by withholding purchases and thus revenue.
As an example, the exact same steps occurred with the U.S. threat to Greenland. Suddenly Canada is included in the Nordic family, we are new best friends with Sweden and Denmark and holding joint military exercises in Greenland. Now we are considering arming ourselves with Nordic aircraft and perhaps German subs.
We are moving away from dependency on a rogue state (the U.S.) without getting too cozy with another rogue state, China, which calls itself a near-north country. Russia is calling us warmongers as we develop an armament relationship with Ukraine. As Carney pointed out, when larger nations turn rogue, smaller nations need to band together. WWII is a good example of that. Safety in numbers has been around for a long time.
Fred, the treaty Canada had made with the UK, Norway and the other countries in NORAD since the defection of the USA will definitely help to protect Canada. The fact that Mark Carney anticipated this and had set this agreement in place shows he is ‘on the ball’ where the Disunited States are concerned.
Penny Frost I do think Canada is moving faster than many people realize.
One thing that feels different lately is the recognition that smaller countries need strong partnerships and cannot afford to assume old arrangements will always hold.
The world changed... and Canada seems to be adjusting.
Fred, I'm slightly puzzled over this one. Well, not entirely: Carney HAS launched significant expansion of our military for the arctic. The expansion of four bases in the "higher" lower range, or "lower" higher range (Whitehorse, Gander, Iqaluit, and Inuvik) are being tendered right now! And the expansion of the highway to the Arctic Ocean is actually supposed to start happening imminently (the easiest - as an existing winter road is there already -- it's just making the river crossings, etc. into permanent bridges and what not). Oh, and fine-print has expansion or creation of about four other "forward operating bases" too -- Cambridge Bay, Resolute, and I forget the others.
But, as much as those tenders (for the base improvements, etc.) are happening right now, it likely will take a better part of a year or two to actually get all the logistics and planning out of the way -- it's not like they're going to be functional (as intended) by September (or some such)!
So maybe I end up back echoing you: What can we do NOW??
(we've set the stage for tomorrow, but what can happen today?)
Even the good news of this month: Sub contract, Gripens, etc. still need time to get the factories built and working, etc., etc. Though even doing that stage(s) is significant boost to the support industries sooner than later.
Also, I just want to add that my father and uncles fought in WWII, did not talk about it. My dad also fought In Korea, he had a lifelong career in the military. It did change him. So can I sacrifice something for the best country in the world, YES
Good article Fred. Canada is a vast geography but sparsely populated and mainly in the southern latitudes. But, we have had citizens living in the arctic longer than Canada has been a country. Much change is underway globally and environmentally. Canadians can and are changing how we invest in our country and how we interact with the world. This is positive. The return on these investments are also calculated to be bountiful. And, a university is being established in an Arctic community!
As a retiree with limited resources, I am prepared to pay the price.
Heather... that means something.
When people with the least room to absorb hardship are still willing to sacrifice for Canada, the rest of us should probably take a hard look in the mirror.
Canada is in a real bind. We're a massive country geographically with a relatively puny population that doesn't generate a ton of money. We can't afford to pay for the current costs of running the country, yet we're being pressured to spend more and more we don't have to spend. Arctic defense, submarines, fighter planes, universal health care, tariff industry bail outs. All of these things are being paid for with additional debt. I hate to say it Fred, but we're in a heap of trouble and I can't see any solutions on the horizon.
I think we've got the best guy working on it though as our Prime Minister. I can only imagine if we had PP in there. Everybody deserves a home, on a safe street talk. Of course we do. But it takes discipline to have the things you want. The things that matter in old age. You have to give up the trips and all the things you are supposed to have, because you have a budget. Too many people are living in a dreamworld until reality sets in. That is not a pretty picture. Same thing in a country. But right now, we are in a pickle.
Carol-Ann you nailed something important here.
Countries, like people, eventually run into reality.
Wanting good things matters... but discipline, sacrifice, and hard choices are usually the price of keeping them.
I hear you Frank.
And honestly, this is exactly the uncomfortable conversation we need to have.
My concern is whether we can afford not to deal with some of this.
The world changed while Canada kept thinking tomorrow would look like yesterday.
