Canadian Blue
-
Posts
2,969 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Canadian Blue
-
-
The Liberals under Paul Martin would have likely avoided a deficit since I doubt they would have cut the GST.
No, they would have just put that money into national childcare and buying off the NDP and banning handguns.
-
I'd be hard pressed to name a Tory in the present government who doesn't seen more ideologically to the right of what we have seen the past. In short, I don't see any Red Tories.
How do you define Red Tory. Are you talking a social conservative/economic nationalist or are we actually talking about someone who's socially liberal/fiscally moderate.
Think I on the side of Canadians who in polling yesterday said they want to avoid a deficit as a priority. What side are you on?I'm on the side that wants to avoid a deficit, unfortunately you can't name me a single political party that realistically wants to avoid deficit. Don't tell me that Stephane Dion would avoid a deficit since this whole coalition has been about proposing a large stimulus for the economy.
Is their a second Reform Party that I should know about?
-
Harper felt it was important to address this push to the right at the convention. I think there is a fairly large segment of the party that no longer wants to creep along incrementally as Flanagan and Harper want.
As far as the criticism of the Liberal party, I think we have seen ample evidence of blue and red Liberals tugging back and forth for decades now. We used to see that with the PCs but there seems to be less of a Red Tory element left.
So you're only supportive of some kind of individual thought as long as it's in the Liberal Party.
By the way you must also be a strong opponent of incrementalism if you oppose any stimulus package and want to avoid a deficit no matter what. That would put you to the right of Stephen Harper and the CPC at the moment.
-
Really? For years discontinuing Trudeau's financial policies was the hallmark of Turner's leadership. What a whopper you've told.
No, I can recognize the problems with protectionist politicians unlike yourself. I believe one of John Turner's campaign promises was to ensure bureaucrats in Ottawa ran the nurseries of the nation.
-
What about the contibutions indians made to modern medicine that your ancestors stole and took all the credit for?
You're the one arguing that we have no culture, perhaps you should tell us why yours is superior. I'm a libertarian so I think ones cultural proclivities should be a personal matter.
-
Adam Smith, John Locke, Voltaire, Lafontaine, General Brock, Champlain, John A. Macdonald, Wilfred Laurier, The Northwest Company, liberal democracy, the printing press, libraries, Julius Ceaser, Plato, capitalism, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Milton Friedman, the North West Mounted Police, Sam Steele, John Thompson, modern medicine, John Molson, Alexander Graham Bell, and Claire Danes.
There's much more, but then again I wouldn't want to fill the entire page.
-
What's left is the survivors of this holocaust and terrorism from the European and UK infestation that history books call immigrants.
Unintentionally spreading disease is not akin to terrorism or a holocaust, if I spread my cold to someone that's hardly an example of terrorism.
IN one breath you say, the indians came across a land bridge in smalll hunting bands now you're saying they were organized socities. What exactly are you saying there Mr Mentally Disturbed, Intergenerational Dork?Couldn't they cross the land bridge and then start organized societies.
Some of those indians fought for your smelly arses feedom in both World Wars--tell that too all the retardeded right wingers in this country.You know, it's always ironic when somebody calls someone 'retarded' and somehow manages to misspell retarded.
By the my relatives were aboriginal war vets. The fought for all you grown men who have the freedom to whine like little babies todayThat's great, but keep in mind that even some of us European's fought in both wars too. Perhaps instead of blaming everyone else for the problems of the reserves you should ask yourself if individual responsibility ever comes into play.
-
Secu-Socialist war on Jesus Christ, Tolerant of all except Christians
When anybody else saw the topic title did they immediately think it would like to a Stephen Colbert video.
-
I generally agree with most of the sentiment that Harper has really turned back on his values as a classical liberal. It seems that I can only look back in fondness in 2006 when one of his first actions was to cut back spending on useless federal government programs and use the entire surplus to pay off debt.
Unfortunately it looks the general consensus around the world is that deficit spending is the only way to combat the recession and we've taken safety in that false consensus. If the $30 billion was to in the form of temporary tax relief then I'd be happier, but it'll likely will be nothing more than a bunch of handouts.
-
I haven't seen a hidden agenda. I do see Tories who attended the Winnipeg convention wanting to move to the right on social and economic policy.
Really, individual Tories have differing views on abortion, I'm shocked. Like I said not everyone engages in groupthink like the Liberal Party of Canada.
Harper won two majorities and showed no real inclination to cut spending. He didn't. He could have done it any budget and the Senate cannot vote down money bills. They can delay, they amend but they cannot defeat the bill. Mulroney stacked the Senate to ensure quick passage of the GST.Mulroney stacked the Senate in the early 90's, not during the 80's when said spending cuts would have taken place.
Any person who thinks Turner would have continued these things is delusional.Probably because John Turner was a strong proponent of an interventionist government and never showed any inclination to discontinue Trudeau's policies.
