Economy Headed For Tougher Times

[mrlupin]

1700 layoff at Bombardier, 1600 at sears, The National Post, The Globe and Mail, BestBuy, Heinz, Kelogg,Potash,Encana, Humpty Dumpty, Research In Motion, Canadian Revenue Agency Auditors and on the list goes.

This at a time where debt versus income is at a record high in Canada (165% ), house prices are at bubbly levels (says the Wall Street Journal,the Economist and Deutch bank) and the central bank of Canada has no where to go with its overnight lending rate but up. (The rate is close to 1%)

How much time until the consumer starts to cut back on discretionary spending? Are the airlines going to take a hit shortly?

Any ideas...?

[CanadaEH]

I don't think much of that has to do with the economy as much as it does changing industries and times.

[Mizar]

There does seem to be a wide variety of reasons. While I am not sure, I suspect Bombardier is cutting back due to the C Series development ending. As well, they really have not had many orders for several types on the airline side although the big bizjet side has been great. National Post and the Globe are dying industries. So is Sears as a business which will be replaced by others. Best Buy would likely be the same but it could be online shopping. RIM is in trouble due to its product line versus competitors. Potash corp is an international market that has been like OPEC with the cartel having been weakened lately by events in Russia.Kellogg, Humpty Dumpty and Heinz are partially victims of green energy and over-regulation in Ontario.

But I suspect that there are a lot of incremental jobs being created in large parts of the country. Industries and companies come and go in the capitalist system. That is what keeps it strong if managed well. The weak like Sears disappear and others move into their place.

I post an article below that I read today about Canada overtaking the US as a place to invest and it states who is much responsible. You know, that vilified man.

Canada overtakes U.S. as second best place in the world to do business

Canada, struggling to emerge from a two-year slump brought on by weak exports, has swept past the U.S., Germany and Japan in a Bloomberg ranking of the best countries for doing business.

Canada rose four places to reach second place, behind only Hong Kong, which led for a third straight year. The U.S. fell one spot to third place in the index that’s based on six criteria, followed by Singapore and Australia.

The rise in the ranking for Canada reflects recent corporate tax cuts and the impact of a weakening dollar that policy makers are projecting will help the world’s 11th-largest economy rebound from weaker-than-expected exports. A falling dollar lowers input costs relative to competitors, while the tax cuts helped make investments more profitable.

“Those are two big factors,” said John Manley, a former Canadian finance minister who is now head of the Ottawa-based Canadian Council of Chief Executives. “Compared with a lot of the world, we have a pretty good story to tell.”

After rising for much of the previous decade, Canada’s currency has depreciated since 2011, amid weakening commodity prices and as investors regained confidence in the U.S. economy. The drop has accelerated since October, when the Bank of Canada dropped its bias for higher interest rates, a move that Prime Minister Stephen Harper endorsed. The dollar is down 14% from its post-recession high on July 21, 2011 and has dropped 6.2% since the bank’s Oct. 22 announcement.

Harper has also sought to bolster the expansion with tax cuts, trade deals such as the recently announced pact with the European Union and efforts to build energy infrastructure.

Tax Cuts

Harper, in power since 2006, gradually cut the rate to 15% from above 22%, a move opposition lawmakers have said is unaffordable when the government is running deficits.

Thomas Mulcair, leader of the main opposition New Democratic Party, said in a March interview he would increase corporate tax rates to fund social programs if he took power, claiming the cuts have benefited primarily the country’s largest companies.

Royal Bank of Canada, Suncor Energy Inc., Bank of Nova Scotia, Toronto-Dominion Bank and Bank of Montreal are the country’s five largest corporate payers of income taxes, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Lower corporate taxes helped fuel federal shortfalls that are poised to top $160 billion between 2008 and 2015, according to finance department projections released in November.

Manley said its important not to become complacent, and is urging the federal government to pay “close attention” to training and skills issues, infrastructure development and make sure trade agreements get implemented.

“Competitiveness is one of those things that you could never say you’ve achieved it,” Manley said. “Holding on to No. 2 is not going to be easy.”

http://business.financialpost.com/2014/01/22/canada-overtakes-u-s-as-second-best-place-in-the-world-to-do-business/

[W5]

The effect of today’s technology on tomorrow’s jobs will be immense—and no country is ready for it

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21594298-effect-todays-technology-tomorrows-jobs-will-be-immenseand-no-country-ready

[mrlupin]

I don't think much of that has to do with the economy as much as it does changing industries and times.

