Does anyone else find this quote a tad disturbing?
"We began in 2005 and that was to defeat the government so that we could go to the election and get our own mandate. That's how the Conservative party formed the government," said Harper.
I don't think I can trust someone that is as power hungry as Harper is.
the guy changed all the letterhead from Government of Canada to Harper Government ... the guy is totally narcissistic ...
Will this come back and haunt him? Not really sure, he seems kind of teflon, time will tell.
i'm not sure why he's going on about this coalition ... the reality is that he should do nothing ... make token tax cut gestures and do not say anything controversial ... and he'll get his majority ... continue to use social media to launch negative attack campaigns and he's a lock ...
Will this come back and haunt him? Not really sure, he seems kind of teflon, time will tell.
i'm not sure why he's going on about this coalition ... the reality is that he should do nothing ... make token tax cut gestures and do not say anything controversial ... and he'll get his majority ... continue to use social media to launch negative attack campaigns and he's a lock ...
The only reason I can is he figures that Canadians do not want a coalition government and that fear will get him a majority.
After I gave it more thought, I don't object to a coalition government but it has to include members from the party with the most seats. The problem it won't work with the current leaders, which goes back to needing all parties to replace their leaders.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
The only reason I can is he figures that Canadians do not want a coalition government and that fear will get him a majority.
After I gave it more thought, I don't object to a coalition government but it has to include members from the party with the most seats. The problem it won't work with the current leaders, which goes back to needing all parties to replace their leaders.
strange ... he has his majority now ... it's his to lose ... to beat this horse is not a good idea but then again - he can't really campaign on his record or his platform so, i suppose he needs a talking point ...
the problem is that, the way the country is ... you can't have a coalition with the conservatives ... they are basically ideologically different than every other party ... they are right wing ... everyone else is centre or centre-left ... heck ... the green party is closer to the liberals than the conservatives ...
The only reason I can is he figures that Canadians do not want a coalition government and that fear will get him a majority.
After I gave it more thought, I don't object to a coalition government but it has to include members from the party with the most seats. The problem it won't work with the current leaders, which goes back to needing all parties to replace their leaders.
strange ... he has his majority now ... it's his to lose ... to beat this horse is not a good idea but then again - he can't really campaign on his record or his platform so, i suppose he needs a talking point ...
the problem is that, the way the country is ... you can't have a coalition with the conservatives ... they are basically ideologically different than every other party ... they are right wing ... everyone else is centre or centre-left ... heck ... the green party is closer to the liberals than the conservatives ...
I think they all can work together, it's just matter of will and compromise but in order for that to happen all parties need leadership change. I don't really consider Harper a true conservative anyways...if was a true conservative he would never have interfered with the potash sale, the 2 CRTC rulings that they got involved with and I'm sure there are others.
For me the the 2 things that will stand out from the Harper years are getting more cell providers in the market, I know since I originally went with a smart phone a fews years ago my bill has dropped 40% because my provider has been forced to match other companies, and the other really great thing that was done was the TFSA this is an amazing finance tool.
So unlike some, I can find some positives...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I think they all can work together, it's just matter of will and compromise but in order for that to happen all parties need leadership change. I don't really consider Harper a true conservative anyways...if was a true conservative he would never have interfered with the potash sale, the 2 CRTC rulings that they got involved with and I'm sure there are others.
For me the the 2 things that will stand out from the Harper years are getting more cell providers in the market, I know since I originally went with a smart phone a fews years ago my bill has dropped 40% because my provider has been forced to match other companies, and the other really great thing that was done was the TFSA this is an amazing finance tool.
So unlike some, I can find some positives...
the conservatives now are basically a mish-mash of the old reform party and the old mike harris cronies ... the cronies are in control and their interests are similar to harris ... govern on an agenda that supports their primary base (not voter base, but political base) ... the progressive conservatives of yesteryear COULD work with other parties because they were a centrist party ... the conservatives now are too far to the right to work with other parties except on some minor issues ...
if the conservatives were prepared to work with the other parties ... we would not be having this election at this moment ...
