National Labour

[Winterhaze13]

What are your thoughts about this fictional party's platform. Would you vote for this party?

National Labour Front

The following is the political and economic doctrine for the Labour Front of Canada, a left-wing party devoted to creating social justice and equality. Here are 16 demands we hope to lobby in favour of:

1. Nationalize key industries such as oil and gas and use the revenue to fund social programs, as well as education and healthcare.

2. Nationalize healthcare and education to make it available to all walks of life, rich or poor. The education system should be entirely free from kindergarten to undergrad in universities. However, students are required to pay for books and residence if they require it. All schools should maintain the same standards and curriculum. Introduce standardized teaching manuals.

3. Introduce a redistribution tax on major corporations that will be allocated to small business and the disadvantaged in society.

4. The state should introduce legislation that will increase the number of worker's unions in the private sector.

5. The state should be more involved in the economy by creating public sector jobs. The government can control inflation by cutting spending on social programs. If there is too much unemployment, the state should create jobs in the public sector.

6. The senate should consist of ordinary people in society that meets a certain criteria. It will be made up of people with a political science or economics degree, doctors, lawyers, native leaders, bureaucrats, union leaders, etc. They will be chosen through a lottery to serve either a 2 or 6 year term.

7. Eliminate taxes on family essentials such as baby food, diapers, and clothing. Increase the tax credit per child.

8. Revamp the tax system so that single-income households, low-income families, the elderly and other disadvantaged members of society pay almost no income tax. Raise taxes for wealthy households.

9. See to it that major corporations become more accountable and responsible.

10. Introduce an inheritance tax on estates worth $1 million or more. The tax will increase as the value of the estate rises.

11. More tax credits for families using the day-care system.

12. Increase immigration to one percent of the population annually.

13. Introduce additional taxes for home owners with property worth $1 million or more.

14. Eliminate NAFTA and implement the Kyoto protocol.

15. Ban corporate donations to political parties.

16. Increase foreign aid to 0.7% of GDP.

[Newfie Canadian]

I don't see anything concerning military spending.

Do they have anything on military spending?

[Big Blue Machine]

Sounds like another NDP party to me.

[Conservative1]

i would say this sounds like the NDP as well....

[Slavik44]

If anything they sound confused...maybe lost???

Because technically are health care is Public, and available to everyone, And then there is oil and gas which is predominently owned by the Provinces (10% private??). I could also be wrong but I did graduate from a public school system, I belive I got an education, although sometimes I am not sure. Then there is the whole the senate should be compossed of ordinary people. So we get Political science grads, economic grads, doctors and lawyers, through them in a lottery...oh wait a second doctors and lawyers are not ordinary, there goes that Idea. Then there is single income households pay no income tax, so does that include a lawyer who is not maried and makes 80K? I mean there is a few interesting Ideas there but I stress a few most of them are just ridiculous.

[Hugo]

These ideas stink!

1. Nationalize key industries such as oil and gas and use the revenue to fund social programs, as well as education and healthcare.

What revenue? Most public industries make a loss. Moreover, if the government is going to charge high prices and give the profits to social programs, what is the difference between that and just taxing people and giving it to social programs - other than another layer of bureaucracy that needs to be funded?

2. Nationalize healthcare and education to make it available to all walks of life, rich or poor.

The healthcare system is not available to all. It is available to those who are willing and able to wait a long time. Heaven help you if you are busy, or if you need urgent treatment. Same goes for public education. If you're willing to settle for substandard education, fine.

3. Introduce a redistribution tax on major corporations that will be allocated to small business and the disadvantaged in society.

What small businesses? Seeing as how you are penalising success and discouraging growth, what good reason is there for an entrepreneur to set up shop in Canada instead of a country that won't punish him if he is successful?

4. The state should introduce legislation that will increase the number of worker's unions in the private sector.

Why - so the unions can rip the workers off? Do you plan to uphold union rights to commit violence against people and property? How do you think yourself any different to Al Capone?

5. The state should be more involved in the economy by creating public sector jobs.

Malinvestment and misallocation of scarce resources, highly irresponsible and will cause greater poverty. Money taken from taxpayers to fund more public servants is money that they cannot spend on paying somebody to give them goods and services in the private sector. To grow the public sector means that you will shrink the private sector.

