Hondaracer is saying this (about the BC NDP blowing their budget) because he is just being Hondaracer. Unfortuantely, a lot of people among the general public assign blame from worldly situations beyond the local / regional / national gov's control to those very same govs regardless of whether the blame is actually deserved.

If anyone could predict the future they'd be very wealthy, lots of things happen that are out of control or unexpected... natural disasters, etc.

Would you prefer they sold crown land to their friends and bankrupted ICBC just to meet their budget and save face like the CC Liberals did?

lol just fucking say the budget is going to be the budget

If it’s 600 million, say it’s going to be 600 million

Why does every single budget have to be projected at X amount then it’s going to be X amount over

As I said with the federal one, the chief economic officer for Scotia bank questions all these items and how they couldn’t be foreseen earlier like the hundreds of millions earmarked for indigenous claims they knew about a year ago.

Everyone is just so dumb these days it’s like oh well hehe I guess it is what it is :shrug:

In the private sector, companies like this are on the border of bankruptcy if you don’t know whether you’re profitable until the final invoice comes in. Yet in the public sector where almost every expense is known and anticipated long before the budget is released, EVERY SINGLE budget is over by double digits?

It’s incompetence.

You're vastly oversimplifying the process.

Think about your own organization, there are something like 50 different departments all reporting upward, they all have their own managers and finance people and interests and power struggles and politics, when the organization issues a forecast or projection, it's based on cumulative reporting of all those individuals and their programs... it's a best guess.

Sometimes there's a surplus, sometimes there's a deficit. With all the ancillary costs of doing ANYTHING this year, I am not surprised there is a deficit. Could that have been predicted? Maybe? But then you'd be critcized for submitting a guess at a projected shortfall wouldn't you? You work with your historical data on what you KNOW to be true and go from there, you don't guess that maybe you might be short by x amount and then try to achieve that fake number.

And if they projected a massive shortfall, then they'd be obligated to do something about it... like raise your taxes and cut services.

And guess who'd be the first person to be bitching on a forum about that? Probably you lol

If all you’re trying to do is appease the public, would it not be more effective to overshoot your estimate than underestimate the budget and come in under?

Things like the broadway skytrain etc. and huge infrastructure projects are what they are, but when you look at these overruns, they are nothing comparatively in the overall budget

Like, the federal budget being 30% over a promise made 6 months ago is insanity. I don’t care where you stand, that’s ridiculous.

Didn't we just have a $4.7 Billion budget surplus in 2022?

Yet the BC conservatives would've had a higher deficit.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-conservati...eens-1.7073958

Also maybe the lower corporate taxes have something to do with the fact that real estate is a significant portion of the provinces gdp which is in a slump.

You also don't understand how corporate finance or government finance works re: allocation of debt... the minutae of how things like that are handled in the government is a science unto itself.

I'll give an example, CCG might have a budget for an ice breaker for say $40 million... that would include construction, training of crew, staffing of ship and some future operating costs. It takes years to build a ship, so the money gets assigned in 1 budget, then separated out as a carry forward outside of the realm of budgeting for subsequent years... costs may increase, materials may increase, training and staffing costs may increase... they may assign more $ in future years to compensate or they may have a surplus. Then you get something like a car gets bought in Victoria, they section ran out of money, so what do they do/ Search for excess somewhere else in carry forwards, maybe the ship program had $40,000 left over in it so they can grab some of that money from a 3 year old budget and pay for the car today and resolve everything that way.

Indigenous payments would be a similar thing, they woud forecast the expenditure, set the money aside out of the current budget at the time the decision was made, and possibly not pay it out until much later when it's a carry forward aount so it's not actually coming out of "today's" budget.. but the public perceives it that way bacause all you see is a headlines that says "BC NDP pays $120 million to indgenous" or whatever it might say. THey may even gloss over it being a time lapsed payment too.

When you sit there on your keyboard and say "THESE IDIOTS THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE IT BETTER" it's because you just can't or don't want to understand the intricacies that go into even the smallest decisions outside of your own field of expertise and have some assumption that anyone who does anything for whatever organization is in control of anything that isn't going well is an idiot.

