NDP: Official Opposition or Jack Layton as PM?

[ToadBrother]

With the LPC almost totally destroyed. Letting the NDP in power to self destruct is the only sure way to let the CPC rule forever. Or at least for at least a generation.

Not much of a fan of democracy, I see.

Parties that do not have contenders, or serious contenders, and thus guarantee themselves generational or multigenerational rule almost inevitably fall into despotism and incompetence. A vibrant functional democracy requires that any government have a potent vital replacement ready and waiting to take it away.

Edited April 26, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Smallc]

Not in BC.

It did in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia.

[ToadBrother]

It did in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia.

And it's not like the other two parties have always delivered brilliant Provincial governments either. Alberta is drowning in public debt, its "conservative" government having literally raped a decade or two's production, and it still has sucky public services.

[Smallc]

and it still has sucky public services.

The largest in Canada I believe (or was Newfoundland and Labrador's slightly larger?).

[Evening Star]

With the LPC almost totally destroyed. Letting the NDP in power to self destruct is the only sure way to let the CPC rule forever. Or at least for at least a generation.

Do you still think Mr Canada is an NDP supporter, Scotty?

[TimG]

A vibrant functional democracy requires that any government have a potent vital replacement ready and waiting to take it away.

Cannot agree more.

[Mr.Canada]

Not much of a fan of democracy, I see.

Parties that do not have contenders, or serious contenders, and thus guarantee themselves generational or multigenerational rule almost inevitably fall into despotism and incompetence. A vibrant functional democracy requires that any government have a potent vital replacement ready and waiting to take it away.

Francisco Franco led a vibrant, economically successful country without and opposition so it can be done.

[ToadBrother]

Francisco Franco led a vibrant, economically successful country without and opposition so it can be done.

He ran a corrupt despotic dictatorship whose successes were in no small part due to the successes in the rest of Europe and the blind eye that Spain's eyes turned to Franco's abuses.

If Franco's Spain was such a damned good thing, then why didn't the Spanish people support the attempted coupe?

I see you've backed to making daft and unforgivable statements again. If you think dictatorships are so damned good, Mr. C, then I encourage to vacate our democracy for, say, China.

Edited April 26, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Mr.Canada]

He ran a corrupt despotic dictatorship.

Yet it was a vibrant successful society where many people did very well for themselves.

[ToadBrother]

Yet it was a vibrant successful society where many people did very well for themselves.

Could you define "vibrant society" here? Spain's fortunes were in no small part due to external circumstances. Internally, if you fell on the wrong side of the coin, you found Franco's Spain less than accommodating.

Why do you hate democracy so much?

[Mr.Canada]

Could you define "vibrant society" here? Spain's fortunes were in no small part due to external circumstances. Internally, if you fell on the wrong side of the coin, you found Franco's Spain less than accommodating.

Why do you hate democracy so much?

He was a strong leader, that's what I like. I don't hate democracy.

[ToadBrother]

He was a strong leader, that's what I like.

He was a tyrant. I can understand you liking a strong leader if its someone like Gladstone, Churchill or Ronald Reagan, but Franco? He was a despot.

I don't hate democracy.

But the kind of strong leader you seem to admire cannot exist in a functioning democracy.

[Wild Bill]

Yeah, because the Tories have such wonderful members. Remind me again how many were caught in various scandals?

I wouldn't go there if I were you, Mr. Lionstorm! I have direct and personal witnessing of a VERY prominent NDP member who installed a 15 year old girl in an apartment in Ottawa as his mistress! He was married at the time. He strung the young girl along for several years before he dumped her and went back to his wife.

I know this because she was the sister of one of my best friends at the time. I will not mention his name here. No need to cause trouble after all this time.

So don't try getting all "holier than thou" on us!

Besides, ALL parties have had scandals! It's what happens when you make them up out of human beings! Because it happens to all parties, it really becomes an irrelevant factor, except when one party does something truly unique, like stealing over 140 million directly from tax payers!

[nittanylionstorm07]

Cheap labour is not slave labour. Workers in developing economies may be horribly impoverished, but that is better than having no job at all.

Those people wouldn't have jobs because when manufacturing jobs come back, the left would suddenly remember that manufacturing jobs cause pollution and kick them out again.

Or the best board members and execs will choose to work for corporations located in countries that don't have such measures and we will be stuck with poor managers running money losing ventures being propped up by a bloated government printing paper to sustain itself until the economy collapses under the weight of its own unsustainable debts and moral self-righteousness.

Why do you care more about workers in other countries than those in your own? It's a problem that runs rampant with North American conservatives.

Also, the government wouldn't be in the situation they are in now if corporations decided to responsibly handle themselves in the first place.

Edited April 26, 2011 by nittanylionstorm07

[Wild Bill]

When will you understand that if businesses want to be a part of our society they can contribute to it in more ways than having a place for people to sell their labour. If they want an educated, healthy and secure labour force, they will pay into the systems that ensure that.

In any case, we're talking about keeping the corporate taxes below the US level. And, Layton has only proposed raising them back up to the 2006 levels. This is hardly edgy and disastrous Commie talk.

The louder you whine, the more unreasonable the right seems. Especially considering the massive profits banks, telecommunications and oil companies are raking in.

Yeah, and if wishes were horses my granny wouldn't bump her ass when she hopped!

When will YOU understand that the world goes the way it will and doesn't care about your wishes? You can't demand that companies become "educated". They will simply leave!

As a matter of fact, they have been leaving! In droves! And it sounds like you are in favour of driving them away!

