A nickle for your thoughts? No more pennies allowed

Finally!!!  No more useless pennies. 

No doubt there will be  much hand wringing and finger pointing about today's federal budget.  There always is, especially during times of constraint.  Everyone's laundry list of things to cut is different, while some don't care whether the budget is balanced at all.  For the record, I do like to see our governments (be they federal, provincial or municipal) operating with at least balanced, if not surplus budgets.

Just because one individual or one party has a different set of priorities than others doesn't make that person or that party inherently evil, different strokes for different folks as the old saw goes.

But one thing I think we can all agree on is the wisdom in finally deciding to eliminate the lowly penny, sending it to the trash bin with other historical relics like half pennies and farthings.

It is being reported that taxpayers will save about $11 million per year, not much in the grand scheme of things, but we are dealing with one cent pieces here. 

I'd actually written about this before, back in March of 2009, going so far as to advocate eliminating the nickle as well and bringing in a $5 coin to go with our loonies and tooniess, (READ IT HERE).

Yes, it is a small measure for a small unit of currency.  Now everyone go back to debating the meatier aspects. 

What the federal budget will say, and what it really means...cue Carlin

When Thursday rolls around Canadians will be finding out exactly what kind of government a minority of some 40% of us chose.  In  point of fact it might be well under 40%, depending on how many Canadians were sent to non-existant polling stations which might just have boosted Conservative numbers a tad. 

Isn't Floridahhhhh...errr I mean Canada great?

We're being told that the budget will focus on certain areas or themes.  Of course they'll positioned with nice flowery language, employing plenty of double speak, something politicians do very well.

In the interest of clarity here's my take on what we'll be hearing and what the actual impact will be.

• Support for innovation and research. 

Sounds nice, but let's call it what it really is okay?  Corporate welfare.  Tax credits designed to ensure this nations wealthiest business pay even less in taxes than they already are.  Adam Smith preached the profit motive, companies competing against each other, researching and innovating to better their chances of survival.  Now we've got the corporate nanny state looking to hold big business' hand.

• Overhauling of regulations for resource development. 

Again this sounds positive.  An overhaul is a good thing right?  Every machine needs an overhaul for it to keep running.  But what it really means in this case is allowing resource companies to avoid annoying things like environmental impact studies.  We'll find out how the environment was impacted by pipelines, mines and oil sands projects after the money has been made.

• Investing in training and opportunity. 

Now who could argue with that?  Well folks, sorry to say it just sounds like more corporate welfare to me.  "Ya know those people you were going to hire?  We'll letcha stick taxpayers with their training costs.  Your business gets skilled workers to help you make even more $$$$, and you don't have to invest a dime.  Why invest your own capital when the government can stick it to Joe and Jane Sixpack"?

And finally the biggest bone job of them all: 

• Insuring the long-term sustainability of major social programs like Old Age Security

Oh boy.  To sustain social programs we're gonna have to cut benefits and/or raise the eligibility criteria.  But you boomers nearing retirement don't have to worry, you guys vote and there are a s*** ton of you, so we're gonna stick your kids and grand kids with the bill.

For a primer on political double speak I give you the late great George Carlin:

Mulclair is a winner, cue the attack ads

He won the battle, Thomas Mulcair  is the new leader of the NDP.  Now he needs to win the war of bringing his party together.

I have no doubt that Conservative strategists are already burning the midnight oil, trying to come up with a plan of attack that will ensure the roughly 60% of electors who didn't support the Harper government remain a house divided.  Divided enough that the Tories can win another majority with about 40% support the next time we go to the polls in three or so years time.

I do believe the NDP chose wisely.  Yes, Thomas Mulcair will ruffle some feathers with the old guard, those who see the NDP as the conscience of parliament.  But if the NDP is serious about building a bigger tent, then they're going to have to reach beyond their traditional labour base.

I for one would love to see them ditch the 'New' and become Canada's Democratic party.  Like it or lump it branding maters, and selling Canada's Democratic party would be easier than convincing some to vote NDP.

So when will the attack ads start?  That's a good question, but I think any efforts by the Tories will be centred around keeping the majority of Canadians who vote centre-left divided. 

Need to raise taxes or cut services? Hit boomers...

I was born in 1966, and by some warped definition I am somehow included in the post-war baby boom.  The baby boom is said to be the result of servicemen coming home after WWII and making up for lost time with their wives in an era that pre-dated birth control.  My father however was born in 1938, and at the conclusion of the war he was about 9 years of age, so obviously he wasn't returning home to father children.

Those on the front end of the boom, (they like to be called zoomers now I hear) are about twenty years older than I am.  I wonder how many twenty year olds consider themselves as being from the same generation as a forty year old?  Obviously I don't identify with the generation of which I am nominally a part. 

The baby boom has been like a cloud of locusts, moving through various stages of their lives and gobbling up everything in their path.  They continually elected the likes of Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney, whose governments racked up a mountain of debt to pay for the services and programs boomers wanted and valued. 

Now?  The till is empty and all that's left behind is a huge bill.  But rather than hitting up those entering retirement, boomers are happy to see their children and grandchildren being smacked with what's owing.

Take the student protests in Quebec recently.  Sure, education was free or damn near when the boomers went through.  But all that lovely spending can't be sustained, and boomers aren't going to school anymore, so its time to jack tuition costs. 

So we need to raise the eligibility age for public pensions?  Tut tut, don't worry grandma and grandpa, you won't be affected, just your children.  I mean let's face it, your governments have being provided services to you guys for years on borrowed money, and it wouldn't be fair to expect you to be the ones to pay it back.

Yes, I might be a boomer, but I know by the time I reach 65 I'm going to be looking at Freedom 75, 85 or maybe even 95 and state funded health care will be a distant memory.  Fortunately by the time I'm 95 just about all the boomers will have zoomed to their graves.