blueblood

This isn't the same landscape as when harper first got in. If harper gets a minority, it won't be harper being able to bully the liberals into passing legislation. Ignatieff crossed the rubicon on his policy and what he plans on doing in parliament. Its a tory majority or a gong show.

And the status quo was falling corporate tax rates. According to you a tory minority means the govt lasts 30 days until the throne speech where ignatieff votes non confidence with a good chance of the other party's following suit. And we all know what the gong show wants to do with the govt coffers... But let's have another minority and more wasteful games.

Taxpayers are fickle people. Everybody wants something for nothing. Everybody wants rock bottom taxes and govt programs all over the place. This is going on in the usa. In 93 the liberals got in by promising everything, however the bond market said otherwise and cuts had to be made and spending reduced. As a result the economy drastically improved and people's lives improved and the liberals enjoyed power for 13 years. In 93 the economy was in bad shape. Harper got elected on tax cuts, however the economy was booming. Fast forward to today, its debatable whether the economy is good or bad, and there is a choice between low taxes and high spending. in times of hardship for the economy, left leaning candidates run on spending their way to prosperity and keeping quiet on how to pay for it. Unfortunately taxpayers buy it. In good times, people like how things are going and want tax reductions. What taxpayers don't get is that a govt can't spend its way to prosperity, and in doing so causes problems down the road. That's why harper has such a difficult time getting his point across.

Like I said jurisdictions around the world are slashing corporate tax rates. Why would they be doing that? Maybe because they want jobs and an improved economy perhaps? Its the fact that we are in uncertain times that corporate taxes need to be cut so that its easier for those companies to keep spending and providing jobs. Taxpayers are also smart enough to know where their jobs come from. They know that having a good economy gives them a far better quality of life than a tax and spend government nonsense. We have had around twenty years of sound fiscal policy, part of which involves slashing corporate taxes, as a result canada is one of the leading economies on the planet. And as a result of that, business friendly govts get to enjoy power. Layton gets to learn that lesson the hard way. Japans woes are getting blown out of proportion by the media. Yes its a mess, however the economic analysts predict that japan will need commodities and supplies. With the debt needed to pay for that, japan will finally have to enact realistic fiscal policy for the first time in 20 years. Another tory minority will mean another gong show. If you want to see some experiment in parliamentary procedures by the opposition just for the sake of it being legal and a fun idea, then have at it. However this is very risky for the economy because of the bonehead ideas ignatieff and layton have. I like my economy growing at 5.1% in q1. With the tax cuts it has a chance to grow further. Taxpayers also demand a good stable economy, and corporate tax cuts allow for that and personal tax cuts down the road.

Oh please! We have jurisdictions all over the world slashing corporate taxes. England is in worse shape than us and is cutting corporate taxes, obama is wanting to cut corporate taxes. I forget, its either malaysia or indonesia, but one country down there has corporate taxes totalling 20%. With the current tax rates falling, canada's gdp in q1 is expected to grow by 5.1%. We have the economist from the u of c saying that 200 000 jobs are on the line if corporate taxes are raised. Economists have stated that corporate taxes are the worst taxes to have on an economy, even worse than personal income taxes. If your fine with capital going to other jurisdictions instead of here than have at it. As for ireland, they were one of the poorest countries in the western world prior to slashing their taxes. It was because of a housing bubble caused by similar policies and sense of entitlement as the usa. What's even funnier is that when ireland accepted the bailout, they we'ree able to keep their tax rate low at the bane of germany and france. Why do good when you can do better...

That's been my point. Harper has to communicate something very difficult which is a net benefit to canada vs ignatieff who gets to show us a spending scheme that very likely hinders our economy. Harper is hoping that canadians are big picture thinkers, unfortunately for him there might not be enough.

Except they are good for the economy.

Yet the free market has shown to be the best way to exploit it. And ontario won the proximity to the usa and cheap labour lottery. Too bad they cashed in their winnings. Venezuela also won that geological lottery, how's that going for them?

And yet that same free market results in western canada having a labour shortage. Don't worry we'll leave the light on for you.

And if the manufacturing sector had to deal with the same ridiculous threats the oil industry did, they'd be howling at the moon.

