The Difference between a Liberal and Conservative

[PoliticalCitizen]

Like higher unemployment? Or perhaps spending less per capita on education? Or maybe just simply having less money per person to spend than our southern neighbours.

Yes the benefits of socialism...

Like:

- Over 2 million people in jail, 10,000 of which are under 18;

- No national healthcare system;

- 33,000 national debt per capita

Not to mention Enron, WorldCom and the WHOLE INVESTMENT BANKING collapse.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Lets see... The U.S. has:

- A per capita GDP that is approximately $6000 per year more

- An unemployment rate that is approximately 1% lower than that in Canada

- While they do have a higher murder rate, overall their rate of crime is lower than that in Canada

Granted I do not think the U.S. is perfect (nor is any country), but the fact is Canada falls short of the U.S. in many areas.

I could also point out that Canada is a country that probably has a much larger resource-base than the U.S. (including oil, mineral resources, lumber, etc.) Given all the advantages that Canada has, its likely even a totally incompetent government would show at least some success.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...ok/geos/ca.html

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...ok/geos/us.html

You're good with details, so maybe you can provide us with the following details on the "War on Terror" which comes as part of the "American Dream" package:

- total cost

- number of casualties

- number of civilians killed

You could also give us your evaluation as to what REAL goals has the war achieved.

Thank you.

[M.Dancer]

Like:

- Over 2 million people in jail, 10,000 of which are under 18;

- No national healthcare system;

- 33,000 national debt per capita

Not to mention Enron, WorldCom and the WHOLE INVESTMENT BANKING collapse.

So you think Canada's system is immune to the likes of Enron?

Think Bre-X...

[Kitch]

A very interesting look at the ideological dynamic and the inherent costs to each option. Well done.

Thank you!

[PoliticalCitizen]

So you think Canada's system is immune to the likes of Enron?

Think Bre-X...

Well by voting Conservative you're asking for more of it...

[segnosaur]

Like higher unemployment? Or perhaps spending less per capita on education? Or maybe just simply having less money per person to spend than our southern neighbours.

Yes the benefits of socialism...

Like:

- Over 2 million people in jail, 10,000 of which are under 18;

It is true that many of the people are in jail for minor drug charges (which I admit probably isn't a wise thing to do). But, I've also pointed out that the U.S. has a lower overall crime rate than Canada (according to U.N. statistics). Most people would think that actually punishing people who steal/injure others is acceptable if it keeps them from harming others.

- No national healthcare system;

Not exactly accurate.

- The U.S. does have medicare/medicaid to handle the people who are truly poor. And many employed people have jobs that have health insurance (or can pay for their own). Of those that have absolutely no health insurance, many are employed but have not been working long enough for their health insurance to kick in. The number of people who have had no health insurance for a significant length of time is very small

- True, health care is more expensive in the U.S., and can be devistating financially if you don't have health insurance. However, the responsiveness of their health care (providing necessary treatments when needed as quickly as possible) exceeds that of Canada, even if the coverage is not equal across the country. Now, whether its better to have equal (but lower quality) coverage like we have in Canada, or Superior (for most) but widely varying coverage is a question that has no answer.

The point is, we can't claim our health care is better or worse than in the U.S., just different

Not to mention Enron, WorldCom and the WHOLE INVESTMENT BANKING collapse.

Someone else already pointed out Bre-X. I could possibly also point out Nortel. (Yes, Nortel is a multinational company, but its headquarters is in Canada.)

- 33,000 national debt per capita

You're right... the U.S. does have a huge debt, and unlike Canada, they continue to run a deficit.

Of course, I could also point out that for much of the Trudeau era, the per-capita debt/deficit was actually much higher in 'socialist' Canada than the 'right wing' U.S.

You're good with details, so maybe you can provide us with the following details on the "War on Terror" which comes as part of the "American Dream" package:

- total cost

- number of casualties

- number of civilians killed

You could also give us your evaluation as to what REAL goals has the war achieved.

Not sure why the 'war on terror' is relevant... the 'war on terror' does not really affect the average U.S. ciitizen to a signficant degree. But, I'll play along....

Without the U.S. Invasion, Iraq would never have experienced the joy of boy bands...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2003/dec/1...rock.worldmusic

[segnosaur]

So you think Canada's system is immune to the likes of Enron?

Think Bre-X..

Well by voting Conservative you're asking for more of it...

Why do you say that? It was the Liberals who were in power when the Bre-X scandal happened.

(Not that I'm necessarily blaming the Liberals... it likely would have happened regardless of who was in power. But why the assumption that all the 'bad' stuff only happens due to the right wing being in power?)

