blueblood

If there was an ndp tory coalition. The libs would be in serious trouble. Having the ndp govern in a fiscally responsible govt (somewhat) would give the ndp credibility it needs. Harper would be toast at the leadership review. It would be interesting, but a do nothing govt. No tax reductions, no outrageous spending. The stipulations of the coalition agreement would be interesting as well. Any ndp grunt with half a brain would love a situation like that.

Wasn't he a free press journalist? The only thing I don't like is that he's old. I think this would have been the perfect riding to stick in a young cpc candidate and give him/her some time to become a good mp.

Like this job creation? http://www.statcan.gc.ca/subjects-sujets/labour-travail/lfs-epa/lfs-epa-eng.htm Coincidence? Seems like the unemployment numbers getting whittled away to me. I will give you that the rate is slower than most people would like. It could be worse, you could live in the usa or england.

Here's what some experts have to say http://money.canoe.ca/money/business/canada/archives/2010/12/20101230-123731.html What is with the liberals and "good enough" attitude? What's wrong with being the best? What is wrong with having the best environment in the world to do business? And what is wrong with shareholders getting more money? Who are shareholders? There are a great many deal of canadians who are shareholders and who are putting their money in harm's way in order to get a return on investment so they don't have to rely on the cpp for their retirement. Businesses exist in order to make money, not provide jobs. Businesses only offer jobs if it will help them make more money. What low corporate taxes do is lower a company's expenses so that it is easier to grow and thus create jobs. Corporate tax policy for the last decade was to slash taxes consistently, as a result we have the best growth in the g7 right now, we weathered the economic crisis far better than the developed world. Why are other countries slashing corporate taxes? Why is ontario finally starting to get around to slashing corporate taxes? Perhaps because it is proven to be beneficial for the economy and the most efficient way to spur job creation.

I agree. Its a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch. Ignatieff's policies are bad enough, no need for this nonsense.

Same goes for the liberals taking ideas from ol' preston manning and the reform party during the 90s

That must have been part of that green shift proposal in 2008. That would have had to have been put in or there could have been problems. I don't know how it would work out politically with all that revenue from the carbon tax. I don't buy the libs would have popped in the tax reductions in other areas with this system in place. I think they would have kept spending more, keeping in the trend line with the minority govt since 2004. There was just so much spending going on, and we have to look at who's running the liberal party.

Lots don't support the taxing the trusts, but lots understand why. I think it was a straight up political and govt revenue issue. The cpc in a minority govt has been spending a lot of money, which sucks but given the situation understandable (ie pass legislation, buy votes). A lot of companies were going to convert to trusts, and the govt/bureaucrats had a fit with the potential loss of revenue to fund all this spending. Had the tories kept the status quo, that likely would have put the opposition into a tizzy, and a potential election could have occurred with this as an issue, which I don't think the tories could have won on (some paying no tax vs. Most paying tax). The cpc gets a pass because of what we have for alternatives. Martin had resigned as leader, and who knows what leader the libs would have stuck in, and the ndp which no pro business person would touch with a forty ft pole. Its a price to pay to keep a somewhat business friendly govt in power.

C'mon man!!! What does it matter if the trickle down affects third world countries? That means they have money to buy our stuff. The days of working as a factory worker being the ticket to prosperity are over. There is lots of work out west, thus being a choice; do you want money or don't you? The only way manufacturing will occur in canada on a 1990s scale is when the cost of production out in china exceeds it in canada, and that won't happen for quite sometime. Its simple economics, it doesn't make sense when a country is efficient at resource production and trying to do manufacturing, while another country is efficient at manufacturing and inefficient at resource production. Why not trade? There is a world outside of ontario, and we here in the west had to quickly realize that or we'd be in the poorhouse! The trickle down effect is making the world and canada a richer place. It just isn't at the pace that some people want.

Yet its not as stupid as the opposition thinks the canadians are. Who would have thought that a politician would make election promises contingent on the books being in order? Do the left think that companies are going to continue operating the way they are today with higher taxes and thus higher expenses?