Just google what rich people do with their money. They do all sorts of things with it. I couldn't find stuffing money in a wall safe behind a painting. Even putting money in the bank helps out the economy by providing more liquidity to the banks for lending. Stuffing money in a wall safe is the stupidest thing a person can do, our best friend inflation reduces its value and I can't get any returns from money sitting in a wall safe vs putting it in the bank, investments (expansion, stocks, bonds, etc.), or spending on something that gives satisfaction. Companies flush with cash are spending money on investments and mergers and acquisitions. That might mean spending money overseas. If I work less than I do now, the economy takes a small hit. But its all right because somebody will pay my way? I'd be able to survive, but my input dealers lose out on what I could be spending there.

Of course he's going to "screw it up", he's got the gift that keeps on giving in bruce carson and harper has to be the guy saying "no" to spending on education while giving "faceless corporations" "taxpayers money". That's a marketing nightmare! I think harper has to go for a homerun against ignatieff in the leaders debate. Which will be extremely difficult in itself.

Tax and spend for everyone!!! Harper needs to deep six the coalition thing for now, and rip that liberal platform to pieces. The economy is the centrepiece now. Ignatieff has the advantage of being mr. Nice guy and throwing money around. Harper needs to throw in how corporate tax cuts are good for the economy in a quick sound bite.

And the wealthy have fled venezuela which has left that country amounting to a pile of monkey crap. Everywhere else is richer in latin america but venezuela. They cooked the golden goose and are paying for it. Stupid is as stupid does. Rich people pay the bills, its when buffoons like obama, chavez, lenin, castro, and layton think that they should pay more is when there's a big problem. Its also easier for the average person to get by because of rich people putting their money to work in the economy, not by government punishing them with taxes. The USSR was the biggest failure of the 20th century, why do people want to copy such a pathetic system like that?

I'm not the one claiming alien intelligence... If you claim to have alien intelligence, I guess earth has nothing to worry about if the aliens are real/trying to invade us.

This is one of the not seeing the forest for the trees statements when people justify high taxes. This would be an adequate statement if I and others were to have stacks of cash in a vault behind some painting. This does not happen nowadays. People with money put their money to work and in doing so make other people richer. The govt taking 50% of somebody's paycheck and blowing it on consumption spending (which nowadays consists most of govt spending) is proposterous. The economy is taxed as a whole, the govt is going to get paid anyway, its far better for money to be flowing through the economy than straight to the govts coffer for consumption. Govts should look at it that way than pillaging rich people. I don't see what's wrong with a flat tax. Everyone pays their fee for the govt. Rich people still pay more dollars, but have far more dollars in the bank to put to work.

So do they teach economics, commerce, and management on that UFO of yours?

If I have to donate 50% of my wealth, why should I have to work harder than a poor person who has to give up much less?

And you don't think at that point in time, the gong show would have spent all that money? That was the point of the coalition. The money was going to be spent anyway. The great what if is how much the opposition would have spent. If harper would have fallen on his sword at that point in time, it very likely would have taken longer to pay off the deficit if he wereto win an election whenever it would take place, after the coalition agreement expired.

It was either harper spend that money, or the gong show comes in and spend god knows how much money. The train already left the station when the coalition came into being

If anything the tories are using the rope a dope strategy by running a campaign more boring than church while ignatieff is flailing around hoping something will work.

I was emphasizing your point of how much vehicles are insured vs. Population. Lots of farmers have a nice truck, a jalopy truck, one or more dump trucks, semi truck, super b trailer, flat bed goosenecks or semi trailer, cattle trailer, snowmobile trailer, snowmobile, quad, perhaps camper, boat trailer. Its a lot of insurance vs a typical city dweller. Loggers have something like that as well. Since there is a bigger farmer/logger to city person ratio in manitoba than ontario, that helps prove your point.

And it looks like voters gave him a pass and over 40% polling results.

Of course I didn't win, I was referring to the opposition's mentality from 2008 to the present. Its fact that during the 2nd term of mulroney and with martins term as finance minister with manning as his opposition is where the ship got righted.

That same large scale spending program that resulted in the same deficit that the same opposition is wailing that is out of control. Sounds like heads I win tails you lose. That really hurts the oppositions credibility and I think that's reflected in the polls