You don't think changing industries and times will affect the economy?

People without jobs or with part time jobs or worst with McJobs, don't spend much on real-estate, restaurants or airline tickets. As more lose jobs, we are likely to see a trickle down effect and the airline industry is not left unscathed.

[Mizar]

The economy has been changing for hundreds of years. New technologies arrive and old ones are replaced. The new technologies that replace the old ones, create and kill jobs at the same time. Robots replace assembly line workers but people have to design and build the robots and the software that runs them and fix them.

Lots of farmers lost their jobs over the past century due to new technology but how many jobs were created at John Deere, etc. And as a benefit, food production has never been higher in the world. The aviation industry as we know it will some day no longer exist, having been replaced by something else as unimaginable as the A380 was a century ago. The same goes with the energy industry and all those jobs in Alberta and other locations in Canada(that is why it is best to get as much for while we can).

It is fruitless to try and protect industries that will inevitably die. That is what was happening in Britain with the coal industry until Thatcher came along and put an end to what was costing huge amounts to the taxpayer for an artificial life support. Let free enterprise do its thing. Certain amounts of regulation of it are quite justifiable but trying to keep an industry on a never-ending life support just creates huge costs to the taxpayer, sometime for the benefit of a very few as we see in the dairy industry.

One might say "what about the good jobs and the families these industries in need of protection support"? I say what about all the good jobs not created because we stifle progress. Many of the good jobs we had in the 70s are long gone but look at how many new ones have been created such as high tech. There will always be individual upheaval in this process, but the overall upheaval is greater if we try to protect the individual one.

[mrlupin]

No one is contesting the changing economy Mizar, same for industries that change and transform.

That is all too obvious.

I also did not start this thread to promote protectionism.

To me here are some ingredients for economic hardship;

-a high consumer debt load, (165% of disposable income compared to 105% in the US)

-loss of jobs at the rate of 10000 jobs per month,

-Droping dollar (go for exports in long run but horrible for imports of supplies, equipment for industry and for the consumer it means inflation of costs)

-unemployment rising (higher than in the US now)

-high petrol prices

Just at AC, you can expect an increase in costs of 33 million for every drop of one cent. Then you see AC flooding the market with 22% more seats to the Caribean (while a reduced dollar will result in vacation packages being more expensive for every Canadian).

[mrlupin]

[DEFCON]

I think there's a difference in the changes we're seeing today that's not reflected in historical trends. North America is quickly losing its industrial base; not because industrial production has become an archaic practice of the past, but because the corporatocracy has been allowed to transfer the work to third world extensions for one reason only, increased profitability.

[Mizar]

No one is contesting the changing economy Mizar, same for industries that change and transform.

As part of your overall general theme on the thread you started called "Economy Headed for Tougher Times", whichmay or may not be correct, you have stated "You don't think changing industries and times will affect the economy?"

You state that an ingredient for economic hardship is a falling dollar. This would seem to fly in the face of statements by our opposition leader that the oilsands have killed so many jobs due to causing the high dollar and has generally been opposed the the oilsands(I mention this because I feel that your political leanings are closer to his). So when the dollar goes up, we hear economic hardship. When it goes down. we hear economic hardship.

Once again, 10000 job losses a month sounds significant but are another 10000 equivalent jobs being created a month. The unemployment rate rose slightly last month but has been at a similar rate with slight overall downtrend for the last year. Just because the US has all of a sudden lowered their unemployment rate below ours does not mean our economy is in trouble. A lot of Canadians are happily paid to remain mostly unemployed, especially in the eastern regions of the country.

Petrol prices have been high for a long time. Fortunately, for North America, we have been insulated by our increasing oil production. Another reason for the oilsands.

While AC is important to the economy in terms of providing transportation for so many others, the fact that its International tourist market could be hit is insignificant to the overall economy. Especially if more Canadians travel within Canada and we get more foreign tourists as a result. The free market will adjust and where it hurts in one area, it will help in another.

With the US economy recovering. if all other things remain the same, our economy should be helped by that. But, there are other outside forces that could have an affect such as China.

