Federal Government & Politics II

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by shreddog

Here's a thought experiment. When Canada last did a major cut to the PS (under Chretien) the Ottawa housing market saw a big drop. I am not sure how much any cut would be localized to Ottawa this time (assuming that there is a this time), but would it move house prices at all, and if so, would it just be a blip as all the equity money elsewhere would buy up any distressed property as overall demand would still be high?

Half the PS growth has been outside the NCR.
Especially a lot of the customer service jobs. A lot of those jobs are in conservative ridings too. Like the Service Canada call centre in Cornwall. There's probably policy jobs that can be cut in Ottawa. Would help free up real estate in Ottawa too. I expect at least 20 000 PS jobs cut in Ottawa with the Tories. How much that moves real estate is hard to guess.

Here's the provincial distribution (with the NCR separated out) of the federal public service.

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-bo...ce-tenure.html

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nowhere did I ever say OAS is going to bankrupt the country. But OAS growth outstripping all other demand means that our federal government increasingly lacks the fiscal room to do just about anything else. And it's particularly bad when we're basically deficit financing a huge chunk of that spending.

So introducing a Harper model of increasing the retirement age, assuming it was to come in 11 years later like his proposal, will do nothing to deal with the problem you're concerned about. Changing the threshold for the tax claw back could reduce the total cost of OAS in a shorter time frame.

Alternatively the government could raise more revenue. As others have noted, they could increase taxes (GST is probably the simplest way), or, for example, by removing the capital tax allowance on home sale transactions. As the government added the 'did you sell your home' question to the income tax return in 2016, it looked for a while like they were going to go there, but so far, that hasn't happened, and I don't see a conservative government wanting to go there.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I fully expect the CPC to be UK Tories 2.0. it's the most logical option for a quick boost. Austerity Uber Alles! So gut the Canada Health Act to allow two tier healthcare and cap the health transfers. Cuts on every personal transfer like OAS and CCB. Remove a lot of barriers to competition in expensive sectors like airlines and telecom and banking. And of course, force as much liberalization of professions and trades as possible to drive down professional wages. If we can pay doctors half as much, we can double the number of doctors in the country. Licensing more immigrant health professionals neatly gets around the complaint that two tier healthcare will cause a shortage of personnel. Going to be interesting to see what happens when highly paid professionals get the same wage suppression as the working class have been getting for two decades.

You do realize that physicians are in high demand worldwide.

Fun fact, there are more physician vacancies in the US than there are physicians in Canada.

Canadian physicians could flee en masse to the US, and the US would still be crying for more.

Also, not as easy as you might think to get FMGs to work in Canada as replacements, especially if Canada remains a high cost country and physician wages are halved. Your typical Nigerian medical graduate would see this, and say "screw that", and head off to the UK or Australia instead.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Changing City

So introducing a Harper model of increasing the retirement age, assuming it was to come in 11 years later like his proposal, will do nothing to deal with the problem you're concerned about. Changing the threshold for the tax claw back could reduce the total cost of OAS in a shorter time frame.

Nobody said they have to do it 11 years later. They could do it immediately. What exactly the policy is and how it is implemented is less relevant here than the goals and results. What matters is arresting the growth of the OAS bill and ultimately perhaps even reducing it. I've argued before for replacing OAS and GIS entirely with a minimum income guarantee tied to the poverty line. Basically a promise that no senior will live in poverty.

The current system is basically a prize for living in Canada for 40 years with clawbacks based more on residency than income (most seniors aren't making more than the ridiculously high clawback threshold). It doesn't take into lifetime tax contributions. And whole it does take into account income, it somehow doesn't pay enough to meet the poverty line. It also doesn't take into account the various retirement needs of those age groups. Somebody with a very physically demanding job may need to retire at 60. Somebody who pushes paper may be able to work till 70. Forcing the bricklayer to wait till 67 is as nonsensical as paying the accountant at 65.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Alternatively the government could raise more revenue. As others have noted, they could increase taxes (GST is probably the simplest way), or, for example, by removing the capital tax allowance on home sale transactions. As the government added the 'did you sell your home' question to the income tax return in 2016, it looked for a while like they were going to go there, but so far, that hasn't happened, and I don't see a conservative government wanting to go there.

