Federal Election Polls

[Evening Star]

No it means the jobs are created in the economy - not necessarily by the company in question. For example, a company that lowers it prices because of the tax cuts would allow its customers to expand because they now have lower input costs. Attempting to attribute jobs to a specific company would create bad incentives and probably cause more harm than good.

This makes some sense, actually...

[cybercoma]

No it means the jobs are created in the economy - not necessarily by the company in question. For example, a company that lowers it prices because of the tax cuts would allow its customers to expand because they now have lower input costs. Attempting to attribute jobs to a specific company would create bad incentives and probably cause more harm than good.

Companies don't lower their prices because of tax cuts. Companies don't control their prices; markets do.

[Smallc]

Companies don't lower their prices because of tax cuts. Companies don't control their prices; markets do.

That isn't completely true. Companies have to make money. If they are taxed less, they have more money available, and so they can lower their margins. That puts downward pressure on the market.

[punked]

That isn't completely true. Companies have to make money. If they are taxed less, they have more money available, and so they can lower their margins. That puts downward pressure on the market.

In some models and Some markets yes. However their are many of markets where it is already saturated and a larger margin is welcomed so no savings what so ever would be passed on. There is no one size fits all solution and there are so many different factors that depending on your model these tax cuts would do very little for anyone but the profits of companies.

[ToadBrother]

In some models and Some markets yes. However their are many of markets where it is already saturated and a larger margin is welcomed so no savings what so ever would be passed on. There is no one size fits all solution and there are so many different factors that depending on your model these tax cuts would do very little for anyone but the profits of companies.

You're quite right on this score. This simplistic direct line drawn in the sand between lower taxes and higher employment ignores a lot of factors. One has to be careful not to produce a "jobless" recovery, in which case corporate tax cuts, in particular, simply end up in the bank or in dividends. I'm not saying businesses shouldn't have cash reserves or that investors shouldn't have dividends, but if you're cutting into government revenues that may be needed during an economic downturn for tax cuts that are supposed to stimulate job growth, only to have it banked, well, your cuts have failed in their intention.

The same goes to job creation plans like Layton's. It's too simplistic to decree that they cannot work, considering that the Federal and Provincial governments have long had wage subsidy programs, with the underlying idea that the government will pay a certain amount of wages to a business (usually a smaller business) if they hire an employee. When you strip away all the fluff, that's not much different than what the NDP are promoting, and certainly both levels of government have seen value in such programs.

I dislike these sorts of debates that amount to outrageous oversimplifications of some pretty complex issues. There's no denying tax cuts can do good, but what good they do must be measured against other costs associated with reducing government coffers. If you're in the midst of a real slowdown, the markets in general are going to be depressed, so just simply throw money at businesses isn't going to convince them to hire oodles of employees, mainly because that increases wage costs, payroll liabilities and so forth without any guarantee that the extra productivity gains that new employees might deliver has any particular place to go. A company in the midst of such economic conditions is much more likely going to sit on the money it saves, and use existing labour capacity more efficiently.

There are also situations in which a government will have to raise taxes, no matter how much it risks competitiveness. The UK is in such a situation. Not pretty, but there are times when tax cuts are inadvisable, and when raising taxes may even be necessary, and blind allegiance to low tax rates could be worse than reasonable hikes.

Edited April 14, 2011 by ToadBrother

[punked]

I think we would agree here.

[TimG]

Companies don't lower their prices because of tax cuts. Companies don't control their prices; markets do.

Companies in a competitive market often cut their prices to increase market share. In any case, prices cuts are simply one way for the benefits of tax cuts to ripple through the economy. In other cases it might be used for capital equipment, wage increases or even more dividends. All of these provide benefits and increase employment over where it would have been without thw tax cuts yet none of these jobs can be directly attributed to the tax cuts.

It issue comes down to opportunity cost. i.e. will money left in the hands of corporations generate more economic activity than money left in the hands of government? The answer in most cases is it is better to leave it with corporations because governments are not in the business of wealth creation.

Now you can argue that some government services are necessary that they are worth the price of reducing economic activity and, in some cases, I would agree with you.

[Harry]

CTV News/Globe​/Nanos Tracking - Conservati​ves lead by 8, NDP trends up to 18 (April 11 to 13)

Nik on the Numbers

The first night after the leaders' English debate has the Conservatives with an 8 point advantage over the Liberals and the NDP trending up to 18.3% support nationally. Support for the Tories stands at 38.9% followed by the Liberals at 31.1%, the NDP at 18.3%, the BQ at 7.5% and the Green Party at 3.1% nationally.

