Argus Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Shrinking TFSAs and cancelling income splitting, as well as raising corporate taxes is...just not in a way that most people will notice. That won't be nearly enough. And the daycare program is just one of many, many promises. They've been lowballing the cost, but Quebec's less ambitious program costs about $3.5 billion per year. I'm also not sure how raising corporate taxes is going to help stimulate the economy.... 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
poochy Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Imagine how much it would cost tom implement that program in very small or isolated communities, mind boggling. Quote
Evening Star Posted August 21, 2015 Author Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) "social and civil liberty issues" I don't really care about, So what you're actually asking is whether the NDP might appeal to you more than the Liberals, since 'progressive' is a bad thing for you? Sorry, I'm just not clear on where your questions are going. and if I'm not mistaken, aren't the Liberals also proposing some form of National Daycare? Not as far as I'm aware? I scanned the policy documents they've released and don't see this. They have been talking about a Child Care Benefit, which is not the same thing. What Labour participation policies are the NDP promoting? I thought they were after "small business", I would think further unionized labour would be a net-negative for "small business".... Examples, from section 1.1 of their policy book: l Improving labour laws to make benefits more accessible for workers on contract or in parttime positions. m Adopting social responsibility criteria for companies recognizing their responsibility to employees, the environment, community, consumers, and shareholders. n Creating industrial sector councils involving representatives of industry, workers, and governments. o Facilitating worker participation within companies to develop more democratic, transparent, and efficient workplaces I'm going to level with you, though: I have basically zero trust that the LPC will do anything they promise to, based on their previous record and JT's general flakiness. I also generally believe that they have been ineffective in the House for more or less the past decade. Edited August 21, 2015 by Evening Star Quote
Evening Star Posted August 21, 2015 Author Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) .likewise their promise to legalize pot...... Mulcair promises decriminalization "the minute we form government". Edited August 21, 2015 by Evening Star Quote
Smallc Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 That won't be nearly enough. And the daycare program is just one of many, many promises. They've been lowballing the cost, but Quebec's less ambitious program costs about $3.5 billion per year. I'm also not sure how raising corporate taxes is going to help stimulate the economy.... Is quebec's program less ambitious? We're talking about only 1M spots across the country, and at double the cost of what Quebec is (or recently was). Quote
Argus Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Is quebec's program less ambitious? We're talking about only 1M spots across the country, and at double the cost of what Quebec is (or recently was). They've raised the cost to $20 based on need, and by less ambitious I'm talking raw numbers. And even Quebec's system only has enough spaces for less than half those who need them. But they keep increasing the coverage (and cost) and I suspect it would be the same with a national system. Eventually, especially with a 'progressive' government, they wold face an irresistible urge to increase the numbers to cover all who want it, and I believe the cost of that has been pegged in earlier studies at as much as $16.5 billion per year. 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
overthere Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 It was 14 years ago. It's very possible his thinking changed in 14 years. Mulcair has a handicap in that his party is itself polarized and he does not have control of signifciant factions within the party. Every NDP leader knows that to gain a majority, they must move to the center and be seen to have moved. So far, that has been impossible. The Tories did it in the last decade. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Derek 2.0 Posted August 22, 2015 Report Posted August 22, 2015 So what you're actually asking is whether the NDP might appeal to you more than the Liberals, since 'progressive' is a bad thing for you? Sorry, I'm just not clear on where your questions are going. No, the inverse. The assumption being, if I were a "progressive social democrat" (I'm not fyi) voter, which party of the three (NDP/Liberals/Green) would align closer to my own values. Furthermore, if the assumption is based on selecting a party that could form Government, which party would I select (this discounting the Greens)? So far, from what both parties propose, to my surprise, and leadership style, I'm to now assume that Justin Trudeau's Liberals would make the more viable choice. Not as far as I'm aware? I scanned the policy documents they've released and don't see this. They have been talking about a Child Care Benefit, which is not the same thing. I'd assumed the Liberals were still promising daycare, since they've been promising it since the early 2000s (later 90s?). I'm going to level with you, though: I have basically zero trust that the LPC will do anything they promise to, based on their previous record and JT's general flakiness. I also generally believe that they have been ineffective in the House for more or less the past decade. What makes you feel an NDP Government would be different? I mean to actually pass legislation, it would have to receive assent from a Tory led Senate, either forcing Mulcair to fill vacant Senate seats and/or relying upon Liberals senators and some number of Tories to support would be NDP legislation. Do you feel Tories and Liberals are going to rubber stamp legislation for an NDP Government? Quote
Evening Star Posted August 25, 2015 Author Report Posted August 25, 2015 Wow. Repealing C-51 is still a trump card. The NDP are also on at least the right page wrt post-secondary education. I'd need to read the Lib plan on that area. Quote
Smallc Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 I'm really considering voting NDP. It's like they've switched places with the Liberals. Quote
Argus Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 Wow. Repealing C-51 is still a trump card. The NDP are also on at least the right page wrt post-secondary education. I'd need to read the Lib plan on that area. Why would they even have a 'plan' on post secondary education? That's entirely within the provincial area of responsibility. Does he have a plan to fix the potholes on my street too? 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
