Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Not a ‘vibecession’—Canadian living standards are declining

Published

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Grady Munro

In June 2019, inflation-adjusted per-person GDP was $59,905 compared to $58,601 in September 2024, a decline of 2.2 per cent. And while per-person GDP has ebbed and flowed during this decline, the third quarter of 2024 marks the sixth consecutive quarter that living standards have fallen in Canada.

During a recent press conference about the Trudeau government’s plan to send $250 cheques to many Canadians and suspend the GST on certain goods and services for two months, federal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said Canadians are experiencing a “vibecession,” which is creating negative feelings about the economy despite “really positive economic news.” According to Freeland, these two proposals, which will cost billions, will “help Canadians get past that vibecession.”

But in reality, the economic woes of Canadians are real, and new data from Statistics Canada show that Canadian living standards are declining.

Let’s look at the numbers. From July to September of 2024, after adjusting for inflation, the Canadian economy (as measured by GDP) grew by 0.3 per cent yet per-person GDP (an indicator of living standards and incomes) actually fell by 0.4 per cent.

How can the economy grow while living standards decline?

Because Canada’s rapid population growth, fuelled by high levels of immigration, means the overall economy has increased in size but per-person GDP has not. And during the same three-month period (July to September), Canada’s population increased by 0.6 per cent (or 250,229 people), outpacing the rate of economic growth.

Not merely a one-off, this continues a historic decline in Canadian living standards over the last five years. In June 2019, inflation-adjusted per-person GDP was $59,905 compared to $58,601 in September 2024, a decline of 2.2 per cent. And while per-person GDP has ebbed and flowed during this decline, the third quarter of 2024 marks the sixth consecutive quarter that living standards have fallen in Canada.

Last week, the House of Commons approved the government’s plan to temporarily suspend the GST on select items from December 14 to February 15, at an estimated cost of $1.6 billion (the legislation now goes to the Senate for approval). The government has delayed the “$250 cheques” plan to potentially accommodate NDP demands to expand eligibility to include seniors (the original proposal would have sent cheques to an estimated 18.7 million Canadians at a cost of $4.7 billion).

Neither one of these proposals will incentivize Canadians to work and invest, and therefore these proposals won’t help raise living standards. To help drive economic growth, create jobs and provide more economic opportunities for workers across the income spectrum, the federal government should reduce the overall tax burden on workers and businesses, and make Canada a more attractive place to work and invest.

Despite any claims of a “vibecession,” Canadians remain mired in an actual recession in their standard of living. Minister Freeland’s comments once again prove that this government is disconnected from the reality many Canadians face. It’s not just bad vibes—data shows Canadians are actually worse off today than they were in 2019.

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Trudeau leaves office with worst economic growth record in recent Canadian history

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Ben Eisen

In the days following Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s resignation as leader of the Liberal Party, there has been much ink spilt about his legacy. One effusively positive review of Trudeau’s tenure claimed that his successors “will be hard-pressed to improve on his economic track record.”

But this claim is difficult to square with the historical record, which shows the economic story of the Trudeau years has been one of dismal growth. Indeed, when the growth performance of Canada’s economy is properly measured, Trudeau has the worst record of any prime minister in recent history.

There’s no single perfect measure of economic success. However, growth in inflation-adjusted per-person GDP—an indicator of living standards and incomes—remains an important and broad measure. In short, it measures how quickly the economy is growing while adjusting for inflation and population growth.

Back when he was first running for prime minister in 2015, Trudeau recognized the importance of long-term economic growth, often pointing to slow growth under his predecessor Stephen Harper. On the campaign trail, Trudeau blasted Harper for having the “worst record on economic growth since R.B. Bennett in the depths of the Great Depression.”

And growth during the Harper years was indeed slow. The Harper government endured the 2008/09 global financial crisis and subsequent weak recovery, particularly in Ontario. During Harper’s tenure as prime minister, per-person GDP growth was 0.5 per cent annually—which is lower than his predecessors Brian Mulroney (0.8 per cent) and Jean Chrétien (2.4 per cent).

So, growth was weak under Harper, but Trudeau misdiagnosed the causes. Shortly after taking office, Trudeau said looser fiscal policy—with more spending, borrowing and bigger deficits—would help spur growth in Canada (and indeed around the world).

Trudeau’s government acted on this premise, boosting spending and running deficits—but Trudeau’s approach did not move the needle on growth. In fact, things went from bad to worse. Annual per-person GDP growth under Trudeau (0.3 per cent) was even worse than under Harper.