The only card that Carney has to play on this front, is the insistence that as much of the "production" as possible must happen in Canada -- so yes, a ton of $$$ is needed to pay for this, but the economic multiplier effect is that if most of that money is ploughing into factories, jobs here in Canada, then those industries/workers SPEND that money buying houses here, cars, other manufactured goods, etc., etc., etc. so more employment happens, which means more GDP, which means more taxes to the government -- and well, hopefully it starts to balance out (to what the extent that needs to happen on a macroeconomic basis). And to echo Carol-Ann's comment: Canada is fortunate right now to have the world's most regarded macroeconomist as a PM (this transcends normal politics -- doesn't matter if he's Liberal, Conservative, NDP or what. The Liberal party just happened to have a vacancy at the time . . . .). And he's doing wonders with building a weak hand (of cards) into a stronger one.
Forgot to add: That's how the USA bought itself out of the Great Depression -- find an economically destitute area of the country, then go and build a military base there (and Interstate highways, etc., etc.). You get the advantage of the base, but it kickstarts local economies.
And then those (defence) economies start selling to other countries (Canada with Sweden with the GlobalEyes, then Gripens (it won't just be Bombardier building the Canadian contract -- we'll likely be building some of the Ukrainian ones, too). Same thing with our drone manufacturing (once it gets up and running), among other things.
Oh - I forgot about the food insecurity stuff too. Do we end up creating an export market for food as well as for our own supply?? Right now, we (and Australia) sure could corner the beef market . . . . (Japan was kicking our tires for wagyu beef - which they normally would import from USA. But now . . . . .??)
But this all does take time to put into place.
This is a really interesting way to look at it Grant.
And honestly, this may be the more optimistic version of the story...
if we’re going to spend anyway, can we spend in ways that strengthen sovereignty and build economic capacity at the same time.
Defence, Arctic infrastructure, food security, manufacturing...
all of it feeds jobs and resilience.
I think the timing problem still worries me, but I like where your head is at.
I feel the same trepidation. To me, the solution is to tax all of us fairly, including, especially including, the wealthy. I have long thought that a flat income tax, let's say 10 or 15%, ought to be applied to everybody above a minimum untaxed level, with no loopholes, no hiding income offshore, and everbody pays it, no exceptions. That could potentially pay off all of our national debt, provide enough funding for healthcare, education, defense, etc. Currently, the weathy do not pay their fair share of taxes. It's time they did.
While I agree with you Leslie that our country needs a lot of revenue to pay for all the things that are screaming for more money, the reality in Canada is that the top 10% of earners are already paying an effective tax rate of 35% to 45%. According to A.I. top Canadian earners pay a rate about 10% higher than Americans, but the top .01% of Americans use a pile of tax loopholes to effectively pay as low as 8%. I don't think that Canadians have the ability to cheat on their taxes the way Americans are allowed to.
Fair point Frank.
I suspect this is where Canadians will have very different opinions on the how.
Taxes, loopholes, spending priorities, growth... all of it.
The part that feels unavoidable to me is...
Canada probably can’t keep operating on yesterday’s assumptions while the world changes around us.
I'm not sure that I would trust A.I. for ANY reliable statistic; I'd rather trust Stats Can for that kind of information. But there are plenty of American and other wealthy people operating businesses in Canada and they certainly do not pay sufficient tax here (this would be corporate taxes now). As for wealthy Canadians, well, I myself pay easily over 25% of my earnings in income tax, between federal and provincial. I am certainly not wealthy, though certainly not poor either. If I were earning over $500,000 a year, I would GLADLY pay 50% of my earnings to Revenue Canada, since I could readily live on $250,000 a year. After all, that sum ($250,000) is far, far more than I earn as a gross income right now, and much more than most Canadians could even hope to earn. So, I still think that income tax on wealth needs to be higher.
Thoughtful points Leslie.
I suspect reasonable people can disagree on how we pay for what’s coming... taxes, growth, spending priorities, closing loopholes, all of it.
What feels harder to avoid is the bigger reality...
stronger sovereignty and resilience likely come with a bill one way or another.
I agree, there will be a bill one way or the other. I will be more than happy to pay it provided that I can (I'm retiring this year), and that it works to keep Canada together. My father's family, on his dad's side, have been in Ontario since the later 1780s. I'm very attached to this marvelous country.
Ouch. I think I’m going to have to sit with this one awhile. It brings a variety of truths and stresses together that paint a difficult picture to focus on. Thank you for sharing.
Rebecca thank you.
Sometimes the hard conversations are the ones worth sitting with.
I wrestled with this one myself.