In the wake of the English debate, the Conservatives opened up an advantage over the Liberals in Atlantic Canada outside of the margin of error for the regional sub-sample with support at 49.3% for the Tories compared to 35.6% for the Grits (NDP support stood at 14.0% in Atlantic Canada).

Over the past three days in BC, Conservative support has slid while NDP support has increased although the Conservatives still lead. The ballot support in British Columbia is at 40.8% for the Conservatives, 28.7% for the Liberals, 22.4% for the NDP and 7.3% for the Green Party.

Policy was cited by 54.5% of Canadians as top vote factor.

Visit the Nanos website at 4pm daily to get the latest nightly tracking update on the top national issue of concern and the Nanos Leadership Index comprised of daily trust, vision and competence scores of the leaders.

The detailed tables and methodology are posted on our website where you can also register to receive automatic polling updates.

Methodology

A national random telephone survey is conducted nightly by Nanos Research throughout the campaign. Each evening a new group of 400 eligible voters are interviewed. The daily tracking figures are based on a three-day rolling sample comprised of 1,200 interviews. To update the tracking a new day of interviewing is added and the oldest day dropped. The margin of error for a survey of 1,200 respondents is ±2.8%, 19 times out of 20.

National Ballot Question: For those parties you would consider voting for federally, could you please rank your top two current local preferences? (Committed voters only - First Preference)

The numbers in parentheses denote the change from the three day rolling average of the Nanos Nightly Tracking ending on April 12th (n=1,200; committed voters only n=989). *Undecided represents respondents who are not committed voters (n=1,201).

Canada (n=1019 committed voters)

Conservative 38.9% (-1.0)

Liberal 31.1% (+0.7)

NDP 18.3% (+2.0)

Bloc Quebecois 7.5% (-1.6)

Green 3.1% (-0.7)

*Undecided 15.2% (-2.5)

Vote Driver Question: Which of the following factors are most important to you today in influencing your vote [Rotate]? (n=1,200)

The numbers in parentheses denote the change from the three day rolling average of the Nanos Nightly Tracking ending on April 12th (n=1,200).

Traditionally Vote for Party 7.0% (+0.2)

Party Leader 23.1% (-0.3)

Party Policies 54.5% (+1.8)

Local Candidate 12.5% (-1.1)

Unsure 2.9% (-0.6)

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?hl=en&shva=1#inbox/12f53afd6d5686c7

The latest "CTV News/Globe/Nanos Poll".

Edited April 14, 2011 by Harry

[cybercoma]

The number of non-committed voters almost equals the number of committed voters. It all depends on how many people get out to the polls on May 2. Those non-committed voters could change the entire face of the election, depending on how they vote.

[capricorn]

Visit the Nanos website at 4pm daily to get the latest nightly tracking update on the top national issue of concern and the Nanos Leadership Index comprised of daily trust, vision and competence scores of the leaders.

Here is the daily leadership index following the English debate.

Harper - 122.8 up from 94.9

Layton - 57.3 up from 57.1

Ignatieff - 52.7 up from 49.6

Duceppe - 13.8 down from 14.4

May - 4.1 down from 6.9

More Nanos numbers here.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01265/Nanos_leadership_a_1265173a.pdf

Globe wrap-up of the numbers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/harpers-leadership-rating-jumps-after-debate-but-will-he-hit-glass-ceiling/article1985770/

[Harry]

Here is the daily leadership index following the English debate.

Harper - 122.8 up from 94.9

Layton - 57.3 up from 57.1

Ignatieff - 52.7 up from 49.6

Duceppe - 13.8 down from 14.4

May - 4.1 down from 6.9

More Nanos numbers here.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01265/Nanos_leadership_a_1265173a.pdf

Globe wrap-up of the numbers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/harpers-leadership-rating-jumps-after-debate-but-will-he-hit-glass-ceiling/article1985770/

And tomorrow morning I suppose we will get some feedback from Nanos about the exciting French debate which was quite different from the pitiful English debate which was rigged by Malkin, etc.

Contrasted by the wonderful Francophone moderators the English moderator was more than useless.