I don't see a conservative government raising any taxes at all. So it's surprising that we keep discussing it as a potential option. We all know it's not going to happen. It's going to be all cuts all the way. Federal version of Mike Harris probably.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

You do realize that physicians are in high demand worldwide.

Fun fact, there are more physician vacancies in the US than there are physicians in Canada.

Canadian physicians could flee en masse to the US, and the US would still be crying for more.

Also, not as easy as you might think to get FMGs to work in Canada as replacements, especially if Canada remains a high cost country and physician wages are halved. Your typical Nigerian medical graduate would see this, and say "screw that", and head off to the UK or Australia instead.

I'm not by any means suggesting this is my preferred idea or even a desirable policy. But if you want to contain healthcare costs and increase the number of service providers how else do you do it? It's basically the same idea as our IT sector. We send our best grads to the US and our industry runs on cheaper labour. Maybe Canadians will have to get used to the idea of very high turnover at their local clinic and a lot more new immigrant doctors.

You say that the Nigerian doctor would pick Australia or UK. But have you seen doctor's wages in the UK? Wouldn't take much for us to compete with them. Especially in Family Medicine. Also, just look at the amount of FMGs we get here that don't practice or Canadians who simply go to the US to practice because they can't get employed here. Those quotas (not standards) keep wages up. But if the feds allow privatization, there's no need for provinces to keep quotas for how many doctors they license. Meet the standard? Here's your license. And this is literally the basis of Poilievre's regular campaign joke about a taxi being the best place to have a heart attack.

Ps. The halved was an exaggeration to make it easier to picture the relationship between reduction in pay and increase in personnel.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm not by any means suggesting this is my preferred idea or even a desirable policy. But if you want to contain healthcare costs and increase the number of service providers how else do you do it? It's basically the same idea as our IT sector. We send our best grads to the US and our industry runs on cheaper labour. Maybe Canadians will have to get used to the idea of very high turnover at their local clinic and a lot more new immigrant doctors.

Yes, Canadian health care would become a branch plant economy just like everything else. It would be fine for getting your blood pressure checked, or your diabetes medications dispensed, but, if you became really sick, you would have to go to Boston or Chicago for proper care.

Have we really sunk this low? I'm glad I'm getting out while I can. I imagine it will take longer than two years for the system to really crash, but, if the crash comes sooner, I can just quit at any time.

[Truenorth00]

Oh and the best part about all this (politically) for the Conservatives? If they change the Canada Health Act, they will in no way get the same amount of heat as the provinces for the turmoil that will surely follow.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Yes, Canadian health care would become a branch plant economy just like everything else. It would be fine for getting your blood pressure checked, or your diabetes medications dispensed, but, if you became really sick, you would have to go to Boston or Chicago for proper care.

Have we really sunk this low? I'm glad I'm getting out while I can. I imagine it will take longer than two years for the system to really crash, but, if the crash comes sooner, I can just quit at any time.

Thankfully, idle chitchat on an internet forum is just that. I wouldn’t be bracing myself for the crash just yet. I only hope the people actually making the decisions will listen to the experts and not destroy the system on a whim, or do damage that takes decades to reverse, based upon some personal bias.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Yes, Canadian health care would become a branch plant economy just like everything else. It would be fine for getting your blood pressure checked, or your diabetes medications dispensed, but, if you became really sick, you would have to go to Boston or Chicago for proper care.

Have we really sunk this low? I'm glad I'm getting out while I can. I imagine it will take longer than two years for the system to really crash, but, if the crash comes sooner, I can just quit at any time.

There's a lot of ways to implement a policy like this. There's nothing that says it would result in a "crash". Does every other country with non-single payer not function?

The way I see it, the biggest gaps and bottlenecks are the easiest targets. So maybe specialists stay well compensated and controlled with quotas while family medicine becomes far less lucrative and more open. So those expensive to produce Canadian grads go to specialties and the immigrants do the bitch work of Family Medicine. That's not hard to picture when we see how other industries work.