I think you get worried too easily about the overall economy. The reality is that it is doing fairly well and being managed fairly well. From a federal point of view, our defecit is decreasing and on target for a surplus. Changes are being implemented such as unemployment benefits(and hopefully will continue to be), government bureacracy is being cut, incessant calls for wasteful spending are being resisted, taxes have been lowered and may continue to be lowered in the long term. The economic outlook based on our government's management is good but of course, there are always the outside factors beyond our control such as the great recession.

That is why you want good ecomomic stewardship in times of crisis. We have been very fortunate.

[mrlupin]

That is why you want good ecomomic stewardship in times of crisis. We have been very fortunate.

lol

Well good on you Mizar if you feel very fortunate to have our present stewards.

[mrlupin]

Job Losses At End Of 2013 Even Worse Than Thought, StatsCan Data Shows

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/30/unemployment-canada-2013_n_4694851.html

Instead of having created 21000 jobs in November, Stats can revises it numbers to 27600 job losses in November.

[mrlupin]

Job cuts at Sears and Bestbuy, not exactly positive for the economy...

Job cuts at Sears, Best Buy target managers January isn’t even over and 2014 is already shaping up to be a difficult year for Canadian retailers and their workers.

http://www.thestar.com/business/economy/2014/01/30/best_buy_canada_cuts_950_jobs.html

[Kip Powick]

Job cuts at Sears and Bestbuy, not exactly positive for the economy...

Job cuts at Sears, Best Buy target managers January isn’t even over and 2014 is already shaping up to be a difficult year for Canadian retailers and their workers.

http://www.thestar.com/business/economy/2014/01/30/best_buy_canada_cuts_950_jobs.html

Not unexpected............Think about this....why get dressed in winter clothes, or even just leave your house, get in your car and drive to a store to make a purchase that 'most' people have probably researched to death on the Internet when you can sit in the comfort of your own home and buy the item online?

The cost of shipping is most often lower than the cost of your time, gas and wear and tear on the car and a lot more relaxed than bucking the crowds. I'm no genius but occasionally I get really annoyed at some sales persons when I do make an effort and go to a store and I know more about the item than the sales person and that same individual attempts to make a sale by blustering his/her way through the conversation.

.

It is a fact of life that the evolution of technology and the endless advances in the same technology will undoubtedly decrease personal shopping for the vast majority of 'tech savvy' people in the future.

It's a different story for major appliances as most folks want to actually see the item and get a bit of 'hands-on' experience and I think the same can be said about cars....although I did by my wife's car based on just one photo !!!

It has been said by 'somebody' that in the future, over 75% of High School graduates will be in the 'service industry' unless a concerted effort is made by individuals to enhance their education, whether it be in a college and 'trades' or university high end desired degrees.

I don't envy today's generation...quite a tough row to hoe.

[DEFCON]

Sears decided to remake themselves in the image of their big-box competitors. Historically, all my large home purchases (appliances of every type, TV's, stereo, beds etc) have been made at Sears. When they took their new big box approach with respect to 'name brand' product defects, returns and the like, I decided to shift my allegiance to any of the few remaining mom & pop operators.

[Fido]

I wonder if the employment numbers have ever gone UP in the middle of a Canadian winter?

The Stascan numbers say that they are seasonally adjusted but they still seem to follow a seasonality of falling in the winter and growing in the milder months.

A more reliable number is the year over year number where the number of employed INCREASED in Canada by 100,000.

Granted, over 70,000 of those jobs appeared in Alberta.

[boestar]

MAny construction jobs do not work during the winter and is considered seasonal work. That helps drive the numbers down in winter.

[Mizar]

Well good on you Mizar if you feel very fortunate to have our present stewards

As stated earlier, plenty of good jobs around to be had, but as always, technology is shifting the playing field. For those who want to slack and wander into a high paying manufacturing job eventually, there is less and less of that in the future. As was stated even many years ago to me while in school, skills are important and becoming even more so.

"Professional, scientific jobs hit record high

Grim news of job losses are overshadowing a bright spot in Canada’s labour market: Employment in professional services has never been higher.

The professional, scientific and technical services sector, which tends to pay above-average wages, quietly hit its highest job level on record in December. The sector led the country’s job growth last year, with an increase of 85,500, a notable gain given the economy created the fewest number of monthly jobs since 2009.

It is now the fourth-largest sector by employment in Canada, with more workers than in construction. This industry includes accountants, engineers, architects, lawyers, research-and-development specialists, surveyors, consultants, graphic designers and marketers. Its share of total employment has climbed to 7.6 per cent from 4.9 per cent two decades ago, according to Statistics Canada data compiled for The Globe and Mail.

