Moonbox

CBC's bias is well documented and well understood by anyone but the most fervently partisan Liberal. That's why nobody watches CBC news, why nobody listens to CBC radio and why it wouldn't survive without subsidies.

The coalition will not last even if it does go through. The majority of Canadians didn't vote for Harper, you're right, but even fewer voted for a Liberal/NDP coalition. Combined the two parties still have less seats than the CPC. I don't think YOU really understand how parliament works if you think the coalition is going to be stable and if you think the Bloc is not being given extraordinary power if the coalition is allowed to go through. They signed an agreement they wouldn't vote against confidence issues? Is that kind of like how Harper signed to fix election dates? Do you seriously believe that the Bloc isn't going to demand concessions from the coalition? Do you seriously think they would avoid voting against something they felt was bad or (lol) not completely and totally tilted towards Quebec? That agreement is worth about as much as a fart in the wind. I would LOVE to see how strict the courts are with parliamentary agreements. One clue: They're NOT.

Lobbyists and large corporations were where the vast majority of Liberal funding came from. Conservative funding comes largely from individual voters. Since Chretien implemented gag laws basically preventing large businesses from contributing large amounts of money the LPC has gone broke. Hahaha. Go figure.

Zero seats in 3 major cities is a bit more significant than practically zero seats in 4 provinces. The Tories don't do well in the cities because 'cities' are where the vast majority of money towards social programs go. The Liberals and ESPECIALLY the NDP don't typically do well outside these areas because anyone living outside don't receive any benefit from all the money doled out there. News flash: The tories don't campaign on social welfare. The threat is that Quebecquers will continue to spoil parliament by voting Bloc. We'll continue to have regular elections that will cost tax payers billions due to minority governments. The funny part is that this is all going to happen to the detriment of the Liberals. Lucky for you. Gotta make sure those welfare cheques keep coming!

That's a policy that started decades ago. Trudeau championed that cause.

He would have survived and for how long? The opposition is literally frothing in its hatred for Harper. You CANNOT realistically say that they were prepared to cooperate with him, especially given the leaked transcripts where Layton confirmed this coalition had been in the works for months. This situation is 100% about party subsidies and personally I REALLY think they needed to go anyways. We should not be taxed to support spending by parties that can't raise money on their own. Trudeau and Chretien were the champions of election gag laws and they did it specifically to ruin and finish the federal PC's. I doubt you were fussing then. Now the situation is reversed and I'm finding it rather ironic how outraged you are.

That's a really good point Argus. That's why ultimately Harper is probably going to be happy to let this go through. Giving the NDP more legitimacy isn't going to hurt the conservatives AT ALL. It's going to hurt the Liberals and that's about it. On top of that cozying up to the NDP is a fairly big shift to the left for the Liberals. What do you think is going to happen with the small C's who have recently been voting liberal? What do the conservatives have to lose here? They lose parliament I guess, but in dicey times like this who wants to be governing anyways? I'd much prefer to have them running things and not start doling out money to useless corporations, but if they're replaced by the coalition I'll just shake my head and eagerly await the consequences in the next election.

There's little to nothing that's going to 'save' our economy right now. We're in for a crap storm and throwing money into the economy isn't going to fix that. The auto sector has been over capacity for like 15 years now. The jobs being lost there are NOT coming back. Throwing money at them is NOT going to prevent this because you'd just be giving the Big Three more money to lose. I'm really not certain here what people are expecting the government to do. It's sort of a 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' sort of situation. What is a bailout going to do??? It hasn't worked ANYWHERE else.

If the NDP is involved you can bet your ass it will be a big part of the plan.

I don't think any politician would consider himself fortunate to govern in times like these. Generally speaking governments don't get re-elected after recessions. Harper should count himself fortunate that he won't have to take responsibility for a disastrous economy. Whoever inherits this mess is going to pay for it in the next election whether or not they deserve it. If the Liberals/NDP want to throw money at people like the US is doing and watch inflation and taxes rise, so be it. I'm not happy about it but they WILL pay for it. I'm okay with stimulus but not bailouts. If the new coalition is going to invest in municipal and provincial infrastructure (highways, power etc) then I won't complain. If we're going to be throwing money at charities like an over-capacity auto industry, however, then I'll LMAO when Canadians make them pay for it in the decades to come.

