‘Get More – Pay Less’ may be an appealing slogan for a store like Target, but we should hold our political leaders to a higher standard than big box chains.

Elections are prime time for parties to promise voters more of the things they want. These promises are rarely accompanied by thorough accountings of costs, or where the money will come from.

This election, parties must be honest about the choice we face: pay for the services we want, or scale down these services to the level we’re willing to pay. Responsible platforms offer a vision for how to balance trade-offs, rather than pretending it’s reasonable for voters to expect more while paying less.

💡  How to avoid being duped

📊  Party Assessments

Prior to the election, both the Conservative and Liberal parties claimed that they wanted to restore balanced budgets. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre aims to eliminate the federal deficit over his first term (4-5 years). Liberal Leader Mark Carney promises to restore balance to the operating budget within three years.

We now know that neither party is entirely serious about this goal (see the previous section in which we show no party has a credible plan to balance the budget). The parties are weak on this front because they regularly imply that the federal budget can be balanced without taking a hard look at the largest line items -- especially Old Age Security -- and carefully considering whether revisions are required.

💡  How to avoid being duped

📊  Party Assessments