By Pepper Parr
January 6th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
In the Trudeau years, the Canadian economy grew by 41 per cent, to $3.2 trillion. It grew by just 18 per cent under Trudeau’s predecessor, Stephen Harper, who governed for roughly the same amount of time.
Per capita income grew by more than 23 per cent on Trudeau’s watch, to $77,700, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Trudeau’s predecessor managed only a 7.6 per cent increase.
In the main, Canadians became wealthier in the Trudeau years. The median net worth of Canadians soared by about 66 per cent between 2016 and 2023, to $519,000, according to Statistics Canada.
Trudeau came to office with a mandate to engage in deficit spending and spend he did on both physical and social infrastructure.
Those are the facts.
My comment is not about monetary growth rates. Still, I was curious and checked the numbers myself interestingly, from the 1960s to 2024, the spending spree started with Justin’s Father and was massive, and this trend continued through all the leaders in this period, it’s worth noting that U.S. spending accelerated dramatically above Canada’s beginning in 1992 under Bill Clinton, and has continued through to today, surprisingly to me, Jean Chretien in that period reduced spending significantly; Lester B Pearson (1963-1968) seems to be the winner in the growth department, with a 6.3% growth rate and with the lowest spending rate out of all the leaders, after Pearson Canada’s growth rate is pretty stable averaging between 1 and 3 percent the difference between Harper and Trudeau the younger is a 0.1% average. My dislike for Trudeau was never about monetary policies, an interesting article on the reasons why voters picked Trump was that they were just tired of the endless Democratic party scheming and fraudulent activities. That about sums up my feelings with an extra helping of disgust at his divisive politics.
Let’s assume those facts are correct, so after 10 years we have 3 positives to report, pretty awesome eh.
I have the data to back this up, we are much wealthier, investments soar, when governments print money, we own our house and two rentals, all is swell! Wait a minute maybe I should support the Trudeau clan for all these awesome achievements.
This however is a fake economy, wage growth driven by inflation due to money printing, artificial ramp ups in minimum wage which further adds to inflation (ask those people if they are better off – perhaps while they are standing in line at a food bank or living in a camper van).
Expansion of the federal government by 40%, large contracts through the green slush fund to liberal insiders, payments to consultants, expansion of the CBC and bonuses to executives, all paid for by debt help drive those wage increases. This is all fake money, its not growing GDP.
So you make 40 percent more than 2015 on average, but the average cost of a home has risen from $500k to $1M, rent has doubled, are you any further ahead – no, you are behind.
Yes, I have lots of time for the worst PM, and worst party in Canadian history.
I note that you have not included Canada’s year by year GDP/ capita or our national debt/ capita over Justin Trudeau’s tenure, in comparison to all other G7 countries over the same period. Respectfully, once you do that, we will be able to talk facts!
Some other facts.
How much of the increase in your figures was a result of hyper inflated real estate values? Sell that to 25% of Canadians who have slipped below the poverty line and cannot afford adequate shelter or healthy food.
His late inaction and without accepting responsibility has left Canada in an incredibly vulnerable position and worse with key Ministers now jockeying to replace the supreme ruler. He even had the audacity to comment on his promised electoral reform.
All drama all about saving what little is left of the Liberal brand for what enough seats to fill a minivan. All at the expense of the country.
Liberals will probably think they can turn the page in weeks Christy Clark or a Mark Carney with likely more conflicts of interests than Liberal scandals can save their bacon. Fools rush in.
Newsflash it won’t work.
With respect to Net Worth around 50% of the net worth of Canadians is tied up in their home. If you are on a fixed income you will have to sell your home to survive. Practically speaking you have more wealth now but will have to sell your home and move to P.E.I to reap the benefits of the uptick in net worth.
People may have more money but with the price of food increasing , of rents going to ridiculous levels, etc…are we really better off? If people have so much money to spare how is it that most young people are unable to afford to buy their own home? Why are people being forced to live in tents because rents are unaffordable? I think somebody is wearing rose coloured glasses.
