Argus Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 In what ways? Depends on what you think of as Left. I do know that the moment he took power the money taps started flowing. His tight fisted history as finance minister was forgotten as he promised everything and anything to everyone in order to get votes. I was really not impressed at all by him appointing two barely competent (if they are at all) judges to the Supreme Court simply because a politically important question was coming up on gay marriage and he wanted to gay rights activists there. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bleeding heart Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Depends on what you think of as Left. I do know that the moment he took power the money taps started flowing. His tight fisted history as finance minister was forgotten as he promised everything and anything to everyone in order to get votes. That's not a leftist phenomenon, but an ordinary multi-partisan one. Unless we're going to philosophically blame some opague entity called "the Left" for what people on the Right do with equal aplomb...which hardly seems reasonable. I was really not impressed at all by him appointing two barely competent (if they are at all) judges to the Supreme Court simply because a politically important question was coming up on gay marriage and he wanted to gay rights activists there. If you're right, I take your point. Except that same-sex marriage, at least in Canada, can hardly be deemed a left-right issue, at least not anymore. A clear majority supports it, ranging from about 60% to over 70%, depending on poll questions. Edited March 25, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Argus Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 I think most Canadians who watch QP will reserve their opinion on Mulcair until they see his performance as the new leader and what his views for the party and Canada. Most of the views so far by some of the media is that he's a hot-head, with a bad temper. Aren't most Frenchmen? Don't most MP's who sit across from the Tories get hot under the collar in the House and people sitting at home watching? I don't care if he has a temper. I care about what he stands for and what policies the NDP want to use for their election platform. I also care about what policies they're not mentioning. Will Mulcair bring rationality to the NDP as we see from some of the social democratic parties in Europe, particularly northern Europe? Or will we see another leftists dilettante who flings money far and wide at every leftist cause he cherishes? Will he embrace intelligent economic policies or are we going to see another Dalton McGuinty on the federal level, flushing billions into environmental schemes that do nothing, and raising taxes again and again and again (and thus destroying industry). And will he, like the leftists of the past, zealously intrude into people's lives by using government power to tell people how they need to think, how they need to act? Are we going to see some version of the American affirmative action program (long embraced by the NDP) forced on the private sector? As someone who admires nordic societies and how they're run, here is what I fear from any NDP government: Ever higher taxes. To the NDP, the middle class has always seemed to be just a wallet with no bottom. They care nothing about their problems, only about the poor. Affirmative action programs. The NDP have always seemed to care far more about brown people than white people. Large increase in immigration and in refugee acceptance rates. The NDP have always seemed to be more interested in the well-being of non-Canadians than Canadians. Much more generous social programs with very little restriction which discourage people from working. Softheartedness in tandem with softheadeness Laws to forbid 'anti-social' behaviour such as we see in parts of Europe. For example, you can actually go to jail for insulting someone's ethnic or racial or religious background in England or France. The laws on what you can write about in France make our human rights commissions seem positively restrained. And frankly, in discussions with those on the left here and elsewhere, I see very little commitment to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of association, or expression or religion. There seems a tendency among the left towards the thought that freedom of speech is great - unless they disagree with what you say - in which case you shouldn't be allowed to say it. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Tilter Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 First, with both Harper and Mulcair, the centre of federal politics has moved to the right - and become far more reasonable/pragmatic. Second, the political game is such that this was inevitable. Swing voters (the median voter) are boxed in and will have to choose between the NDP's Mulcair and the Conservative's Harper. There is no longer a mushy middle. Third, given that regionalism more than ideology drives federal politics, the fact that Mulcair is the great-grandson of Honoré Mercier may play a role in what happens next. Fourth, it is ironic that an ex-provincial Liberal now leads the federal NDP and an ex-provincial NDP is de facto leader of the federal Liberals. If the federal Liberals were a stock, I would put a sell advisory. What's so unusual about that? The lost parties are now both led by a turncoat and it looks like the NDP & Liberals can switch back & forth at will--- It must be confusing for them to remember to what party they belong at any given moment---- they'll have a lot of "Reagan" moments in the coming years. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 On top of that there have been Leaders in the past with Dual Citizenship who strengthened our country and made it a place to grow and invest in.. Whereas its been some Single Citizenship Prime Ministers who have sold out Canada. We had a Prime Minister with dual citizenship: John Turner (British and Canadian). It's nothing more than fear-mongering that someone should be less committed to Canada because they hold French citizenship. We are a nation borne of the French and British. No one at all saw it as a contradiction that Turner was both British and Canadian and no one saw it a contradiction for Canadians, at least until recently, to consider themselves British subjects, although we've been independent for generations. Moreover, Tony Clement hold dual-citizenship and he holds a portf0lio in cabinet. Dual-citizenship is only a problem to partisans that choose to make it a problem because it suits their biases. People who don't like Mulcair are going to complain about it, while turning a blind eye to the fact that the Conservative government itself has Ministers with dual-citizenship. Quote
madmax Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 (and thus destroying industry). Great total quote.. I am just quoting this short piece... with you speaking Provincially of Dalton...and taxes on Industry. Taxes on Industry have not been raised but have been lowered by both the Harper and McGuinty governments. Much like the Harris, Eves, and Chretien and Martin governments before them.... So with regards to destroy Industry one has to look alot deeper then taxation policy. I have yet to see a government in the last 20 years Federal or Provincial that understands industry, but they do fall into Lobbiest traps... Other then this small quibble.. Good Post.... Quote
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 If you're right, I take your point. Except that same-sex marriage, at least in Canada, can hardly be deemed a left-right issue, at least not anymore. A clear majority supports it, ranging from about 60% to over 70%, depending on poll questions. While I would love to agree with you, 60-70% of Canadians are Left-leaning. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Will he embrace intelligent economic policies or are we going to see another Dalton McGuinty on the federal level, flushing billions into environmental schemes that do nothing, and raising taxes again and again and again (and thus destroying industry).You're blaming de-industrialization on Dalton McGuinty. You don't actually believe that do you? Quote
Argus Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Great total quote.. I am just quoting this short piece... with you speaking Provincially of Dalton...and taxes on Industry. Taxes on Industry have not been raised but have been lowered by both the Harper and McGuinty governments. Much like the Harris, Eves, and Chretien and Martin governments before them.... So with regards to destroy Industry one has to look alot deeper then taxation policy. In McGuinty's case it wasn't taxes on industry but other factors. However, McGuinty did enormously increase taxes (and spending) in Ontario. That's especially true if you consider his 'health care premium' which actually didn't go to health care at all, but into general revenues. His environmental efforts on behalf of green energy have resulted in huge and ongoing increases in electricity costs which have been entirely unhelpful to manufacturers. My fear with the NDP is we would see both those things happening, plus some sort of green energy tax on industries based on the European CO2 cap and trade thing. I'm already paying more than half my income in taxes and getting, so far as I can see, precious little in return. I don't need another government which is going to increase my taxes in order to spend my money on people who are much less productive than me on the basis of "fairness". Edited March 25, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Great total quote.. I am just quoting this short piece... with you speaking Provincially of Dalton...and taxes on Industry. Taxes on Industry have not been raised but have been lowered by both the Harper and McGuinty governments. Much like the Harris, Eves, and Chretien and Martin governments before them.... So with regards to destroy Industry one has to look alot deeper then taxation policy. I have yet to see a government in the last 20 years Federal or Provincial that understands industry, but they do fall into Lobbiest traps... Other then this small quibble.. Good Post.... It's quite clear that all of the de-regulation and lowered-taxes of the last 30 years have done absolutely nothing for de-industrialization. In the new economy, rather than being paid for our jobs, we pay businesses for our jobs (w/ tax-breaks, new infrastructure, land-grants, etc). Quote