“Canada is definitely not just a hewer of wood and drawer of water,” said Daniel Schwanen, assistant vice-president of research at the C.D. Howe Institute, who published a paper last month calling the expansion in tradeable service jobs such as engineering, design and architecture an “overlooked success story.”

“There’s a new kind of middle-class, good job that’s emerging.”

That may prove cold comfort to the hundreds of thousands of laid-off factory workers in the past decade, many of whom have since struggled to work with comparable pay or hours. But there’s a key lesson for the younger generation on the cusp of entering the work force: These types of jobs also tend to require higher education.

It’s a sector characterized by its reliance on worker skills (rather than equipment or materials), one that typically requires a university or college education. And unlike call-centre or factory jobs, it’s not an area where jobs are easily outsourced to countries with lower labour costs.

The pay tends to be higher. Average earnings in the sector are $1,298.80 a week compared with a national average of $927.61 for all sectors, Statistics Canada’s payrolls data show. Moreover, wages in areas such as accounting, technology and administration are expected to grow about 4 per cent this year, according to a Robert Half survey. Its list of hot jobs this year include mobile app and software developers, and customer service managers.

“In today’s competitive market, there’s a trend toward hiring professionals who have the specialized skills required to help companies achieve their business goals,” said Greg Scileppi, president of Robert Half’s international staffing operations.

Canada’s labour market has been slowing, and economists expect Statistics Canada to report on Friday that about 15,000 jobs were created in January, with the unemployment rate inching down to 7.1 per cent.

While much focus has been on the demise of well-paid factory jobs and the rise of lower-paying work, the growth of professional services has been largely unnoticed, Mr. Schwanen said.

It’s not the only area on the services side of the economy to tally growth. Health care and social assistance employment also hit a record in December. All told, the share of services jobs has grown to 78.1 per cent of total employment from 74 per cent two decades ago, reflecting a shift in Canada’s economy.

Correspondingly, the share of jobs on the goods-producing side of the economy has shrunk to 21.9 per cent. Factory jobs, once the key source of employment in the country, tumbled to 9.8 per cent as a share of the total last year from 14 per cent in 1994, Statistics Canada data show. Jobs in professional services weren’t nearly as hard hit by losses during the recession as other fields, says Tara Talbot, vice-president of human resources at jobs-search site Workopolis. And, “these were also amongst the areas where we’ve seen the greatest post-recession increases in hiring.”

Its site has seen a 5-per-cent increase in job postings for positions in this category, led by growth in Ontario, Quebec and Alberta."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/jobs/professional-scientific-jobs-hit-record-high/article16656954/

[mrlupin]

What does it matter to the economy if jobs are available in fields where there are no qualified individuals? I'm sure we need doctors, nurses, scientists etc. Those are all great jobs but you can't expect the majority of the population to be working in those fields.

That the unemployment rate is going up does not mean no good jobs are available. It means that although some job positions are available, the unemployed are not suited for the work. Look up the definition of structural unemployment, it might help you understand.

If people aren't working, they aren't buying 500000 condos in downtown Montreal or Toronto. That is one place where you will see the effect on the economy...

[mrlupin]

Here is a bank CEO that sees things the way I do. Ed Clark. The other CEOs quoted in the article are probably also right. Real Estate will not affect most Canadian banks directly, the Harper government through it's action with the CHMC has shifted most of the risk to the Canadian tax payers.

Under Harper we have seen:

-30 year mortgages (insured by CHMC)

-35 years mortgage (insured by CHMC)

-40 years mortgage (insured by CHMC)

- elimination of the max value of mortgages insured by the CHMC (for years the CHMC was insuring homes bought with 5% down, worth millions of dollars due to the restriction being lifted by Flaherty)

-now they've gone back to under a million for max value of the insurable mortgage and they have also gone back to 25 year mortgages

If there is a real estate bubble that will affect the economy, if was for the most part Flaherty/Harper/Conservative governement created.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/bank-ceos-should-be-worried-about-real-estate-tds-clark/article16330596/

So much for good stewardship... Whomever gets elected at the next election will be stuck with quite a mess to clean up.

[Mizar]

Just as I thought, the whole thread has been started as another anti-Harper rant. Sorry, but we have done much better than other similar countries(maybe not Australia), our taxes have not been raised, cuts have been made to the bloated bureaucracy. And any waste of spending you can come up with would have been much greater under the opposition.