The reasons for weak economic growth (under Harper and Trudeau) are complicated. But when it comes to performance, there’s no disputing that Trudeau’s record is worse than any long-serving prime minister in recent history. According to our recent study published by the Fraser Institute, which compared the growth performance of the five most recent long-serving prime ministers, annual per-person GDP growth was highest under Chrétien followed by Martin, Mulroney, Harper and Justin Trudeau.

Of course, some defenders will blame COVID for Trudeau’s poor economic growth record, but you can’t reasonably blame the steep but relatively short pandemic-related recession for nearly a decade of stagnation.

There’s no single perfect measure of economic performance, but per-person inflation-adjusted economic growth is an important and widely-used measure of economic success and prosperity. Despite any claims to the contrary, Justin Trudeau’s legacy on economic growth is—in historical terms—dismal. All Canadians should hope that his successor has more success and oversees faster growth in the years ahead.

Continue Reading

Business

Greenland Is A Strategic Goldmine

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By John Teichert

President-elect Donald Trump recently snapped the gaze of the national security establishment to an often-overlooked geographical feature — Greenland.

Trump’s comments have been enough to start a long-overdue conversation about the semi-autonomous territory owned by Denmark, a landmass that retired Admiral James Stavridis, who served as the Supreme Allied Commander for NATO, has called “a strategic goldmine for the United States.” Stavridis was speaking both literally and figuratively.

Trump has likely done something that many of the so-called national security experts have never considered: He has looked down on a globe from the top. The traditional U.S.-centric view does not tell the full story nor provide the proper perspective. A top-down glance unveils key observations that reveal the wisdom of focusing on a geographic feature that has been brushed aside for far too long. 

Greenland and the entire Arctic region are typically considered simply rugged and quaint. Yet, their significance must be properly elevated as a fundamental component of U.S. national security and economic interests. Trump has done just that.

A North-Pole-centered perspective reveals that Greenland is the largest geographical feature in the Arctic region. As a result, it holds oversized strategic significance in controlling land, sea, air, undersea and space domains for a substantial part of the planet. Proper utilization of the Greenland landmass creates opportunities for multi-faceted dominance of the entire region.

This same perspective reveals a massive trade route, given the right climatic conditions and ice-breaking capabilities. It provides a maritime shortcut between the East Coast and the West Coast of the United States, and similarly for trade between Europe and Asia.

The Houthis in Yemen have reminded the world of an important economic truth — the ability to shut down transit through a key trade route can have ripple effects on the global economy. Suffocating transit through the Red Sea has tripled the cost of shipping from Asia to the East Coast of the United States, enacting huge global inflationary pressures. These negative impacts would be dwarfed by a nation that could control and restrict transit through the Arctic Ocean.

The view from the North Pole also enlightens the viewer about the closer-than-expected proximity between Russia and North America. The protective buffer of the Atlantic Ocean does not tell the full story, and the distances between the United States and Canada and their Russian adversary are much shorter than would otherwise be understood.

Through this literal worldview, Greenland looms large in its significance. This is especially true when it is properly viewed as the primary barrier between Russia and the east coast of the United States. Such positioning provides the rationale for the United States Space Force’s posture on the island with its early warning radars and space control systems – situated to protect against strategic surprise.

Trump’s strong statements about proper economic and strategic utilization of Greenland have been informed by such strategic orientation. These statements are also a natural extension of his rightful insistence that European NATO members pay their fair share to meet collective defense requirements.

While the United States has a commendable 75-year history of supporting European and collective security, fair share also means that America’s European allies must support North American security. That starts with Greenland and continues with a robust strategic focus on the Arctic region.

None of this addresses the largely untapped and abundant natural resources in the Arctic region, from oil and natural gas to precious metals and rare earth minerals, which are desperately needed to sustain a thriving modern global economy. Calling it a goldmine is not hyperbole.

Not only have Trump’s comments gained our attention, but they have also captured the attention of Greenland’s Prime Minister Múte Egede. Egede has eagerly proclaimed that his territory is poised to enhance its collaboration with the United States regarding natural resources and security efforts.

Thus, with just a few words informed by a properly oriented security perspective, Trump has already motivated and cultivated a collaboration that could strike gold for American interests.

United States Air Force Brigadier General John Teichert (ret) is a prolific author and leading expert on foreign affairs and military strategy. He served as commander of Joint Base Andrews and Edwards Air Force Base, was the U.S. senior defense official to Iraq, and recently retired as the assistant deputy undersecretary of the Air Force, international affairs. General Teichert maintains a robust schedule of media engagements, and his activities can best be followed at johnteichert.com and on LinkedIn. General Teichert can be reached at [email protected].

Continue Reading

Trending

X