Why are socialists so different between countries?

[Argus]

Unless you're planning o introduce Iranian-style anti-conversion laws, how do you plan to prevent a person from choosing any particular religion?

You don't, but not allowing in lots and lots of Muslims would certainly help.

[Second-class Canadian]

The same way nature has for billions of years.

Zero regulations and survival of the fittest.

Ironically enough, this is one of the things that attracts me to libertarianism. A rational policy is far superior to libertarianism, but libertarianism is superior to an irrational policy. As a result, the libertarian candidate would usually be the best default candidate when none of the others are worth voting for. Sad, really.

[-1=e^ipi]

the only differences remaining between parties being so superficial as to make voting almost insignificant.

There are still differences, but even on issues where the parties differ, all the parties still have terrible positions. For example, with respect to consumption tax vs income tax. It would make sense to tax shift to relatively more consumption tax. But we see the conservatives want to lower the consumption tax, where as the NDP wants to keep the consumption tax as is and raise income tax or corporate tax. Tax policies get dumbed down to low-tax = bad, high-tax = good and none of the parties care about which type of tax is more efficient.

So, how do we shake this up?

I hate all the parties so I just spoil my ballot. Maybe if more people spoiled their ballot rather than voting for the least bad option, parties would respond to that or new parties would form to try to appeal to the ballot-spoilers. Although with our first-past-the-post system, it is difficult for new parties to form.

Ultimately I think we need new political parties. Because our current political parties are terrible from the foundation up.

[Second-class Canadian]

A good example, there are some things a competent government can do better than the private sector can, but if the government can't convince of of its competence in spending the money wisely and passing wise laws, then maximum deregulation is the next best option, leaving us to give to worthier charities.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Second-class Canadian

[-1=e^ipi]

A rational policy is far superior to libertarianism, but libertarianism is superior to an irrational policy. As a result, the libertarian candidate would usually be the best default candidate when none of the others are worth voting for. Sad, really.

This made me laugh. Very true.

[Freddy]

Ironically enough, this is one of the things that attracts me to libertarianism. A rational policy is far superior to libertarianism, but libertarianism is superior to an irrational policy. As a result, the libertarian candidate would usually be the best default candidate when none of the others are worth voting for. Sad, really.

I feel the same way. I also think there is one way to get things right, and thousands of ways to get it wrong. That ratio isn't in our favour. And it's why like a doctor I rather do no harm unless, I am 100% sure I'm doing the right thing. Edited July 4, 2015 by Freddy

[Second-class Canadian]

Stats Can 2011 shows about 50% of Canadians over 16 being functionally literate in neither official language. This leaves a politician of any political stripe with one of two options: cater to the electorate's ignorance or challenge it and educate it.

Then there's the problem of the prisoner's dilemma. If one candidate decides to exercise his patriotic duty and challenge the electorate's beliefs, and the other candidate strategically caters to them for personal gain, we know who will win. Somehow we'd have to get all candidates to agree to challenge and educate the electorate and agree on wise fundamentals and disagree only on legitimate disagreements for the good of the country. But in today's partisan environment, courting the illiterate vote is the goal.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Second-class Canadian

[PrimeNumber]

I feel the same way. I also think there is one way to get things right, and thousands of ways to get it wrong. That ratio isn't in our favour. And it's why like a doctor I rather do no harm unless I am 100% sure I'm doing the right thing.

And that's libertinism.

Libertarianism believes at it's foundations that corporations can be trusted more than our government to do the right thing. It believes in the deregulation of corporate restrictions, citing that any and all transgressions can be solved by a court system without any significant oversight.

A court system that would more than likely be at the whim of the highest bidder. No thanks, I'll take my chances with the government over corporations that care about nothing other than pandering to their shareholders interests. Interests that often include no one but themselves. This is why Libertarianism will never gain any significant momentum in this country.

[Second-class Canadian]

Of course libertarianism has its problems, but if the NDP, Liberals, Conservatives, and Greens suddenly saw the wise parking their votes with the Libertarian Party, maybe then they'd start to smarten up for the good of the people.

Let's consider this: Canada's literacy rate will probably not even be an election issue.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Second-class Canadian

[Freddy]

Libertarianism believes at it's foundations that corporations can be trusted more than our government to do the right thing. It believes in the deregulation of corporate restrictions, citing that any and all transgressions can be solved by a court system without any significant oversight.

A court system that would more than likely be at the whim of the highest bidder. No thanks, I'll take my chances with the government over corporations that care about nothing other than pandering to their shareholders interests. Interests that often include no one but themselves. This is why Libertarianism will never gain any significant momentum in this country.

How is that different from what we have now???

So our government is libertarian then. You described what we have today perfectly.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Freddy

[PrimeNumber]

How is that different from what we have now???

Under Harper, not too much. The right has always been very pro-corporation, as if the corporations give a crap about them.

Under a government that panders to corporations a little less, who knows? Let's elect one and find out.

[Second-class Canadian]

Under Harper, not too much. The right has always been very pro-corporation, as if the corporations give a crap about them.

Under a government that panders to corporations a little less, who knows? Let's elect one and find out.

So what party will raise taxes without screwing companies over by protectionism?