-
Let me get this straight all of the people who were supportive of the Coalition who wanted to put forward a $30 billion dollar stimulus are now opposed to a $30 billion dollar stimulus package because the CPC is bringing it forward.
Of course we wouldn't have gone into a deficit with Stephane Dion, he was proposing a $40 billion dollar tax hike afterall. Not to mention making strategic cuts [perhaps disbanding another regiment] to the budget.
-
You could run your yourself.
I've considered it, but if all goes well I'll be a mountie somewhere in the boonies where I can hopefully keep myself isolated from the idiocy of politicians. Besides, at my young age I doubt I'd be a viable candidate.
When I heard this on the news I couldn't be this!! What happen to all the money they were BOOSTING about and giving the people back what $400.00??? I guess Conservatives don't believe in SAVINGS for a down turn??Topaz, Goddamnit.
They will be dipping into the savings to avoid the deficit, however in my mind it's still a deficit, and the PC's are still incompetent.
-
I can only hope with an additional 30 seats going to Ontario, Alberta, and BC, fewer and fewer politicians will continue this experiment in sado-masochism.
Quite frankly Quebec will never separate, not necessarily because they love Canada, but because the province has unfortunately become completely dependent on the rest of Canada economically.
-
I think you can trust that the Liberals will move to occupy the center. The question is whether Harper will move farther to the right.
Hold on, if you're preaching a balanced budget at any cost won't the mean the Tories need to move right.
Or are you talking about Stephen Harpers hidden agenda to turn Canada into 1950's Alabama... or is this the hidden agenda where Stephen Harper puts soldiers in our cities, with guns, in Canada!!!
-
I supported free trade but was against his overspending that entire time he was in office. I believed Turner would have been far better at that then he ever was. Moreover, I don't think Turner would have opened the constituent.
The Tory supporters who are trying to revive Mulroney should know that few people believe we are better off because of him. Most believe we are better off because he left. He split the country, raised taxes and destroyed his party.
Most people also think we're far better off because of Trudeau despite the fact he left this country in more debt then any PM, raised taxes, split the country, as well as took away civil liberties in the early 70's. Just because most people are more enamoured with charisma than actual policies doesn't make a man great.
You're still negating the fact that both the GST and NAFTA were essential in helping to provide a stronger economic recovery, as for the stacked senate, it happened in 1991 right when the battle over the GST was coming into play. That had occured during the recession, not before it.
Any person who thinks that a continuation of the National Energy Program, protectionism, ownership of 63 crown corporations, and the creation of 'make work programs' would have led to a stronger economy and balanced budget is a victim of false hope.
-
Dion lost. Now it is time to grow up and acknowledge that Harper put the country into deficit, not Dion.
I fully acknowledge that Harper put the country into deficit, what I'm questioning is why you're stating that a party which was going to increase taxation by $40 billion and introduce largescale national social programs was going to keep us out of deficit and promote a strong economy.
I voted for a party with Michael Ignatieff, John McCallum and Gerard Kennedy who I had a lot more faith in to avoid a deficit.Problem with the Liberals is that they've veered far to the left. Depending on what Ignatieff does, the LPC could instead become just an NDP lite, if they do the party of Paul Martin, John Manley, and Frank McKenna, is dead.
-
I think it is ridiculous to think that Turner would have continued policies that you describe. He probably would have saved us billions in better budgets, better fiscal management and avoided constitutional crisis after crisis.
The boom during the Reagan years led to a boom in Canada as well. If Mulroney had controlled spending and avoided opening the Constitution, the deficit could have ended in the early 1990s.
The worldwide recession happened in the early 90's jdobbin, the same time that the Liberal Party was opposing NAFTA and changes to the GST. The fact that most spending cuts were opposed by the Liberal dominated Senate doesn't even seem to come up on the radar.
Have you ever wondered why people call you hyper-partisan. This is the reason why because you argue that if we had elected a protectionist government which wanted to create 'make work programs' in 1988 our country would have been far better off today.
-
Harper's increases to the arts have been greater than what the Liberals had proposed in previous elections. If you don't like crappy art or the CBC, speak to Harper.
I'm talking about the recent election where the Liberals promised to do far more because "arts is fun." Whether you like it or not the big difference between the Liberals and Conservatives is that at the very least the CPC wasn't going to put in place a large bureaucracy like National Daycare, it was more or less the choice between the lesser of two evils, in the last election the lesser of two evils was Harper.
I think we could have been in so good shape as to not go into deficit.Only if we had implemented your parties $40 billion dollar tax on the economy.
So if you are so against a deficit you must have not voted for the Liberal Party with Stephane Dion, Bob Rae, and Ujhal Dosanjh, each of whom has been associated with fiscal prudence.
-
Mulroney had a booming economy by the end and didn't cut spending. His priority was making himself a legend by getting Quebec into the constitution. Our economy could have done even better if he had let the issue rest. He just couldn't do that though.
He raised taxes 19 times and didn't cut spending even when he had control of the Senate.