God, Anglos are boring sometimes.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Harry

[Harry]

Vraiement. So the NPD is going after some of Harper's seats in Quebec.

Plus de 10 néo-démocrates au Québec, prédit Mulcair

[/b]

Seul député et unique vedette du Nouveau Parti démocratique (NPD) au Québec, Thomas Mulcair croit que son parti pourrait faire élire jusqu'à une douzaine de candidats québécois, dont deux à Québec même. Lui-même se donne d'excellentes chances d'y parvenir, par son travail, mais aussi en raison de liens familiaux...

----

La priorité est de "sortir'' Stephen Harper de là

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/dossiers/elections-federales/201104/13/01-4389629-plus-de-10-neo-democrates-au-quebec-predit-mulcair.php

[punked]

Would love the NDP to take all the seats in Quebec.

[capricorn]

And tomorrow morning I suppose we will get some feedback from Nanos about the exciting French debate which was quite different from the pitiful English debate which was rigged by Malkin, etc.

Malkin?? I guess you mean Paikin. How was the debate "rigged" by Paikin?

Contrasted by the wonderful Francophone moderators the English moderator was more than useless.

What I saw was the Franco mods being biased in favour of Duceppe. I followed live blogging at RDI during the debate and even the Quebec bloggers were saying they were favouring Duceppe in terms of talking time.

God, Anglos are boring sometimes.

If you truly believe that then you're the proof.

[blueblood]

Here is the daily leadership index following the English debate.

Harper - 122.8 up from 94.9

Layton - 57.3 up from 57.1

Ignatieff - 52.7 up from 49.6

Duceppe - 13.8 down from 14.4

May - 4.1 down from 6.9

More Nanos numbers here.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01265/Nanos_leadership_a_1265173a.pdf

Globe wrap-up of the numbers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/harpers-leadership-rating-jumps-after-debate-but-will-he-hit-glass-ceiling/article1985770/

Harper's handlers are taking a risk keeping him muzzled in the french language debate. Why didn't any of the leaders slam duceppe about speaking for all quebecers when he has only about a little more than 1/3 support, harper has to deal with that. Why didn't harper paint duceppe as an economic illeterate. Then there is the skeleton in the closet which is their massive debt caused by unchecked tax and spend trudeau buffoonery.

I think harper needed to go discuss quebecers as individuals and not as a collective, that plays into duceppe's trap.

[punked]

Harper's handlers are taking a risk keeping him muzzled in the french language debate. Why didn't any of the leaders slam duceppe about speaking for all quebecers when he has only about a little more than 1/3 support, harper has to deal with that. Why didn't harper paint duceppe as an economic illeterate. Then there is the skeleton in the closet which is their massive debt caused by unchecked tax and spend trudeau buffoonery.

I think harper needed to go discuss quebecers as individuals and not as a collective, that plays into duceppe's trap.

Because nothing you say would have played well in Quebec and outside of Quebec where it might play well no one would care because the debate was in French. You are in English Canada so what you think is awesome can be different in French Canada sorry.

[Smallc]

Because nothing you say would have played well in Quebec

Economic issues do play in Quebec though. For some reason, everyone ignores them.

[blueblood]

Economic issues do play in Quebec though. For some reason, everyone ignores them.

I think its a bloody serious issue. Quebec has a massive debt that it can't pay for and is unsustainable. All duceppe talks about is wanting to leave and all that jazz, but leaves no plan on how he's going to pay for it and a plan on how to run it. Interesting to note CN rail and CP have expanded into the usa and are doing so around the mississippi river system. Then there is the bond and investor market to deal with, who is going to invest in an unstable and anti-business environment led by the bloc? Then there is the churchill falls hydro project, how much is nfld going to soak them for power?

Economic issues are not important because they aren't exciting as doing something daring like leaving. Its like young kids leaving home to party in the city, but end up living just above poverty because they want that lifestyle. Nobody wants to be lectured on responsibility, but in the usa that dialogue is taking place.

[Smallc]

Nobody wants to be lectured on responsibility, but in the usa that dialogue is taking place.

In fairness, that discussion took place here a long time ago, and most governments are fiscally responsible, despite current hiccups. Even with what the US proposes, they'll still be in as bad of shape if not worse than Quebec.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Smallc

[blueblood]

In fairness, that discussion took place here a long time ago, and most governments are fiscally responsible, despite current hiccups. Even with what the US proposes, they'll still be in as bad of shape if not worse than Quebec.