As far as federal policy goes though, the only thing relevant is that there's a federal government willing to give the provinces room to do what they want. I don't think there's a Premier in the country who would pass up the freedom to privatize and experiment with different service delivery and licensing models if the feds allowed it.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thankfully, idle chitchat on an internet forum is just that. I wouldn’t be bracing myself for the crash just yet. I only hope the people actually making the decisions will listen to the experts and not destroy the system on a whim, or do damage that takes decades to reverse, based upon some personal bias.

You ever known highly ideological people ro listen to experts? And you have an entire political party, whose brand and identity is actually built on rejecting the experts. So why would they suddenly change in office?

Also the advice given by the experts will be highly dependent on the question asked. What do you think the experts would say if the federal government asked, "How do we contain federal healthcare costs and still make sure every Canadian has a doctor and lower wait times?"

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Oh and the best part about all this (politically) for the Conservatives? If they change the Canada Health Act, they will in no way get the same amount of heat as the provinces for the turmoil that will surely follow.

The hyperbole seems excessive.

The Canada Health Act will remain. It's practically religion at this point. The Pope doesn't throw out the Old Testament, even if bits of it stopped making sense awhile ago.

Ottawa will do the Ottawa Way(tm) when money gets tight.

All these little genius programs that Ottawa has cooked up as federal-provincial sharing (especially in the last few years) will suddenly find themselves on a crash diet of the promised funding from Ottawa. "Not federal responsibility!", the feds will claim, whilst hacking transfers. Maybe they do a Steve Harper bit and say to the provinces: "Take it, or leave it, final offer."

Like a cement block heaved from the sinking federal lifeboat onto the provincial ones, the federal government's load gets lighter. The provinces get the ugly job of doing the messy bit of using the meat cleaver.

It's the ugly side of all these federal-provincial shared programs. The feds take the credit for the idea, the provinces get the bill when Ottawa has fiscal problems.

[Truenorth00]

^ Yeah. And the provinces know this. Which is why so many of them are flat out refusing to commit to new programs. The next government will probably agree to scrap any deal with any province that wants out. So I would expect most of that new social spending unwound.

But these deals aren't the largest deficit drivers though. And therein lies the rub. Most of these new programs aren't booking massive costs yet because they are still ramping. The biggest line items beyond interest payments are transfers to the provinces, CCB and OAS. Highly unlikely the Feds will cap or severely limit the growth of transfers without also giving flexibility to the provinces.

If this was Harper, I would agree that he wouldn't go there. But with an ideologue like Poilievre (and what is looking like a much more ideological caucus), I can't see how they won't. And a large mandate will definitely be seen as license to slaughter some sacred cows.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Yes, Canadian health care would become a branch plant economy just like everything else. It would be fine for getting your blood pressure checked, or your diabetes medications dispensed, but, if you became really sick, you would have to go to Boston or Chicago for proper care.

Why the conditional tense?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by lio45

Why the conditional tense?

I am unconditionally pissed off.

JT has got to go!!!!!

I would vote for a leprous rat gnawing on my great toe before I would ever vote for JT.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's a lot of ways to implement a policy like this. There's nothing that says it would result in a "crash". Does every other country with non-single payer not function?

The way I see it, the biggest gaps and bottlenecks are the easiest targets. So maybe specialists stay well compensated and controlled with quotas while family medicine becomes far less lucrative and more open. So those expensive to produce Canadian grads go to specialties and the immigrants do the bitch work of Family Medicine. That's not hard to picture when we see how other industries work.

As far as federal policy goes though, the only thing relevant is that there's a federal government willing to give the provinces room to do what they want. I don't think there's a Premier in the country who would pass up the freedom to privatize and experiment with different service delivery and licensing models if the feds allowed it.

You’re astute, and that’s an excellent post. In fact in the context it’s a pretty good idea to get cheap TFWs for the “lesser” medical positions. Just like democracy, all the other alternatives at this point are even worse.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Yes, Canadian health care would become a branch plant economy just like everything else. It would be fine for getting your blood pressure checked, or your diabetes medications dispensed, but, if you became really sick, you would have to go to Boston or Chicago for proper care.

