Jump to content

Canadian Political Polls


Recommended Posts

We created CPP! - NDP.

We created air!

We created water!

We created life!

I know it is hard when you come to the realization that the Liberals have never had a progressive idea in their life Dobbin and all their achievements OAPP, Medicare, UI and so were all CCF/NDP ideas and forced through when the Liberals were scared of losing power but I thought you would take it better then this. There is still room in a real progressive party which has fought for Canadians for a long time, you are welcome to join.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, the NDP implemented everything federally, from the Constitution Act, 1982, to medicare.....all without once forming government.

Realistically, it's not hard to say that the NDP played a part in the creation of many Canadian institutions, but to accuse the Liberals and the Conservatives of having no part in any of it is ludicrous. They were the parties in power and they were often the ones making most of the decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the NDP implemented everything federally, from the Constitution Act, 1982, to medicare.....all without once forming government.

Realistically, it's not hard to say that the NDP played a part in the creation of many Canadian institutions, but to accuse the Liberals and the Conservatives of having no part in any of it is ludicrous. They were the parties in power and they were often the ones making most of the decisions.

I will give the Conservatives some slack under Diefenbaker because they really did not have to adopt the NDP and CCF ideas they did no one would have faulted them. However when the only time the Liberals implement anything is when they are in minorities and they are about to fall and need the NDP I don't give them anything. The NDP get all the credit for that. So the OAPP that was an NDP victory, Medicare the NDP again forced the Liberals to make good on something they had been talking about for 60 years until the NDP already did in Sask and the Liberals needed the NDP votes to keep the government alive. No the Liberals don't get anything for that. The Charter was great and the Liberals had a hand in it too bad they laughed at Tommy when he proposed the exact sametime 30 years earlier.

Sometimes it good to be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not suggesting anything like the words you are putting in my mouth. I am however suggesting that at some points the government has to step in to protect the Canadian consumer. It isn't right that they are nickeled and dimed and offered no other option, and the government sits back and lets this happen. I am all for corporate profit and private enterprise am not for hurting Canadians to have it.

Credit cards are fine they make money hand over fist. However when they charge 19-30% interest and someone gets in trouble and goes bankrupt that hurts the whole economy. You have to remember that it only hurts that Credit Card company but it hurts the car company of that family hasn't paid off there car, it hurts the debt they may have on a television set or dishwasher, the landlord they pay rent too and so on. It also hurts that family in the future. That and those banks giving out those credit card well they are lent too by the Canadian people at an interest rate right now of .25%. So sure we can legislate their rates, and I am not talking something crazy but if they want the loans from the Canadian people they better be ready to listen to them too.

Here in lies the fundamental flaw in your argument. This implies that people have the right to borrow the banks money, which is really the money of other Canadians at a minimal interest rate. To make life easier for them. Well here's the reality of it Punked, if they can't afford to buy whatever it is they are buying, televisions, dishwashers, cars all of which are luxury's, I might add, they shouldn't be buying them. If they are buying them on their credit cards which are inherently a short term loan they have to accept the fact that short term loans carry with them a high interest rate.

People are not entitled to low intrest rates, that is not the way the world works. It's the Banks money, and if you want to borrow it you have to abide by their rules. Sure you don't like it, well tough. Credit cards aren't designed as a means to live, if you pay them off within 30 days you'll never pay a dime of interest, it's really that simple. If you can't pay it off in 30 days you likely shouldn't have one to begin with.

Who decides what's a fair rate? What factors do you think go into setting the intrest rate on credit cards? One factor is it's intended to be a short term loan, less interest is accrued overall as a result. Also some of your down trodden "hard working" Canadians are actually deadbeats, they borrow money from the bank and never pay it back. Could it be the bank has to recoup some of those losses? You need to get out the "us" versus "them" mindset, it's blinding you to the bigger picture. Demonizing corporations and portraying the citizens as victims of corporate neo-feudalism is all to popular with the NDP.

As I said many "hard working" Canadians are anything but, many of them don't pay their bills, don't work hard at all, and feel they are entitled to public funding. We make our own fate and we're responsible for our own choices. I can't feel sorry for some deadbeat who wracked up a bunch of credit card debt and now is complaining about the high interest rates. That just doesn't wash with me.

