Bob Rae out ahead in poll of Canadians

[Argus]

He won't dare raise taxes. Besides he doesn't need to. He is not facing a deep recession resulting in huge deficits. He is looking at a surplus. Why would he raise taxes and risk having his head chopped off?

Because Socialists solve problems with money. We'll need at least another five billion for health care. We'll need several billions more for day care. He's said he wants to double our foreign aid, that's another two and a half billion. He'll want huge investment in public housing, at least a billion there, maybe two or three. Think of all the bedrock NDP causes and an NDPer now in control of the budget. Oh yeah, he'll very quickly find a need to raise taxes.

[Mimas]

I think the Liberals will do better with Rae than Ignatieff though. Despite Raes record the Liberal leadership candidates aren't offering much, and the two who would probably be the best bet to lead the part Kennedy and Dion aren't even considered in a position to win it.

I'm not too impressed with Rae's preformance. What I'd question most is if he would be willing to do what is NECESSARY during a recession. Meaning government cutbacks, or perhaps raising taxes which would do more harm for the economy.

It's awfully sad that people only care to be fiscally responsible during a recession. Most of the time the economy is growing and recessions are the exception, not the rule.

What do people do in their personal lives? Do they move to a tent at the street corner when they lose their job? No, they use their savings or borrow to get through the bad times and then they get another job they pay their debt. Then they save for the days when they won't be able to work anymore - for retirement.

But what do conservatives say that governments should do? During bad times borrow. During good times, don't pay down your debt, just cut taxes and continue to borrow. That's what Mulroney and Harris did. The result was record high debts and we now spend 20 cents on every dollar we pay in taxes just to pay the interest on the debt. But NO, we there is no way we should be paying our bills. We should waste our money on trips to the Bahamas and crap made in China. It doesn't matter that the Baby boom generation is retiring and will cost us a freaking fortune. But no, we ought to spend everything right now and when we hit the babyboom wall, we'll think about it then.

Conservative governments have the worst track record for being "fiscally responsible", so let's keep it up.

[Argus]

But what do conservatives say that governments should do? During bad times borrow. During good times, don't pay down your debt, just cut taxes and continue to borrow. That's what Mulroney and Harris did.

No, actually it isn't.

But do carry on regardless. You always do.

[Riverwind]

Oh yeah, he'll very quickly find a need to raise taxes.

Or break his promises on spending increases.

[scribblet]

Because Socialists solve problems with money. We'll need at least another five billion for health care. We'll need several billions more for day care. He's said he wants to double our foreign aid, that's another two and a half billion. He'll want huge investment in public housing, at least a billion there, maybe two or three. Think of all the bedrock NDP causes and an NDPer now in control of the budget. Oh yeah, he'll very quickly find a need to raise taxes.

We can't afford Bob Rae, personally I'm counting on Ontario to remember him.

If Bob Rae gets in, we can count on the NDP to support him, and maybe even a future merger of the two parties.

[normanchateau]

Why would he? Because he's a socialist.

What evidence is there that he's a socialist? And if he's a socialist, why did the Ontario unions abandon him and why did he abandon the NDP?

[Mimas]

He won't dare raise taxes. Besides he doesn't need to. He is not facing a deep recession resulting in huge deficits. He is looking at a surplus. Why would he raise taxes and risk having his head chopped off?

Because Socialists solve problems with money. We'll need at least another five billion for health care. We'll need several billions more for day care. He's said he wants to double our foreign aid, that's another two and a half billion. He'll want huge investment in public housing, at least a billion there, maybe two or three. Think of all the bedrock NDP causes and an NDPer now in control of the budget. Oh yeah, he'll very quickly find a need to raise taxes.

Ok, Ms. Psychic.

[Mimas]

Why would he? Because he's a socialist.

What evidence is there that he's a socialist? And if he's a socialist, why did the Ontario unions abandon him and why did he abandon the NDP?

Bob Rae was never a real NDPer, nor was he a socialist. His comes from a Liberal family. Also, his brother is a lifelong Liberal well known in Liberal circles. Bob just found it easier to make it to the top in the NDP than in the Liberal party. He denounced the NDP as soon as he left office and wrote many articles against NDP policies in subsequent years.

[scribblet]

For those who are not from Ontario, socialist Bob Rae was the leader of the Ontario NDP, maybe that should be former socialist Bob Rae. Maybe his left wing stance at that time was one of opportunism

The NDP gov't had a fiscal problem, so BoB Rae brought in a program that raised taxes and cut spending by reducing the payroll in the public sector, through a social contract.. He cut the payroll by giving employees 12 unpaid days off a year, better than laying them off actually. Part of the fiscal problem was the huge pay hike previously given to civil servants, the ramifcations of which Bob Rae apparantly didn't foresee.