[Alta4ever]

I don't have a fancy story to express my opinion on the difference... but I'll try an analogy using teachers!

A conservative teacher believes that students ought to behave while a liberal teacher understands that sometimes kids will misbehave. The approach of the conservative teacher is to punish students when they act inappropriately (the teacher being the ultimate judge of what is/isn't inappropriate), while the approach of the liberal teacher is to proactively avoid circumstances that lead to student misbehaviour by creating a classroom culture that is (an honest attempt at being) harmonious.

In other words, the conservative has a strong belief about how the world works and will react to anything that threatens to upset that. The liberal, conversely, knows that the world is full of people... each with their own mind... and so doesn't try to control the world. Rather, they simply try to... create a societal framework that lends itself to a harmonious society. Given the exact same information, reasonable people reach very different conclusions. It seems to me that this is something intolerable to conservatives. If people don't reach the same conclusions then they're obviously unreasonable, unintelligent or ignorant.

A conservative world seems to be so isolated. "I" work hard for "my" money and "I" don't want to share it with people who didn't earn it. Fair enough. But, "you" don't live in this world by yourself. We interact with people for... everything! We're social beings. To put it in selfish terms, "I" benefit from a society that works well and in which everyone is well. So rather than saying conservatives are selfish and liberals are not... which is not true... you can say that each has a different approach to getting what they want out of society.

Let's say you own a house on a nice street. Your next door neighbour, for some reason, does not maintain their house. This (in selfish terms) could decrease the value of your house. So, you have three options if you care to prevent this: 1. Contribute to the maintenance of your neighbour's house (money, labour, etc.). 2. Move. 3. Complain to somebody, maybe the neighbour, until the neighbour conforms to your ways.

2 doesn't seem like it would be a popular option. 1 = liberal, 3 = conservative. Mind you, 1. leads to the potential problem of those who tend to take advantage and 3. leads to potential conflict. I guess liberals and conservatives differ in terms of the poison that they pick!

So why is that the liberals cannot accept a difference in opinon refuses to hear all else and then hands you a bad grade in University because you don't believe in socialism?

[Alta4ever]

Since Harper became PM and he seems to want to change some of the rules then why didn't start with the seating government has to open the books and show their expenses, their surplus if any and exact how much this war is costing and get everything out in the open so we can judge how they are handling our tax dollars. The difference between the Libs and the Cons is a good question and I wish Harper would explain what the difference is between the progressive conservatives and the conservatives. I'm sure the conservatives must have some of the alliances views or how else would the former members give up their alliance views to me conservatives.

IF you know what a progressive you will understand why it was purposly left out of the name, infact the name progressive conservative is a contradiction of ideologies.

[M.Dancer]

Well by voting Conservative you're asking for more of it...

Do you think at all about what you write ?

I would ask you to explain how Bre-X or the Nortel fiasco had anything to do with the governing Librals of the day or how a Consevative government would impact fraud (aside from their get tough on crime).

I would ask you that except I don't think you can provide an intelligent answer.

It's enough that your premise of corporate fraud being in the sates and not here because of our socialism is decisively shown to be childish nonsense.

[CrazeeEddie]

I really hope that not all conservatives are as selfish and ignorant (and obviously blind to the real world) as yourself. Of course everyone who has lots of money worked really hard for it, ask Paris Hilton....

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many

others her age, she considered herself to be a Federal Liberal , and among

other Liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support

more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Conservative ,

a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had

participated in, and an occasional chat with various professors, she felt

that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep

what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes

on

the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed

objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she

indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in

school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let

him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a

very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no

time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have

time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because

she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, 'How is your 2.0 GPA friend Audrey

doing?' She replied, 'Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are

easy

classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so

popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to

all

the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes the

next

day because she's too hung over.'

Her father smiled, 'Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to

deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0.

That

way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and

equal distribution of GPA.'

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired

back, 'That's a crazy idea. That would not be fair! I've worked really

hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work!

Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I

worked my tail off!'

The father replied gently, 'Welcome to the Conservative party.'

(If anyone has a better explanation of the difference between a Liberal

and a Conservative, I'm all ears.)

[noahbody]

I really hope that not all conservatives are as selfish and ignorant (and obviously blind to the real world) as yourself. Of course everyone who has lots of money worked really hard for it, ask Paris Hilton....

Didn't she star in "Young people fucking"?

[Alta4ever]

I really hope that not all conservatives are as selfish and ignorant (and obviously blind to the real world) as yourself. Of course everyone who has lots of money worked really hard for it, ask Paris Hilton....

You Jealousy is showing the fact is her father and grand father worked hard to create what they did, grow up and conrence yourself with what you do not what she does. After a generation or two acting like she does they with have destroyed the family name and its wealth.

