Jump to content

Full Autonomy For The Provinces. Yes or No


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, hernanday said:

Yeah and we had alot better standard of living comparatively in the 80s and 70s, you seem to be forgetting that back then only one income bought a house and raised a family of 6 kids with 2 cars, debt free.

... Yet you ignore what happened in the 90's as a result of those policies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

It was not at all a unified republic but a loose confederation of thirteen warring tribes.

Thirteen warring, genocidal tribes that have now been put into 50 warring, genocidal tribes. Using the US as a rational example that should be followed is utter nonsense.

Edited by hot enough
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

If you don't mind me weighing in again on one of your more internal issues...

Americans have been here before.  Our first constitution practically gave full autonomy to the thirteen member states.  It was not at all a unified republic but a loose confederation of thirteen warring tribes.

Would you go so far as to allow the ten provinces to have the power to regulate their own defense and foreign affairs? To make treaties with each other and with foreign states?

I think the provinces should have LESS power, not more. They screw up almost everything they touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, hernanday said:

Yeah and we had alot better standard of living comparatively in the 80s and 70s, you seem to be forgetting that back then only one income bought a house and raised a family of 6 kids with 2 cars, debt free.

Ah yes, nostalgia for the good old days, which did not in fact exist.

A single income anytime bought the average working class family either a very, very  modest home by todays standards.  Or more likely, they rented.  

And both of those outcomes are possible today for a single middle class wage earner.

What has changed is peoples expectations, and that has been dramatic. That small, tired 900ft2 bungalow in the iffy neighbourhood That was the norm for Mum and Dad back then is not acceptable to many first time buyers.  They want the 2000ft2 new house, 2 new vehicles, new furniture and 2 weeks in the sun every year. That takes two people working full time at decent jobs with no time off for having kids or getting laid off.  Both of them will vote for the party that promises subsidized day care too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So exactly how much power do the provinces have vis a vis Ottawa? What can the federal government specifically NOT do and the provinces can? I know that primary (pre-university/grade school/whatever) education is in the hands of the province not the feds.  But what else? I think this was mentioned somewhere else but I can't remember where.

We seem to have this same debate in the States.  Typically the Republicans do lip service to smaller federal government and states' rights and the Democrats don't.  Either which way the federal government gets more powerful as time goes by.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

So exactly how much power do the provinces have vis a vis Ottawa? What can the federal government specifically NOT do and the provinces can? I know that primary (pre-university/grade school/whatever) education is in the hands of the province not the feds.  But what else? I think this was mentioned somewhere else but I can't remember where.

We seem to have this same debate in the States.  Typically the Republicans do lip service to smaller federal government and states' rights and the Democrats don't.  Either which way the federal government gets more powerful as time goes by.

In general, the provinces handle:

- Education (as you mentioned)

- Health care (although they do have to fall under the Federal Health Act, which mandates things like universality, provinces still have significant leeway in deciding what services are listed with health care, where hospitals are located, etc.)

- Managing resources (public land, timber, etc.) and provincial utilities

- Welfare (at least I think...can't remember if that changed)

- Interacting with cities/towns

The federal government handles:

- Defense

- International trade

- Coastal fisheries

- Rail and water transportation connections shared by provinces

- Currency and banking

- Post office, the census, patents/copyrights and similar functions.

Both levels of government may collect taxes. And In some cases we have federal programs (Like Canada Pension), but provinces have the option of "opting out" and setting up a similar system.

In some cases, the federal government may implement rules, and then the province may actually add to the rules. (For example, the federal government may create rules to protect the environment, but the provinces may establish additional rules.)

http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/bna.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

So exactly how much power do the provinces have vis a vis Ottawa? What can the federal government specifically NOT do and the provinces can? I know that primary (pre-university/grade school/whatever) education is in the hands of the province not the feds.  But what else? I think this was mentioned somewhere else but I can't remember where.

We seem to have this same debate in the States.  Typically the Republicans do lip service to smaller federal government and states' rights and the Democrats don't.  Either which way the federal government gets more powerful as time goes by.

Right now the provinces are in charge of...

Aboriginal Relations 
Agriculture and Rural Development 
Culture (formerly Culture and Community Services) 
Education 
Energy 
Enterprise and Advanced Education 
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development 
Health (formerly Health & Wellness and Seniors) 
Human Services 
Infrastructure 
International & Intergovernmental Relations 
Justice and Solicitor General 
Municipal Affairs 
Service Alberta 
Tourism, Parks and Recreation 
Transportation 
Treasury Board and Finance

 

Decentralized government  is more representative. I would definitely be in favor of a fairly large decentralization of power. The federal government should be a lot smaller, and handle only things like international trade, borders and immigration, national defence, and inter-provincial commerce, and inter-provincial transportation.

Even the provincial level is too centralized. I would move a lot of that to the municipal level.

Your governance would more or less come from within your own community, and people that have an intimate understand the issues and challenges.

Edited by dre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/2/2017 at 1:37 PM, Argus said:

Given the kinds of provincial governments we have in BC, Alberta and especially Ontario, I don't think I'd like to trust them with any more power than they currently have.

Well, as long as the people keep giving them all the power that they want the bull will continue on. It is the people who are their own worse enemy, and all politicians know this. The only time most Canadians get involved in politics is every five years. After that they totally forget about it until the next election. A country with people of that mind set will never go anywhere except in the politicians favor, and that is never any good for we the people. Politicians know how to feed the bull to the people and they know that they can get the people to eat that bull. Politics is nothing more than a place where unscrupulous people can go and learn the fine art of lying, cheating, and stealing from we the stunned people.  

