NDP Make Big Move in Latest EKOS Poll

Bryan · May 29, 2015

This is a stupid argument on so many levels.

Yes, I think we have already established that you aren't a fan of reality.

cybercoma · May 29, 2015

Yes, I think we have already established that you aren't a fan of reality.

Your argument says that someone who makes $7 million a year is poor if they spend all of their money. I'm sorry, but that's beyond stupid. It's moronic even.

Bryan · May 30, 2015

Your argument says that someone who makes $7 million a year is poor if they spend all of their money. I'm sorry, but that's beyond stupid. It's moronic even.

It is a moronic statement, for sure, but you're the one making it. It's certainly not what I said.

BC_chick · May 30, 2015

I was following the thread and it certainly sounded like that's exactly what you said.

On Guard for Thee · May 30, 2015

It's the only meaning that really matters. Wealth is your net, not your gross. If you don't get to keep it, it's not a relevant number.

Ummm, you cant keep what you dont make.

cybercoma · May 30, 2015

I was following the thread and it certainly sounded like that's exactly what you said.

Just another thread where poor Bryan is completely misunderstood, but won't bother to explain his ideas further. If I push him on it, he'll just say "go back and read what I said." What he said is clearly that you're not wealthy if you spend all of your money, no matter how much money you make. But now that he realizes how painfully stupid that argument is he'll just say I misunderstood it and never elaborate. This is the point where I stop bothering and let the discussion stand for itsels, so that those with the ability to think rationally can see how stupid the argument is.

Bryan · May 31, 2015

What he said is clearly that you're not wealthy if you spend all of your money

Not what I said. I said if you don't get to keep it. Gross and net are not the same thing. You could be making big a large gross, but have expenses related to making that money that exceeds that income. You could have other expenses beyond your control as well.

cybercoma · May 31, 2015

Tell me more about expenses that exceed income and how tough it is for someone in the top quintile, compared to how expenses exceed income for those in the bottom quintile.

Bryan · May 31, 2015

Different people have different degrees of difficulty dealing with their given situations. That doesn't change the fact that one must actually be accumulating assets to be wealthy.

jacee · May 31, 2015

Different people have different degrees of difficulty dealing with their given situations. That doesn't change the fact that one must actually be accumulating assets to be wealthy.

Hmm ... Well one thing's for sure:

If you're spending a lot of money, you're not poor!

.

BC_chick · May 31, 2015

Different people have different degrees of difficulty dealing with their given situations. That doesn't change the fact that one must actually be accumulating assets to be wealthy.

You need to be fiscally responsible to accumulate assets - and you can do that in any income bracket - but that has absolutely nothing to do with how earnings are used to define income class. You're talking about two very different things.

Edited May 31, 2015 by BC_chick

Bryan · June 1, 2015

Hmm ... Well one thing's for sure:

If you're spending a lot of money, you're not poor!

.

Again, the money may not necessarily be theirs to spend.

jacee · June 1, 2015

Again, the money may not necessarily be theirs to spend.

You're being very unclear so I don't know what your point is.

.

Vancouver King · June 11, 2015

CBC reports today: NDP Doubles Support In Atlantic Canada At the Expense of Liberals.

"A poll released Wednesday shows many Atlantic Canadian voters are ready to switch from red to orange, with the Liberals' massive lead softening in favor of an NDP surge."

"Halifax-based Corporate Research Associates found support for the NDP in the four Atlantic provinces jumped from 14% to 29% in just 3 months.

"The poll shows supports for the Liberals dropped from 56% to 43% in the same time period. The support for the Conservatives changed marginally, from 26% to 24%."

............................................................................................

Taken together with Nanos' recent soundings suggesting Mulcair's NDP has edged ahead of it's rivals nationally, expect the old line parties to adjust their political fire towards the far left. The NDP magic in Alberta continues it's national reach.

cybercoma · June 11, 2015

43% for the Liberals and 29% for the NDP is not an NDP lead in the Maritimes. Not even close.

jacee · June 11, 2015

It's a huge upward trend for the NDP thee, though ... a wave ...

I think people are seeing Mulcair as a better bet than Trudeau both for getting rid of Harper, and as PM.

Globe and Mail:

mulcair-poised-for-clear-shot-at-prime-minister-as-ndp-surges-in-polls

Edited June 12, 2015 by jacee

Keepitsimple · June 11, 2015

It's a huge upward trend for the NDP ... a wave ...

I think people are seeing Mulcair as a better bet than Trudeau both for getting rid of Harper, and as PM.

Globe and Mail:

mulcair-poised-for-clear-shot-at-prime-minister-as-ndp-surges-in-polls

Go Tom go!

PIK · June 12, 2015

Tom will never be PM.

cybercoma · June 12, 2015

Tom will never be PM.

The NDP will never govern Alberta....

Keepitsimple · June 12, 2015

Tom will never be PM.

I can't count him out. Trudeau continues to be a pathetic alternative to Harper - so much so that the NDP and Liberals may not just split the vote on the Left - he may garner a majority of it but just as importantly, a good number of Liberals may just end up sitting on their hands. That will prevent the Tories from sneaking up the middle. If the cards fall the right way, we might just find Mr. Mulcair heading a minority government. All mostly thanks to Mr. Trudeau. A good portion of Canadians were looking for a solid, trustworthy alternative to Harper - and the Liberals blew it again by chasing the shiny pony. All that said, the incumbent government is more often behind in the polls - especially after 10 years - but people only start being serious a couple of months before the election. It will indeed be interesting.

Edited June 12, 2015 by Keepitsimple

dre · June 12, 2015

Not what I said. I said if you don't get to keep it. Gross and net are not the same thing. You could be making big a large gross, but have expenses related to making that money that exceeds that income. You could have other expenses beyond your control as well.

What the hell are you even talking about?

Your "income" is calculated by subtracting those expenses from gross. If youre expenses approach your gross then you dont HAVE a big income.

Good grief.

Bryan · June 12, 2015

If youre expenses approach your gross then you dont HAVE a big income.

Yes. Thank you for repeating what I just said.

dre · June 12, 2015

Yes. Thank you for repeating what I just said.

WWWTT · June 12, 2015

It's a huge upward trend for the NDP thee, though ... a wave ...

I think people are seeing Mulcair as a better bet than Trudeau both for getting rid of Harper, and as PM.

Globe and Mail:

mulcair-poised-for-clear-shot-at-prime-minister-as-ndp-surges-in-polls

The NDP will never govern Alberta....

Tom will never be PM.

Ya there's this thing called polls and trends.

Check out my status update.

Clear movement towards an NDP federal majority government!

Ahhh but you guys still have your good old opinions.

At least one of you guys understand how these things work.

WWWTT

edited to add I'm not sure if I should be adding cybercoma into this because he's always making sarcastic comments and this makes it difficult to gauge his opinion from time to time.

Edited June 12, 2015 by WWWTT

cybercoma · June 12, 2015

My statement was a sarcastic response to "Tom will never be PM," since 6 months ago just about everyone would say "The NDP will never govern Alberta." Yet here we are with Rachel Notley as the first minister of Alberta.