Is a fully planned economy your goal?

The government can control inflation by cutting spending on social programs.

The government can control inflation by stopping inflation. Government creates inflation and absolutely nothing else by increasing the money supply in disproportionate rate to the increase in capital.

If there is too much unemployment, the state should create jobs in the public sector.

If there is too much unemployment the state should lower minimum wage. All minimum wage does is prove that you can buy as much unemployment as you want.

If you think me wrong, why not just raise minimum wage to $10,000 per hour?

6. The senate should consist of ordinary people in society that meets a certain criteria. It will be made up of people with a political science or economics degree, doctors, lawyers, native leaders, bureaucrats, union leaders, etc.

These are not "ordinary people", these are academics and intellectuals. See the state of universities right now to see how little the views and goals of academics correspond with those of the population at large.

7. Eliminate taxes on family essentials such as baby food, diapers, and clothing. Increase the tax credit per child.

Why not just eliminate sales taxes? It is regressive anyway.

8. Revamp the tax system so that single-income households, low-income families, the elderly and other disadvantaged members of society pay almost no income tax. Raise taxes for wealthy households.

The first part is a good idea. The second is not. Wealthy people create the investment that drives industry and creates jobs. Take their money away and there will be less jobs and lower real incomes (less investment in industry means less development and slower price decreases).

9. See to it that major corporations become more accountable and responsible.

To whom? They are already fully accountable and responsible to their stockholders. What business do you have trying to dictate to a corporation you have no stake in at all? Can I tell you you can't drive your car on weekends?

10. Introduce an inheritance tax on estates worth $1 million or more. The tax will increase as the value of the estate rises.

Why? The people who leave the inheritance have already paid income and sales taxes all their lives. Why does their death give you an excuse to triple-tax them?

11. More tax credits for families using the day-care system.

To encourage single-parenthood? Good idea. We need more single mothers, because heaven knows that that mode of family life causes less crime, juvenile delinquency etc. Daycare is definitely used more by single parents. See here for more.

12. Increase immigration to one percent of the population annually.

If you cut out welfare you wouldn't need any immigration controls. The only people you'd get would be people willing to work.

13. Introduce additional taxes for home owners with property worth $1 million or more.

Again, this will create more unemployment and lower real incomes.

14. Eliminate NAFTA and implement the Kyoto protocol.

There's already so much out there on how Kyoto is nonsensical junk science I don't think I need to add to it. The Ontario government estimates that fully implementing Kyoto will lose 400,000 jobs in the province.

[cybercoma]

Sounds like everything I'm opposed to. If I wanted the government controlling more of my life, I'd move to a country that has a fascist government.

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

[Argus]

What are your thoughts about this fictional party's platform. Would you vote for this party?

A fairly good recipe for government bankruptcy, massive unemployment, and the collapse of the economy.

[Hugo]

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

See here.

[Conservative1]

That's amazing...lol

[cybercoma]

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

See here.

Well, I guess I'm a moron. lol

Thanks for the link!

[Winterhaze13]

These Arguments stink!!!

What revenue? Most public industries make a loss. Moreover, if the government is going to charge high prices and give the profits to social programs, what is the difference between that and just taxing people and giving it to social programs - other than another layer of bureaucracy that needs to be funded?

These industries are very profitable, ask OPEC. Shell and other oil companies are among the largest and most profitable companies in the world. You must be thinking of automotive companies. The revenue generated can go to a good cause and not to Opec and the corrupt oil industry such as Haliburton and Texaco.

The healthcare system is not available to all. It is available to those who are willing and able to wait a long time. Heaven help you if you are busy, or if you need urgent treatment. Same goes for public education. If you're willing to settle for substandard education, fine.

National Health Care used to be in Canada. And I think that education is far to important to leave to the private sector whose motivation is profit and not efficiency. Also, it should be available to everyone. In the Soviet Union's education was state runned and it was far superior to ours. It should be open to everyone.

What small businesses? Seeing as how you are penalising success and discouraging growth, what good reason is there for an entrepreneur to set up shop in Canada instead of a country that won't punish him if he is successful?

I'm not penalizing these corporation for being successful. Although they do become profitable at the expense of others. I think our economy would be better off with more competitive businesses who are not preyed on by major corporations.

