Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Harper's Historical Revision

I'll get into the platform details later, or more correctly the damage control measures, but the overarching theme from Harper- we foresaw what we are seeing today in the economy and took prudent action. That frame, an attempt to show that his policies have always incorporated the latest economic challenges.

Is that so? Here is Harper a mere THREE weeks ago:
PM believes worst over for economy
U.S. credit crisis fallout no reason for 'doom, gloom' in Canada, says an optimistic Harper

"My own belief is if we were going to have some kind of crash or recession, we probably would have had it by now, a year into the (financial) crisis," said Harper, who once taught economics.


Anonymous said...

Good catch, Steve.

And those were very prominent words at the time, another embodiment of the "steady hand" campaign.

The Liberals and other parties should be all over him on this change.

(I was going to say, "change of heart" at first but realized he'd have to have one first in order to change it)

Steve V said...


His whole spiel today was prefaced on the fact that his visionary mind foresaw all of this, and he policies reflect that. It's a fraud!

Steve V said...

Harper getting angry in his post-platform presser. I guess his internals show what we're seeing :)

Antonio said...

I hate to sound like the contrarian here.

But we can all agree on a few things here.

1) Stephen Harper did not start the crisis.

2) Canadian Banks are well capitalized and up to now, not in danger.

3) unemployment is low, the government isnt running a deficit, but probably will soon once the oil profits come down and even then it wont be drastic, noting close to 4-5% of GDP as it is in many countries)

Voters are looking for who will help us wade through this, not finger pointing.

Until then, unlike the US, the fundamentals of the economy are set up quiet well to handle the turbulence ahead

Antonio said...

as for Harper claiming he foresaw this,

good luck convincing people of that fallacy.

Besides, when you blow your whole ad budget talking about bad the other guy instead of talking about what you did, it becomes pretty hard for people to remember anything you did, beneficial or not

Steve V said...


Fair points. What is relevant though, is how one responds to rapidly changing events. It is irrelevant now how this all started, or if our fundamentals were strong, it matters if a leader shows himself to be nimble and pragmatic, that's what people are looking for, and that's WHY Harper is tanking in the polls.

Anonymous said...


Off-topic but interesting in light of current trends. Ekos Research actually conducted a very thorough debate post-script poll.


What I find interesting is, despite the whole "who won / who lost" question, they did an entire segment just focusing on those folks who said the debates caused them to rethink their vote. Liberals came out way ahead on that question.

Plus I like that focus because, face it, most people are going to "cheer" when answering the call - simply reiterating who they intend to vote for.

It's the undecideds who may change the numbers in retrospect.

I also like that they actually asked the question, "Who lost the debate?" which is a more valid aspect when you have five people at a table instead of just two folks at a podium.

They also allowed the option "no one" on who won and who lost questions, which is novel.

Steve V said...

I saw that, very encouraging for Dion. I guess our eyes didn't lie, despite the quick spin of the talking heads. I really think the media shouldn't sit together in an isolated room, they tend to get group think and look detached.

Gayle said...

Re: the economy. Newman had someone on yesterday who I believe said the reason Canada will come through this OK is because of solid fiscal management for the past 15 years.

So who do we credit for that then...?

Steve V said...

It's too bad about this Martin book, because I actually believe he could be useful right now. Canadians still see him as one of our best M of F in history, a few shots at Flaherty...

Socially Active said...

All find and dandy, but world markets are interconnected.

It is simply naive to believe that some how magically Canadian markets are not effected.

More important the Government like any business needs to prepare based on market trends.

For example we know we have an aging population which is going to require more health care professionals. But not simple accepting this known fact and preparing for it, we will find ourselves in credital shortage in a few years. And as result cost prohibitive medical cost and insufficient medical care.

Harper has an economic degree and book knowledge, but has zero willingness to accept that reactionary economics also know as firefighting is the fastest way to destroy a business or a country for that matter.

When looking at economic cost it is important to consider the social and individual cost. It is Government's role to balance individual and social cost. Harper conveniently makes an academic approximation and neglects or incompletely considers social cost.

Steve V said...

"Harper has an economic degree and book knowledge"

I wonder what Harpo thinks of the 230 PHD's in his field, who support the LIBERAL PLAN.

And, I heard two economists today, one from CIBC, the other a think tank, say that you do need to react with speed, pumping money into infastructure the best way to ensure a soft landing.