I think they all can work together, it's just matter of will and compromise but in order for that to happen all parties need leadership change. I don't really consider Harper a true conservative anyways...if was a true conservative he would never have interfered with the potash sale, the 2 CRTC rulings that they got involved with and I'm sure there are others.
For me the the 2 things that will stand out from the Harper years are getting more cell providers in the market, I know since I originally went with a smart phone a fews years ago my bill has dropped 40% because my provider has been forced to match other companies, and the other really great thing that was done was the TFSA this is an amazing finance tool.
So unlike some, I can find some positives...
the conservatives now are basically a mish-mash of the old reform party and the old mike harris cronies ... the cronies are in control and their interests are similar to harris ... govern on an agenda that supports their primary base (not voter base, but political base) ... the progressive conservatives of yesteryear COULD work with other parties because they were a centrist party ... the conservatives now are too far to the right to work with other parties except on some minor issues ...
if the conservatives were prepared to work with the other parties ... we would not be having this election at this moment ...
or is it Harper that can't work with other parties? He is a micro manager. That's why a change in all leaders is necessary. The leader can take the party in any the direction they choose. You make a strong case that Chretien and Martin were more small c's.
This is the part of Harper I'm not fussy about, all middle class and lower income people deserve tax cuts, whether you are single, married or have kids, imo.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
or is it Harper that can't work with other parties? He is a micro manager. That's why a change in all leaders is necessary. The leader can take the party in any the direction they choose. You make a strong case that Chretien and Martin were more small c's.
This is the part of Harper I'm not fussy about, all middle class and lower income people deserve tax cuts, whether you are single, married or have kids, imo.
Harper definitely has an ego ... and in a way - he has to micro-manage because a lot of the reform aspects of the party are not capable of making sound political decisions ... if you notice ... the only ones allowed to talk are all the old harris cronies ... like baird, clement, flaherty, etc ...
this family tax cut is such a joke ... you can't solve day care with this tax cut ... the lower and middle class do not need tax cuts ... these tax cuts in the grand scheme of things don't add to much compared to the social implications ... without a national daycare program ... many families especially single-parent ones can't afford to put their kids in daycare which in turn limits the job oppoturnities they have available to them ... which then puts them in greater need of social assistance ...
this family tax cut is such a joke ... you can't solve day care with this tax cut ... the lower and middle class do not need tax cuts ... these tax cuts in the grand scheme of things don't add to much compared to the social implications ... without a national daycare program ... many families especially single-parent ones can't afford to put their kids in daycare which in turn limits the job oppoturnities they have available to them ... which then puts them in greater need of social assistance ...
I am not really sure how well a national daycare program would really work. Personally I think it would be really bad. I mean Quebec has heavily subsidized daycare (like 7 bucks a day), and from talking to relatives who live over there, there isn’t nearly enough daycare providers to meet the demand at that price. So there is a massive demand and super long waiting lists, which means there are a ton of people who can’t even get daycare, even though affording it is not a problem. Plus with such a high demand compared to supply, there are really a lot of crappy daycares out there since they know that they will still get the same government money and as long as they are not actually abusing kids there will still be a line up for their services. So until someone comes up with a way to deal with the shortage of providers, I am happy with my 100 a month childcare benefit.
For me the the 2 things that will stand out from the Harper years are getting more cell providers in the market, I know since I originally went with a smart phone a fews years ago my bill has dropped 40% because my provider has been forced to match other companies, and the other really great thing that was done was the TFSA this is an amazing finance tool.
So unlike some, I can find some positives...
Those things were nice. Also I live in Ottawa and work in a business related to construction, and those government stimulus/economic action plan projects kept a lot of people working for the last few years when a lot of other construction projects dried up.
Those things were nice. Also I live in Ottawa and work in a business related to construction, and those government stimulus/economic action plan projects kept a lot of people working for the last few years when a lot of other construction projects dried up.
the stimulus plan was brought on by the opposition ... don't forget the conservatives were barely acknowledging a crisis until well after the fact ... they were forecasting a surplus that turned out to be a huge defecit for like ages ...
the spending on infrastructure during a recession is what every gov't did ... let's not go give them credit for something they got forced to do by the opposition ...
as for daycare ... there are still massive waitlists at the current rate ... the issue is both parents have to work these days ... right now ... the current subsidy is not helping anyone ... especially in toronto where if you have more than 1 kid in daycare ... a nanny is actually a better economical option ...
