LEAP Manifesto, would you sign?

[Big Guy]

We require examples of a far right agenda and a far left agenda to decide where in between those two we want to stand. Through Harper we have seen the far right. Through the LEAP manifesto we now see the far left. We now have a better idea of where we want to eventually land. I believe it is a healthy process for our democracy.

[overthere]

So dramatic. This document isn't even remotely controversial and it's far from radical. The Netherlands are considering banning petrol and diesel cars by 2025. Now that's radical change.

I expect the Dutch will follow the German model of evangelical eco responsibility and buy their electricity from coal fuelled plants in Poland.

My favorite part of LEAP (today) is: "High-speed rail powered by renewables and affordable public transit can unite every community in this country "... Umm, have they looked at A MAP? Well, no the authors have not looked at a map of Canda, where very few communities are served by rail of any sort, and even fewer served by conventional passenger rail. Then I realized that the authors have looked at a map: of the the Toronto subway system, because that is their life experience. Some things never change in this country.

Edited April 15, 2016 by overthere

[TimG]

Through Harper we have seen the far right.

Nonsense. Harper was not far right by any measure. He certainly did not advocate blowing up the current economic system and replacing it with fairy tails.

[dre]

What is innovative about that? You had an asset that was abandoned which a new group of owners took over and made profitable. The worker-owner is a model that can only work when someone else provided the capital necessary to build the abandoned asset in the first place. Worker owner groups are not set up to build any business that requires a lot of capital investment. Exceptions show up from time to time but they are not the basis for a sustainable economic model.

The asset wasn't abandoned it was sold. And workers only own a part of it, the rest is owned by investors. And the business lost money under the old model but it makes money now. But more importantly the adversarial relationship that often exists between owners and workers is gone. Workers have a stake in profitability and they can see the books. That makes workers more likely to make concessions if those concessions are required to keep the business profitable.

And its not a zero sum game... both owners and workers make more money with this model.

[TimG]

That is not nationalizing, it is more akin to building co-ops

You can play games with the details but it is all the same: the proletariat seizing the means of production from the bourgeoisie.

[overthere]

Nonsense. Harper was not far right by any measure. He certainly did not advocate blowing up the current economic system and replacing it with fairy tails.

But you have to admit that the uber-right fascist Harper dismantled the entire socialist health system, and the entire socialist system of public education- and don't forget how he repealed abortion on demand and banned same sex marriage.

Canada has one of the narrowest political spectrums of any developed cpontry. The notion that Harper or the Cons are right wing by any international measure is laughable. However, it does follow the script that to demonize people you first have to pretend they are demons.

[TimG]

And its not a zero sum game... both owners and workers make more money with this model.

You have not established why this model is 'different'. You have owners who invest their money in the business and you have workers with no skin in the game. This is slightly different from other wood factories since some of the owners are also workers but the principal that the owners make decisions that optimizing their revenue stream is still true. Edited April 15, 2016 by TimG

[?Impact]

You can play games with the details but it is all the same: the proletariat seizing the means of production from the bourgeoisie.

I would say it is the 99% reaping the rewards of their own labour. There is no seizing involved. Did Mountain Equipment co-op seize anything from Eddie Bauer? If that is the case, then I guess you would say that Pepsi seized from Coke?

b.t.w., I didn't know that Fairies had tails.

[dre]

You have not established why this model is 'different'. You have owners who invest their money in the business and you have workers with no skin in the game. This is slightly different from other wood factories since some of the owners are also workers but the principal that the owners make decisions that optimizing their revenue stream is still true.

You didn't read the article. The owners DO have skin in the game.

[TimG]

I would say it is the 99% reaping the rewards of their own labour.

Labour is only one of many inputs needed to create a successful business. Without capital, labour is largely worthless so the argument that the profits of a business "belong" to the workers is specious. They belong just as much to the owners who invested the capital necessary to build the business.

Also, the 'great leap forward' manifesto does not exactly spell out how it would go about replacing owner driven businesses with worker run co-ops but it is safe to assume they intend to use tax system to 'seize' the assets of profitable businesses and use the proceeds to fund the businesses that meet the politburo's approval.

Edited April 15, 2016 by TimG

[TimG]

You didn't read the article. The owners DO have skin in the game.

What do you think this means: "This is slightly different from other wood factories since some of the owners are also workers"? The article makes it clear that not all workers are owners and that becoming an owner requires capital. Edited April 15, 2016 by TimG

[andromeda]

there's another saying.... and it's 'look before you leap'. what the draftees of this manifesto have done is gather up a few feasibility studies which are sketchy at best and decided to try and turn it into party economic and social policy at the national level. no more free trade. community ownership. social justice. if not communism it's pretty far left wing to me. whether it's feasible or not .... who knows? maybe it's only feasible if we ration power to a fraction of what we're consuming today. I would say this.... before plunging the nation into some left wing economic experiment... how about we try it out at the micro level first? let's pick a community of about 100,000 people and try it there. then we'll understand a lot better of what we're up against and how realistic the goal of a country being powered by 100% renewable energy really is.

