NDP: Official Opposition or Jack Layton as PM?

[cybercoma]

I absolutely hate the argument that companies give people jobs. They don't give people anything. People sell their labour to companies. For being self-proclaimed protectors of the economy, you have a tenuous grasp at best on the simplest economic theories. What's the point in discussing things any further if you people can't even understand this simple fact or the other thing you all seem to keep overlooking: price-elasticity. It's like entering a debate about medical procedures with someone whose only experience is playing the Operation board game.

[TimG]

I absolutely hate the argument that companies give people jobs.

Companies are mobile. Labour is not. This means that we want companies to purchase Canadian labour. Doing this requires a mix of policies. Lower corporate taxes is one.

[nittanylionstorm07]

Companies are mobile. Labour is not. This means that we want companies to purchase Canadian labour. Doing this requires a mix of policies. Lower corporate taxes is one.

Yes, if Canada and America (same discussion in both countries) want to look like third world countries.

The race to the bottom by seeking out cheap near-slave labor needs to stop.

[TimG]

Yes, if Canada and America (same discussion in both countries) want to look like third world countries.

What to corporates taxes have to do with that?

As for the race to bottom: get over yourself. The rest of the world has mostly figured out how to compete and there is nothing we can do about it other than compete as well. That means flexible, highly educated work forces and social infrastructure that minimizes the cost of operating in Canada. This means the people should pay for their services - not companies.

Edited April 26, 2011 by TimG

[nittanylionstorm07]

As for the race to bottom: get over yourself. The rest of the world has mostly figured out how to compete and there is nothing we can do about it other than compete as well. That means flexible, highly educated work forces and social infrastructure that minimizes the cost of operating in Canada. This means the people should pay for their services - not companies.

Free Trade Agreements and low to no tariffs have ruined job opportunities in the western world, for one.

Also corporations have to use infrastructure and services as well, and likewise, they should have to pay for it.

They should help pay for education as well to help ensure that they have a well educated workforce... as well as healthcare to help ensure that they have a healthy workforce. It's mutually beneficial and in their interests to ensure these things.

Conservatives, of course, fail to think of things like this.

[CPCFTW]

I absolutely hate the argument that companies give people jobs. They don't give people anything. People sell their labour to companies. For being self-proclaimed protectors of the economy, you have a tenuous grasp at best on the simplest economic theories. What's the point in discussing things any further if you people can't even understand this simple fact or the other thing you all seem to keep overlooking: price-elasticity. It's like entering a debate about medical procedures with someone whose only experience is playing the Operation board game.

We aren't talking about Marxist economics. Welcome to the 21st century and globalization.

[cybercoma]

Conservatives, of course, fail to think of things like this.

That's not true at all. It was conservatives that put those things into place to help support business. It's people on message boards with no understanding of history that don't see this.

[Battletoads]

Free Trade Agreements and low to no tariffs have ruined job opportunities in the western world, for one.

There's nothing wrong with freetrade... but only between democratic first world countries.

[nittanylionstorm07]

That's not true at all. It was conservatives that put those things into place to help support business. It's people on message boards with no understanding of history that don't see this.

Are you being facetious? Wasn't it the NDP that introduced universal healthcare to Canada? Isn't it the liberals in the US that introduced public education and have attempted to introduce universal healthcare?

[CPCFTW]

Free Trade Agreements and low to no tariffs have ruined job opportunities in the western world, for one.

Also corporations have to use infrastructure and services as well, and likewise, they should have to pay for it.

They should help pay for education as well to help ensure that they have a well educated workforce... as well as healthcare to help ensure that they have a healthy workforce. It's mutually beneficial and in their interests to ensure these things.

Conservatives, of course, fail to think of things like this.

Yes we should impose tariffs and other protectionist measures to keep low skilled jobs within our borders, and the corporations should pay for an educated work force to sew our shoes. What would I do without my $400 Nike shoes sewn by someone with a master's degree in history?

[nittanylionstorm07]

There's nothing wrong with freetrade... but only between democratic first world countries.

Exactly. A FTA between Canada and the US is great (although Canada should help protect their local corporations from takeover by US companies).

A FTA that includes Mexico is not as good. A free trade agreement between any east asian country besides Japan is terrible.

[TimG]

Free Trade Agreements and low to no tariffs have ruined job opportunities in the western world, for one.

So you want to live in a world where billions are condemned to living in abject poverty outside our walled compounds? That is a pretty selfish attitude for a NDP supporter. I thought altruism whas your thing?

Also corporations have to use infrastructure and services as well, and likewise, they should have to pay for it.

The overwhelming amount of tax revenue goes to pay for social programs which should be paid for by the people that use them.