Those things were nice. Also I live in Ottawa and work in a business related to construction, and those government stimulus/economic action plan projects kept a lot of people working for the last few years when a lot of other construction projects dried up.
the stimulus plan was brought on by the opposition ... don't forget the conservatives were barely acknowledging a crisis until well after the fact ... they were forecasting a surplus that turned out to be a huge defecit for like ages ...
the spending on infrastructure during a recession is what every gov't did ... let's not go give them credit for something they got forced to do by the opposition ...
as for daycare ... there are still massive waitlists at the current rate ... the issue is both parents have to work these days ... right now ... the current subsidy is not helping anyone ... especially in toronto where if you have more than 1 kid in daycare ... a nanny is actually a better economical option ...
Then they should at least take some responsibility for that portion of the deficit. As for the deficit I am 100% against deficit's. There should be balanced budget legislation and the governing party runs a deficit they should be held criminally responsible. The government has plenty of revenue to balance it's books, for example, did we really need to spend 2 billion on a G8/G20 conference? when the year before in Pittsburgh it cost 20 million.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Then they should at least take some responsibility for that portion of the deficit. As for the deficit I am 100% against deficit's. There should be balanced budget legislation and the governing party runs a deficit they should be held criminally responsible. The government has plenty of revenue to balance it's books, for example, did we really need to spend 2 billion on a G8/G20 conference? when the year before in Pittsburgh it cost 20 million.
don't even get me started on the G20 ... it was doubly brutal because it was money intentionally spent to fuck Toronto over ... i know we don't see eye to eye on that ... so, we'll just leave it at that ...
the biggest reason why our defecit was so huge was all the tax cuts Harper gave out knowing we were going into a global financial crisis ... we had a huge $10 Billion rainy day fund ... well ... it rained and buddy gave it all away at basically little benefit to most canadians ...
Then they should at least take some responsibility for that portion of the deficit. As for the deficit I am 100% against deficit's. There should be balanced budget legislation and the governing party runs a deficit they should be held criminally responsible. The government has plenty of revenue to balance it's books, for example, did we really need to spend 2 billion on a G8/G20 conference? when the year before in Pittsburgh it cost 20 million.
don't even get me started on the G20 ... it was doubly brutal because it was money intentionally spent to fuck Toronto over ... i know we don't see eye to eye on that ... so, we'll just leave it at that ...
the biggest reason why our defecit was so huge was all the tax cuts Harper gave out knowing we were going into a global financial crisis ... we had a huge $10 Billion rainy day fund ... well ... it rained and buddy gave it all away at basically little benefit to most canadians ...
Oh I see your point on the G20, and the way Harper acts, it's believable.
Yes they pissed away the surplus...no doubt there.
I don't like deficits, I just imagine as a country where we'd be without deficits and a national debt, I just think we'd be better off.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Oh I see your point on the G20, and the way Harper acts, it's believable.
Yes they pissed away the surplus...no doubt there.
I don't like deficits, I just imagine as a country where we'd be without deficits and a national debt, I just think we'd be better off.
for sure ... no political party (even socialist ones) will ever run a platform on a defecit ... it makes no sense whatsoever ...
And if we didn't have deficits and the huge national debt, taxes would never be an issue, health care, education, post secondary education, the state of our roads, the environment, public transportation would not be an issue, there would be plenty of money to take care of all those needs. I just wish we would develop a plan to take of the national debt over a 25 year or period...future Canadians would be so appreciative and the benefits would be so worth it going forward, imo.
And actually I've been following Jack Layton more, mainly because I don't trust Iggy or Harper, and was wondering if Harper won a minority why Layton couldn't lead a coalition government, he seems the most trustworthy, down to earth and so far isn't promising the world.
Harper has no business talking about coalitions, it's in his past, a lot has come out over the past few days about him talking about coalitions. Like you said the majority was his to lose, I think he's going to lose it, so now we need to talk about coalition government, because unless Harper does an about face and learns to play with others parliament will operate the same way.