What party will spend the money wisely? Right now Canada is half illiterate and most Ontario parties prefer to defend the separate school system's overhead costs rather than spend more on literacy education. Federal parties defend official bilingualism at 2.4 billion a year while schools on reserves are underfunded between 2000 and 3000 per student yearly and the adult illiteracy rate there is at 60%.

I don't mind paying higher taxes if they'll go to bread and butter issues like literacy. But it never does. Instead it all goes to special interests. So what's the difference?

Edited July 4, 2015 by Second-class Canadian

[Freddy]

Under Harper, not too much. The right has always been very pro-corporation, as if the corporations give a crap about them.

Under a government that panders to corporations a little less, who knows? Let's elect one and find out.

What Canada needs, to stay relevant is the, capacity to create/attract new corporation that succeed on a global economic scale because of what this country can bring to the table.

At this moment we have fallen behind, and it looks to me we are heading towards irrelevance.

[Second-class Canadian]

What Canada needs, to stay relevant is the, capacity to create/attract new corporation that succeed on a global economic scale because of what this country can bring to the table.

At this moment we have fallen behind, and it looks to me we are heading towards irrelevance.

How do we do that when according to Stats Can 2011 about 50% of Canadians over 16 (and 60% on reserves) are functionally literate in neither official language and such an appalling literacy rate is not even an election issue?

Hey guys, come to Canada and hire our illiterate workers.

[PrimeNumber]

What Canada needs, to stay relevant is the, capacity to create/attract new corporation that succeed on a global economic scale because of what this country can bring to the table.

At this moment we have fallen behind, and it looks to me we are heading towards irrelevance.

It was bound to happen eventually, we don't have any where near the population to support a secondary sector economy anymore. India and China will continue to pull in manufacturing, no matter how hard we fight it. It's just how developing economies work. We are and for the foreseeable suture will be a primary and tertiary Sector economy. Unless of course the government intervenes in it, which the right doesn't want.

We could try and jump on the growing $6.5 Trillion green energy boom that is happening right now, but the right doesn't want that either.

Essentially if we want to save our manufacturing economy our best bet is to absolutely sell ourselves short by lowering every measurable coproate rate we have to try and attract new corporations. Which will work, for awhile. But then there's that pesky thing about affordable living and working conditions and so once share holders and boards see that there are bigger profits to be made overseas or down south in other developing countries than they too will leave.

[Second-class Canadian]

We'look even raise the minimum wage, but never that half are functionally illiterate.

[Second-class Canadian]

Then we'll raise tariffs on you.

[Freddy]

How do we do that when according to Stats Can 2011 about 50% of Canadians over 16 (and 60% on reserves) are functionally literate in neither official language and such an appalling literacy rate is not even an election issue?

Hey guys, come to Canada and hire our illiterate workers.

We continue to pass children regardless if they can read or not. The problem seems to be that we have become ultra sensitive feminist rainbow kittens that can't compete globally due to being unbelievably soft. Edited July 4, 2015 by Freddy

[Second-class Canadian]

We continue to pass children regardless if they can read or not. The problem seems to be that we have become ultra sensitive feminist rainbow kittens that can't compete globally due to being unbelievably soft.

So why is this not a Federal election issue? Adult functional literacy in neither official language on reserves sits at 60%, and that is a Federal responsibility. If we want to promote economic deve lip mental on reserves, improving literacy rates is essential.

[Freddy]

In the case of Canada, I think that Canadian politics have this bad case of 'it's conventional wisdom, and you can't go against conventional wisdom'. And this applies to all parties.

With respect to the GST, it's 'conventional wisdom' that Canadians don't like the GST, therefore no party wants to raise the GST.

With respect to the Healthcare system, it's 'conventional wisdom' that Canadians like their healthcare system, and that only two healthcare systems exist (the USA or Canada; apparently European healthcare systems don't exist in the minds of North American politicians), so no party wants to change the healthcare system because doing so will be seen as American, unpatriotic and treason.

With respect to supply management, it's 'conventional wisdom' that any party that wants to eliminate supply management will lose more votes than they will gain, therefore no party wants to eliminate it.

The same thing is seen with Catholic school systems and the LCBO in Ontario. It becomes 'conventional wisdom', so nothing gets changed.

Because it goes again our ultra sensitive feminist rainbow kitten conventional wisdom.

[Freddy]

So why is this not a Federal election issue? Adult functional literacy in neither official language on reserves sits at 60%, and that is a Federal responsibility. If we want to promote economic deve lip mental on reserves, improving literacy rates is essential.

Because it goes against our ultra sensitive feminist rainbow kitten political conventional wisdom.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Freddy

[Second-class Canadian]

Maybe what we need then is a shakeup. Establish a unified market with another country, maybe the US and Greenland. One we become aware that our illiterate population now has to compete head on with them for jobs, suddenly governs will take education more seriously.

[Second-class Canadian]

Because it goes against our ultra sensitive feminist rainbow kitten political conventional wisdom.

So how do we change that?

[Freddy]

Maybe what we need then is a shakeup. Establish a unified market with another country, maybe the US and Greenland. One we become aware that our illiterate population now has to compete head on with them for jobs, suddenly governs will take education more seriously.

We already are. Immigration. I see more and more immigrants outperforming Canadians at work.

[Second-class Canadian]

We already are. Immigration. I see more and more immigrants outperforming Canadians at work.

I'm certainly pro-immigration, and that helps. But that alone does not make the native population literate.