Argus Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) You're blaming de-industrialization on Dalton McGuinty. You don't actually believe that do you? I didn't blame it on Dalton. I meant that I feared a federal NDP would take up his policies and make them worse because they have more power. And because the NDP have long wanted higher taxes and more controls on industry. The loss of manufacturing jobs in Ontario is more related to the rising Canadian dollar than McGuinty's incompetence. But his idiotic green energy initiatives have certainly not helped given how they have increased energy rates. I can see the NDP doing far worse by way of emissions taxes on industry, for example, and costly new regulations for safety, for environmental oversight, for affirmative action, etc. Edited March 25, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Wild Bill Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Most of the views so far by some of the media is that he's a hot-head, with a bad temper. Aren't most Frenchmen? What a racist statement! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 I didn't blame it on Dalton. I meant that I feared a federal NDP would take up his policies and make them worse because they have more power. The loss of manufacturing jobs in Ontario is more related to the rising Canadian dollar than McGuinty's incompetence. But his idiotic green energy initiatives have certainly not helped given how they have increased energy rates. Do you think we shouldn't pursue "green" initiatives at all or do you have a specific problem with the way he pursued them? I suppose this is more a provincial politics subject, so I don't really want to derail the thread. However, I'm curious because I want to know what "green" policies would be acceptable to you at the federal level. I don't live in Ontario anymore, so I'm not familiar with McGuinty's "green" policies. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 NDP doing far worse by way of emissions taxes on industry, for example, and costly new regulations for safety, for environmental oversight, for affirmative action, etc. You don't think safer and cleaner industry is a worthwhile goal? Quote
Argus Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) You don't think safer and cleaner industry is a worthwhile goal? Let me answer that by referencing my post above about the inefficiency of the public service. In the federal public service, the most overly bureaucratized, painstakingly slow and frustrating sector is that of Human Resources. Why is that? It seems simple. The job is to hire people, and to promote them, preferably based on merit. Simple enough. But we want to be fair, too, right? Who can argue against fairness in hiring and promotion!? Nobody, of course. However, the fairness portion of the job has grown and grown to the point where by my estimate 95% of the role of HR is ensuring fairness, not ensuring the job (ie, hiring and promoting people) actually gets done in anything like an efficient manner. So they develop elaborate, time-consuming processes to ensure fairness at all levels. Every question to be asked in every test is analyzed and cross-analyzed for its necessity and relevance to the tasks of the position to be filled, and to ensure it doesn't discriminate on any basis against anyone. This result in lengthy disagreements with managers stating what they need candidates to have and HR types telling him how he can't test for that for a wide variety of reasons. It results in a process where even the simplest of processes to hire say one person, for a clerk job, can easily take over a year of effort on the part of managers and HR staffers. To hire a large influx of people at a higher level for a more complicated job can take far longer. But we all want fairness, right? And if the cost of hiring one person goes from say, $100 to $1000 or $10,000 is it still a good thing to ensure fairness? The job of business, any business, is to make money. Inefficiency costs money. Time costs money. The more elaborate regulatory processes you saddle industry with, the less profit there is, and the less likelihood that industry will grow and prosper. So certainly safety is important. Certainly environmental concerns are important. I just have very little confidence that an NDP government will put my care or interest into ensuring such expansions of existing regulations are done with the interests of industry in mind. How many NDP types here, for example, think that the best answer to the emissions of the Alberta energy sector is simply to close it down? And Mulcair? As far as I know he is no friend of Alberta's energy sector. Is he a friend of any other sector he thinks might be a polluter? Will his new environmental rules care much for what profits those industries can make? I don't have a lot of confidence they will. Edited March 25, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
waldo Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Dual-citizenship is only a problem to partisans that choose to make it a problem because it suits their biases. People who don't like Mulcair are going to complain about it, while turning a blind eye to the fact that the Conservative government itself has Ministers with dual-citizenship. of course, back in January, Harper Conservatives 'floated' this as a trial balloon against Mulcair... with Harper himself taking direct shots. As I said earlier, you will now begin to see the best worst coming forward as Harper Conservatives will begin to frame Mulcair. On this issue, I expect they will use Layton's own words attacking Dion's dual citizenship. And so it begins... Stephen Harper : "Just to be clear, these cases have come up in the past, and obviously it’s for Mr. Mulcair to use his political judgement in this case," Harper said. "In my case, as I say, I’m very clear. I’m a Canadian and only a Canadian." Quote