Does anyone else find it ironic that the people here who have been criticizing Harper's over-spending are now frothing in excitement at the prospect of a Liberal/NDP coalition that's going to topple his rule because they don't think he's spending enough?? (Hey Jdobbin!) Even up to and leading into October people were furious at his tax cuts and spending increases. Personally, I always felt he was overspending and I've never been hugely impressed. With that said, the opposition has been and still is promising to spend MORE. That's why I've never voted against Harper and that's why I may vote for him again. Jdobbin I'll ask for the THIRD time now how you justify bailout money (and giant deficits because of it) in addition to what's already been spent when previously you were a consistent opponent of bigger budgets leading up to now. METHINKS it may be a little partisanship? For the record, I'm not against running a moderate deficit in times like this. Personally, I was quite fine with the prospect of Conservative deficits this year. I'm not so sure I'm okay with running $15-20 billion deficits a la Trudeau/Mulroney because the worthless big three and their even more useless unions cannot and never will be competitive in their current state.

The Bloc would hold the balance of power. A Liberal/NDP coalition means very little because the CPC controls more seats than both of them combined. Every decision will have to cater to the Bloc because without the Bloc's help no legislation will pass. The Conservatives cooperated with the Bloc in 2006 and the coalition would have to pretty much the same. It's a matter of what considerations are offered to Quebec to decide how happy/unhappy the rest of Canada will be with the arrangement. Quebec is already our biggest welfare province and to allow it to go any further is likely going to alienate the rest of Canada even worse.

Why? What's the alternative?

Non conciliatory and bullying are two VERY different things. What I said was that the conservatives wouldn't call an 'election' any time soon because it would be unpopular to do so. The thought of a coalition hadn't even crossed my mind. I'd rather have the Tories leading us right now. I don't need bailout money, nor does my family. Blue collar needs the money right now. The Liberal/NDP coalition is promising it. I'm not pleased with this but I'm betting they'll pay politically when their bailouts and tax increases are announced. On the other hand, I think whatever party leads during the recession is going to hurt for it in the future. I'm disgusted with the Liberals as they are right now, and if a party is going to sink because of the economy, I'd rather it be Bob Rae, Justin Trudeau and the whole gang. Typical dodge and avoid. The question was what do YOU think about the intended billions about to be thrown in as bailouts/stimulus? The economy has been slowing for over a year now and I've been quite fine with increased spending along the way. Jdobbin you've been opposed to virtually EVERY spending announcement made. I find it hilariously ironic how you think spending billions in extra stimulus (which the conservatives have already been doing somewhat) is all of the sudden okay under the Liberals. This is what makes it really difficult to take your arguments seriously. Now that a Liberal government is on the horizon, are you all of the sudden becoming a champion of Keynesian economics? I won't be surprised, but I do believe it might hurt your credibility. If, on the other hand, you're prepared to be just as critical about Liberal spending, particularly this aid package which is the crux of the whole fiasco, then congratulations, you're on your way to becoming someone we can all take seriously.

Canada is a hard core capitalist country. There are only a few in the world more capitalistic than Canada. I laugh every time people say we're a socialist country. I vomit every time I hear Trudeau's name.

It's getting so so so incredibly old hearing you say that. "Ruthless Bullying" I can't even take you seriously when you say this. Harper didn't bully. He took advantage of a paralyzed and crippled opposition who disagreed with basically everything he said and pushed his party platform forward. That was it. He advanced his agenda because nobody was going to stop him. Why bother cooperating with your political rivals/enemies if you're not required to? Don't bother answering by the way Jdobbin. That was a rhetorical question. Having said that, I'm actually HOPING the Liberals and the NDP get in bed together. They'll make it a three-some with the Bloc. If I was Harper I'd be doing whatever I could to let someone else govern during this economic S**T storm and take the heat for the fat deficit in a few years. What I'd like to know though, particularly from you Jdobbin, is what your position is on a Liberal/NDP coalition that has pretty much indicated they'll start throwing billions worth of hand outs and bailouts to struggling Canadians. Can you justify the spending now once the Liberals are in charge???? /rolls eyes

and the truth shall set us free.