Who really knows, also I do not understand how the Green Party can be left out of the debates, did they not get around 7 percent of the vote in the lat election and are polling at around 10%.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
And if we didn't have deficits and the huge national debt, taxes would never be an issue, health care, education, post secondary education, the state of our roads, the environment, public transportation would not be an issue, there would be plenty of money to take care of all those needs. I just wish we would develop a plan to take of the national debt over a 25 year or period...future Canadians would be so appreciative and the benefits would be so worth it going forward, imo.
And actually I've been following Jack Layton more, mainly because I don't trust Iggy or Harper, and was wondering if Harper won a minority why Layton couldn't lead a coalition government, he seems the most trustworthy, down to earth and so far isn't promising the world.
Harper has no business talking about coalitions, it's in his past, a lot has come out over the past few days about him talking about coalitions. Like you said the majority was his to lose, I think he's going to lose it, so now we need to talk about coalition government, because unless Harper does an about face and learns to play with others parliament will operate the same way.
Who really knows, also I do not understand how the Green Party can be left out of the debates, did they not get around 7 percent of the vote in the lat election and are polling at around 10%.
dude ... did you get hit in the head recently!?? ... :shock: ... this doesn't seem like the lukin2006 i've been talking to all this time!! ... haha ...
i totally agree with everything you are saying ... in leadership polls - Layton always wins out as being the most trustworthy ... but the NDP have to fight huge stigma's ... mainly that they can't win enough seats so people think they are wasting a vote ...
i believe the only way harper doesn't get his majority is if people vote strategically ... every conservative voter that i've talked to seem to be spewing the same talking pts they are being fed without any critical thinking ... it'll be hard for them to change their vote ... having said that - i suspect that if harper doesn't get his majority this go around ... it could be the end of days for him ... those guys are looking to pull a mike harris ... get in, gut, exploit and run ... all those guys are sitting pretty now and no doubt they are pushing hard this go around based on polling ...
what i find weird tho is their mishandling of things like the coalition and the military jets ... why not just come out and say they'll cost what they will ... no one in their base is gonna care ... why the need to flat out lie about it? ... it's a poor move on their part ...
And if we didn't have deficits and the huge national debt, taxes would never be an issue, health care, education, post secondary education, the state of our roads, the environment, public transportation would not be an issue, there would be plenty of money to take care of all those needs. I just wish we would develop a plan to take of the national debt over a 25 year or period...future Canadians would be so appreciative and the benefits would be so worth it going forward, imo.
And actually I've been following Jack Layton more, mainly because I don't trust Iggy or Harper, and was wondering if Harper won a minority why Layton couldn't lead a coalition government, he seems the most trustworthy, down to earth and so far isn't promising the world.
Harper has no business talking about coalitions, it's in his past, a lot has come out over the past few days about him talking about coalitions. Like you said the majority was his to lose, I think he's going to lose it, so now we need to talk about coalition government, because unless Harper does an about face and learns to play with others parliament will operate the same way.
Who really knows, also I do not understand how the Green Party can be left out of the debates, did they not get around 7 percent of the vote in the lat election and are polling at around 10%.
dude ... did you get hit in the head recently!?? ... :shock: ... this doesn't seem like the lukin2006 i've been talking to all this time!! ... haha ...
i totally agree with everything you are saying ... in leadership polls - Layton always wins out as being the most trustworthy ... but the NDP have to fight huge stigma's ... mainly that they can't win enough seats so people think they are wasting a vote ...
i believe the only way harper doesn't get his majority is if people vote strategically ... every conservative voter that i've talked to seem to be spewing the same talking pts they are being fed without any critical thinking ... it'll be hard for them to change their vote ... having said that - i suspect that if harper doesn't get his majority this go around ... it could be the end of days for him ... those guys are looking to pull a mike harris ... get in, gut, exploit and run ... all those guys are sitting pretty now and no doubt they are pushing hard this go around based on polling ...
what i find weird tho is their mishandling of things like the coalition and the military jets ... why not just come out and say they'll cost what they will ... no one in their base is gonna care ... why the need to flat out lie about it? ... it's a poor move on their part ...
hehehe...no not hit on the head...like you just want whats best for the country and right now we're being short changed, if it does come down to a coalition government it needs to stay in place for 3-4 years.
