Why I might vote Conservative or Libertarian.

[Machjo]

Why I might vote Conservative or Libertarian.

I'm a socialist at heart in some respects wanting to promote social justice, yet I see little of that in the NDP's campaign priorities. It talks about helping the middle class. I belong to the middle class and don't need help, thank you very much. As a socialist party, shouldn't the NDP be talking about helping the homeless and destitute instead?

The NDP and Liberal Party talk about Bilingual judges and the right of high flyers to receive a 7-up in either official language on an international Air Canada flight. Shouldn't they be focusing on the linguistic rights of Deaf and other less advantaged linguistic communities instead, or maybe increasing the availability of Braille?

The NDP worry more about the ideological goal of Medicare funding going towards acquiring property and Medicare policy blocking private investment rather than delivering medical services.

NDP nationalism worries about Canadian Content rules as if culture stops at the border rather than seeing media as a window on the world and a potential bridge between peoples.

Though free trade benefits rich and poor countries, it generally benefits poorer countries more (making it a wonderful equalizer), yet the NDP and Liberal Parties are generally less keen on it than the Libertarian and Conservative Parties.

For these and many other reasons, voting for a Libertarian candidate might be preferable. The Libertarian Party seems too keen on lowering taxes too steeply and too quickly (which concerns me as a fiscal conservative who likes to see balanced budgets), but I think it has the right idea on other fronts. By reducing media funding, it would allow me to fund the media of my choice with my own money. By cutting subsidies to the middle class, it would free me to give my money to the charity of my choice to those who really need it. By cutting back on official bilingualism, it would free yet more of my money that I could again give to the charity of my choice to help Deaf and other less advantaged linguistic communities rather than forcing me to subsidize the privileges of those who need help the least.

Since I am unaware of a Libertarian candidate in my riding yet, I could consider a Conservative candidate maybe, though I would have to give that one serious thought given the Conservative Party's support for C-51 and the erosion of civil liberties generally.

At present, it's up to the NDP and Liberal and Green Parties to win my vote. Until a party directs my taxes towards those who need them the most, it's best to let me take care of that myself.

[TimG]

Since I am unaware of a Libertarian candidate in my riding yet, I could consider a Conservative candidate maybe, though I would have to give that one serious thought given the Conservative Party's support for C-51 and the erosion of civil liberties generally.

One thing to keep in mind: for better or for worse the courts in Canada have been extremely proactive when it comes to protecting people's rights. Things like a prisoner's right to vote is guaranteed when in most other countries it is considered an absurdity. For that reason any excessive measures are not going to survive a court challenge. OTOH, the Conservatives are the only party that cares about limiting the size of government. Under the NDP or the Libs the government will expand even faster and that will result in an erosion of individual rights in the long run. For those reasons, I feel the CPC is the best choice for the Libertarian voter in this election even if they are far from ideal. Edited August 18, 2015 by TimG

[Freddy]

Why have the government do something you can do better for far less??? Why is it that you want a welfare state so badly???

Edited August 18, 2015 by Charles Anthony
deleted quote of re-copied Opening Post

[Keepitsimple]

Why have the government do something you can do better for far less??? Why is it that you want a welfare state so badly???

I thought it was a thoughtful post. Considering voting for a Libertarian or Conservative candidate is far from "wanting a welfare state so badly".

[waldo]

I thought it was a thoughtful post. Considering voting for a Libertarian or Conservative candidate is far from "wanting a welfare state so badly".

according to Stephen Harper, Canada is already there; as Stephen Harper said: "Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it."

[waldo]

welfare state? Oh my... what's this: Stephen Harper reinvents the welfare state:

Tuesday’s report by the Parliamentary Budget Office stated what should have been obvious: about a third of what Ottawa spends on its Universal Child Care Benefit already goes to families who don’t need or use daycare.

The report estimates that when the benefit is expanded this year to include all children under 18, a little over half will go families who don’t need or use daycare.

[-1=e^ipi]

Consider spoiling your ballot instead. If you despise all the parties, that may be a better way to express your dislike of your options.

[socialist]

Consider spoiling your ballot instead. If you despise all the parties, that may be a better way to express your dislike of your options.

The proper electoral thing to do if one is dissatisfied with all choices is to write Decline on the ballot. That is official.

[Machjo]

I remember my first and last local meeting as a new NDP member years ago. I came in thinking we could talk about increasing Government funding to teach poor children abroad how to read and write (when I was still unaware of the poverty that existed on some reserves), but instead I quietly listened in shock as this circle of middle class university students were talking about how the Government should subsidize their bus passes. That's what I call gimme gimme socialism.

[Machjo]

I've cast my share of blank ballots.

[Machjo]

I can see a benefit to the welfare state in peinciple. Pure capitalism has its flaws and a proper welfare state can correct these. For instance, it can create media in a sign language and so create employment for the Deaf in the process. It can provide quality universal compulsory education to ensure children from poor families have a more equal chance to become productive members of society. These are just some examples of the benefits of a proper welfare state.

But once it becomes a form of gimme gimme socialism, it's lost all sense of purpose.

[Moonlight Graham]

The CPC aren't in any way close to being libertarian. Government spending has continued to rise substantially over the last 10 years. Gov spending actually decreased over numerous years in the 90's (for the first time going back to the 1950's) under the Chretien gov. Instead of expanding welfare programs like the NDP likely will do, the CPC increases our military and participation in foreign wars, our prison system, government surveillance, creates tax break systems etc. Lots of spending, just different ways of spending.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/government-spending

Edited August 18, 2015 by Moonlight Graham

[Smallc]

The CPC aren't in any way close to being libertarian. Government spending has continued to rise substantially over the last 10 years.