Haha...cited by whom? What policies, pray tell? High taxes? No, the Liberal government was extremely lucky in that it lead a government for 13 years that pretty generally was booming worldwide. The dot com boom busted but that was NOT what was really propelling the economy forwards. Huge real estate markets, record profits for resource and finance companies and unheard of cheap lending were the leading factors in NORTH AMERICA'S 10+ year economic boom. The Liberals benefited from that and were not responsible for it. Now the Conservatives are inheriting what turns out to be an artificially inflated economy. The cheap lending turned out to have a price. The real estate market was over develloped. Financial companies were basically fixing the books and an unsustainable auto industry has finally proven itself unsustainable. Add to that the fact that resource prices, which were sky rocketing due to speculation, are now plummeting and this is why we're about to face deficits. We have yet to see what the 2009 budget is going to be. If Harper lowers spending it would be interesting to see how long it takes for him to be voted out of office.

This whole debate is just silly. Comparing Conservative finances now to Liberal Finances post 1993 is ridiculous. It's like comparing the skill of two skippers on a 24 foot yacht where one captain is sailing in a hurricane and the other is sailing on a bright sunny day. You can't compare. The liberals federally have had the great fortune to have not faced a recession in 25 years and were fortunate enough to be in power during Canada's biggest economic boom in 50 years. I've already said on numerous occasions that I think Harper could really curb his spending. I also think an income tax cut would have been better than a GST tax cut. With that said politics is ALWAYS about comparisons. Right now our country IS a nanny state. WE, as Canadians, have turned our government into a pandering slave to uneducated and ignorant public opinion. We saw what happens when the government announces spending cuts in Quebec. It's worse than raising taxes almost. Aside from that, we DON'T WANT a government right now that's goin to drastically cut spending. It's bad economic policy. A deficit is a good idea right now. We just don't want unsustainable Trudeau/Mulroney style deficits.

Now there's a post full of dazzling intellect. Another person who doesn't understand why the deal was made. The 'bailout' was made to free up liquidity in a cash-starved Canadian economy. The banks weren't in trouble, but if they kept their lending tight to protect themselves then any potential recession is magnified. The banks, Canadians and their government all want to avoid that.

I don't think you understood why Canadian banks are making deals with the government. You've put a hugely negative spin on what the government and the Canadian banks are doing when in reality our banks and government have performed admirably compared to the rest of the world recently. Why should Canadian banks be hurt by worldwide subsidation of foreign financial industries?

You totally missed the point of the article... and you totally don't understand how the deals between our Federal Government and the banks work.

Why Canada's Banks Don't Need Help An interesting article from Time.com If you're too lazy to read basically what's being said is that while Canadian Banks are in no danger of collapse like everywhere else in the world, now that foreign banks are being backed by their governments Canadian Banks are at a huge disadvantage competitively without federal help.

Chrysler is done. There's not a chance in the world it will survive without pretty much a government buyout. GM and Ford are teetering on the brink. Personally, I say good riddance. I'm not against well-paying jobs for Canadians. I think Canada NEEDS these sort of primary manufacturing businesses in order to survive as strong economy. With that said, the Big Three gouged North Americans for decades with garbage cars for terrible prices. They were allowed to do this because there was no competition. Thank god to Toyota and Honda for allowing us an alternative where 30% of the cost of each vehicle DOESN'T go towards overpaying employees and paying benefit/pensions to uneducated and often unskilled workers. GM has something like a $30/hour labour cost disadvantage compared to a Toyota or Honda when benefits and pensions are factored in. Why on earth should we, the consumers, pay that? No wonder we're not buying those cars. Obviously you feel bad for the families getting laid off at the Big Three but only for how stupid they were to go along with the most disastrous and short-sighted union in world history. Message to CAW employees: Your wages and benefits are unsustainable and have been for a good long while. Next time you go to the negotiation table try and be a little more realistic.

not to mention incoming auto-industry bailouts.....