CPC Leadership Predictions

[Argus]

I don't see how you can have a stronger military and still have a smaller government, less intrusive government, and pay down the debt. A strong military requires a massive increase in taxes, conscription and government control (not ownership) of industry.

It requires choices, that's all. No, it certainly doesn't require conscription or government control of industry.

I note in the news this morning Australia, which is 2/3rds the size of Canada and has no oil, just signed a $50 billion deal with France to buy 12 submarines. Canada, meanwhile, is still trying to make its 4 used submarines we bought off a UK scrap heap work. The Nordic countries have always had strong militaries, with balanced budgets.

[Argus]

Enlightening.

So what's a conservative? What is it that a Red Tory believes in that's not conservative?

A red tory, to my memory, cares mainly about social policy and comparatively little about fiscal policy.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Argus

[overthere]

Enlightening.

So what's a conservative? What is it that a Red Tory believes in that's not conservative?

This whole discussion highlights the unspoken reality of Canada: our political spectrum is very, very narrow. There is really little to choose from between Liberals, Conservatives and NDP. The 'left-right' pigeonholing has little connection to the reality that all parties occupy the center.

[overthere]

It requires choices, that's all. No, it certainly doesn't require conscription or government control of industry.

I note in the news this morning Australia, which is 2/3rds the size of Canada and has no oil, just signed a $50 billion deal with France to buy 12 submarines. Canada, meanwhile, is still trying to make its 4 used submarines we bought off a UK scrap heap work. The Nordic countries have always had strong militaries, with balanced budgets.

Australia has oceans of natural gas, which they sell as LNG to Japan and China.

While Canada was and is flapping our collective gums and getting nothing accomplished, Australia built the infrastructure, secured LNG contracts at high prices, and ate out lunch and ate our economic future. You know, business as usual in both Australia and Canada.

You are right though about Australias military. They have a coherent defence policy which involves looking after themselves for the defence of their country. The policy transcends party politics, nobody disagrees significantly with that despite Australia having a much more volatile recent political history than Canada. It is a sharp contrast to our 'management' of our 'defence'.

[Newfoundlander]

A red tory, to my memory, cares mainly about social policy and comparatively little about fiscal policy.

So to be a conservative you have to care about fiscal policies more than social policies?

[Guest]

The far right seems to care more about social policies than the fiscal variety.

[waldo]

CPC supporters actually think Harper Conservatives were fiscal conservatives! Go figure.

.

[?Impact]

The PC party died because of the GST. Even though it was a necessity.

I concur that the GST implementation play a significant role in the decline of the PC party, but many other issues were at play as well. Unemployment was high, the debt situation was out of control and our deficit had not declined at all during their tenure, even things like the failure to reach agreement on constitutional reform (Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords) was a factor. Probably most of all, the public was just tired and wanted change.

[Bob Macadoo]

You are right though about Australias military. They have a coherent defence policy which involves looking after themselves for the defence of their country. The policy transcends party politics, nobody disagrees significantly with that despite Australia having a much more volatile recent political history than Canada. It is a sharp contrast to our 'management' of our 'defence'.

They don't have the fallback we in NORAD, NATO, etc. exploit.

[PIK]

Nor do they live beside America.

[Argus]

You are right though about Australias military. They have a coherent defence policy which involves looking after themselves for the defence of their country. The policy transcends party politics, nobody disagrees significantly with that despite Australia having a much more volatile recent political history than Canada. It is a sharp contrast to our 'management' of our 'defence'.

Australia has a very close alliance with the US. It is inconceivable that any attack on Australia would fail to draw the US in on their side. Despite this, the Australians are determined to have the capability to defend themselves and to enforce sovereignty of their waters.

In Canada, only the Conservatives have any such interest, and in the Harper government, that was tempered by Harper's pragmatism in pursuit of votes. He knew that the NDP and Liberals, as well as most of the media would strongly oppose any money going to the military, and so Canadians who believe in a strong military have nowhere to go with their votes if he disappointed them. Which he did. The Canadian military is now on a downward slope which will see its numbers and abilities drastically decline over the coming years while the Liberals redirect money to vote-winning payouts to voters.

[Argus]

So to be a conservative you have to care about fiscal policies more than social policies?

There are many definitions of conservative. But tradition plays a major role in anything that doesn't directly impact fiscal policy. The phrase 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' is a reasonably apt description of a conservative belief. If you want to change what's working, in other words, be prepared to demonstrate that the new thing will definitely be an important improvement, and worth the cost and upheaval. If you can't, then go away. Conservatives believe in paying the bills as they come in, saving for the future, and limiting both the size of government and government's ability to interfere with the lives of citizens.

In terms of fiscal policy there is, to a conservative, things government MUST do, and then everything else. You pay for what government must do, and if money is left over, then you consider what else to do. If no money is left over then that's that. A lot of what government does not is not necessary. It's done because this or that group feel it would be a good thing. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't .But it all costs money which is taken from the pockets of those who earned it.