Argus Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 I'm really considering voting NDP. It's like they've switched places with the Liberals. You haven't read their policy manual, have you... 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
Smallc Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 You haven't read their policy manual, have you... You and I both know the leader is far more important than what the nutcase grassroots may think. The NDP are set to increase the GIS, DND spending, and to decriminalize marijuana. Then there's this: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/is-tom-mulcair-a-closet-tory-from-israel-to-thatcher-seven-reasons-critics-say-ndp-leader-is-too-conservative Their stupid daycare plan aside, I'm not seeing anything to not like based on their promises thus far. Quote
poochy Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 You and I both know the leader is far more important than what the nutcase grassroots may think. The NDP are set to increase the GIS, DND spending, and to decriminalize marijuana. Then there's this: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/is-tom-mulcair-a-closet-tory-from-israel-to-thatcher-seven-reasons-critics-say-ndp-leader-is-too-conservative Their stupid daycare plan aside, I'm not seeing anything to not like based on their promises thus far. You cant pass a bill when the crazies in your party wont vote for it, he won't get away with being a liberal in an NDP's clothing for very long, he might be near the center, but most of his party is not. Quote
Smallc Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 You cant pass a bill when the crazies in your party wont vote for it, he won't get away with being a liberal in an NDP's clothing for very long, he might be near the center, but most of his party is not. That's definitely true. I really wish Harper were gone, it would make my decision far easier. Quote
cybercoma Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 It's Doug Ford's time to shine! Give Harper the boot! Quote
Smallc Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 It's Doug Ford's time to shine! Give Harper the boot! Not quite. Quote
Argus Posted August 26, 2015 Report Posted August 26, 2015 (edited) You and I both know the leader is far more important than what the nutcase grassroots may think. Is he? Perhaps. But you're forgetting one thing Mulcair has definitely committed to, and that's changing our election laws so that there's proportional rep. If Mulcair is, as you seem to be thinking, more conservative than his 'nutcase grassroots' would like, what do you think is going to happen when you only need 3% to have a political party? I'm thinking a sizable number of those lefty NDP people are going to demand their policies be carried out or else they'll split and form a new social democratic party of some sort, a party which would immediately have power, and which, unlike in the present system, expect to be re-elected fairly easily. They don't have to actually do it, mind. The threat would almost certainly be sufficient. I expect the Tories to lose people to similar splitting, by the way. Edited August 26, 2015 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
Evening Star Posted August 27, 2015 Author Report Posted August 27, 2015 NDP policy book taken down, to be replaced by a platform based on "financial considerations". Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 27, 2015 Report Posted August 27, 2015 NDP policy book taken down, to be replaced by a platform based on "financial considerations". So Team Mulcair will decide the parties forthcoming policies........And I thought NDP supporters were opposed to a powerful PMO Quote
Smallc Posted August 27, 2015 Report Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) From the link However, a party spokesman said that just as the Conservative and Liberal leaders aren’t bound by the policy resolutions of their own members, Mulcair is not obliged to campaign on everything his grassroots put in their policy booklet. ----- Lavigne said the platform has been created with “input” from the party, caucus and leader, and added that affordability is one factor behind promises being made. Sounds like every other party, including the Conservatives. I'm sure many people from the Reform days would be aghast at Harper...including Harper. It is, in reality, part of becoming a pragmatic alternative. Edited August 27, 2015 by Smallc Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 27, 2015 Report Posted August 27, 2015 Is he? Perhaps. But you're forgetting one thing Mulcair has definitely committed to, and that's changing our election laws so that there's proportional rep. If Mulcair is, as you seem to be thinking, more conservative than his 'nutcase grassroots' would like, what do you think is going to happen when you only need 3% to have a political party? My question, if the NDP and Liberals feel changing our voting system will make us more democratic, why are they adverse to having a national referendum on the topic? Quote
Evening Star Posted August 27, 2015 Author Report Posted August 27, 2015 My question, if the NDP and Liberals feel changing our voting system will make us more democratic, why are they adverse to having a national referendum on the topic? This would be better, I agree. I think this is what the Greens are proposing when they say they will create a Democratic Voting Commission and "[t]he recommendations of the Commission will be presented as options to Canadian voters." Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 27, 2015 Report Posted August 27, 2015 This would be better, I agree. I think this is what the Greens are proposing when they say they will create a Democratic Voting Commission and "[t]he recommendations of the Commission will be presented as options to Canadian voters." Indeed, or the Conservatives to an extent, with their proposed law requiring any proposed changes be put before Canadians first. I seem to remember, to past proposed changes in Ontario and British Columbia were rejected........ Quote
socialist Posted August 29, 2015 Report Posted August 29, 2015 Indeed, or the Conservatives to an extent, with their proposed law requiring any proposed changes be put before Canadians first. I seem to remember, to past proposed changes in Ontario and British Columbia were rejected........ Therein lies Mulcair's big problem. If he gets a majority, he'll be Bob Rae 2.0, torn between the "eat the rich, nationalize the banks" side of the party and those on the more centrist/modern side. Quote Thankful to have become a free thinker.
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.