FYI you're not suggesting a mixed market, it's what we already have, you're suggesting communism, where the government sets the prices and controls the market entirely. Regulation is one thing, dictating private policy and limiting profit margins is another thing entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the NDP implemented everything federally, from the Constitution Act, 1982, to medicare.....all without once forming government.

And they won't as long as they continue to make out that they are responsible for everything under the sun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here in lies the fundamental flaw in your argument. This implies that people have the right to borrow the banks money, which is really the money of other Canadians at a minimal interest rate. To make life easier for them. Well here's the reality of it Punked, if they can't afford to buy whatever it is they are buying, televisions, dishwashers, cars all of which are luxury's, I might add, they shouldn't be buying them. If they are buying them on their credit cards which are inherently a short term loan they have to accept the fact that short term loans carry with them a high interest rate.

People are not entitled to low intrest rates, that is not the way the world works. It's the Banks money, and if you want to borrow it you have to abide by their rules. Sure you don't like it, well tough. Credit cards aren't designed as a means to live, if you pay them off within 30 days you'll never pay a dime of interest, it's really that simple. If you can't pay it off in 30 days you likely shouldn't have one to begin with.

Who decides what's a fair rate? What factors do you think go into setting the intrest rate on credit cards? One factor is it's intended to be a short term loan, less interest is accrued overall as a result. Also some of your down trodden "hard working" Canadians are actually deadbeats, they borrow money from the bank and never pay it back. Could it be the bank has to recoup some of those losses? You need to get out the "us" versus "them" mindset, it's blinding you to the bigger picture. Demonizing corporations and portraying the citizens as victims of corporate neo-feudalism is all to popular with the NDP.

As I said many "hard working" Canadians are anything but, many of them don't pay their bills, don't work hard at all, and feel they are entitled to public funding. We make our own fate and we're responsible for our own choices. I can't feel sorry for some deadbeat who wracked up a bunch of credit card debt and now is complaining about the high interest rates. That just doesn't wash with me.

FYI you're not suggesting a mixed market, it's what we already have, you're suggesting communism, where the government sets the prices and controls the market entirely. Regulation is one thing, dictating private policy and limiting profit margins is another thing entirely.

Our arguement is the same the banks aren't entitled to the peoples of Canada's money unless they are ready accept what the people want. If that means a little lower interest rates then so be it.

PS we do regulate loans and decide what is fair, we just don't do it on credit cards. Go figure. Check out National Housing Act. Banks have to follow the maximum interest rates on long term housing loans if they want to borrow from the goverment. Maybe because we live in a mixed market.

The problem here is I am arguing for a law we already have but that doesn't apply to credit cards or payday loans because they weren't really around when we made these regulations. You are arguing that is wrong. Well that isn't Canada is it? We have a mixed system. I don't want communism, I want what is right for Canadians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see how that is relevant to the NDP forming government or not. What determines whether or not they at some time form a government is what ever current policies they have.

The bloviating by Layton is one of the least attractive qualities and taking credit for policies while never forming government certainly doesn't give one incentive to vote for an NDP government. I can see them taking credit for peace next and claiming it is an original idea.

In other words, the NDP praises itself for achievements while discrediting the government that actually did the work to bring it about. That hasn't worked out so well for the NDP over the years at the federal level.

Truth be told, people have looked at the NDP policies and found many to be unappetizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Iraq War was popular? Where?

no war is or should be popular.

The War was popular with as many as 75% of the US public. It was also popular with such intellectuals and economists known as Mike Ignatieff and Stephen Harper :(

Not so much with the Canadian public or with the then Chretian government.

However, the Afghan war was a mixed response, and the mission creep of the Martin Liberals was continued with the Harper Conservatives. It has accomplished very little at a great cost in lives.

Afghanistan is not popular, which actually means the NDP was with the majority of the public in this regards.

perhaps if the NDP based their policy on what people thought was important, they'd be a serious contender for Gov't. Until then, they have to live with less than 20%.

The NDP believed... health care, CPP, FIRA, EI, were important. If the NDP had to base their policies of what people thought was important, we could call them CPC or LPC and fold up their tents. That 20% is a group of people who think differently. Their ideas are not alway bad. Infact some of the best ideas that this country cherishes are directly the result of the having a CCF/NDP within the house with a base of 8% to 20% in polls and few seats.