[Argus]

The far right seems to care more about social policies than the fiscal variety.

Canada doesn't HAVE a far right in political terms. And your belief social conservatives are 'far right' is silly. If you examine the typical hot button social issues like abortion, gay marriage, assisted suicide and the death penalty anywhere from a third to close to half of Canadians are on the 'social conservative' side of the question. That is NOT far right. Far right would be Nazis and white supremacists, and they have no political support in Canada - unlike the far left, because of the left's continuing fascination with Marx and Lenin.

[Argus]

CPC supporters actually think Harper Conservatives were fiscal conservatives! Go figure.

.

They were the Pragmatist Conservative party. They were somewhat fiscal conservative, but only if the cost in political terms wasn't too great. Otherwise they were quite willing to spend money to buy votes. Of course, compared to the current Liberals yes, they were indeed fiscally conservative.

[Argus]

Nor do they live beside America.

Irrelevant. The Americans would defend Australia against any conceivable enemy in that part of the world. Besides, if you cede protection to another then you basically cede jurisdiction and sovereignty.

If disputes arise in the north they will be decided between the Russians and Americans, neither of whom recognizes our claims, and Canada will have nothing to say in the matter. We don't even have ships capable of getting there, after all, and will not be building any. We're going to spend billions more on the arts instead.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/budget-2016-liberals-to-pump-1-87b-into-culture-1.2828143

Edited April 27, 2016 by Argus

[Newfoundlander]

There are many definitions of conservative. But tradition plays a major role in anything that doesn't directly impact fiscal policy. The phrase 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' is a reasonably apt description of a conservative belief. If you want to change what's working, in other words, be prepared to demonstrate that the new thing will definitely be an important improvement, and worth the cost and upheaval. If you can't, then go away. Conservatives believe in paying the bills as they come in, saving for the future, and limiting both the size of government and government's ability to interfere with the lives of citizens.

In terms of fiscal policy there is, to a conservative, things government MUST do, and then everything else. You pay for what government must do, and if money is left over, then you consider what else to do. If no money is left over then that's that. A lot of what government does not is not necessary. It's done because this or that group feel it would be a good thing. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't .But it all costs money which is taken from the pockets of those who earned it.

None of this answers my question really but I'm sick of you trying to explain all of this.

[Derek 2.0]

Irrelevant. The Americans would defend Australia against any conceivable enemy in that part of the world. Besides, if you cede protection to another then you basically cede jurisdiction and sovereignty.

Its not, and is the basis for the Australian defense posture........they have been nearly burnt by both the British and Americans, have had their territory bombed and invaded by the Japanese, and have had their own Cold War for decades with one largest Muslim nations on the planet....which is a mere few hours flight time away from Northern Australia........

The Australian views on national defense are shaped by their own history.........in relation to Canada, and potential Tory leaders, ours is based on our own history and the reality that we live next to the World's largest Superpower.........

National Defense, though a red meat issue with the Tories, will play little in selecting the next leader of the CPC, and though you dump on him, Peter Mackay was by far the most popular MND (among the troops) since Allan McKinnon's brief stint.

[Smallc]

Australia has a very close alliance with the US. It is inconceivable that any attack on Australia would fail to draw the US in on their side. Despite this, the Australians are determined to have the capability to defend themselves and to enforce sovereignty of their waters.

It's a long way from the US or Japan to Australia.

[Argus]

It's a long way from the US or Japan to Australia.

Much of the US pacific fleet is based overseas.

[Smallc]

Much of the US pacific fleet is based overseas.

Yes, in Japan.

[Argus]

Yes, in Japan.

The US has got ships pretty much anywhere there's likely to be action. Do you think Indonesia is going to build a big fleet of warships overnight and launch a sneak attack on Australia before the US notices anything is even happening?

[Smallc]

The US has got ships pretty much anywhere there's likely to be action. Do you think Indonesia is going to build a big fleet of warships overnight and launch a sneak attack on Australia before the US notices anything is even happening?

I can't believe you're trying to argue that Australia isn't more isolated from the US than us.

[Argus]

I can't believe you're trying to argue that Australia isn't more isolated from the US than us.

Can you suggest any possible circumstance where there would be rising friction and tension between Australia and another sizeable country which would not give the US lots and lots and lots of time to get involved before anything actually happened?

The Australians just have too much pride to be freeloaders and let someone else take care of them.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Argus

[Smallc]

Can you suggest any possible circumstance where there would be rising friction and tension between Australia and another sizeable country which would not give the US lots and lots and lots of time to get involved before anything actually happened?

The Australians just have too much pride to be freeloaders and let someone else take care of them.

Australia spent less than us until about a decade and a half ago. Their circumstances are now different in their opinion.

[Charles Anthony]

#StopThreadDrift