Is Stephen Harper the only federal leader to have held a real job?

[Argus]

I was just thinking about it last night. I know that Dion never left the campus until he ran for politics. Jack Layton, I believe, similarly never left a college campus before running for office. I don't think he ever held a real job either. Elizabeth May was born to well-off parents, went to law school, and has been an activist/protestor/gadfly for leftist causes ever since. I don't know about Duceppe.

I think Harper may be the only guy who ever rode a bus to work at a job he didn't like in order to earn a paycheque.

Maybe that gives him a different perspective than the rest.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Argus

[guyser]

Talk about elitist.

They all had jobs.

[Barts]

I was just thinking about it last night. I know that Dion never left the campus until he ran for politics. Jack Layton, I believe, similarly never left a college campus before running for office. I don't think he ever held a real job either. Elizabeth May was born to well-off parents, went to law school, and has been an activist/protestor/gadfly for leftist causes ever since. I don't know about Duceppe.

I think Harper may be the only guy who ever rode a bus to work at a job he didn't like in order to earn a paycheque.

Maybe that gives him a different perspective than the rest.

Don't be an ass. University professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, municipal counselor, non-profit organization director are all "real jobs." This Right Wing canard about "real jobs" is just plain silly. BTW, Stephen Harper was once the President of the extreme right wing National Citizens Coalition, a non-profit advocacy group like May's Sierra Club of Canada, and I consider the work he did there a real job, too.

You know sometimes Right Wing-nuts say some really dumb things.

[Moonbox]

Yeah Argus I can't really back you up on that one. University professor can sometimes be a wishy-washy job but it IS a job nonetheless and some of them work pretty hard. I support Harper too but I don't think this is a very strong point.

You could maybe say that Dion is an out of touch academic and Layton is a proven social assistance cheat (which he really truly is) but they all worked for a living.

[independent]

Yeah Argus I can't really back you up on that one. University professor can sometimes be a wishy-washy job but it IS a job nonetheless and some of them work pretty hard. I support Harper too but I don't think this is a very strong point.

You could maybe say that Dion is an out of touch academic and Layton is a proven social assistance cheat (which he really truly is) but they all worked for a living.

Are you suggesting that someone with Harpers background is more in touch? Layton social assistance cheat?(link please)

[Argus]

Don't be an ass. University professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, municipal counselor, non-profit organization director are all "real jobs." This Right Wing canard about "real jobs" is just plain silly.

Aside from Harper, none of them, so far as I know, ever had to cope with a crappy job, or crappy pay. They never had to worry about how to pay the bills. They never had to learn the difference between what they'd like to pay for, and what they HAD to pay for. And I think it shows in their politics. They honestly never learned the difference. They went to school, and never left. Twenty years later they ran for some political office.

You might consider a university professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, etc. as real jobs, but most people don't. Real jobs are jobs you do because you have to, and where you have a boss breathing down your neck, not one where you are protected from being fired no matter what you do, including being an incompetent idiot.

How do you understand the needs of common, ordinary people when you've never been one? When you've never worked in a mail room or on a factory floor, or on a fishing boat or in a tiny cubicle? How do you understand the reality of economics, from the perspective of what happens to the little guy in recession, when you've never BEEN the little guy, when you've never had to worry much about money. What' a university professor make? Close to $100,000, right? And his wife was one too, I believe. So family income for the Laytons and Dions somewhere between $150,000 - $250,000 most of their lives after college.

Perhaps I begin to see, now, why the prospect of adding taxes to the fuel people need to heat their homes doesn't seem to be much of a deal to Jack and Stephan. I mean, heating costs are nothing big, right? They're less than the cost of golf club membership. Besides, winter time is when they take long trips south to enjoy the sun. I doubt either could imagine not being able to afford to do that.

[guyser]

The question is why do you hate Harper so much Argus?

Aside from Harper, none of them, so far as I know, ever had to cope with a crappy job, or crappy pay. They never had to worry about how to pay the bills.

Oh please save us the "poor Harper" routine.