Have we really sunk this low? I'm glad I'm getting out while I can. I imagine it will take longer than two years for the system to really crash, but, if the crash comes sooner, I can just quit at any time.

The United States has the same problem, albeit with the problem somewhat differently assigned to government.

Medicare and Medicaid soak up about $1.5T (~25%) of the US federal budget. Social Security adds another $1.3T. The US federal government runs a deficit of ~6% GDP (~$1.7T).

Turns out that demographers were right, regardless of country. A demographic bulge who wants top-notch healthcare and cash payouts in their old age but piled up debt in their peak years (see: US federal debt accumulation - $32T and counting!) will absolutely wreck fiscal responsibility.

The money men will get wise. Canada just doesn't have the advantage of the world's reserve currency to soften the blow.

Mostly, hope one punches out before they do. Parties are fun if you get to leave before the bill comes due.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lio45

You’re astute, and that’s an excellent post. In fact in the context it’s a pretty good idea to get cheap TFWs for the “lesser” medical positions. Just like democracy, all the other alternatives at this point are even worse.

I look at the budget, the productivity crisis, etc and I don't see any other way out. And given that the Conservatives are unlikely to get such a strong mandate in the future, I don't see why they would restrain themselves from slaughtering a lot of sacred bulls and burying them so deep that the LPC will never be able to bring them back to life. Heck, I'd argue their base is demanding it.

Also, more than half the provinces with half the population have conservative premiers who keep arguing that Ottawa needs to butt out. So why would the federal CPC not oblige them?

It's strange to me that people think Poilievre will only restrict himself to reversing a handful of Liberal policies. What politician really thinks like that? Especially if they win a landslide?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by thewave46

The money men will get wise. Canada just doesn't have the advantage of the world's reserve currency to soften the blow.

Indeed.

The US also has the safety valve of a two tier (private) payment model for health care.

I am not against the concept of two tier medicine BTW. I partake in a small measure myself because we have a private MRI clinic in Moncton.

I think two tier is inevitable in Canada. A single payer system with free health care for all is the ideal, until the single payer can't afford to pay any longer. We are rapidly approaching this point.

Which government will have the balls to open the floodgates???

[Truenorth00]

^ And if two tier is inevitable then so is flooding the job market with FMGs. No more quotas. Just a licensing exam. Like the US MLE. Maybe quotas for those who get paid directly, like those employed in the public system or in certain specialities. But beyond that, it's going to be hard to argue that the profession should be substantially protected as it is now.

I suspect eventually we'll evolve to a system like the NHS in the UK. And I see that British GPs average £90-100k with that two tier system. That's certainly less than most Canadian GPs after conversation, and they live in a country with a higher cost of living.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I look at the budget, the productivity crisis, etc and I don't see any other way out. And given that the Conservatives are unlikely to get such a strong mandate in the future, I don't see why they would restrain themselves from slaughtering a lot of sacred bulls and burying them so deep that the LPC will never be able to bring them back to life. Heck, I'd argue their base is demanding it.

Also, more than half the provinces with half the population have conservative premiers who keep arguing that Ottawa needs to butt out. So why would the federal CPC not oblige them?

It's strange to me that people think Poilievre will only restrict himself to reversing a handful of Liberal policies. What politician really thinks like that? Especially if they win a landslide?

Absolutely. There is always a lot of fear mongering with Conservative governments and secret agendas. But having nearly universally Conservative premiers (BC 50-50 to make it a nearly clean sweep) a huge deficit, a landslide and an rabidly ideological prime minister really is the perfect storm.
They don't even need to cancel the Canada Health Act just continue the lack of enforcement.

All that said Polievre doesn't seem like he wants to do thankless hard work and he talks like he wants to be a populist conservative so a lot of his base would be hit hardest by almost all of these cuts and benefit only marginally from tax cuts. It's possible we get something more like Trump blowing up the budget pushing tough decisions off for someone else.