Mulroney privatized 23 crown corporations, ended the National Energy Program, brought forward NAFTA which was vehemently opposed by the Liberals in 1988, and put in place the GST to replace the MST. I will fault him on his big spending ways, but to say that a continuation of Liberal Party policies during the 80's and early 90's would have been a better alternative is ridiculous.
As well to argue that the worldwide recession of the early 90's wouldn't affect the budget deficit is just as absurd, that's not an example of a booming economy. Kim Campbell proved to be correct in the election when she stated the budget deficit wouldn't be erased until the late 90's, and yet their were good things that came about due to the reign of Mulroney jdobbin.
-
I am saying that Harper will go into deficit four years in a row according to this own words before they spend one penny on stimulus.
Probably because that's what most economists have forecasted, and most will still note that Canada is still in the best shape economically compared to most other western nations.
I think Turner would have been better on spending.Only because the Liberal Senate would have actually supported spending cuts. However I'm gratified to see that you would have opposed free trade in 1988.
Liberals decreased taxes under Martin.Yes, in 2000, right before the election, when the opposition was running on a platform of steep cuts in taxation.
Jdobbin if even the Liberals aren't good on spending as you seem to now admit, and should have known based on the platform given to Canadian's by Dion which included steep increases for crappy art. Then which party would actually support in an election, would be behind a new Reform Party?
-
I am opposed to any fiscal stimulus that doesn't attempt to put a lid on other spending.
I will shout at any party who puts Canada into deficit.
So are you now saying that you'll oppose the Liberals who are touting deficit spending at this time to help bring about an economic stimulus package?
-
The present deficit has nothing to do with the stimulus package on the table now.
So a stimulus package will not incur a deficit, or for that matter the GST cut which is now being implemented in the UK as well, will do nothing to help the economy.
Which is why Harper stacked the Senate. But did he cut spending? No. He opened the Constitution. Twice.Are you talking about Mulroney or Harper. As was stated before the Liberal dominated Senate was attempting to halt many of Mulroney's initiatives including the GST and NAFTA. Both of those planks likely helped Canada's fiscal situation.
In the end I think even you could agree that Mulroney was a better pick in 1988 than John Turner who wanted to put us back into the same mindset as the 1970's.
Liberals did continue Tory policies. Too bad Tories didn't continue Liberal policies of keeping a lid on spending.Oh I agree with you that the Tories should have kept a lid on spending, and I applauded the cuts they made when they first got into office. However the Liberal Party wasn't going to keep a lid on spending, the only difference was that while the Tories increased spending on border security, the military, law enforcement, and GST cuts, the Liberals wanted to instead direct more spending towards Young People Fucking, taking over the nurseries of the nation, and implementing a large carbon tax.
Seems to me that it was the Liberals who had the sense to cut income taxes while Harper cut the GST.You mean increasing taxes by $15 billion and giving us a couple of trinkets worth approximately $10 billion and spending the rest on building state owned nurseries and funding Tal Bachmann's trip to Africa?
-
Instead we have Flaherty, a sound financial master about to let the Canadian economy go into deficit.
jdobbin, are you now opposed to any stimulus plan which both the Liberals and New Democrats are touting, and one which will more than likely get the support of both the Tories and the Liberals at the end of January?
Or will you oppose any stimulus plan because you don't want the country to go into deficit?
-
The budget officer said it was Tory spending and tax cuts that put on into deficit territory.
Odd isn't it that the British Labour government had put in similar tax cuts as the Tories to help provide a stimulus for the economy, no?
Mulroney did not decrease spending. It was still way above the increase in population and the rate of inflation. Harper increased revenues. That is it.Weird, I could have sworn that the Liberal controlled Senate at the time was doing everything to stop cuts in spending. This of course included attempts to halt progress on free trade.
Other countries went back into deficit long before Canada. Fiscal discipline was the hallmark of most of the Liberals years in government.Fiscal discipline, eh. You mean essentially continuing most of the Tories policies such as NAFTA and the GST. As well the fact our country was one of the last to go into deficit with the Tories at the helm is hardly something to balk at.
By the way it's also good to note that the Liberal bretheren in Ontario have consistently been opposed to giving an economic stimulus in the form of a corporate taxcut, something which both federal and provincial Liberals are vehemently opposed to. Perhaps you should reconsider your argument that Liberals are always known for fiscal discipline as they don't seem to have a lick of common sense when it comes to taxation.
George W. Bush = Harry S. Truman?
in Federal Politics in the United States
Posted
This discussion is useless, now that Obama is becoming President the world is perfect. All the children of the world will join hands and sing Kumbaya in unison, we will all love one another and practice free love. The age of Bush is over, and we will now bow down to the second coming of the Messiah. Even celebrities are now stating that they will no longer let their children lick electrical sockets since Obama became President.
or....
We will wake up six months from now and realize how stupid we were to think that a charismatic politician can solve all of our problems and be proof of inspiration.