They should help pay for education as well to help ensure that they have a well educated workforce... as well as healthcare to help ensure that they have a healthy workforce. It's mutually beneficial and in their interests to ensure these things.

Those are things are necessary to get the companies to buy high priced Canadian labour in the first place. Why should companies have to pay high labour costs AND the costs of social programs. The people who use the programs should pay for them. Edited April 26, 2011 by TimG

[nittanylionstorm07]

Yes we should impose tariffs and other protectionist measures to keep low skilled jobs within our borders, and the corporations should pay for an educated work force to sew our shoes. What would I do without my $400 Nike shoes sewn by someone with a master's degree in history?

It's better than a flight of capital with no return, encouraging slave labor, and having a lack of jobs.

There is a decent sector of the population that could have many of those lower-skilled jobs just fine. Better them to be employed than not... or do the conservatives really want to keep these people on welfare as a political point? It would not always be people with Master's Degrees, etc.

If you control the profit of companies and salaries of board members and executives so they don't get out of control and efficiently spread the money around, you won't have a problem with $400 shoes, etc.

[nittanylionstorm07]

So you want to live in a world where billions are condemned to living in abject poverty outside our walled compounds? That is a pretty selfish attitude for a NDP supporter. I thought altruism whas your thing?

No, however encouraging sweatshop behaviors is not good either. If we work on ourselves first... THEN we can help others. We can't help others while we are self destructing.

The overwhelming amount of tax revenue goes to pay for social programs which should be paid for by the people that use them.

That's why the individual tax rate is 30-40% and the corporate tax rate is in the upper teens. Corporations still have to pay their share, though.

Those are things are necessary to get the companies to buy high priced Canadian labour in the first place. Why should companies have to pay high labour costs AND the costs of social programs. The people who use the programs should pay for them.

Because if they don't, they will see an ever-decreasing skilled workforce and have to move anyways.

See how this works?

[cybercoma]

Are you being facetious? Wasn't it the NDP that introduced universal healthcare to Canada? Isn't it the liberals in the US that introduced public education and have attempted to introduce universal healthcare?

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.

[CPCFTW]

It's better than a flight of capital with no return, encouraging slave labor, and having a lack of jobs.

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

There is a decent sector of the population that could have many of those lower-skilled jobs just fine. Better them to be employed than not... or do the conservatives really want to keep these people on welfare as a political point? It would not always be people with Master's Degrees, etc.

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.

If you control the profit of companies and salaries of board members and executives so they don't get out of control and efficiently spread the money around, you won't have a problem with $400 shoes, etc.

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.

Edited April 26, 2011 by CPCFTW

[TimG]

No, however encouraging sweatshop behaviors is not good either. If we work on ourselves first... THEN we can help others. We can't help others while we are self destructing.

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?

That's why the individual tax rate is 30-40% and the corporate tax rate is in the upper teens. Corporations still have to pay their share, though.

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

Because if they don't, they will see an ever-decreasing skilled workforce and have to move anyways.

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

[Mr.Canada]

I fully support Jack Layton as official opp leader. He would do a great job keeping Harper on his toes. The Liberals are doing a terrible job at it tbh. Every PM needs to be held to account for their actions. They should be under great pressure daily.

The whole reason for the withholding of info by PM Harper is simply because he knows that he is sitting across from a very weak leader of the opp. He wouldn't try it with Layton. Judging by his actions he respects Layton far more then he does Ignatieff. That's my take anyhow.

[TimG]

I fully support Jack Layton as official opp leader. He would do a great job keeping Harper on his toes.

A narrow minded view. If Layon is off opp he will eventually be govt. Canadians need a strong Liberal party that is able to take over government.

[Smallc]

A narrow minded view. If Layon is off opp he will eventually be govt. Canadians need a strong Liberal party that is able to take over government.

The NDP will be tempered by becoming serious. The same thing happened in the provinces.

[Mr.Canada]

A narrow minded view. If Layon is off opp he will eventually be govt. Canadians need a strong Liberal party that is able to take over government.

It would force Layton and the NDP to move more to the centre. I hate the LPC and want to see it destroyed. I would love the CPC to rule forever but that isn't reality so I'd be fine with the NDP having a turn if they can become for centrist.

[Mr.Canada]

Dble post.

Edited April 26, 2011 by Mr.Canada

[TimG]

I'd be fine with the NDP having a turn *IF* they can become for centrist.

I would rather stick with the party that I know is centrist than risk letting the left wing nut jobs get anywhere near the levers of power.

[TimG]

The NDP will be tempered by becoming serious. The same thing happened in the provinces.

Not in BC.

[Mr.Canada]

I would rather stick with the party that I know is centrist than risk letting the left wing nut jobs get anywhere near the levers of power.

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.