The rate is down, however there is a rise in population, so there are a fair amt of crimes occuring. Jails are needed to house those criminals and then there's the fact that the jails are currently overcrowded. A stat I'd like to know is a ratio of convictions vs space in prison. The rate is redundant if those who are convicted get chinsy sentances because of low prison space and/or funding isues.

If I said it once, I've said it a thousand times. Jails are overcrowded and with the rise in population, that means there is still a substancial amt of people committing crimes. I'm not sure if the crime rate takes that into account. Then there's the fact that canada has an aging population and some people maybe feel too old to commit crime.

Depends on circumstances. If we're in the middle of a war or economic turmoil, I'd want the war to end and the turmoil to be fixed first, then start with the nitpicking. A pretty responsible way of going about things. Would you risk economic ruin or national security in a war situation for the sake of parliamentary privelege? I answered yours, your turn.

Don't fret, you can thank the bond vigilantes for that!

Acting responsible would be not opposing every little thing with vitriol just for the sake of opposing and trying to greedily get power just because the tories have it. For example passing the accountability act, the quebec nation in a nation, apology to first nations about residential schools, harper supporting the liberals on the afghan mission. That kind of responsible. Unfortunately we have the opposition in the middle of a financial crisis wanting to cause all sorts if instability and force all kinds of bad policy that does not work and only makes things worse. Had all this been going on when it wasn't a financial crisis, it wouldn't be so bad.

You are 100% right about the rules, that's how it is. However, I and enough canadians to award the tories the most seats of any party in the house (so far) are seeing a completely irresponsible opposition more concerned with obtaining power than running the country. Had the opposition acted in a way that is more responsible (note that is subjective), I would in fact be outraged with you!! As for managing the economy, the tory policy of slashing corporate taxes that they bullied graham/dion into voting for have resulted in canada leading the g7 in the economy. Thank goodness for the economy graham/dion was opposition leader at that time and not ignatieff. Had the opposition been "strong" then (by strong I mean irresponsible) as it is now, our economy would not be in as good as shape as it is now.

Your metrics for pissing on democracy are different than mine. Unless harper does something outrageous, the little shenanigans going on in parliament don't bother a lot of canadians. You have to remember the kind of opposition we have here, and unfortunately for you a large amt of canadians are giving harper a pass. I don't think you personally should vote tory. In your metrics, the tories are not playing nice in the westminster parliamentary system. If that's a bigger issue to you than the economy, don't vote tory. The main ballot question imo is: is the economy more important than westminster nitpicking? Canadians will decide that on election day.

I know the prorogue option is off the table. I wanted to hear it from you. Now we're at the problem with where we're at based upon your post. The opposition the last time around didn't read harper's budget and voted it down immediately. What's to stop them from doing the same if harper wins another minority? If you had a good shot at being the pm would you pass the budget? I wouldn't! I don't know about you but I take the economy very seriously and so do many canadians. What the gong show is proposing is not good for the economy, and with the current parliamentary environment, the gong show gets in if a minority govt gets elected.

Parliament had the same atmosphere in 2005 as it did in late 2010-2011. In other words the govt was going out on a rail. If harper wins a minority, what's stopping the opposition from exercising parliamentary manoeuvers to put themselves in the captain's seat? And we all know what will happen if tax and spend parties get their hand on the spigot in a minority situation... There is no free pass for harper this time around, the opposition has made it quite clear harper has to go. Do you think the gg will let harper prorogue for a third time?

And this is why a minority govt would be a bad idea right now. Instability anyone?

Hearing trump's ideas to boost the economy, he'd sound like a democrat. Protectionism for everybody!!!

Time to focus on a current issue in usa politics. http://m.cnn.com/primary/_1Rg1qz-igMJFgRsba My question is are the republicans willing to fall on the electoral sword in order to put the country's finances back in order?

Mulroney had to deal with very high interest payments to bondholders. As with petro-can, the asset had to be sold in order for funding to pay off trudeau's debt. Its far more efficient for the fed gov to collect taxes from the company than try and run it themselves.

Why? People putting stuff online is public domain. If you want to post stuff online with your name on it, be ready to deal with the consequences. There's a difference b/w a wire tap and doing a google/facebook search.

To the op: Who cares?