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 I think most Canadians who watch QP will reserve their opinion on Mulcair until they see his performance as the new leader and what his views for the party and Canada. Most of the views so far by some of the media is that he's a hot-head, with a bad temper. Aren't most Frenchmen? Don't most MP's who sit across from the Tories get hot under the collar in the House and people sitting at home watching? I hope he is a hot head...The opposition in this country has been weak and fearful of the Harper Government for too long.It's time the opposition found it's "inner asshole" and embraced it because we are dealing a whole bunch of them currently occupying the government benches... Nice guys finish last... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Boges Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 The Conservatives need to play less favorites and need to produce some attack ads for the NDP and Mulcair and make the NDP feel noticed. Why? Very few riding the CPC won were battles between them and the NDP. They triumphed because of the collapse of the Liberal Party. A strong NDP is good because they take away from the Liberals seat count in ridings that wouldn't consider voting Tory. Quote
Newfoundlander Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Why? Very few riding the CPC won were battles between them and the NDP. They triumphed because of the collapse of the Liberal Party. A strong NDP is good because they take away from the Liberals seat count in ridings that wouldn't consider voting Tory. In western Canada it was between the Conservatives and NDP. Ontario is more Conservative/Liberal races but that could change. If the Conservatives don't attack Mulcair now they could likely miss their chances. Layton was basically un-attackable in recent years because Canadians new him so well and Conservative attacks on him didn't work. One reason Bob Rae has been attacked was because they knew Canadians were warming up to him and that he could end up becoming the permanent leader. If they allow Mulcair to become well known to Canadians they may lose their chance of defining him as a communist. Quote
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 In western Canada it was between the Conservatives and NDP. Ontario is more Conservative/Liberal races but that could change. If the Conservatives don't attack Mulcair now they could likely miss their chances. Layton was basically un-attackable in recent years because Canadians new him so well and Conservative attacks on him didn't work. One reason Bob Rae has been attacked was because they knew Canadians were warming up to him and that he could end up becoming the permanent leader. If they allow Mulcair to become well known to Canadians they may lose their chance of defining him as a communist. I think they've started already because I saw that within 1 minute of his election last night,the Conservatives called him an "opportunist,in love with high taxes,a job killer,and,divisive"... I thought the last one was particularily hillarious because,as we all know,Mr. Harper has been a concensus builder... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Boges Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 In western Canada it was between the Conservatives and NDP. Ontario is more Conservative/Liberal races but that could change. If the Conservatives don't attack Mulcair now they could likely miss their chances. Layton was basically un-attackable in recent years because Canadians new him so well and Conservative attacks on him didn't work. One reason Bob Rae has been attacked was because they knew Canadians were warming up to him and that he could end up becoming the permanent leader. If they allow Mulcair to become well known to Canadians they may lose their chance of defining him as a communist. Did they not release a statement attacking him within seconds of him winning? Quote
Boges Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 I thought the last one was particularily hillarious because,as we all know,Mr. Harper has been a concensus builder... Well he did unite two parties that were separated for a decade. During the coverage yesterday of the convention I heard the term "Anyone but Mulclair" a lot. Quote
Newfoundlander Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 Did they not release a statement attacking him within seconds of him winning? I heard they did. I believe you said there was no need of it though, and I disagree. Quote
Boges Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 I heard they did. I believe you said there was no need of it though, and I disagree. Well they are the opposition and they're the only other party with a legit permanent leader. The Liberals also apparently released attack statements as well. Quote
jbg Posted March 25, 2012 Report Posted March 25, 2012 He cut spending, he cut the public service, he cut taxes and he balanced the budget, what's un-fiscally conservative about that? By downloading expenses to the provinces? That's more like whack-a-mole than true cuts. Phoney baloney. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
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.