FROM 1983 to 2008 (Including 2008)
IN THIS 26 YEAR PERIOD,
WE PAID IN canada
INTEREST CHARGE(S)
ON THE FEDERAL (NATIONAL) DEBT
just under 1 trillion loonies

ACCORDING TO THE
CANADIAN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
(Table 1. Fiscal transactions)
961.2 BILLION DOLLARS.

THESE DOLLARS DID NOT GO TO
HELPING SOCIAL PROGRAMS OR
IN REDUCING OUR TAX BURDENS
OR FOR ANY INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

SOURCES:

http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2009/frt0901-eng.asp

http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2008/frt08_1-eng.asp

http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2007/frt07_1-eng.asp

http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2006/frt06_1-eng.asp#fedgov

That's not quite the full story, one under god.

>>THESE DOLLARS DID NOT GO TO
HELPING SOCIAL PROGRAMS OR
IN REDUCING OUR TAX BURDENS
OR FOR ANY INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS<<

What is missing from this equation is the destination of the money that was borrowed in the first place. If it turns out that all of it was spent on the pay and perks of pollies and public servants, than yes, it's a scandal.

But if the borrowed money was spent on good deeds, clearly it had been necessary to borrow the money in the first place. Otherwise, widows and orphans would have starved, public transport would have come to a standstill etc. etc.

If you wanted to perform those good deeds without incurring debt, the only alternative would have been to increase the tax burden. So the complaint that repayments on those borrowings do not now permit the burden to be decreased is simply the other side of the coin: an increase had been previously avoided.

By focussing on the interest payments, you fail to acknowledge the benefits, the social programmes and infrastructure projects etc., created by the original amount borrowed.

It's the reason money gets borrowed in the first place. To do stuff.