Ignatieff not ready for election

[Shady]

The only job he ever held before entering politics was as a mailroom clerk in the Edmonton office of Imperial Oil.

moved to Edmonton, Alberta, where he found work at Imperial Oil, in the mail room.[5] Later, he would advance to work on the company's computer systems.

Leaving politics would mean unemployment for Harper.

He graduated in 1978, at the top of his class with a 95.7% average. He took up post-secondary studies again at the University of Calgary, where he completed a Bachelor's degree in economics. He later returned there to earn a Master's degree in economics, completed in 1993.

Wikipedia

[capricorn]

What it does show is just how much power Iggy now wields in Parliament.

Yeah. So much power that the Liberal party can't defeat the government without the cooperation of one of the other opposition parties. I don't confuse political power with an opposition leader who is simply doing his job.

[capricorn]

Leaving politics would mean unemployment for Harper. He won't resign.

Maybe. Unlike Iggy, he doesn't have a job waiting for him at Harvard or the BBC.

[sharkman]

Iggy is nothing more than a glorified carpetbagger who has quickly become drunk with the little political power he has, playing these games with an election call and trying to blame Harper for an election after bluffing. Canadians will soon grow tired of these antics, and want a real leader for the Liberals. But the cupboards are still bare.

[Shady]

Canadians will soon grow tired of these antics, and want a real leader for the Liberals.

Not only a real leader, a real Canadian. Yankee go home!

[madmax]

prorogue anyone

[daniel]

...Leaving politics would mean unemployment for Harper. He won't resign.

Wouldn't he be eligible to collect an MP's pension?

[Topaz]

Regional disparity is a problem but it's not one of Harper's creation. It's a travesty that you can get EI after working only 360 hours a year ANYWHERE in this country. That should NEVER have become permanent policy and it's disgusting that it is. The solution is NOT to allow it everywhere but rather entirely rewrite the qualification system.

If, for example, you're hit with a recession that temporarily lowers employment numbers in general, the system can be amended to extend benefits for part of the duration and make allowances for workers who get hired and laid off in succession, providing that they had strong employment history prior. Someone who worked for years and years at GM, for example, is likely going to have trouble finding work right now and will likely need help retraining and finding new permanent work. I see no problem making amendments for THAT sort of person.

For those who have little to no extended employment history, however, including the many that work for the summer and then get laid off and work under the table in the winter (ie my brother in law), their EI benefits should be taken away and they can find out what it means to actually work a whole year. They should have a proven history of working the vast majority of the year and if they don't then they can suck their own asses.

If you are working and paying into EI and the company you are working for closes up or layoffs and if you don't have enough hours in, you get nothing! They need to change EI because more businesses are going with part time help. The 360 is really for times when we are in a recession but part timers should have some kind of help.

[capricorn]

If you are working and paying into EI and the company you are working for closes up or layoffs and if you don't have enough hours in, you get nothing!

That's assuming you don't find another job.

[benny]

That's assuming you don't find another job.

Employment is a lagging indicator of economic activity. In other words, an economic recovery should be well under way before jobs come back.

[Topaz]

That's assuming you don't find another job.

Right, and thats the point, its the government duty to make sure you are entitled to it. In my area, unemployment is 10% and at the EI office,you can get training but they tell you, its a waste of time because there are no jobs in this area. So some people do and some people don't. Harper wants to make changes of letting employers collect, which was a NDP idea. The 2 week waiting period, should be by choice. There ae some families that live from pay cheque to cheque and they can't wait for 4-6-8weeks. The five weeks the Tories added on, could be 2weeks up front and then 3 weeks at the end.

[benny]

Right, and thats the point, its the government duty to make sure you are entitled to it. In my area, unemployment is 10% and at the EI office,you can get training but they tell you, its a waste of time because there are no jobs in this area.

Right-wingers will urge you to move in another area to see if the job situation is better.

[jdobbin]

He graduated in 1978, at the top of his class with a 95.7% average. He took up post-secondary studies again at the University of Calgary, where he completed a Bachelor's degree in economics. He later returned there to earn a Master's degree in economics, completed in 1993.

Sounds like an overeducated elitist.

[jdobbin]

Not only a real leader, a real Canadian. Yankee go home!

Now you hate Americans?

[benny]

Sounds like an overeducated elitist.

prejudice

[jdobbin]

prejudice

You think he is prejudiced as well?

[benny]

You think he is prejudiced as well?

Kids' game!

[ToadBrother]

Iggy is nothing more than a glorified carpetbagger who has quickly become drunk with the little political power he has, playing these games with an election call and trying to blame Harper for an election after bluffing. Canadians will soon grow tired of these antics, and want a real leader for the Liberals. But the cupboards are still bare.

Do you guys actually believe this crap, or do you get pamphlets sent out telling you what to say, because that is so moronic that it's difficult to imagine anybody but a semi-literate party hack coming up with it.