Why - so the unions can rip the workers off? Do you plan to uphold union rights to commit violence against people and property? How do you think yourself any different to Al Capone?

Unions don't inflict harm on society like major corporations do.

Malinvestment and misallocation of scarce resources, highly irresponsible and will cause greater poverty. Money taken from taxpayers to fund more public servants is money that they cannot spend on paying somebody to give them goods and services in the private sector. To grow the public sector means that you will shrink the private sector.

Is a fully planned economy your goal?

Your early points don't make sense to me. And my goal is not to shrink the private sector but make it more competitive by eliminating major corporation's advantages and redistributing to the poor. A planned economy is not our goal, but a fair one is.

The government can control inflation by stopping inflation. Government creates inflation and absolutely nothing else by increasing the money supply in disproportionate rate to the increase in capital.

Thanks, I know that. You can also control inflation by increasing interest rates.

If there is too much unemployment the state should lower minimum wage. All minimum wage does is prove that you can buy as much unemployment as you want.

If you think me wrong, why not just raise minimum wage to $10,000 per hour?

Eliminating the minimum wage would not necassarily mean that more jobs would be created. Minimum wage is meant to keep employers from exploiting labour. By eliminating it you would inject harm into society that would exceed any benefit.

These are not "ordinary people", these are academics and intellectuals. See the state of universities right now to see how little the views and goals of academics correspond with those of the population at large.

Well, I think the educated should run the state. We should have professional politicians and not only businessmen and lawyers from well to do backgrounds.

Why not just eliminate sales taxes? It is regressive anyway.

Sales taxes pay for government funded services. They are important.

The first part is a good idea. The second is not. Wealthy people create the investment that drives industry and creates jobs. Take their money away and there will be less jobs and lower real incomes (less investment in industry means less development and slower price decreases).

The economy is driven by the middle class and poor who constitute 90% of the populations. However, it is the wealthy who benefit the most from the economy and as a result they should pay most of the taxes.

To whom? They are already fully accountable and responsible to their stockholders. What business do you have trying to dictate to a corporation you have no stake in at all? Can I tell you you can't drive your car on weekends?

Society!!! Who else. They are not accountable, try to watch the Canadian documentary The Corporations. They use loopholes in the legal system to break the law, they contaminate the planet and they are driven by profit and accountable is not in their interest.

Why? The people who leave the inheritance have already paid income and sales taxes all their lives. Why does their death give you an excuse to triple-tax them?

The problem is that most of the wealth is inherited from generation to generation and I believe that all corporate wealth is better off in the hands of the middle class or poor.

To encourage single-parenthood? Good idea. We need more single mothers, because heaven knows that that mode of family life causes less crime, juvenile delinquency etc. Daycare is definitely used more by single parents. See here for more.

What? When did I say that. Daycare is very expensive, in Toronto it is $1,000 a month. We need to help families. That is why women are staying home and not working.

If you cut out welfare you wouldn't need any immigration controls. The only people you'd get would be people willing to work.

Canada's economy is kept afloat by immigrants. They work for less which creates lower prices and more production. Toronto, this country's economic engine, its population consists of 45% immigrants. So they are very productive members of society.

Again, this will create more unemployment and lower real incomes.

How? We are putting more money in the hands of people who will spend it. The wealthy have a greater propensity to save and the middle-class drives the economy. So, it makes economic sense. Take from the rich and give to the poor who will spend it and it goes back to the rich. From there the cycle begins once again.

There's already so much out there on how Kyoto is nonsensical junk science I don't think I need to add to it. The Ontario government estimates that fully implementing Kyoto will lose 400,000 jobs in the province.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How do you know? It hasn't even been implemented yet.

[Winterhaze13]

Sounds like everything I'm opposed to.  If I wanted the government controlling more of my life, I'd move to a country that has a fascist government.

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fascist, you cannot be more wrong. My intention is not to infringe the rights of business. Rather, I want to make the private sector more competitive by eliminating major corporations that inflict harm on society and small businesses. I want to redistribute to the poor and middle class and small business. That is obvious. Actually, the Nazis are seen by many historians as tools of the corporate world. IBM made many of the electronics in the deathcamps. That is how Hitler got into power. Watch The Corporation, a famous Canadian documentary that came out on video last week.