On the other hand, federal spending to GDP is at its lowest level since the 1950s.

As for expanding the military, the Conservatives really haven't done all that much of that, when you consider their cuts. Their at about the levels they were when they took office.

[Moonlight Graham]

On the other hand, federal spending to GDP is at its lowest level since the 1950s.

As for expanding the military, the Conservatives really haven't done all that much of that, when you consider their cuts. Their at about the levels they were when they took office.

Stats? Links?

Also, how has spending to GDP been over the last 10 years. CPC has slowed the growth of gov spending the last few years, but it still rises.

[Smallc]

Stats? Links?

Also, how has spending to GDP been over the last 10 years. CPC has slowed the growth of gov spending the last few years, but it still rises.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/canadian-military-spending-by-the-numbers

http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/images/cprv34n3-1-graph.jpg

The quote I was thinking of was for federal tax revenue. It's now lower than at any point since 1950, and spending is on their way there. Only the recession and the forced stimulus caused the rise that you see in the chart.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Smallc

[Moonlight Graham]

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/canadian-military-spending-by-the-numbers

http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/images/cprv34n3-1-graph.jpg

The quote I was thinking of was for federal tax revenue. It's now lower than at any point since 1950, and spending is on their way there. Only the recession and the forced stimulus caused the rise that you see in the chart.

Thanks for the links. I agree that stimulus was obviously a factor, but so was austerity to come with the recession. Also, how was stimulus "forced"? We don't really know how the CPC would have spent without the recession. Either way, they still didn't react to the recession or gov spending like a libertarian would. A libertarian likely wouldn't have bailed out any companies etc.

[Smallc]

Thanks for the links. I agree that stimulus was obviously a factor, but so was austerity to come with the recession. Also, how was stimulus "forced"? We don't really know how the CPC would have spent without the recession. Either way, they still didn't react to the recession or gov spending like a libertarian would. A libertarian likely wouldn't have bailed out any companies etc.

I agree they're not libertarians - but the Conservatives didn't plan any stimulus. That was the bogus reason for the coalition crisis: 2008, remember (the real reason was the planned end of political subsidies)? Thats why I call it forces, and that's why I laugh whenever people who hate the Conservatives (mind you, I'm almost one of them) talk about their debt and deficit numbers - numbers that they didn't plan for.

[eyeball]

...the Conservatives are the only party that cares about limiting the size of government.

While increasing it's power.

Under the NDP or the Libs the government will expand even faster and that will result in an erosion of individual rights in the long run.

It's a little late to cry now. It's not like it hasn't been pointed out before the folly of conservatives blindly supporting their guys increasing the power of the state when it's in their hands without considering what life will be like when the state is in the hands of the people they fear and loath.

You're your own worst enemies.

[Moonlight Graham]

I feel the CPC is the best choice for the Libertarian voter in this election even if they are far from ideal.

I'm going to go with the Libertarian Party of Canada as the best choice for the libertarian voter this election.

[TimG]

I'm going to go with the Libertarian Party of Canada as the best choice for the libertarian voter this election.

Libertarian party is only running 80 or candidates. Most people don't have that option (a problem noted in the op).

[Freddy]

I thought it was a thoughtful post. Considering voting for a Libertarian or Conservative candidate is far from "wanting a welfare state so badly".

Maybe I miss understood the OP. It sounded to me he/she would consider voting NDP only if they return to a welfare state policy?

[waldo]

(which concerns me as a fiscal conservative who likes to see balanced budgets)

.

.

I could consider a Conservative candidate maybe

if, as you say, "you like to see balanced budgets"... don't fall into the myth of Harper Conservative "fiscal conservatism"! The following graphic per the Marc Garneau twitter feed... graphic includes source data reference to 'Finance Canada - Fiscal Reference Tables 2014; again... Harper Conservatives inherited a $13.8 billion surplus from the Liberal party... and turned it into... this:

[socialist]

if, as you say, "you like to see balanced budgets"... don't fall into the myth of Harper Conservative "fiscal conservatism"! The following graphic per the Marc Garneau twitter feed... graphic includes source data reference to 'Finance Canada - Fiscal Reference Tables 2014; again... Harper Conservatives inherited a $13.8 billion surplus from the Liberal party... and turned it into... this:

Don't let waldo deceive you with this simplistic chart. The Liberals governed under much better world conditions. The CPC reign has been more challenging. Also, remember what the Liberals did with the EI fund to make things look better than they actually were. To me the liberals and NDP represent the further erosion of private property rights. be careful listening to the charlatans here.

[cybercoma]

the Conservatives are the only party that cares about limiting the size of government.

Is that why they're tied for the largest government in our history?

[cybercoma]

Don't let waldo deceive you with this simplistic chart. The Liberals governed under much better world conditions.

The Conservatives already blew through the surpluses before Harper even recognized that there was a recession. It wasn't until October of 2008 that the markets crashed and they didn't bottom out until March 2009. By then the Tories already blew through the surpluses handed to them by the Liberals and were into deficit spending already, in spite of the warnings about the markets. Two and a half years ago the Dow Jones recovered to an all-time high and continues to climb. Meanwhile, Harper has had a majority government since 2011, able to pass whatever legislation he chooses and still can't balance the books. He's had 8 years of deficit spending, added more to the debt than any other government in history, and has one of the largest cabinets this country has ever seen. Meanwhile, he's cut services to veterans, food inspections, rail safety, Stats Canada, and the list goes on. The mismanagement under the Tories is seriously off the charts.

Edited August 18, 2015 by cybercoma