Thats the problem with Harper he just not coming clean about anything.
Saw this played on the CBC the other day. So what has changed MR. Harper
I'd be lying if I said I was surprised that the Liberals have gained, because I think that Ignatieff has started quite well campaign-wise, but at the expense of the NDP instead of the Conservatives? Is this a response to where he plans to spend (education, daycare, popular on the left), or to how he plans to pay for it (mainly taxing the corporations, popular on the left but despised by the Tories)? I just found it odd.
Unrelated question: does anyone know the reason that Elizabeth May chose to run in a BC riding that has largely been Conservative for the past 50 years? I can't find anything on-line about it, but my search skills are admittedly weak. Wouldn't it more sense to pick a softer target seat, instead of going after cabinet ministers, if the goal is to win your party's first seat?
I'd be lying if I said I was surprised that the Liberals have gained, because I think that Ignatieff has started quite well campaign-wise, but at the expense of the NDP instead of the Conservatives? Is this a response to where he plans to spend (education, daycare, popular on the left), or to how he plans to pay for it (mainly taxing the corporations, popular on the left but despised by the Tories)? I just found it odd.
Unrelated question: does anyone know the reason that Elizabeth May chose to run in a BC riding that has largely been Conservative for the past 50 years? I can't find anything on-line about it, but my search skills are admittedly weak. Wouldn't it more sense to pick a softer target seat, instead of going after cabinet ministers, if the goal is to win your party's first seat?
the liberals gain are primarily due to people not wanting harper to get his majority ... the reality is that in order to prevent a harper majority - there needs to be strategic voting ... which in some cases may mean voting liberal or in some other cases voting green or the NDP ...
she's chosen to run in saanich because that's where she predominantly lives and she's spent the last couple of years establishing a base there ... the most recent poll actually has her close to the conservative incumbent there ... i suspect that if liberal/ndp voters voted strategically, she could win ... the main part of the saanich is mostly ex-albertans who've retired there but the outskirts are fairly progressive people ...
the liberals gain are primarily due to people not wanting harper to get his majority ... the reality is that in order to prevent a harper majority - there needs to be strategic voting ... which in some cases may mean voting liberal or in some other cases voting green or the NDP ...
she's chosen to run in saanich because that's where she predominantly lives and she's spent the last couple of years establishing a base there ... the most recent poll actually has her close to the conservative incumbent there ... i suspect that if liberal/ndp voters voted strategically, she could win ... the main part of the saanich is mostly ex-albertans who've retired there but the outskirts are fairly progressive people ...
The strategic voting thing makes sense, although I'm not following the the specific case of how it gets May elected. The Lib/NDP supporters all vote Green? Seems a long-shot.
The strategic voting thing makes sense, although I'm not following the the specific case of how it gets May elected. The Lib/NDP supporters all vote Green? Seems a long-shot.
the goal is to prevent a harper majority ... so, if he needs 155 seats or whatever is to get a majority - every seat that is not won works towards that ...
if my info is correct and May is the one polling closest to the conservative incumbent - then the idea is to vote strategically with the person most likely to win the riding ... in this case - May ...
i'm sure you've heard that an NDP candidate has withdrawn his name for consideration in a riding because he feels it is much more important to prevent a harper majority than exude NDP influence ...
The strategic voting thing makes sense, although I'm not following the the specific case of how it gets May elected. The Lib/NDP supporters all vote Green? Seems a long-shot.
the goal is to prevent a harper majority ... so, if he needs 155 seats or whatever is to get a majority - every seat that is not won works towards that ...
if my info is correct and May is the one polling closest to the conservative incumbent - then the idea is to vote strategically with the person most likely to win the riding ... in this case - May ...
i'm sure you've heard that an NDP candidate has withdrawn his name for consideration in a riding because he feels it is much more important to prevent a harper majority than exude NDP influence ...