A lot of this rings true of how I used to view the world, now that I’m older and more cynical now things are scarier but definitely more clear as well
I know exactly what you mean.
Sometimes getting older feels like trading comfort for clarity.
Not always pleasant… but definitely harder to ignore what’s real.
The Canadian mindset is very Nordic in nature and probably has to do with the longer time of darkness and conversely, the lesser time of lightness. Be that as it may, we have always assumed that the North is ours, everybody knows that and we live in a rules based world. However we are now confronted with the reality that not all nations agree to live by rules; some nations have gone rogue.
Our reaction is to reconsider and to look to protect what is ours. In the face of threat we take steps to protect ourselves, giving rise to a sudden resurgence of declarations of sovereignty, of finding new partners to have our backs and of heightened awareness of the risks. We strike individually at the threat by withholding purchases and thus revenue.
As an example, the exact same steps occurred with the U.S. threat to Greenland. Suddenly Canada is included in the Nordic family, we are new best friends with Sweden and Denmark and holding joint military exercises in Greenland. Now we are considering arming ourselves with Nordic aircraft and perhaps German subs.
We are moving away from dependency on a rogue state (the U.S.) without getting too cozy with another rogue state, China, which calls itself a near-north country. Russia is calling us warmongers as we develop an armament relationship with Ukraine. As Carney pointed out, when larger nations turn rogue, smaller nations need to band together. WWII is a good example of that. Safety in numbers has been around for a long time.
Thoughtful comment Jim.
I think you’re onto something with the Nordic mindset idea.
We probably did assume the rules-based world would mostly hold because, for a long time, it mostly did.
The uncomfortable shift is realizing more countries are playing power politics again...
and Canada has to adjust faster than we’re used to.
Fred, the treaty Canada had made with the UK, Norway and the other countries in NORAD since the defection of the USA will definitely help to protect Canada. The fact that Mark Carney anticipated this and had set this agreement in place shows he is ‘on the ball’ where the Disunited States are concerned.
Penny Frost I do think Canada is moving faster than many people realize.
One thing that feels different lately is the recognition that smaller countries need strong partnerships and cannot afford to assume old arrangements will always hold.
The world changed... and Canada seems to be adjusting.
Thank goodness for Mark Carney and Canada! Elbows up and love from England 🏴
Fred, I'm slightly puzzled over this one. Well, not entirely: Carney HAS launched significant expansion of our military for the arctic. The expansion of four bases in the "higher" lower range, or "lower" higher range (Whitehorse, Gander, Iqaluit, and Inuvik) are being tendered right now! And the expansion of the highway to the Arctic Ocean is actually supposed to start happening imminently (the easiest - as an existing winter road is there already -- it's just making the river crossings, etc. into permanent bridges and what not). Oh, and fine-print has expansion or creation of about four other "forward operating bases" too -- Cambridge Bay, Resolute, and I forget the others.
But, as much as those tenders (for the base improvements, etc.) are happening right now, it likely will take a better part of a year or two to actually get all the logistics and planning out of the way -- it's not like they're going to be functional (as intended) by September (or some such)!
So maybe I end up back echoing you: What can we do NOW??
(we've set the stage for tomorrow, but what can happen today?)
Even the good news of this month: Sub contract, Gripens, etc. still need time to get the factories built and working, etc., etc. Though even doing that stage(s) is significant boost to the support industries sooner than later.
Fair pushback Grant... and honestly, this is helpful context.
You’re right that movement is happening, and I’m encouraged by it.
My concern is probably more about the gap between starting and being ready.
We’re finally moving, but the world is not hitting pause while we catch up.
Your question may actually be the real one... what can we do now while tomorrow gets built?
Also, I just want to add that my father and uncles fought in WWII, did not talk about it. My dad also fought In Korea, he had a lifelong career in the military. It did change him. So can I sacrifice something for the best country in the world, YES
Heather thank you.
Your father and uncles carried burdens most of us can barely imagine.
That’s exactly the question... if they sacrificed for Canada, what are we willing to sacrifice to keep it strong?
Good article Fred. Canada is a vast geography but sparsely populated and mainly in the southern latitudes. But, we have had citizens living in the arctic longer than Canada has been a country. Much change is underway globally and environmentally. Canadians can and are changing how we invest in our country and how we interact with the world. This is positive. The return on these investments are also calculated to be bountiful. And, a university is being established in an Arctic community!