So when the chief financial officer from Scotia says these expenses should have been foreseen I guess she’s just missing the point as well?

This isn’t even a partisan issue, this is across every party. Budgets seem like they are meaningless other than the obligation to report them.

So why do you trust her arm chairing something? She wasnt there and she doesn’t know the factors, she should stay in her own lane instead of commenting or ask herself why Scotia isn’t even a first tier bank and work on that instead.

People commenting on other industries they don’t work in might as well be talking about physics with an arts degree, which just proves the point I was saying above. Just stroking her win ego saying she knows what’s up.

All your complaining comes down to 1 simple thing you have alluded to in mentioning that being partisan doesn’t matter… you don’t trust anyone in the government or any politician… as soon as they do anything you don’t like they’re stupid, or cheating, or should have known blah blah… there’s literally no one that will ever stand your test of time or have your support they’ll all disappoint you in the end because they’re not picking up the phone to call you to ask you what you want or would do in every situation.

You don't need to be a CFO to retroactively say something should've been foreseen if that suits your political preferences.

Just be truthful for once and I’d respect you? lol

Btw, I think Rebekah Young, the woman I’m referencing is pretty qualified to asses this budget:

“Rebekah provides thought leadership on inclusive economic growth that is resilient in an evolving and ever-changing world. Rebekah joined Scotiabank in 2019 as Director, Fiscal & Provincial Economics, while also covering the global auto sector. Previously, she held senior roles at the IMF, the Department of Finance, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development”

What does she know though?

Think of how much money we'd save if we stopped paying the natives and just continue to land acknowledge them :pokerface::awwyeah::lawl:

with a name like Rebekah, you know she's a friggin bitch. nahhh you couldn't be a normal Rebecca, you had to put a stank on it.

Doesn’t change that she does not work in the field she is commenting on and doesn’t understand the nuances.


She just gets to sit there and look up like 10 talking points and look at some posted numbers and say “Oh yah mmhmm I would have seen this coming” nevermind what underscore mentioned that she may be politically motivated / compromised to further her own or the banks own interests.

How is it any different than you sitting there and re-assessing past Canucks trades and saying “oh they should have known” with a smug grin on your face? Everything’s obvious when you’re not in the drivers seat at decision time and don’t know anything more than surface level facts but get to play with the results knowing what already transpired.

I bet I could spend 10 minutes reviewing numbers and anecdotes for your department and come up with a list of things I think you’re fucking up too but does that mean I actually understand it? Or would my opinion be missing heaps of context and nuance or understanding of policies guidelines or rules that I’m not aware of? Heck ya

Dunno.. her qualifications and education look better than almost anyone at the federal level dealing with it, but ok you win

Edit* also fucking Freeland resigned primarily because SHE fucking disagreed with it! The fucking finance minister :lol

So I think it’s pretty fair to criticize it like jfc.. you guys..

Jesus Christ, that's so hot. Women with bitchy names. :sweetjesus:

Dukes, meet cuntbag McGee.

Cuntbag, here’s Mr Dukes. He’s a doctor !!! (Proctologist)

Get ready to get even more ass-raped when spending USD.

US Fed Reserve announced they will not be dropping rates as often as expected for next year, 2 drops instead of 4.

Markets down, USD up immediately after that announcement. Now to 1.44, highest since around 2020

https://g.co/kgs/TRrY3HZ

But you know, fuck Trudeau

EUR to CAD is 1.5, at this rate its almost better to go to Europe lol. Practically same price, less MAGA.

Look at this chart, what does it track in Canada?

https://i.imgur.com/5dZO0Ow.jpeg

I mean, it could tell you that US had their largest economic crash in modern history in 2008 but if you ignore that it could probably say something different.
Remember when houses in the US were selling for $1? I do.

Yea. The largest crash in modern history was still above the two liberal terms.

Yeah of course it was, cause it was the US crash you fuckin dunce. Our dollar went UP because the US dollar went DOWN.

2008 didn’t happen in a vacuum, it was a global crisis.

You’re focused on a single year blip VS a trend over a decade? Ok.