I was quite pleased to read that this government has cut 13.6 billion in spending over the last few years since being freed from the shackles of the opposition while a minority government.

Meanwhile, Ontario has shown what the other style of thinking leads to with massive deficits and billions thrown away for feel good policies.

Somehow, the inevitable change in technology changing what jobs will be available is now linked to Harper. Hmmm.

Jobs are available for people who get the skills to do them. Less are available for those with no skills, that is the result of the inevitable advance in technology.

You say to look up structural unemployment. Is that what we have on the east coast where so many refuse the full time jobs out west for their government subsidised 10 weeks of work per year. If you want a job in this country, you have one. But you may have to move.

[boestar]

Yup they cut 13.6 billion. Ask a Vet if he supports some of those cuts.

Any cut in spending has a corresponding cut in service. not necessarily a good thing.

[mrlupin]

Mizar,

Get over yourself. I started this thread not to drag your beloved PM in the mud but because most here work in the airline industry and this industry is greatly affected in downturns. Maybe you are too young to remember what it was like looking for work in the early nineties? I wasn't looking for work back then but many of my coworkers were and jobs were hard to come by. If I remember correctly, that is also when AC took it's brand new B747 and parked them in the desert. Not exactly the best of times...

I posted about of job losses and you countered with an article of job opportunity for proffessionals. None of the candidates whom have just lost their jobs are likely to be able to fill unless they retrain.

The economy includes many things, real estate is one of them. Under Harper, the federal government exposure to bad mortgage (they insure it under the CHMC) has gone from 300 billion to 600 billion. Try to include that when you gloat about your 13 billion dollar reduction in services.

The Harper government has done good things, but you appear so biased and supporting of that governement that I doubt you would be able to clearly see what those things are...

[Mizar]

Yup they cut 13.6 billion. Ask a Vet if he supports some of those cuts.

Any cut in spending has a corresponding cut in service. not necessarily a good thing.

Overall, the cuts are very good. Your post appears to dismiss the entire thing because of what is felt to be a mistake(without taking either side of the issue) in one area. When there is a massive project involving thousands of cuts, it is likely that there will be a few errors. That is just reality. I don't believe in remaining paralyzed in what I see as huge government overspending just because there may be an occasional mis-implementation of cuts which are much needed.

A more credible argument could be that someone supports a more interventionist cradle to grave government policy such as what the opposition advocates and the reasons why they feel this is what should be done. Many people support this idea and many countries follow this approach as that is what the voters asked for at some point in the past.

I guess it would not surprise many to hear that I have not supported this more interventionist approach. I post a link about what has happened in some of the Nordic countries that the NDP likes to use as their role model for us.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/afp/2014/01/23/398998/Nordic-welfare.htm

"Nordic welfare states cut back on social programs

COPENHAGEN -- The Nordic model, known for high taxes and its cradle-to-grave welfare system, is getting a radical makeover as nations find themselves cash-strapped.

During the post-war period, the Scandinavian economies became famous for a “softer” version of capitalism that placed more importance on social equality than other western nations, such as Britain and the United States, did.

But globalization, economic necessity and an ideological shift to the right has led to a scaling back of the public sector.

In Sweden, visitors are sometimes surprised to learn about yearlong waiting times for cancer patients, rioting in low-income suburbs and train derailments amid lagging infrastructure investment.

“The generosity of the system has declined,” said Jonas Hinnfors, a professor of political science at the University of Gothenburg.

“Much of this already started changing in the 1980s and especially in the 1990s,” he added.

In the wake of a banking crisis in the early nineties, Stockholm scrapped housing subsidies, reformed the pension system and slashed the healthcare budget.

A voucher-based system that allows for-profit schools to compete with state schools was introduced, and has drawn attention from right-wing politicians elsewhere, including Britain's Conservative Party.

In 2006, conservative Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt's government accelerated the pace of reform, tightening the criteria for unemployment benefits and sick pay while lowering taxes.

Income tax in Sweden is now lower than in France, Belgium and Denmark, and public spending as a share of GDP has declined from a record 71.0 percent in 1993 to 53.3 percent last year.

Once the darling of progressives, Sweden has become a model for free-market-leaning thinkers including British weekly The Economist, which last year hailed the scaled-down Nordic model as “the next supermodel.”