Look, I know where Harper grew up. I lived in the exact same neighbourhood as he did. The divinding line for highschools was the pool a block away. So he went to Richview Coll....aptly named I might add.

He lived on Princess Anne. Nobody , and I repeat, nobody living in my neighbourhood suffered. His dad was an accountant at Imperial Oil.

Yeah...their struggles would be along the likes of ....umm Prime Rib or Strip Loin son?

From there he moved west, and worked for Imp Oil in the mailroom. How he got that job I have no idea.

He was an MP from 93 to 97. So, according to your criteria he didnt work.

Then he worked for the NCC, according to your criteria he didnt work.

The in 02 he became CA leader, according to you he didnt work.

Shall I go on?

Since I find this so funny it bears repeating...

You might consider a university professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, etc. as real jobs, but most people don't

Why do you hate Harper so much?

[CANADIEN]

Aside from Harper, none of them, so far as I know, ever had to cope with a crappy job, or crappy pay. They never had to worry about how to pay the bills. They never had to learn the difference between what they'd like to pay for, and what they HAD to pay for. And I think it shows in their politics. They honestly never learned the difference. They went to school, and never left. Twenty years later they ran for some political office.

You might consider a university professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, etc. as real jobs, but most people don't. Real jobs are jobs you do because you have to, and where you have a boss breathing down your neck, not one where you are protected from being fired no matter what you do, including being an incompetent idiot.

How do you understand the needs of common, ordinary people when you've never been one? When you've never worked in a mail room or on a factory floor, or on a fishing boat or in a tiny cubicle? How do you understand the reality of economics, from the perspective of what happens to the little guy in recession, when you've never BEEN the little guy, when you've never had to worry much about money. What' a university professor make? Close to $100,000, right? And his wife was one too, I believe. So family income for the Laytons and Dions somewhere between $150,000 - $250,000 most of their lives after college.

Perhaps I begin to see, now, why the prospect of adding taxes to the fuel people need to heat their homes doesn't seem to be much of a deal to Jack and Stephan. I mean, heating costs are nothing big, right? They're less than the cost of golf club membership. Besides, winter time is when they take long trips south to enjoy the sun. I doubt either could imagine not being able to afford to do that.

And I thought making loads of money was your definition of success. Whatever.

[Argus]

He lived on Princess Anne. Nobody , and I repeat, nobody living in my neighbourhood suffered. His dad was an accountant at Imperial Oil.

Yeah...their struggles would be along the likes of ....umm Prime Rib or Strip Loin son?

Pay attention. I didn't say he grew up in poverty. I said he, at least, has held real jobs. Compared to Layton and Dion, who went to university and stayed for twenty years in liberal arts programs.

From there he moved west, and worked for Imp Oil in the mailroom. How he got that job I have no idea.

He was an MP from 93 to 97. So, according to your criteria he didnt work.

Again, I said nothing of the sort. Yes, he worked in the mail room, then did some other work culminating in working for their IT group. But that, at least, is a real job, working for an employer that doesn't gift you with a six figure salary. Harper, in other words, had to try and get by on a small salary. Not something any of the other leaders have EVER had any experience with.

When you don't have a lot of money you come to recognize that there are things you need and things you want. I don't think Dion, Layton or May ever had to learn that lesson. None of them have ever worked for an employer in the normal sense.

[Oleg Bach]

Pay attention. I didn't say he grew up in poverty. I said he, at least, has held real jobs. Compared to Layton and Dion, who went to university and stayed for twenty years in liberal arts programs.

Again, I said nothing of the sort. Yes, he worked in the mail room, then did some other work culminating in working for their IT group. But that, at least, is a real job, working for an employer that doesn't gift you with a six figure salary. Harper, in other words, had to try and get by on a small salary. Not something any of the other leaders have EVER had any experience with.

When you don't have a lot of money you come to recognize that there are things you need and things you want. I don't think Dion, Layton or May ever had to learn that lesson. None of them have ever worked for an employer in the normal sense.

