The Shotgun Blog
« Joementum | Main | 73% of Canadians want global warming policy delay for economic reasons or doubts over scientific certainty »
Monday, December 14, 2009
10%
That's the percentage of the current federal budget that is spent on defense. So about 90% of the federal budget is spent on stuff that has virtually nothing to do with the proper function of government. And they say there is nowhere to cut in the budget.
The war in Afghanistan has helped push federal government spending in this country to a 60-year-high, a new report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives says.
The centre calculates that, for the fiscal year that ends in March, Canada will have spent a little more than $21 billion on national defence. That's nearly 10 per cent of all federal government spending.
The centre, a think-tank often associated with causes favoured by the political left, argues that military spending in Canada is disproportionately high and that it sucks up money that could be used for other government programs, such as environmental spending or foreign aid.
Posted by Richard Anderson on December 14, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Oh yeah they're just toys for our boys in uniform. There's a war on, Ontarian idiots (okay that's redundant.) They need the tools to fight it, and that costs money. If they would just abandon this Kyoto fraud, their projections would be half of what they currently are. The "left" really needs to wake up and leave their fantasyworld.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-12-14 2:16:27 PM
The Government could save money by ensuring the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives does not get one cent of taxpayer's money.
In fact, no organization should enjoy tax-free status because the rest of us are effectively forced to subsidize them despite the immorality of some of these organizations.
Posted by: Philanthropist | 2009-12-14 11:23:53 PM
"The centre, a think-tank often associated with causes favoured by the political left, argues that military spending in Canada is disproportionately high and that it sucks up money that could be used for other government programs, such as environmental spending or foreign aid."
Thats just switching one money pit for another.
Posted by: Steve Bottrell | 2009-12-15 1:49:31 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.