“They offer a blueprint of how to reform the public sector, making the state far more efficient,” it wrote.

This month, the Wall Street Journal praised tax cuts and entitlement reforms in Sweden and Denmark that “are now discomfiting their big-government admirers overseas.”"

"If Sweden is the Nordic country to have gone the furthest in shrinking its welfare state, Denmark has moved the fastest.

When her Social Democratic government took power in 2011, there was little to suggest Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt would make any dramatic changes to the country's cherished welfare state — funded by the world's highest tax burden.

After a center-right government had raised the retirement age and reduced the unemployment benefits period from four to two years, “Gucci Helle” — as she is known among her detractors — went on to cut corporate taxes to 22 percent from 25 percent.

Other reforms have included requiring young people on benefits to undertake training, and withdrawing student aid to those taking too long to finish their studies.

It has left her deeply unpopular in some quarters. At last year's May Day speeches she was met by jeers as audience members sprayed her with a water pistol, threw tomatoes at her, and even flashed their buttocks."

"Denmark has been spurred into action by a persistently sluggish economy since a housing bubble imploded in 2007, leading to anemic household spending. But among Danes there is also a sense that the welfare state was ballooning out of control."

In 2011, a TV report aiming to show what life was like for the poor in Denmark visited the home of a single mother on benefits, whose disposable income turned out to be 15,728 kroner (2,107 euros, US$2,860) per month.

“Poor Carina,” as she was later nicknamed, sparked a national debate on the level of unemployment benefits, with one pollster crediting her with fuelling a rise in the number of people who felt benefits were too high."

"The next Nordic country to reform its welfare state is likely to be Finland, battered by a downturn in the two pillars of its economy: the forest industry and information technology.

Helsinki responded to the crisis by announcing in August a slew of measures to put more Finns to work.

Under the controversial plan, the retirement age is to go up, time spent at university will go down, and incentives to enter the job market will be boosted for the unemployed and young mothers."

Only Norway looks unlikely to reform entitlements anytime soon, bolstered by its oil wealth. The country is home to the world's largest sovereign wealth fund. Worth some 5,116 billion kroner (610 billion euros, US$830 billion), each of the country's 5,096,000 inhabitants is — at least on paper — a millionaire.

New center-right Prime Minister Erna Solberg has pledged to preserve the welfare state."

[Mizar]

Mizar,

I posted about of job losses and you countered with an article of job opportunity for proffessionals. None of the candidates whom have just lost their jobs are likely to be able to fill unless they retrain.

The economy includes many things, real estate is one of them. Under Harper, the federal government exposure to bad mortgage (they insure it under the CHMC) has gone from 300 billion to 600 billion. Try to include that when you gloat about your 13 billion dollar reduction in services.

The Harper government has done good things, but you appear so biased and supporting of that governement that I doubt you would be able to clearly see what those things are...

Mr. Lupin. You posted about job losses and I posted about job gains. Some of the laid off workers you talk about will not have it as good as they did. As you said, retraining may be required. Meanwhile, others who did not have it so good are moving up. That is what keeps the economy dynamic. Unlike places such as Italy with its protected jobs in government and industries where workers cannot be fired and so many young people are unemployed because few international companies are willing to go over there and deal with their endless regulation. And local companies don't hire because they can't lay off inexpensively. Not a good role model for here in my opinion where quick layoffs are sometimes necessary.

So, now the article that you pasted a link to. I read it. While I don't claim to understand the details of all this stuff, I do note that you are basing your post and further claims of economic problems in this country on what the article calls a "Contrarian". The article says "His opinion contrasts with those of his peers, many of whom argued Tuesday that the data they look at simply does not give them reason to be overly worried.". So basically, the majority expert view(if that means anything) is not what you have been saying. So your argument about how Harper is basically ruining the economy is based on one contrarian in a sea of other experts saying that this is not a worry. Perhaps a little more analysis is required

I don't mind credible criticism against my "beloved PM" but it should be credible and not based on what I suspect is partisan thinking based on a dislike of other policies(perhaps in the union area). This in my opinion leads to an non-credible statement of poor economic handling based on an individual contrarian in the hope of influencing for a desired change in government. This individual in the article could be correct as contrarians have been correct before, but I don't think you or I have the economic background to be able to credibly analyze such theory. When that is the case, I go with the vast majority.