 

 

Edited by taxme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/2/2017 at 1:42 PM, dialamah said:

BC'rs should take over Canada - good bud for everyone, get those *SUTB types to relax.   Carbon taxes doubled, and SJWs and Climate Change believers should sweep from West to East, greening and equalizing everything in their path.  

Works for me.  :D

*Stick Up The Backside

 

You funny guy, you. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

They helped build a railway over 100 years ago. Surely that counts for something.

That happened long before it became all about Ontario and Quebec. The west helped pay for that railroad also. It was not just the east that paid for it all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, hernanday said:

Harper took the largest Surplus in Canadian history from Paul Martin and turned that inot the largest deficit into Canadian history.  It is true that he slowed the rate of spending in his final year but he increased the debt and increased the deficit during his majority by a very large amount.  The conservatives did not pay off the deficit, in fact every budget they ran every year was a large deficit. We are in a recession, it is a mild recession but still a recession.  Harper lost because Canada did not emerge from the recession as quickly as it should have.  Harper Increased the total debt from 400 billion to 600+ billion.  So he increased the national debt in his short tenure by 50% by running massive deficits.  He spent more than every liberal prime minister who preceded him.

And now it is the liberals and JT's turn to show us all how blowing billions more of our tax dollars on foolishness, and having a good time at the taxpayer's expense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Argus said:

I think the provinces should have LESS power, not more. They screw up almost everything they touch.

Not sure if such a blanket statement is really warranted.

Remember, at the same time that we had Pierre Trudeau getting us started on our huge federal debt, we had the progressive conservative party running Ontario (who were relatively moderate as conservatives go, but still further to the political right than Trudeau). And while we had Jean "Lets buy the same helicopters we just cancelled" Chretien in charge federally, we also had Mike Harris running ontario, who managed to keep Ontario doing fairly well despite a steep drop in Transfers from the feds.

At least if provinces have more power, should they elect a conservative government they can act as a counterbalance to a federal Liberal party (who tends to hold the reins of power more often.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, overthere said:

Ah yes, nostalgia for the good old days, which did not in fact exist.

A single income anytime bought the average working class family either a very, very  modest home by todays standards.  Or more likely, they rented.  

And both of those outcomes are possible today for a single middle class wage earner.

What has changed is peoples expectations, and that has been dramatic. That small, tired 900ft2 bungalow in the iffy neighbourhood That was the norm for Mum and Dad back then is not acceptable to many first time buyers.  They want the 2000ft2 new house, 2 new vehicles, new furniture and 2 weeks in the sun every year. That takes two people working full time at decent jobs with no time off for having kids or getting laid off.  Both of them will vote for the party that promises subsidized day care too.

Most charts show real earnings for north american middle class peaked in the 70s despite productivity increasing substantially.

productivity-and-real-wages.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

I doubt it applies to Canada in equal measure, as Canada is renown for lower worker productivity, low R&D investment, lower automation, etc.

 

If all that is true then how come we have this far superior health care system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Omni said:

If all that is true then how come we have this far superior health care system?

 

Canada's national myth does not equal higher worker productivity.

Canada and Mexico lag far behind U.S. and other nations for productivity, but excels at pogey !

 

productivity_canVSus.png

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/economy/a-canadian-magic-trick-wages-that-rise-even-if-productivity-doesnt/

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Canada's national myth does not equal higher worker productivity.

Canada and Mexico lag far behind U.S. and other nations for productivity, but excels at pogey !

Yet another blatant dodge. I realize it's a difficult fact to deal with. Twice the cost with much worse outcomes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The Canadian provinces are very large in geographic terms. Apart from the tiny PEI and the middle-sized Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, all the rest are larger than France which is the geographically largest country in Western-Europe.

Perhaps that only tells you that European countries are hopelessly small and crammed.

Edited by -TSS-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2017 at 4:53 PM, dre said:

Right now the provinces are in charge of...

Aboriginal Relations 
Agriculture and Rural Development 
Culture (formerly Culture and Community Services) 
Education 
Energy 
Enterprise and Advanced Education 
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development 
Health (formerly Health & Wellness and Seniors) 
Human Services 
Infrastructure 
International & Intergovernmental Relations 
Justice and Solicitor General 
Municipal Affairs 
Service Alberta 
Tourism, Parks and Recreation 
Transportation 
Treasury Board and Finance

 

Decentralized government  is more representative. I would definitely be in favor of a fairly large decentralization of power. The federal government should be a lot smaller, and handle only things like international trade, borders and immigration, national defence, and inter-provincial commerce, and inter-provincial transportation.

Even the provincial level is too centralized. I would move a lot of that to the municipal level.

Your governance would more or less come from within your own community, and people that have an intimate understand the issues and challenges.

Whowhowhoawhoawhoa....wait a tic....INTERNATIONAL and intergovernmental relations are the PROVINCES? You're kidding me, right?

Also, I never expected to hear Canadians talk like residents of the American South. Wow.  I wonder if American liberals know that Canada is like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Whowhowhoawhoawhoa....wait a tic....INTERNATIONAL and intergovernmental relations are the PROVINCES? You're kidding me, right?

Also, I never expected to hear Canadians talk like residents of the American South. Wow.  I wonder if American liberals know that Canada is like that?

The provinces play a role in that yes. I don't know if my position is a liberal or conservative one... It just seems like common sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...