As long as people believe that "Tax Cuts" are good and servics are "Not good" and that the government still manages to get their hands deep into our pockets... CAN YOU SAY INCREASED EI CONTRIBUTIONS and HST, then people will continue to be taxed, corporations will continue to receive welfare, and the public will own the shaft. 80% of the public accepts this and the other 20% are of a diverse group of people who believe differently, if not the same.

Fact is, as has been said before, no matter how much a party moves mainstream, there will always be another group in the minority outside the mainstream. Moving the NDP into mainstream, would only mean that a new party would have to be formed to challenge mainstream thought.

Today we have a strange event. The public is sitting in the Centre and the goverment is a double split right and a split left with no one occupying the middle.

Regardless, there is room for a political party in the 20% range that advocates for consumer protection and social justice issues.

I am not certain that anyone would want this element removed or exceeding 50%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NDP has had good ideas and continue to have some, but going on about credit card, bank and cellphone fees when we have an economic crisis on our hands is not going to make the NDP a viable alternative. While they are issues that should be looked into, Canadians can see we have far more pending issues. For a national party to be talking about credit card, bank and cellphones fees kinda makes them seem amateurish and not looking at the big picture.
Erm, are you not looking at the big picture? All these are protected industries. They are ripping off Canadians, regardless that many Canadians are apathetic to those boring issues. If you want to talk about the "recession" the Industrial base is what drives an economy. The NDP has the strongest industrial policies of any political party. Not that anyone is looking. The Liberals don't have an industrial policy. The CPC has no industrial policy but in similar vision to the LPC of using Trade deals as economic engines. For good measure, it was shortly after the 08 election, when it could no longer be hidden the deep shit the economy was in and the false pronouncements of the CPC that everything was fine and deficits were not in the forecast. It was the disgraceful excuse for an economic update that sparked outrage and created the impetus for Canada to get on with the global stimulus spending. After the money is allocated, the arguments are about WHO benefits.

If you are suggesting the NDP shouldn't campaign on Credit Card, bank and cellphone fees, perhaps your right. But that doesn't mean that something shouldn't be done to put an end to the gouging going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is funny to see the NDP take credit for CPP. Funny to see them take credit for the Charter of Rights as well when the Implied Bill of Rights preceded their existence in any form as a party.

http://www.historyofrights.com/events/charter.html

A year later, Alistair Stewart, recently elected member of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), presented before Parliament the first resolution to create a Canadian Bill of Rights. The CCF had been calling for entrenching certain rights in the constitution since its founding in 1933.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is funny to see the NDP take credit for CPP. Funny to see them take credit for the Charter of Rights as well when the Implied Bill of Rights preceded their existence in any form as a party. They certainly take credit for healthcare on the provincial front but they should remember that the drive for a national program came from a Conservative by the name of Diefenbaker years before Saskatchewan had a program.
You're on thin ice.

Tommy Douglas had the program 11 years before the chief shored it up. It was a program adopted by other provinces 4 years later. 7 years after that, the feds got involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

In 1946, Tommy Douglas' Co-operative Commonwealth Federation government in Saskatchewan passed the Saskatchewan Hospitalization Act, which guaranteed free hospital care for much of the population. Douglas had hoped to provide universal health care, but the province did not have the money

In 1950, Alberta created a program similar to Saskatchewan's. Alberta, however, created Medical Services (Alberta) Incorporated (MS(A)I) in 1948 to provide prepaid health services. This scheme eventually provided medical coverage to over 90% of the population.

In 1957, the federal government passed the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to fund 50% of the cost of such programs for any provincial government that adopted them. The HIDS Act outlined five conditions: public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility. These remain the pillars of the Canada Health Act.

The Saskatchewan program proved a success and the federal government of Lester B. Pearson, pressured by the New Democratic Party (NDP) who held the balance of power, introduced the Medical Care Act in 1966 that extended the HIDS Act cost-sharing to allow each province to establish a universal health care plan.

Edited by madmax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You did, and you are now backtracking.

Actually this is a direct quote of what I said.

It's not the place of the government to regulate private business to the point where they are legislating their profit margin.

In fact that statement specifically states it's not the role of the government to over regulate. I was referring to regulating profit margin specifically not regulation in general. It does not state, imply or otherwise infer that the government should not regulate business, just not to the point of excess.

Care to retract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has to be the biggest whopper I have seen here in a while from a lying NDP that they created CPP. They lump it in with OAS which clearly it isn't since it is plan that is a contributory plan from workers.