Edited April 15, 2016 by andromeda

[eyeball]

We require examples of a far right agenda and a far left agenda to decide where in between those two we want to stand. Through Harper we have seen the far right. Through the LEAP manifesto we now see the far left. We now have a better idea of where we want to eventually land. I believe it is a healthy process for our democracy.

The very first thing the progressive LEAP Manifesto mentions is the truth and reconciliation of the violence in Canada's past. What a conservative manifesto needs to launch itself from is the truth and reconciliation of the fraudulence in Canada's past. Only then will we have a better idea of where we should stand.

All we've saw from Harper was resistance to transparency and accountability amidst claims from his defenders that we have plenty already and don't need anymore. Watch now as the same crew treats the Panama Papers like Snowden's revelations - like a threat that's dangerous and undermining.

[overthere]

The very first thing the progressive LEAP Manifesto mentions is the truth and reconciliation of the violence in Canada's past. What a conservative manifesto needs to launch itself from is the truth and reconciliation of the fraudulence in Canada's past. Only then will we have a better idea of where we should stand.

All we've saw from Harper was resistance to transparency and accountability amidst claims from his defenders that we have plenty already and don't need anymore. Watch now as the same crew treats the Panama Papers like Snowden's revelations - like a threat that's dangerous and undermining.

Two out of three guesses: who established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? Hint: it was the same fascist monster who delivered an official apology to indigenous peoples regarding residential schools. Bonus question: which fascist delivered the apology to those of Japanese ethnicity in internment camps?

[BC_chick]

We require examples of a far right agenda and a far left agenda to decide where in between those two we want to stand. Through Harper we have seen the far right. Through the LEAP manifesto we now see the far left. We now have a better idea of where we want to eventually land. I believe it is a healthy process for our democracy.

Liberals and the Conservatives are on the same page when it comes to Alberta's oil and pipelines, the only real difference is JT just likes to take more photo-ops in Paris.

So if Harper was far-right, that means Trudeau is too.

Besides, what's a nice middle-of-the-road approach to something like this? Totally curious because neither Grits or Tories seem to be offering it.

[eyeball]

Two out of three guesses: who established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? Hint: it was the same fascist monster who delivered an official apology to indigenous peoples regarding residential schools. Bonus question: which fascist delivered the apology to those of Japanese ethnicity in internment camps?

So is it fair to say the truth and reconciliation of fraud should also be verboten?

[waldo]

Two out of three guesses: who established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission?

so...... Harper would have 'established' the TRC... irregardless of the fact that establishing it was a part of the settlement decree associated with the related class action law suit - yes? Carry on!

.

[Argus]

We require examples of a far right agenda and a far left agenda to decide where in between those two we want to stand. Through Harper we have seen the far right.

I suggest you pick up a basic primer on politics and ideologies. You clearly have no understanding of what the words you use mean.

If Harper was far right then Trudeau is a Stalinist.

Edited April 15, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

Canada has one of the narrowest political spectrums of any developed cpontry. The notion that Harper or the Cons are right wing by any international measure is laughable. However, it does follow the script that to demonize people you first have to pretend they are demons.

Those kind of terms are used by the ignorant who are filled with righteous hate for anyone who fails to share their own poorly thought-out political views.

[overthere]

So is it fair to say the truth and reconciliation of fraud should also be verboten?

You introduced the falsehood about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, then dodged the issue when directly challenged..

I'm not going to dignify your evasion by helping you dig new holes for your relocated goalposts.

[overthere]

so...... Harper would have 'established' the TRC... irregardless of the fact that establishing it was a part of the settlement decree associated with the related class action law suit - yes? Carry on!

.

another dodger and mover of goalposts. Teamwork is awesome!

[waldo]

another dodger and mover of goalposts. Teamwork is awesome!

waldo facts get in your way - yes?

[dre]

Those kind of terms are used by the ignorant who are filled with righteous hate for anyone who fails to share their own poorly thought-out political views.

You just described yourself perfectly.

You're probably the biggest user of those kinds of terms here. You barely write a single post without using "the left" in the pejorative.

[cybercoma]

You just described yourself perfectly.

You're probably the biggest user of those kinds of terms here. You barely write a single post without using "the left" in the pejorative.

Reflexivity is a premium for some here.

[eyeball]

You introduced the falsehood about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, then dodged the issue when directly challenged..

I'm not going to dignify your evasion by helping you dig new holes for your relocated goalposts.

I know full well who you're asking about and you know it, why would I need to answer the obvious?

If you can't understand why I asked the question I did maybe it's because you're so indignant about what the fascist you mentioned did to you that you can't think straight

Have you got something against finding out the truth and reconciliation of violence or fraud or what?

Edited April 16, 2016 by eyeball