So you are saying that they are un-deployable because the are un-employable? Layton only answers to bureaucrats - he fulfills the criterium much like baking a cake - certain ingredients go in and it is predictable what the out come will be. He's a systems man like all socialists are..the fact that he lived in subsidized housing with fat ladies stoned on valium that rode about in expensive scooters shows that he is just plain silly - a type of half baked idealizm...ideals that are proven to fail - Trotskyism - Leninism...where are they now?

[Slim MacSquinty]

Layton social assistance cheat?(link please)

I was unable to find a link only lots of other posts on other forums, I do remember the incident, it was reported that Layton and his wife Olivia Chow, often referred to as champaigne socialists, had a combined income of somewhere around $120K and were living in subsidized housing saving themselves hundreds of dollars a month in rent at tax payer expense.

To the point of the thread, both layton and dion had fairly privledged upbringings, hence they could indulge themselves in academic pursuits furthering their elitist images. harper on the other hand was much more middle class in terms of his upbringing.

[CANADIEN]

If Stéphane Dion and Jack Layton were neo-conservative politicians, neo-conservatives would portrait their family affluence and their own past academic career as a ggood thing. Being born i a rich family is always a good thing to neo-conservatives, unless the person "fails" to adopt neo-conservative ideas.

[Moonbox]

Are you suggesting that someone with Harpers background is more in touch? Layton social assistance cheat?(link please)

Jack Layton was a city councillor in Toronto in 1985 and on for awhile. From 1988 - march 1990 he lived in a $800/month three bedroom subsidized apartment. By 1990 he and his wife had a combined income was $120,000. It took 2.5 years almost for him to start paying even REASONABLE rent given his income. He's a snake, a cheat and a completely unscrupulous liar.

It was a Toronto Star article YEARS ago but it was a disgusting abuse of the system.

I'll give you a wikipedia link and you can look it up from there because I'm going to bed right now and don't feel like searching.

Layton and Subsidized Housing - Hahahaha

[August1991]

I was just thinking about it last night. I know that Dion never left the campus until he ran for politics. Jack Layton, I believe, similarly never left a college campus before running for office. I don't think he ever held a real job either. Elizabeth May was born to well-off parents, went to law school, and has been an activist/protestor/gadfly for leftist causes ever since. I don't know about Duceppe.

I think Harper may be the only guy who ever rode a bus to work at a job he didn't like in order to earn a paycheque.

Maybe that gives him a different perspective than the rest.

I don't think any of them, in the old phrase, ever had to meet a payroll.

The staff of Layton and Dion were paid through government taxes. Harper and May arguably had to meet payrolls through donations.

As to riding a bus, Duceppe was a hospital orderly - in his Marxist "I'm the son of a famous actor but I want to be an ordinary worker " phase.

Real job? None of the five around the table in these debates were entrepreneurs.

----

But Argus, if this is the route you want to take, think of Churchill. He never had a real job, and never met a payroll. He was a rich guy born into privilege. And partly because of this, early on, he saw Hitler for what he was.

Good leaders come from all backgrounds. But IMV, a loving/demanding mother makes a critical difference in the success of a child. That's how I tried to educate my children.

Edited October 3, 2008 by August1991

[marksman]

Aside from Harper, none of them, so far as I know, ever had to cope with a crappy job, or crappy pay. They never had to worry about how to pay the bills. They never had to learn the difference between what they'd like to pay for, and what they HAD to pay for. And I think it shows in their politics. They honestly never learned the difference. They went to school, and never left. Twenty years later they ran for some political office.

You might consider a university professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, etc. as real jobs, but most people don't. Real jobs are jobs you do because you have to, and where you have a boss breathing down your neck, not one where you are protected from being fired no matter what you do, including being an incompetent idiot.

How do you understand the needs of common, ordinary people when you've never been one? When you've never worked in a mail room or on a factory floor, or on a fishing boat or in a tiny cubicle? How do you understand the reality of economics, from the perspective of what happens to the little guy in recession, when you've never BEEN the little guy, when you've never had to worry much about money. What' a university professor make? Close to $100,000, right? And his wife was one too, I believe. So family income for the Laytons and Dions somewhere between $150,000 - $250,000 most of their lives after college.