That part for the unions was bad enough but IMO it was opening the public sector contracts without the getting the union agreement. that really did him in. Actually, he did what he thought best under the circumstances, but the unions thought otherwise. He banned the use of strike breakers and pioneered the employment equity act (didn't pass third reading in new gov't), but abandoned public auto insurance, which if I remember correctly was a campaign pledge.

Rae has a book now, Canada in the Balance; he writes that one of the reasons he left the NDP was that it was 'bogged down in a culture of opposition' . I think that is a fair statement, and in fact, would apply it to most parties in opposition, they seem to concentration on opposing simply for the sake of opposing, strictly for polemic purposes. Destructive criticism rather than constructive.

We can only hope that he will do for the Liberals what he did for the Ontario NDP

[jbg]

I thought Rae Days were days full of Raes of sunshine.

[normanchateau]

That part for the unions was bad enough but IMO it was opening the public sector contracts without the getting the union agreement. that really did him in. Actually, he did what he thought best under the circumstances, but the unions thought otherwise. He banned the use of strike breakers and pioneered the employment equity act (didn't pass third reading in new gov't), but abandoned public auto insurance, which if I remember correctly was a campaign pledge.

Doesn't exactly sound like a socialist...

[normanchateau]

The fact is that Martin's reduction of that rate from 16% to 15% was implemented and if he had been elected it would have stayed that way.

The tax cut was announced on November 14th. The government fell less than two weeks later. I suppose it's technically possible to ram legislation through 1st, 2nd, and 3rd reading of the House, through the committee process, and through the Senate in under two weeks but - I doubt it.

You must have had a very special "Harper-supporter" 2005 T1 tax return form which charged you 16% on the first $35,595 of taxable income. Everyone else in Canada paid 15%.

[Mad_Michael]

I'm thinking that Bob Rae is the best candidate - or rather, the candidate most likely to enable the Liberal Party to defeat Harper and return a majority.

That Ignatieff character has no charisma and is stiff as a board. As national leader, I think he'd be a disaster.

Indeed, Ignatieff might be the only Canadian politician with less charisma than Harper!

[Higgly]

It's hard to see why Ignatieff is such a strong candidate. The only one I know who wants to see him as leader is the Globe and Mail!

[normanchateau]

It's hard to see why Ignatieff is such a strong candidate. The only one I know who wants to see him as leader is the Globe and Mail!

Unfortunately Ignatieff would only be a slight improvement over Harper. But any improvement would be better than no improvement.

[Spike22]

With the lame collection of idiots in the Liberal hen house race with Bob "hey let's spend our way out of the recession" Rae to Michael Ignatieff: "where is Canada on the map again? It's been so long since I lived here". To the totally haven't got a chance in hell of winning candidtaes like Kennedy that Justin Trudeau (who the hell cares what you say Justin) is supporting, it is indeed fantastic times for the conservatives. With one of these baboons running their party the conservatives are assured of an election win. By the way Go Leafs Go!

[gerryhatrick]

With the lame collection of idiots in the Liberal hen house race

There is a rule here concerning insults against 3rd parties, and you've broken it with this. Try and elevate the intelligence of your posts.

[Canadian Blue]

Unless your making the same arguments against Conservative's of course.

[gerryhatrick]

Unless your making the same arguments against Conservative's of course.

Nice try at a drive-by, but I don't call Conservative MP's "idiots".

And that's not an "argument", btw.

edit: In your post "your" s/b "you're", as in "you are" rather than the possesive "your". Imagine you, learning something from a Lib!

[geoffrey]

Nice try at a drive-by, but I don't call Conservative MP's "idiots".

"Harper is a wimp

And so are his fervent supporters"

gerry's topic of only a few weeks ago.

But oh well. Back to the issue at hand.

[gerryhatrick]

Nice try at a drive-by, but I don't call Conservative MP's "idiots".

"Harper is a wimp

And so are his fervent supporters"

gerry's topic of only a few weeks ago.

And I made a solid argument for it. His behavior I invoked was wimpy and anyone supporting it was supporting wimpyness.

[Canadian Blue]

edit: In your post "your" s/b "you're", as in "you are" rather than the possesive "your". Imagine you, learning something from a Lib!

How do you know I was referring to you GH? I never mentioned you in particular. I might not have meant "you are".

GH, its fairly said that since you are a hypocrite, all you've got is to come out and act like the grammer police. Usually when I see grammar and spelling mistakes I don't say anything or else I'd by a hypocrite and just look like a jackass.

And I made a solid argument for it. His behavior I invoked was wimpy and anyone supporting it was supporting wimpyness.

Then he can make an argument about the Liberal's being idiot's. I can make a solid argument for why the Liberal's are idiot's if I really wanted to.