[CrazeeEddie]

Regardless of sex, it shows how a young hard working student goes to university, accepts liberal idealogy from having it forced on her by liberal professors. She doesn't really know the difference. She's just following what she was told...blindly without seeking the truth for herself.You totally missed the point.

It didn't say she became a coinservative, did it? It was explained to her in context that she could understand. Her university grades represent those Canadians who have worked hard to achieve a good living. Her friend represents those Candadians who expect hand outs form the government, via the hard -working. She didn't agree with her father's idea, making her a hypocrite. If she gave up 1 point of her GPA, she is a true liberal. However, she didn't agree with her father's idea, giving her a conservative idealogy. Now she knows what a conservative is, because she obviously hadn't seeked both points of view. She just followed liberalism blindly, believing what she was told, without having it explained to her in a way she could understand.

WRONG...

The gist of the story is that anyone who has money obviously has worked hard to earn it, and anyone who does not, is obviously lazy and does not deserve help.

As someone who has A) Been homeless, Been unemployed, and C) Been on welfare, someone who is now his own boss, with his own home, supporting his own family, I can honestly say that this view makes me want to puke. Without these programs, I may very well be dead. Thanks to a MAJORITY (read, NOT Conservative) of Canadians, the world's most compassionate people, I was given another chance. I made the most of it, and I think you'd find that many others would as well.

Of course, it's easy to spit on those below you if you've never walked in their shoes.

While many Conservatives use religion to their own means, I assure you, many are not Christian...

[Alta4ever]

WRONG...

The gist of the story is that anyone who has money obviously has worked hard to earn it, and anyone who does not, is obviously lazy and does not deserve help.

As someone who has A) Been homeless, Been unemployed, and C) Been on welfare, someone who is now his own boss, with his own home, supporting his own family, I can honestly say that this view makes me want to puke. Without these programs, I may very well be dead. Thanks to a MAJORITY (read, NOT Conservative) of Canadians, the world's most compassionate people, I was given another chance. I made the most of it, and I think you'd find that many others would as well.

Of course, it's easy to spit on those below you if you've never walked in their shoes.

While many Conservatives use religion to their own means, I assure you, many are not Christian...

How much of that was you wanting to overcome your porblems and make something better for yourself? I am will to bet that you would have done it even without the government intervention because you strived to do it, much the same as I have.

The difference isn't that conservatives are heartless and will do away with social programs, this just isn't the case, most conservatives will admit the need for effective and targeted social programs for people who want the help and will make an effective use of it, instead of just abusing it.

Give a man a fish he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish he will feed himself for life.

[Slim MacSquinty]

The Liberal Party has shaped and defined Canada into making it what it is today.

It's far from perfect but it's even further from the worst.

By comparing our country to the US you can see the benefits of our socialist - leaning society.

Such broad thinkers these liberals; liberals all good, conservatives all bad. Funny the very people who expect me to be charitable with my tax dollars don't have much charity for others.

As for America there is plenty good about America, there are a few warts too, but if you've ever read Jeffery Simpson's books. "Star Spangled Canadians" I and II you would see that you have been sold a bill of goods, and your smugness is teribly misplaced.

[CrazeeEddie]

You Jealousy is showing the fact is her father and grand father worked hard to create what they did, grow up and conrence yourself with what you do not what she does. After a generation or two acting like she does they with have destroyed the family name and its wealth.

Yes, my jealousy is shining through in the fact that I myself have earned a decent living from absolutely nothing, but based on this story, Paris has worked harder than you, or I to get what she has.

[CrazeeEddie]

How much of that was you wanting to overcome your porblems and make something better for yourself? I am will to bet that you would have done it even without the government intervention because you strived to do it, much the same as I have.

Spoken from TRUE IGNORANCE. tell me, without the programs, how would I have gotten the money to get shelter? How many homeless people have you hired recently? Without those programs, I would still have nothing.

The difference isn't that conservatives are heartless and will do away with social programs, this just isn't the case, most conservatives will admit the need for effective and targeted social programs for people who want the help and will make an effective use of it, instead of just abusing it.

Give a man a fish he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish he will feed himself for life.

I agree, not ALL conservatives are heartless. However, the majority of Liberals UNDERSTAND that most people on assistance are not there because they WANT to be. They're not there because they're lazy. In fact, many are working TWO JOBS, and still receiving assistance. As with all systems (like rich folk and taxes), there will always be cheats.

Yes, I did survive because I WANTED to, but without that helping hand, I can guarantee you I would never have been able to. Until you've been down that road, you cannot even pretend to comprehend. And to think that just because you have more, you've worked harder, is nothing but pure arrogance and ignorance.