OAS and CPP owe their existance to Woodsworth. Not to the Progressive Conservatives or the Liberals. However, if you wish to say the NDP are lying in that they created CPP, then you can say the same for all policy taken from the CCF and NDP and implemented by government.

What you have suggested is that the NDP played no role. Considering the origins of a Canadian Pension Plan originate with the founder of the CCF and is a good idea, it is a bold statement you make that the NDP played no role in the creation of CPP. The NDP played the same role as all the other parties.....

"That same year, the three federal parties - Liberal, Progressive Conservative and New Democratic Party - made a commitment to the principle of a contributory, wage-related pension"

Essentially, the argument you make is that the PCs and the Liberals came to the same conclusion as the CCF/NDP and got busy doing something good for Canadians.

http://www.histori.ca/default.do?page=.canhistory_index

Today's Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan owe their existence to the dreams and hard work of people such as James Shaver Woodsworth.
The video is created by the Canadian Government.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're on thin ice.

Tommy Douglas had the program 11 years before the chief shored it up. It was a program adopted by other provinces 4 years later. 7 years after that, the feds got involved.

Think I said on the the provincial front. Diefenbaker was the one who pushed on the federal front before Saskatchewan got their program running. As you said: the big issue: money. And Diefenbaker drove the initiative for long term sustainable funding.

The idea that it was all NDP and no one else is treading on thin ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OAS and CPP owe their existance to Woodsworth. Not to the Progressive Conservatives or the Liberals. However, if you wish to say the NDP are lying in that they created CPP,

The point from the beginning that saying they created CPP is a load of hogwash.

I have suggested nothing about the NDP except that they are bloviating about their achievements.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I said on the the provincial front. Diefenbaker was the one who pushed on the federal front before Saskatchewan got their program running. As you said: the big issue: money. And Diefenbaker drove the initiative for long term sustainable funding.

The idea that it was all NDP and no one else is treading on thin ice.

What part of 11 years don't you understand???

Back to polls... maybe a new one was cooked over the weekend ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our arguement is the same the banks aren't entitled to the peoples of Canada's money unless they are ready accept what the people want. If that means a little lower interest rates then so be it.

PS we do regulate loans and decide what is fair, we just don't do it on credit cards. Go figure. Check out National Housing Act. Banks have to follow the maximum interest rates on long term housing loans if they want to borrow from the goverment. Maybe because we live in a mixed market.

The problem here is I am arguing for a law we already have but that doesn't apply to credit cards or payday loans because they weren't really around when we made these regulations. You are arguing that is wrong. Well that isn't Canada is it? We have a mixed system. I don't want communism, I want what is right for Canadians.

Your suggesting the government is qualified to set the price of a service without knowing the costs. Do you know how a credit card works? Do you know the volatility, the high risk margin involved in a credit card? Pay day loans are another beast entirely. The point is Punked; if you're a responsible consumer you don't carry a balance on your credit card. The interest rate is immaterial if you pay it off in 30 days. If you can't afford to pay it off that quickly, chances are you can't afford whatever it is you bought. Over 85% of people DON"T carry a balance on their credit cards and never pay any interest. A good portion of those who do carry a balance generally other credit issues also.

Our arguments are vastly different. You're attempting to alleviate personal responsibility for spending, and accepting that credit cards are an entitlement and therefore SHOULD be regulated. I'm suggesting that we are responsible for our own spending and that we don't need the government to save us from ourselves. The banks are not the problem, the people who misuse their credit cards, payday loans or depend on them for survival because they are living beyond their means are.

It is not the right of anyone to have a credit card, it's not free money, it's a convenience and a service and that comes at a cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What part of 11 years don't you understand???

What part of national do you not understand?

No money meant no sustainable provincial programs. That drive came from Diefenbaker.

Back to polls... maybe a new one was cooked over the weekend ;)

Certainly if Layton starts to bloviate about how world peace was an NDP idea, we will see him take a tailspin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A year later, Alistair Stewart, recently elected member of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), presented before Parliament the first resolution to create a Canadian Bill of Rights. The CCF had been calling for entrenching certain rights in the constitution since its founding in 1933.

Which was an evolution of the Implied Bill of Rights which preceded the CCF's existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,744
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    John Wilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • exPS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Proficient
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...