MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123902508

Equipping Canadians for Success: A Shadow Budget for 2014

2014· article· en· W3123902508 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueC.D. Howe Institute Commentary · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederal budgetShadow (psychology)Transparency (behavior)Government (linguistics)Investment (military)BusinessEconomicsLabour economicsFinanceFiscal yearPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2014 edition of the C.D. Howe Institute’s annual Shadow Federal Budget reinforces Ottawa’s near-term focus on returning to budgetary surplus, and presents a number of measures to foster growth in living standards over the longer term. Prudent forecasting and greater transparency in budgeting and government spending are two elements of the plan to achieve an early and durable surplus. Spending control is the third – with the dominant thrust being containing the cost of federal employment, and in particular the costs to taxpayers of federal pensions and other postretirement benefits. The Shadow Budget estimates that caps on taxpayers’ contributions to federal-employee pensions, the termination of indefinite banking of unused sick days, and a move to 50-50 cost-sharing of post-retirement health benefits can reduce federal spending by some $5.2 billion in fiscal years 2014/15 and 2015/16 alone. Shadow Budget measures to equip Canadians for success in the longer term fall under three broad headings: the skills of, and opportunities for, Canadian workers; saving and investment; and innovation and entrepreneurship. Measures to promote skills and opportunities include reducing the pressure of the federal government on Canadian labour markets, investing in new job-information and matching, shifting the tax base from income to consumption taxes, phasing out regionally differentiated Employment Insurance, and promoting longer worklife by increasing the age at which Canadians lose access to tax-deferred saving. The Shadow Budget contains several measures to improve the treatment of saving, and savings, in tax-deferred vehicles. It also proposes to promote investment by providing more uniform tax treatment of active foreign-investment income, and a regular rolling review of capital-consumption allowances. As for innovation and entrepreneurship, the Shadow Budget proposes a more favourable tax regime for intellectual property income and making academic excellence the key criterion in supporting basic research. It would reduce ongoing support to many Crown corporations, prepare a slimmed-down Canada Post for a competitive mail market, and create more market discipline for Crown lenders. It would also reduce tariffs, and create a more transparent system for reporting, reviewing and reducing tax expenditures that substitute for formal spending programs. The 2014 Shadow Budget builds on Canada’s relatively good post-crisis performance. It reinforces progress toward surpluses, and so protects Canadians from higher interest rates and reduces the claims of government borrowing on Canadian saving. And it supports economic growth with measures to better deploy Canada’s human capital, promote investment, and stimulate income-boosting innovation. In short, it provides the kind of fiscal leadership Canadians need from their federal government.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it