I'd be lying if I said I was surprised that the Liberals have gained, because I think that Ignatieff has started quite well campaign-wise, but at the expense of the NDP instead of the Conservatives? Is this a response to where he plans to spend (education, daycare, popular on the left), or to how he plans to pay for it (mainly taxing the corporations, popular on the left but despised by the Tories)? I just found it odd.
Unrelated question: does anyone know the reason that Elizabeth May chose to run in a BC riding that has largely been Conservative for the past 50 years? I can't find anything on-line about it, but my search skills are admittedly weak. Wouldn't it more sense to pick a softer target seat, instead of going after cabinet ministers, if the goal is to win your party's first seat?
I believe these are the same pollster that said the Toronto Mayoral race was to close to call. Did Rob not win rather easily?
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
The strategic voting thing makes sense, although I'm not following the the specific case of how it gets May elected. The Lib/NDP supporters all vote Green? Seems a long-shot.
the goal is to prevent a harper majority ... so, if he needs 155 seats or whatever is to get a majority - every seat that is not won works towards that ...
if my info is correct and May is the one polling closest to the conservative incumbent - then the idea is to vote strategically with the person most likely to win the riding ... in this case - May ...
i'm sure you've heard that an NDP candidate has withdrawn his name for consideration in a riding because he feels it is much more important to prevent a harper majority than exude NDP influence ...
I'm not for strategic voting myself, if you got a good MP who goes to Ottawa and does a good job representing the riding I will support him. With that said not much of a decision, we have NDP here who does a good job for his constituency, but not nearly as good a job as Dwight Duncan has done for us, my local MPP, hehehehe. But it helps being finance minister, hehehe.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I saw that headline this morning, and then I noted it was April 1...
I wonder how he plans to support Harper; he won't be running in that riding because the Tory incumbent isn't going anywhere. That riding was very close in 2008 though.
Comments
the guy changed all the letterhead from Government of Canada to Harper Government ... the guy is totally narcissistic ...
i'm not sure why he's going on about this coalition ... the reality is that he should do nothing ... make token tax cut gestures and do not say anything controversial ... and he'll get his majority ... continue to use social media to launch negative attack campaigns and he's a lock ...
The only reason I can is he figures that Canadians do not want a coalition government and that fear will get him a majority.
After I gave it more thought, I don't object to a coalition government but it has to include members from the party with the most seats. The problem it won't work with the current leaders, which goes back to needing all parties to replace their leaders.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
strange ... he has his majority now ... it's his to lose ... to beat this horse is not a good idea but then again - he can't really campaign on his record or his platform so, i suppose he needs a talking point ...
the problem is that, the way the country is ... you can't have a coalition with the conservatives ... they are basically ideologically different than every other party ... they are right wing ... everyone else is centre or centre-left ... heck ... the green party is closer to the liberals than the conservatives ...
I think they all can work together, it's just matter of will and compromise but in order for that to happen all parties need leadership change. I don't really consider Harper a true conservative anyways...if was a true conservative he would never have interfered with the potash sale, the 2 CRTC rulings that they got involved with and I'm sure there are others.
For me the the 2 things that will stand out from the Harper years are getting more cell providers in the market, I know since I originally went with a smart phone a fews years ago my bill has dropped 40% because my provider has been forced to match other companies, and the other really great thing that was done was the TFSA this is an amazing finance tool.
So unlike some, I can find some positives...
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
the conservatives now are basically a mish-mash of the old reform party and the old mike harris cronies ... the cronies are in control and their interests are similar to harris ... govern on an agenda that supports their primary base (not voter base, but political base) ... the progressive conservatives of yesteryear COULD work with other parties because they were a centrist party ... the conservatives now are too far to the right to work with other parties except on some minor issues ...
if the conservatives were prepared to work with the other parties ... we would not be having this election at this moment ...
or is it Harper that can't work with other parties? He is a micro manager. That's why a change in all leaders is necessary. The leader can take the party in any the direction they choose. You make a strong case that Chretien and Martin were more small c's.
Here is your token tax.