The Tories are the ones in trouble here, not the Liberals. Thus far, Iggy has outmaneuvered Harper at every turn, and Harper is the one with the leash around his neck. Every time Harper seems to be getting uppety and looking like he's going to call Iggy's bluff, the next thing you know, there's Harper at a press conference, looking sheepish and saying "Can't we all just get along..."

Your leader is impotent, largely because he's political ineptitude after the last election forced him into a situation where his own caucus will drag his political corpse through the streets if he dares another election, and Iggy basically dictates policy to him.

Harper is coming damned close to being a failed Prime Minister, a sort of Joe Clark in slow motion.

[benny]

Do you guys actually believe this crap, or do you get pamphlets sent out telling you what to say, because that is so moronic that it's difficult to imagine anybody but a semi-literate party hack coming up with it.

The Tories are the ones in trouble here, not the Liberals. Thus far, Iggy has outmaneuvered Harper at every turn, and Harper is the one with the leash around his neck. Every time Harper seems to be getting uppety and looking like he's going to call Iggy's bluff, the next thing you know, there's Harper at a press conference, looking sheepish and saying "Can't we all just get along..."

Your leader is impotent, largely because he's political ineptitude after the last election forced him into a situation where his own caucus will drag his political corpse through the streets if he dares another election, and Iggy basically dictates policy to him.

Harper is coming damned close to being a failed Prime Minister, a sort of Joe Clark in slow motion.

You are all still only exchanging some versions of "my father is stronger than yours, ha! ha!".

[ToadBrother]

You are all still only exchanging some versions of "my father is stronger than yours, ha! ha!".

I'm not a Liberal supporter either. Perhaps, when you're not assembling word salads, you should ponder that sometimes some of us are wee bit more complex than one-note party hacks.

I guess that says one thing, I *am* smarter than you.

[Moonbox]

If you are working and paying into EI and the company you are working for closes up or layoffs and if you don't have enough hours in, you get nothing! They need to change EI because more businesses are going with part time help. The 360 is really for times when we are in a recession but part timers should have some kind of help.

EI is SUPPOSED to TEMPORARILY support long time contributors when they unfortunately lose work. It was NEVER meant to be used as long-term income replacement for people who don't/can't find long term work. I am HAPPY to support someone who's PROVEN he works the vast majority of the year (or has worked full time for years and years) but I honestly care little for those who can't show that sort of work history.

Listen carefully, because I've already said it: People who are finding themselves out of work (ie a GM employee) and who have contributed long term MUST be helped and there are various ways I can think of doing this.

Like I said, we can make changes to help the people who are hurting BECAUSE of the recession, but we don't have to by extension make it easier for people who didn't work much in the first place and are consistent moochers who won't be working full time anyways.

You're right in that employers to some extent are encouraged to hire only part time, but there are various ways to change this that DO NOT include giving EI freely to anyone who asks regardless of whether they should be getting it.

[benny]

I'm not a Liberal supporter either.

How could I know with all the opportunities you are wasting!?

[sharkman]

Sounds like an overeducated elitist.

Hah, spoken by one who calls himself, "The Doctor".

[normanchateau]

Unlike Iggy, he doesn't have a job waiting for him at Harvard or the BBC.

What makes you think that Harvard gave him a leave of absence with no time limits? Ignatieff's first faculty position was at the University of British Columbia. His last was at the University of Toronto. In between, he held faculty positions at Cambridge, Oxford and Harvard. Were he not leader of the opposition today, his academic career opportunities would be limitless. Moreover, as author of 16 books and hundreds of high pay magazine articles, he is not restricted to academia for a high income.

By contrast, Harper has never made more money than he made as a politician. Employment opportunities for those with a Masters in economics are limited though a PhD, not a Masters degree, would open the door to academia. Harper never got to the PhD stage and the topic of his Masters thesis was politics more than economics. Indeed it could have been a thesis in Political Science. Here's an excerpt from Harper's thesis:

"Minority governments show no particular tendency to fiscally irresponsible behaviour, contrary to some theoretical predictions."

Poor Stephen Harper. Even the conclusions of his Masters thesis are wrong.

No wonder he so desperately clutches to the only high paid job he's ever held.

[Topaz]

EI is SUPPOSED to TEMPORARILY support long time contributors when they unfortunately lose work. It was NEVER meant to be used as long-term income replacement for people who don't/can't find long term work. I am HAPPY to support someone who's PROVEN he works the vast majority of the year (or has worked full time for years and years) but I honestly care little for those who can't show that sort of work history.

Listen carefully, because I've already said it: People who are finding themselves out of work (ie a GM employee) and who have contributed long term MUST be helped and there are various ways I can think of doing this.

Like I said, we can make changes to help the people who are hurting BECAUSE of the recession, but we don't have to by extension make it easier for people who didn't work much in the first place and are consistent moochers who won't be working full time anyways.

You're right in that employers to some extent are encouraged to hire only part time, but there are various ways to change this that DO NOT include giving EI freely to anyone who asks regardless of whether they should be getting it.

One thing you have to remember most of the changes are for times when we are in a recession like now and not when unemployment is low, there's no reason for it.