I don't think that discussion took place in quebec yet. Why does manitoba have respectable books and quebec has gong show books?

[Smallc]

I don't think that discussion took place in quebec yet. Why does manitoba have respectable books and quebec has gong show books?

That's a good question. For a while, Quebec was on the right track (the dept to GDP ratio was getting better), but now.....

[Harry]

So Harper continues to fall, not too much but nevertheless the trend is down for the Conservatives again.

Nik on the Numbers

The Harper Conservatives hold a 10 point advantage over the Ignatieff Liberals looking at the three day tracking ending April 14. Overall, support for the NDP continues to incrementally improve over the past six nights. The improvement has largely been driven by an increase in NDP support in both Ontario and British Columbia.

Tory fortunes continue to slide in British Columbia although the Tories still enjoy a lead. The ballot numbers in BC stand at 38.7% for the Conservatives, 26.6% for the Liberals, 23.0% for the NDP and 11.0% for the Green Party of Canada.

Battleground Ontario remains a tight race with the Conservatives at 39.7% and the Liberals at 39.0% followed by the NDP at 18.2% and the Greens a 3.1% while the Tories continue to have a commanding lead in the Prairies with 56.5% support.

In the wake of the French leaders' debate the BQ enjoy a comfortable lead while the three federalist parties are statistically tied.

More than one in two Canadians (53.6%) cited policy as their top vote driver.

Visit the Nanos website at 4pm daily to get the latest nightly tracking update on the top national issue of concern and the Nanos Leadership Index comprised of daily trust, vision and competence scores of the leaders.

The detailed tables and methodology are posted on our website where you can also register to receive automatic polling updates.

Methodology

A national random telephone survey is conducted nightly by Nanos Research throughout the campaign. Each evening a new group of 400 eligible voters are interviewed. The daily tracking figures are based on a three-day rolling sample comprised of 1,200 interviews. To update the tracking a new day of interviewing is added and the oldest day dropped. The margin of error for a survey of 1,200 respondents is ±2.8%, 19 times out of 20.

National Ballot Question: For those parties you would consider voting for federally, could you please rank your top two current local preferences? (Committed voters only - First Preference)

The numbers in parentheses denote the change from the three day rolling average of the Nanos Nightly Tracking ending on April 13th (n=1,201; committed voters only n=1019). *Undecided represents respondents who are not committed voters (n=1,200).

Canada (n=1020 committed voters)

Conservative 38.7% (-0.2)

Liberal 28.8% (-2.3)

NDP 18.6% (+0.3)

Bloc Quebecois 9.0% (+1.5)

Green 3.7% (+0.6)

*Undecided 15.0% (-0.2)

Vote Driver Question: Which of the following factors are most important to you today in influencing your vote [Rotate]? (n=1,200)

The numbers in parentheses denote the change from the three day rolling average of the Nanos Nightly Tracking ending on April 13th (n=1,200).

Traditionally Vote for Party 7.9% (+0.9)

Party Leader 23.4% (+0.3)

Party Policies 53.6% (-0.9)

Local Candidate 11.6% (-0.9)

Unsure 3.5% (+0.6)

Feel free to forward this e-mail. Any use of the poll should identify the source as the latest "CTV News/Globe/Nanos Poll".

[Harry]

FWIW

Liberals slip back two seats

It was a whirlwind 24 hours, but the Liberals are now back to 73 seats after this morning's Nanos poll brings them back down to earth. As that poll is just replacing yesterday's in the projection, and a new Mustel poll for British Columbia does not shift things much out west, there is little real change in the projection. But the two close ridings the Liberals took back yesterday have slipped just out of their fingers again.

http://www.threehundredeight.blogspot.com/

[Bonam]

FWIW

Heh, projection of 152 seats, 3 short of a majority. I wonder if the cons could effectively govern as if they have a majority if they are just a couple seats short like that. After all, it'd only take a couple opposition MPs being sick now and then.

[wyly]

So Harper continues to fall, not too much but nevertheless the trend is down for the Conservatives again.

but liberals are polling 6 points higher in ontario than they did in 2008 so they'll likely recover seats there...Nik Nanos pointed out a lot of conservative gains are in provinces where they already have seats so it doesn't help them, a 100% conservative vote in albaerta or sask would only gain them 2 seats...