[CrazeeEddie]

All I can say to this is... wha????

The Liberal Party has shaped and defined Canada into making it what it is today.

It's far from perfect but it's even further from the worst.

By comparing our country to the US you can see the benefits of our socialist - leaning society.

Such broad thinkers these liberals; liberals all good, conservatives all bad. Funny the very people who expect me to be charitable with my tax dollars don't have much charity for others.

As for America there is plenty good about America, there are a few warts too, but if you've ever read Jeffery Simpson's books. "Star Spangled Canadians" I and II you would see that you have been sold a bill of goods, and your smugness is teribly misplaced.

[CrazeeEddie]

As a side note, many of these 'socialist' programs so denounced by the right are also funding the 'teaching' you are going on about

How much of that was you wanting to overcome your porblems and make something better for yourself? I am will to bet that you would have done it even without the government intervention because you strived to do it, much the same as I have.

The difference isn't that conservatives are heartless and will do away with social programs, this just isn't the case, most conservatives will admit the need for effective and targeted social programs for people who want the help and will make an effective use of it, instead of just abusing it.

Give a man a fish he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish he will feed himself for life.

[Slim MacSquinty]

I missed the quotes:

"The Liberal Party has shaped and defined Canada into making it what it is today.

It's far from perfect but it's even further from the worst.

By comparing our country to the US you can see the benefits of our socialist - leaning society. "

My comments:

"Such broad thinkers these liberals; liberals all good, conservatives all bad. Funny the very people who expect me to be charitable with my tax dollars don't have much charity for others.

As for America there is plenty good about America, there are a few warts too, but if you've ever read Jeffery Simpson's books. "Star Spangled Canadians" I and II you would see that you have been sold a bill of goods, and your smugness is teribly misplaced."

As for your other comments, no one is suggesting here that welfare should be cut off, in fact Harper has made few substantial cuts to social programs, regardless of what Jack says. The social safety net is just that a net to catch you when you faulter, it should not become a way of life, and unfortunately in the past it has been for some.

Having said that the best thing you can do is provide opportunity and incentive to get ahead, you and I have both done that. good economics, not wholesale socialism, is much more apt to supply the jobs and incentives we are both looking for. Pure unfettered socialism has been proven not to work in european countries and they had to move to a more capitalist system, A good example is the major turn around in Ireland.

Ridiculous promises like universal child care are pure socialism and represent far too large a burden on the middle class, its nice to think in terms like make the rich pay, but there just are not enough rich to pay for these kind of programs, yes there are some ultra rich people out there and its not hard for all to agree they are over rewarded, however having the government adjusting their compensation packages is not really an effective way of doing it, its is the purvue of the stockholders and exchange commisions. The alternative being wage and price controls and they are business killers and most often hurt the middle class the most, both through wage freezes and job losses.

Finally taxation has seldom been an effective was to solve almost any problem, more often, much more often in fact, they have the effect of burdening the middle class where by far the proportional bulk of taxes are and have always been collected.

It is not uncharitable to limit socialism, experiments in democratic socialism have not reduced the number of rich, in fact it usually increases the number of poor. That is not to say that social programs should be abandoned, just dispensed very carfully as they can be a slippery slope.

[whowhere]

If you actually look at ALL of the numbers, as in the ones that actually MATTER, like inflation rates, debt relative to GDP and interest rates paid for debt accumulated already, spending under Trudeau did WAY more to hurt Canada than under Mulroney. Mulroney was a bad PM but Trudeau was 5 times worse.

Your right about trudeau because he paved the way for the cultural destruction of Canada with his Charter of Rights and 1982 Constitution. Canada was better off under the English Common Law of Precedents.

You bring this argument up all the time whowhere but the fact of the matter is Conservative immigration policy is more selective than Liberal policy ever was and they are improving it immensely. You seem to have a problem with the fact the conservatives are ensuring that skilled and productive immigrants come to the country instead of how the Liberals let ANYONE in on a first come first serve basis.

Because I worked in Toronto through the nineties, a period in which Canada was under immense economic pressure because of what mulroney did to Canada's National Debt. He left Canada in a financial mess. The immigrants of those days were from other Commonwealth countries and refugess from where Canada had peacekeeping operations. The immigrants of today are economic migrants here to take whatever job they can find. Name one other Country that has put the interests of Foreign workers over its own citizezens??

Canada is 34 million. At the moment Canada is creating 20000 full time jobs a month. That is not even 1 percent of Canada's population. Canada has an unemployment rate about 6%. So how is it, of the jobs that are being created, they should be going to Foreign workers over Canadians?