If these are the core economic facts resulting from Trudeau’s mandate to deficit spend coming to office, what is the real problem, what’s the beef, besides an election? What are the facts that PP-conservatives base their economic criticisms and blames for everything on Trudeau?
Harper’s performance was inferior by all these overall economic growth, individual income and wealth facts. Other indicators of typical Trudeau contributions to physical and social infrastructure through the mandated deficit spending, went to housing, health, water environment programs, Great and Large Lake programs across Canada, atmospheric and climate change programs, including alternative energy, efficiency, technology, and economic incentives and instruments designed to use the economic system to reduce energy use, waste, greenhouse gases, and other gross air pollutants that are well known to be harmful to health.
Other spending of note, with its own program included shared programs with provinces, municipalities, Cities, First nations, and other directed social targets. It can be shown that many or most of these needs, especially environment and social infrastructure were hit hard by Harper, and PP- Conservatives promise more of the same.
Axe the Tax will have to be paid for, and have its own form of existing deficit in money or corresponding existing program cuts. We also have an undeniable and urgent climate emergency on the doorstep, with a heavy load of evidence – scientific and observable – coming at us.
PP-Con is in denial of all of it, and tells us that he can Axe the Tax and somehow deliver everything included in his long list of promised items with no impact on the budget – including the deficit – and other now treasured programs with social equity and impacts.
Another Trudeau classic deficit spending rationale is a classic Keynesian spending tool, to stimulate a lagging economy, in a manner that will have the most immediate impact on the the level of Consumption in GNP, by providing an increase in consumer Income by the most individuals, with the cost being financed by the government deficit, so the effective income effect is not offset.
In this category, we have the GST and possible PST holiday combined, which have a significant effect, as another fact. Then there is the one proposed $250 “gift” to every working person making under $150,000.
The fact in these 2 stimuli to personal consumption, or a small help to those needy, is they were attributed to the deficit. These are costly additions, that will be significantly consumed, and might help some with existing difficulties.
I have not seen any Party provide any factual basis describing their policy program complete with the factual data, describing spending changes, on what, why, and estimates of results. Then compare your facts with those of Trudeau.
Give us more please than empty words in overabundance. Trudeau led for essentially 10 years, many of them in a Minority. Including The longest session in Minority parliamentary history
It is another fact that it is vastly more difficult to lead and govern as a Minority, and keep it together as long as he did. Pepper’s short article here provides the facts of what Trudeau accomplished in that time regardless of the burdens of leadership in such an unprecedented time. In spite of this situation, compare again with Harper’s record on the same indicators.
This, in my opinion, this requires leadership skills comparable to the task at hand for such a long time. It should not be
Whoever wins the upcoming election will still have to deal with the present economic situation. This is scarily exacerbated by the upcoming Trump threat.
In my view, if the Conservatives win, and with a majority, they will do whatever they want to do – forget policy promises. Remember Trump and his Conservatism crony billionaires and oligarchs that are seeking to rule the world. Then there is MAGA and Tariffs.
This politics I experienced many times, including several times as an insider, working in Treasury and Economics, where lies ruled, and Environment Canada, under Harper, where lies ruled again.
Finally, be careful what you wish for.
Some of the facts. I am sure we are about to see more to balance out the scales. No mention of how housing prices skyrocketed and how fewer people can afford a downpayment and record numbers of Canadians are shopping at food banks.
I think it’s necessary to point out that percentages can be misleading. Certainly the Trudeau figures show bigger percentage increases than the Harper percentages. But that’s not the full story. Nor does it give Trudeau the amount of credit he deserves.
The Harper percentages illustrated are percentages of a smaller base figure. The Trudeau percentage growth whilst impressive are even more impressive when one considers they are of a larger base number than Harper’s. As an example take the percentages (18% and 41%) given for economic growth shown in the article
Let’s say the base number Harper inherited was 100. He grew the economy by 7% to 107.
Trudeau’s inherited base number is therefore 107. So a 41% increase takes the base number up to 151.
See how misleading percentages can be!?
And his reward is unemployment.