Harper to announce family tax cut
http://www.windsorstar.com/life/Harper+ ... story.html
This is the part of Harper I'm not fussy about, all middle class and lower income people deserve tax cuts, whether you are single, married or have kids, imo.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Harper definitely has an ego ... and in a way - he has to micro-manage because a lot of the reform aspects of the party are not capable of making sound political decisions ... if you notice ... the only ones allowed to talk are all the old harris cronies ... like baird, clement, flaherty, etc ...
this family tax cut is such a joke ... you can't solve day care with this tax cut ... the lower and middle class do not need tax cuts ... these tax cuts in the grand scheme of things don't add to much compared to the social implications ... without a national daycare program ... many families especially single-parent ones can't afford to put their kids in daycare which in turn limits the job oppoturnities they have available to them ... which then puts them in greater need of social assistance ...
I am not really sure how well a national daycare program would really work. Personally I think it would be really bad. I mean Quebec has heavily subsidized daycare (like 7 bucks a day), and from talking to relatives who live over there, there isn’t nearly enough daycare providers to meet the demand at that price. So there is a massive demand and super long waiting lists, which means there are a ton of people who can’t even get daycare, even though affording it is not a problem. Plus with such a high demand compared to supply, there are really a lot of crappy daycares out there since they know that they will still get the same government money and as long as they are not actually abusing kids there will still be a line up for their services. So until someone comes up with a way to deal with the shortage of providers, I am happy with my 100 a month childcare benefit.
Those things were nice. Also I live in Ottawa and work in a business related to construction, and those government stimulus/economic action plan projects kept a lot of people working for the last few years when a lot of other construction projects dried up.
the stimulus plan was brought on by the opposition ... don't forget the conservatives were barely acknowledging a crisis until well after the fact ... they were forecasting a surplus that turned out to be a huge defecit for like ages ...
the spending on infrastructure during a recession is what every gov't did ... let's not go give them credit for something they got forced to do by the opposition ...
as for daycare ... there are still massive waitlists at the current rate ... the issue is both parents have to work these days ... right now ... the current subsidy is not helping anyone ... especially in toronto where if you have more than 1 kid in daycare ... a nanny is actually a better economical option ...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le1960063/
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Then they should at least take some responsibility for that portion of the deficit. As for the deficit I am 100% against deficit's. There should be balanced budget legislation and the governing party runs a deficit they should be held criminally responsible. The government has plenty of revenue to balance it's books, for example, did we really need to spend 2 billion on a G8/G20 conference? when the year before in Pittsburgh it cost 20 million.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
don't even get me started on the G20 ... it was doubly brutal because it was money intentionally spent to fuck Toronto over ... i know we don't see eye to eye on that ... so, we'll just leave it at that ...
the biggest reason why our defecit was so huge was all the tax cuts Harper gave out knowing we were going into a global financial crisis ... we had a huge $10 Billion rainy day fund ... well ... it rained and buddy gave it all away at basically little benefit to most canadians ...
Oh I see your point on the G20, and the way Harper acts, it's believable.
Yes they pissed away the surplus...no doubt there.
I don't like deficits, I just imagine as a country where we'd be without deficits and a national debt, I just think we'd be better off.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
for sure ... no political party (even socialist ones) will ever run a platform on a defecit ... it makes no sense whatsoever ...
And if we didn't have deficits and the huge national debt, taxes would never be an issue, health care, education, post secondary education, the state of our roads, the environment, public transportation would not be an issue, there would be plenty of money to take care of all those needs. I just wish we would develop a plan to take of the national debt over a 25 year or period...future Canadians would be so appreciative and the benefits would be so worth it going forward, imo.
And actually I've been following Jack Layton more, mainly because I don't trust Iggy or Harper, and was wondering if Harper won a minority why Layton couldn't lead a coalition government, he seems the most trustworthy, down to earth and so far isn't promising the world.
Harper has no business talking about coalitions, it's in his past, a lot has come out over the past few days about him talking about coalitions. Like you said the majority was his to lose, I think he's going to lose it, so now we need to talk about coalition government, because unless Harper does an about face and learns to play with others parliament will operate the same way.