Libertarianism is just foolish, in the economic sense. Allowing capitalism to run free would just inflict harm on society. A famous economist once wrote that it was "Creative Destruction" because it is only motivated by profit and not the common good.

[Winterhaze13]

Why - so the unions can rip the workers off? Do you plan to uphold union rights to commit violence against people and property? How do you think yourself any different to Al Capone?

This argument is especially amusing to me. In order to discredit Unions he gives me a link to the CAPITALIST MAGAZINE. Well of course they are going to be biased. They even defend Wal-mart practices. I can't take that source seriously.

[fracan]

cybercoma, check out the Freedom Party too... They seem very libertarian to me. Read their platform!

Freedom Party of Canada

[Winterhaze13]

Only people, not businesses, have responsibilities.

Taken from one of the articles in the Capitalism Magazine. But businesses are made up of people and are institutions. All institutions be it the state, the United Nations, Amnesty have a responsibibility not to inflict harm on society. In democracy, no one is above the law and anything that inflicts harm should be accountable for that harm on society.

[cybercoma]

Sounds like everything I'm opposed to.  If I wanted the government controlling more of my life, I'd move to a country that has a fascist government.

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fascist, you cannot be more wrong. My intention is not to infringe the rights of business. Rather, I want to make the private sector more competitive by eliminating major corporations that inflict harm on society and small businesses. I want to redistribute to the poor and middle class and small business. That is obvious. Actually, the Nazis are seen by many historians as tools of the corporate world. IBM made many of the electronics in the deathcamps. That is how Hitler got into power. Watch The Corporation, a famous Canadian documentary that came out on video last week.

Libertarianism is just foolish, in the economic sense. Allowing capitalism to run free would just inflict harm on society. A famous economist once wrote that it was "Creative Destruction" because it is only motivated by profit and not the common good.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're obviously just trolling now. Quite the clever little gimmick you have going here, You almost had me too; I was about to write up a huge long-winded reply when I realized that no one could possibly be this clueless to historical facts and evidence to the contrary.

[Winterhaze13]

Sounds like everything I'm opposed to.  If I wanted the government controlling more of my life, I'd move to a country that has a fascist government.

Wake me up when someone decides to start a Libertarian Party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fascist, you cannot be more wrong. My intention is not to infringe the rights of business. Rather, I want to make the private sector more competitive by eliminating major corporations that inflict harm on society and small businesses. I want to redistribute to the poor and middle class and small business. That is obvious. Actually, the Nazis are seen by many historians as tools of the corporate world. IBM made many of the electronics in the deathcamps. That is how Hitler got into power. Watch The Corporation, a famous Canadian documentary that came out on video last week.

Libertarianism is just foolish, in the economic sense. Allowing capitalism to run free would just inflict harm on society. A famous economist once wrote that it was "Creative Destruction" because it is only motivated by profit and not the common good.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're obviously just trolling now. Quite the clever little gimmick you have going here, You almost had me too; I was about to write up a huge long-winded reply when I realized that no one could possibly be this clueless to historical facts and evidence to the contrary.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

lol I'm a history and Political Science major in University, so I know what I am talking about.

[Hugo]

These industries are very profitable, ask OPEC.

That's not what I wrote. Read it again. If the government monopolizes them they will quickly cease to be profitable.

And I think that education is far to important to leave to the private sector whose motivation is profit and not efficiency.

Profit comes from efficiency. And is food not more important than healthcare? Why don't we have the government provide food, like in the USSR, or China, or North Korea, where the famines in the 20th Century have killed about three times the population of Canada?

In the Soviet Union's education was state runned and it was far superior to ours. It should be open to everyone.

Find me one year where the Soviet life expectancy exceeded American.

I'm not penalizing these corporation for being successful.

Yes, you are. When corporations are successful they grow larger. You want to penalize large corporations, and size is synonymous with success.

Unions don't inflict harm on society like major corporations do.

No, they inflict harm like the Mafia does. They violently assault people and property.

Your early points don't make sense to me. And my goal is not to shrink the private sector but make it more competitive by eliminating major corporation's advantages and redistributing to the poor.

How are you going to get more competition by shutting down the most competitive companies?

A planned economy is not our goal, but a fair one is.

Define "fair".

You can also control inflation by increasing interest rates.

Confused cause and effect. Interest rates are skewed by inflation. You want lower rates, print more money. You want higher ones, burn some.