[nittanylionstorm07]

The first social policies in the west were started by Otto von Bismarck. He implemented them to support business and keep the socialists from gaining power. Many of our social policies are based on this social insurance system. Much of the reasoning used by politicians through the middle of the 20th century was that security was needed for the workforce to keep them happy and productive, but most importantly to avoid work-stoppages. I'm not being facetious at all when I say many of the initiatives were started or implemented by conservatives, but I should be clearer and specify conservative reasoning when it comes to Canada.

That's more of a moderate approach that is neither conservative nor socialistic as it adapts some of the better aspects of socialist systems into a capitalistic society.

[nittanylionstorm07]

People work in sweatshops because it is better than the alternative. No amount of moralizing will change that. Close down the sweatshop by telling them they can't sell into west markets and you will force people onto the street. I bet you would scream bloody murder if a government did that in Canada. Why do you care nothing for people outside your borders?

Why do you care nothing for people inside your own?

The combined provincial/corporate tax rate 30-40% too. Harper is trying to get this down to 25%.

We aren't talking about provinces... we are talking about federally. If you want to talk about provinces, go to St John's, Halifax, Charlottetown, Fredericton, Quebec City, Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, Victoria, Whitehorse, Yellowknife, or Iqaluit.

Companies don't care. We do. We should be paying the cost so companies have a reason to employee high priced Canadian workers.

Companies have to pay a price for settling somewhere, period. Property is property. Income is income. Services are services.

Also, I'm pretty sure companies care about having a well-educated, healthy workforce. The ones that don't are the ones that take their jobs to China.

Edited April 26, 2011 by nittanylionstorm07

[TimG]

Why do you care nothing for people inside your own?

I do. I want to see a healthy business climate that encourages jobs to be created here. I want to keep the cost of living low by importing those things that can be produced cheaper elsewhere.

Trade barriers make simply reduce employment and increase the cost of living. If the barriers are high enough you will send the economy into a depression.

[Wild Bill]

Because Labour is the single highest cost for these people. Our taxes could be 0 it wont bring those jobs back. The math doesn't work.

Not necessarily true, Mr. P! My field was electronic manufacturing. Labour was a very small factor in that business, since so much of the assembly was done by automated machinery.

Yet that business collapsed after 9/1/11, leaving for China and Ireland. Why? Taxes and government required paperwork are the reasons I heard most often!

I have a good friend who worked for a local steel company in their HR department. She told me they had to pay for at least 6 employees just to provide all the data for StatsCan and other government departments! The government doesn't use their own people. They require businesses to do it for them!

It's too easy just to blame labour. Gives a nice diversion for the government, too!

[nittanylionstorm07]

I do. I want to see a healthy business climate that encourages jobs to be created here. I want to keep the cost of living low by importing those things that can be produced cheaper elsewhere.

Trade barriers make simply reduce employment and increase the cost of living. If the barriers are high enough you will send the economy into a depression.

Cost of living goes up with respect to other countries, yes; however, as long as there are executive salary and profit caps, higher wages result in not as high prices, but you can get higher tax revenue which can be reinvested into the community for better services and a higher standard of living. This eventually feeds itself into increasing the value of the country's economy and currency.

[TimG]

Cost of living goes up with respect to other countries, yes; however, as long as there are executive salary and profit caps, higher wages result in not as high prices

Do you really believe that crap? It is complete nonsense. Trade barriers means a higher cost of living. Period. This makes the people who are being "protected" much poorer. There is no debate about that. You are no different from an evangelical claiming that the earth is only 6000 years old if you believe that trade barriers do not increase prices. Edited April 27, 2011 by TimG

[Harry]

Go Habs Go!

The man behind the smile: Getting to know Jack Layton

His defining moment

On April 14 in Montreal, Mr. Layton spent the night with reporters and his entourage at a bar attached to the city’s Bell Centre watching the Montreal Canadiens in a playoff game. The picture of his cheer when the team scored a goal spread across Quebec like a tipped can of orange paint.

That followed his successful appearance on the hit show Tout le monde en parle, and his successful performances in both the English- and French-language debates. The following day, his poll numbers began to rise in Quebec, and have yet to come down.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-man-behind-the-smile-getting-to-know-jack-layton/article2000126/

[CPCFTW]

Cost of living goes up with respect to other countries, yes; however, as long as there are executive salary and profit caps, higher wages result in not as high prices, but you can get higher tax revenue which can be reinvested into the community for better services and a higher standard of living. This eventually feeds itself into increasing the value of the country's economy and currency.

WTF is this?!? That isn't economics, that is your own pseudo-science BS you made up to justify your positions. You are clueless, quite spouting nonsense and go read an economics book.

[Moonbox]

Cost of living goes up with respect to other countries, yes; however, as long as there are executive salary and profit caps, higher wages result in not as high prices, but you can get higher tax revenue which can be reinvested into the community for better services and a higher standard of living. This eventually feeds itself into increasing the value of the country's economy and currency.

Wow. That's the most magical and fantastical economics statement I've ever read on this board. nittany...would it be accurate to assume that your education in economics ended in high school?

[KeyStone]

Even though Sun News, the CBC and the Conservatives keep saying there will be a coalition if the Cons don't win a majority, that doesn't make it true. We've had plenty of minority governments without a change of power, and there is no reason to think there will be one now.

A minority government means that the people did not give the "winning party" a mandate to do whatever they want. It must work with at least one other party, if they wish to get things done. If they are being so unreasonable that they are unable to cooperate with a single other party, and the other parties, then the other parties can form a coalition and try to work out things themselves.