Who really knows, also I do not understand how the Green Party can be left out of the debates, did they not get around 7 percent of the vote in the lat election and are polling at around 10%.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
dude ... did you get hit in the head recently!?? ... :shock: ... this doesn't seem like the lukin2006 i've been talking to all this time!! ... haha ...
i totally agree with everything you are saying ... in leadership polls - Layton always wins out as being the most trustworthy ... but the NDP have to fight huge stigma's ... mainly that they can't win enough seats so people think they are wasting a vote ...
i believe the only way harper doesn't get his majority is if people vote strategically ... every conservative voter that i've talked to seem to be spewing the same talking pts they are being fed without any critical thinking ... it'll be hard for them to change their vote ... having said that - i suspect that if harper doesn't get his majority this go around ... it could be the end of days for him ... those guys are looking to pull a mike harris ... get in, gut, exploit and run ... all those guys are sitting pretty now and no doubt they are pushing hard this go around based on polling ...
what i find weird tho is their mishandling of things like the coalition and the military jets ... why not just come out and say they'll cost what they will ... no one in their base is gonna care ... why the need to flat out lie about it? ... it's a poor move on their part ...
hehehe...no not hit on the head...like you just want whats best for the country and right now we're being short changed, if it does come down to a coalition government it needs to stay in place for 3-4 years.
Thats the problem with Harper he just not coming clean about anything.
Saw this played on the CBC the other day. So what has changed MR. Harper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDTmpXj9 ... =topvideos
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Liberals narrow gap to 6 points in campaign’s ‘first possible shift’
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/liberals-narrow-gap-to-6-points-in-campaigns-first-possible-shift/article1964548/
I'd be lying if I said I was surprised that the Liberals have gained, because I think that Ignatieff has started quite well campaign-wise, but at the expense of the NDP instead of the Conservatives? Is this a response to where he plans to spend (education, daycare, popular on the left), or to how he plans to pay for it (mainly taxing the corporations, popular on the left but despised by the Tories)? I just found it odd.
Unrelated question: does anyone know the reason that Elizabeth May chose to run in a BC riding that has largely been Conservative for the past 50 years? I can't find anything on-line about it, but my search skills are admittedly weak. Wouldn't it more sense to pick a softer target seat, instead of going after cabinet ministers, if the goal is to win your party's first seat?
the liberals gain are primarily due to people not wanting harper to get his majority ... the reality is that in order to prevent a harper majority - there needs to be strategic voting ... which in some cases may mean voting liberal or in some other cases voting green or the NDP ...
she's chosen to run in saanich because that's where she predominantly lives and she's spent the last couple of years establishing a base there ... the most recent poll actually has her close to the conservative incumbent there ... i suspect that if liberal/ndp voters voted strategically, she could win ... the main part of the saanich is mostly ex-albertans who've retired there but the outskirts are fairly progressive people ...
The strategic voting thing makes sense, although I'm not following the the specific case of how it gets May elected. The Lib/NDP supporters all vote Green? Seems a long-shot.
the goal is to prevent a harper majority ... so, if he needs 155 seats or whatever is to get a majority - every seat that is not won works towards that ...
if my info is correct and May is the one polling closest to the conservative incumbent - then the idea is to vote strategically with the person most likely to win the riding ... in this case - May ...
i'm sure you've heard that an NDP candidate has withdrawn his name for consideration in a riding because he feels it is much more important to prevent a harper majority than exude NDP influence ...
I haven't heard that, but I heard this.
New Democrat hopeful quits to support Harper
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/967 ... arper?bn=1
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I believe these are the same pollster that said the Toronto Mayoral race was to close to call. Did Rob not win rather easily?
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I'm not for strategic voting myself, if you got a good MP who goes to Ottawa and does a good job representing the riding I will support him. With that said not much of a decision, we have NDP here who does a good job for his constituency, but not nearly as good a job as Dwight Duncan has done for us, my local MPP, hehehehe. But it helps being finance minister, hehehe.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
yeah ... that's the guy ...
I saw that headline this morning, and then I noted it was April 1...
I wonder how he plans to support Harper; he won't be running in that riding because the Tory incumbent isn't going anywhere. That riding was very close in 2008 though.
ooops ... i just assumed it was the right article ... this is the one i was referring to from a few days ago ...
http://www.metronews.ca/halifax/canada/article/818323