Not to sound insensitive but the fact that your department was dead weight on the corporation and needed trimming isn't really the fault of Conservative Policy. The conservatives really made no changes to immigration policy as far as I know of prior to the last 3-4 months. Even if you lost your job in that period, the policies hadn't even been implemented yet really.

Well, this particular office boasted it had revenues of 50 million and a profit of 15 million. The department I was in was a cost of doing business. It had to be done. The work I did could be reallocated to other offices or outsourced. Which is ultimatley what this prick began to pursue. Well, I will say this prick is not with the company anymore, but he was there long enough to eff me out my job.

You're complaining that the Conservatives are making it so that skilled immigrants get into the country first ahead of unskilled non-english speaking immigrants. Naturally they will be competing for skilled work but to argue against these policies is to suggest that Canada is better off with unskilled immigrants suitable only for minimum wage work so they can mooch off our social system.

You ought to define skilled. Because the so called skilled prick that pushed me out of my $50000 dollar job has cost the Canadian Taxpayers about $40000 in lost tax revenues I would have paid including the employment insurance I collected. Way to go conservative on managing the economy. I wonder how many other people the conservative effed out of their jobs.

Your argument isn't really making sense. You can't find a job because immigrants have a low standard of living and that's why you're still on temporary employment making $20,000? The immigrants, with their lowly standard of living, are doing your $50,000 job and doing it for less than $20,000? I would love to know what your lowly immigrant manager's department was and what your job was.

I will say I am a College Graduate of a particular program. This job directly related to my College Program. This income is was well within lines and reasonable of a College graduate gainfully employed in my program.

I think there is a lot of 'poor me' and blame game being played here. Generally speaking, native Canadians have a VASTLY better time finding jobs than immigrants. To say that ALL of the jobs you could apply for are being filled by foreigners on work permits is juvenile. It's strange that it's never occurred to you that there MIGHT be other reasons other than mythical conservative policy why certain specific people lost and then can't find jobs.

Buddy, I can't say you think. Canada is creating 20000 jobs at the moment. Canada has an unemployment rate of 6%. Do the math. You can't have your cake and eat it. It's called supply and demand. The supply of Full Time jobs does not match the demand of the 6% unemployed. For the jobs that are out there if you are competing with foreigners on Work permits and alike with so called skills they will eagerly accept whatever it is they get. What they do is drive down wages and displace Canadians from what little employment opportunites there are.

Really, it is obvious the conservative have no understanding of economics.

[Alta4ever]

Spoken from TRUE IGNORANCE. tell me, without the programs, how would I have gotten the money to get shelter? How many homeless people have you hired recently? Without those programs, I would still have nothing.

I agree, not ALL conservatives are heartless. However, the majority of Liberals UNDERSTAND that most people on assistance are not there because they WANT to be. They're not there because they're lazy. In fact, many are working TWO JOBS, and still receiving assistance. As with all systems (like rich folk and taxes), there will always be cheats.

Yes, I did survive because I WANTED to, but without that helping hand, I can guarantee you I would never have been able to. Until you've been down that road, you cannot even pretend to comprehend. And to think that just because you have more, you've worked harder, is nothing but pure arrogance and ignorance.

I undstand what you are saying but the main problem is some of the social programs are destructive, others are unnessary as there are publicly funded charities that do a better job, and then their are the ones that are abused and of no use. Then we have the social programs that benefit us, and our country. This is what we need to address, we also must respect provincial jursidiction for these. Why should those in BC, Alberta, and Ont fund the social policies of the other provinces through wealth transfers? That is taxation with out representation.

We also have to able to fund these programs, and there is only so much money that can be spent, and that comes at the detriment of other government spending or tax increases. These are the balances that a government must walk and right know what I understand about most LIBERALS is that they are more interested in buying votes with programs that do very little for anybody. In otherwords they are bribing us with our own tax money money, without regard to the economy, or the regional implications of such policies.

[Kitch]

Well by voting Conservative you're asking for more of it...

Why do you say that? It was the Liberals who were in power when the Bre-X scandal happened.

(Not that I'm necessarily blaming the Liberals... it likely would have happened regardless of who was in power. But why the assumption that all the 'bad' stuff only happens due to the right wing being in power?)

Well said. How much does the government actually influence the economy anyway? CAN a government be blamed for a recession or take credit for good economic times?

[Kitch]

So why is that the liberals cannot accept a difference in opinon refuses to hear all else and then hands you a bad grade in University because you don't believe in socialism?

What are you talking about bud? Did a prof give you a bad grade and rather than taking responsibility for the work that you did you want to blame an entire ideology? Quite intelligent.