Eliminating the minimum wage would not necassarily mean that more jobs would be created. Minimum wage is meant to keep employers from exploiting labour. By eliminating it you would inject harm into society that would exceed any benefit.

This is not an answer. "Why don't we make minimum wage $10,000 per hour?" is the question that I posed.

Well, I think the educated should run the state.

Educated by whom?

We should have professional politicians and not only businessmen and lawyers from well to do backgrounds.

Hitler and Stalin were professional politicians. Very successful ones too.

Sales taxes pay for government funded services. They are important.

So important that the poor have to pay far more for them than the rich? I think you need to address your self-contradictions.

The economy is driven by the middle class and poor who constitute 90% of the populations. However, it is the wealthy who benefit the most from the economy and as a result they should pay most of the taxes.

How do they benefit most? Do they hide their money in mattresses? Or is it reinvested in the economy, resulting in cheaper and better consumer goods and more jobs created?

Society!!! Who else.

Who is "society"?

The problem is that most of the wealth is inherited from generation to generation and I believe that all corporate wealth is better off in the hands of the middle class or poor.

Based on what? 80% of American millionaires are first-generation rich. I don't think that "most" is defined as "20% of".

What? When did I say that. Daycare is very expensive, in Toronto it is $1,000 a month. We need to help families. That is why women are staying home and not working.

Maybe we could help families by not forcing anyone trying to run a daycare through countless expensive government-held hoops, thus driving up the prices? Government "solutions" always create more problems. The daycare example is just another one.

How? We are putting more money in the hands of people who will spend it.

Everybody spends money - unless you think most millionaires burn their money or bury it. This is a ridiculous argument.

Take from the rich and give to the poor who will spend it and it goes back to the rich. From there the cycle begins once again.

It happens already. It's called the market.

How do you know? It hasn't even been implemented yet.

Hence the word "estimate". Do put a little effort in in future.

In order to discredit Unions he gives me a link to the CAPITALIST MAGAZINE. Well of course they are going to be biased.

Ad hominem fallacy. Attack the argument, not the person. Otherwise I could say, "well, Winterhaze is a big fat stupid idiot, so obviously anything he says is wrong."

But according to you, that's a perfectly valid argument.

I'm a history and Political Science major in University

I doubt it. Either you are lying, or you are studying at such a poor-quality university that they don't believe students need to be able to compose a coherent work in English to graduate, or have the slightest inkling of even the most common logical fallacies, or even to be able to spell common words correctly.

Hint: if your final exams are multiple-choice, it's not a good institution!

[Winterhaze13]

I think that Hugo really resents me.

[Hugo]

Not you particularly, just people like you, who trot out tired, old ideas that have not held any water in the last two centuries, and propose to strip men of their liberty and dignity with a smile on your face, telling people as you enslave them that it is for their own good.

[Winterhaze13]

Not you particularly, just people like you, who trot out tired, old ideas that have not held any water in the last two centuries, and propose to strip men of their liberty and dignity with a smile on your face, telling people as you enslave them that it is for their own good.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Enslavement? Capitalism is enslavement.

[Hugo]

Enslavement? Capitalism is enslavement.

Let me get this straight: working for an employer of your choosing or for yourself is enslavement. Working for the state on pain of imprisonment, torture and execution is freedom.

That's your position? Freedom is slavery, peace is war, ignorance is strength, etc? Ignorance certainly seems to be your "strength".

[Melanie_]

Maybe we could help families by not forcing anyone trying to run a daycare through  countless expensive government-held hoops, thus driving up the prices? Government "solutions" always create more problems. The daycare example is just another one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which government held hoops would you like to do away with? The regulations in most jurisdictions in Canada are already very minimal - pass a criminal records check, get some basic first aid training, have a fire exit and some floor space for the children to play, and you are in business. Perhaps some of the nasty stories quoted on the website you provided a link to would have had a better outcome if there were more regulations in place to provide quality care. Refusing to support increased expectations, then quoting examples of substandard care, is self serving.

[Bro]

The ndp platform sounds good ,I even bought into it at one point in my life,but I've realized there has to be checks and balances for any party or anyone to maintain a healthy existence,socialism by the liberals,ndp,or your newly dreamt party,will only lead to further economic chaos.