Perhaps I begin to see, now, why the prospect of adding taxes to the fuel people need to heat their homes doesn't seem to be much of a deal to Jack and Stephan. I mean, heating costs are nothing big, right? They're less than the cost of golf club membership. Besides, winter time is when they take long trips south to enjoy the sun. I doubt either could imagine not being able to afford to do that.

So you're arguing that people who're successful should be looked down at? University professor cabinet minister and lawyer are all real jobs. You don't think lawyers have bosses or can be fired? Does running a small business count as a real job since there's no boss?

Maybe you're right how can someone understand the needs of someone else without being in the same situation. Using that "logic" Harper shouldn't be PM.

He doesn't understand the needs of women because he's never been a woman.

He doesn't understand what the military needs because he's never been in the military.

He can't understand about veterans or being a senior citizen or being from Quebec or Newfoundland.

He doesn't understand what it takes to be a single parent.

He can't understand how to deal with youth crime in the 21st century because he isn't a teenager right now.

Your views about what counts as a real job are as warped as people who think all blue collar workers should be looked down on as stupid and lazy.

Working outside of politics or academia for about 3 years almost 30 years ago doesn't turn someone into the common Canadian.

[Moonbox]

Your views about what counts as a real job are as warped as people who think all blue collar workers should be looked down on as stupid and lazy.

Working outside of politics or academia for about 3 years almost 30 years ago doesn't turn someone into the common Canadian.

My thoughts exactly. Again, I will likely be voting for Harper, but I think you're REALLY stretching this whole 'real job' thing.

[independent]

My thoughts exactly. Again, I will likely be voting for Harper, but I think you're REALLY stretching this whole 'real job' thing.

I read the posts in the last 9 hours or so And found little worth commenting about. There is a lot of stretching going on. Moonbox if you vote for Harper it will be for reasons that make sense. Some of the other poster seem too be living in a fantasy world but more than likely just trolling. Best Wishes hope you make the right choice.

[guyser]

And I thought making loads of money was your definition of success. Whatever.

Dont worry, the definition he wants to use will change with the winds. Once shown to be silly, it changes from real job to taking a bus to a real job or some other non starter. Apparently if you make great money it means you never have had a real job. But if you work in daddy's company for a couple of years and ride a bus , well that means you are a hero to the common man.

Wanna bet the poster drives a car? Maybe he should get a real job.

Good lord, I hope Stephane or Elizabeth didnt take the bus to campus because that would make them "employed" or some such nonsense.

The fact that Harper has been on the public tit for the last 15 or so years is moot.

Cue angry in 5 4 3 2......

[Argus]

But Argus, if this is the route you want to take, think of Churchill. He never had a real job, and never met a payroll. He was a rich guy born into privilege. And partly because of this, early on, he saw Hitler for what he was.

I don't think Churchill ever wrapped himself in the flag of the common man and spent every opportunity trying to pretend his opponent was the tool of big business and the rich.

[Argus]

So you're arguing that people who're successful should be looked down at? University professor cabinet minister and lawyer are all real jobs. You don't think lawyers have bosses or can be fired?

I'm not saying they should be looked down on. I'm saying that they are hardly representative of the common man, and have nothing in their collective pasts which gives any indication they ever shared the kinds of economic concerns and realities the rest of us experience daily. What we have are three pampered, ivory tower elitists trying to pretend they're the representatives of the common man and Harper, the only guy who ever had a sort of lunchbucket job, is an elitist representative of the rich. That strikes me as entirely too hypocritical to pass without remark.

[Topaz]

Harper's bio says that that he graduated high school in TO. 1978 and then he to the U of T for 2 months when he quit and went out west to Edmonton were he worked at Imperial Oil in the mail room and then went to work on the company's computer systems. He took up post-secondary studies at the U of Calgary got his Bachelor's degree in economics, then on to his Master's degree in 1993 when he was also married. Seems like he was going to school the greater part of the 1980's.

[guyser]

Harper's bio says that that he graduated high school in TO. 1978 and then he to the U of T for 2 months when he quit and went out west to Edmonton were he worked at Imperial Oil in the mail room and then went to work on the company's computer systems. He took up post-secondary studies at the U of Calgary got his Bachelor's degree in economics, then on to his Master's degree in 1993 when he was also married. Seems like he was going to school the greater part of the 1980's.

But you dont get it.

Being a student (one who pays to go to Univ) is having a job, but being a Professor, or Asst Prof (one who gets paid) is not having a job.

It should all make sense now, other than the fact it doesnt.

Not to mention that they all probably had summer jobs, and worked thru Univ.

Keep up.

[marksman]

I'm not saying they should be looked down on. I'm saying that they are hardly representative of the common man, and have nothing in their collective pasts which gives any indication they ever shared the kinds of economic concerns and realities the rest of us experience daily. What we have are three pampered, ivory tower elitists trying to pretend they're the representatives of the common man and Harper, the only guy who ever had a sort of lunchbucket job, is an elitist representative of the rich. That strikes me as entirely too hypocritical to pass without remark.

Your 1st posts had nothing to do with hypocrisy. They were all about how Harper is the only 1 in touch with common ordinary people. Your basis for this claim was that he worked for about 3 years almost 30 years ago. The only reason this even counts is because you've used your own highly selective criteria to dismiss the jobs held by his opponents. You haven't said directly they should be looked down on but that's the bottom line. You're saying their policies can't possibly take into account the common man because they're all ivory tower elitists who don't know the meaning of a buck. Harper is no different than the others when it comes to his experience as the common Canadian.

Somehow I doubt you're concerned with hypocrisy. If you were I'd expect you'd be pointing at real examples of hypocrisy. Like complaining about snap elections and even passing a law supposed to prevent snap elections but then calling a snap election. Talking about how politicians shouldn't cross parties but then getting someone to cross to your party days after an election. Saying that the senate should be elected but then appointing an unelected person to the cabinet by appointing them to the senate. Justifying this with the excuse that the person will run in the next by-election but they didn't run in the next by-election or any other. Talking about being accountable and open but doing everything possible to prevent people and media from asking questions or being given access to government information.

I know people have real reasons to vote for every party in this election including Harper. But when talking about voting for Harper those reasons don't include his experience as the common man and they don't include his lack of hypocrisy.

[normanchateau]

You might consider a university professor, cabinet minister, lawyer, etc. as real jobs, but most people don't. Real jobs are jobs you do because you have to, and where you have a boss breathing down your neck,

Unfortunately, these irrational comments are representative of the level of intelligence, critical analysis and discourse that have come to characterize far too many Harper supporters.

If we accept the logic behind these absurd comments, physicians do not have real jobs. Physicians have remarkably stressful jobs. They really don't need Harper supporters claiming that they don't have "real jobs".

I look forward to seeing a citation for the claim that "most people don't" view lawyers, physicians, etc., as having real jobs.

The problem here is that Harper supporters sometimes delude themselves into believing that they understand how "most people" think even though most people in Canada (65% according to the latest Nanos Research poll) are absolutely opposed to Harper.

[blueblood]

Unfortunately, these irrational comments are representative of the level of intelligence, critical analysis and discourse that have come to characterize far too many Harper supporters.

If we accept the logic behind these absurd comments, physicians do not have real jobs. Physicians have remarkably stressful jobs. They really don't need Harper supporters claiming that they don't have "real jobs".

I look forward to seeing a citation for the claim that "most people don't" view lawyers, physicians, etc., as having real jobs.

The problem here is that Harper supporters sometimes delude themselves into believing that they understand how "most people" think even though most people in Canada (65% according to the latest Nanos Research poll) are absolutely opposed to Harper.

And 75% are absolutely opposed to the NDP

And 75% are absolutely opposed to the Liberals.

As for the intelligence of CPC voters, care to watch a Liberal ad recently.

The Liberals underestimated the intelligence of Canadian voters in 2006 and they are doing it again now.