Support NeoGAF

[gutter_trash]

you guys are sooo screwed if PC Harris Boys are allowed back in

 

[Heshinsi]

you guys are sooo screwed if PC Harris Boys are allowed back in

Ontario voters are pretty freaking dumb. They're mostly left leaning but can't stand each other's party. So they instead let the Tories sneak out with a win, even though the clear majority of the population don't want them. Never going to forgive Ontario for Harper. Was fear of the NDP truly worth handing the country over to that maniac?

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Why can't the left join together like the right did?

Wrong province. The left joined together many times before in Ontario to give us the parties we have today. I don't think the right has ever joined together.

 

[Heshinsi]

Wrong province. The left joined together many times before in Ontario to give us the parties we have today.

But right now the Left is splitting the votes between two parties right?

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

But right now the Left is splitting the votes between two parties right?

The left in Toronto and Ottawa are voting Liberal and the left elsewhere are voting NDP.


It just so happens that Conservatives are doing strong in the GTA as well, better than the Liberals, and strong in some rural areas, better than the NDP. That gives us the results we have. We need proportional representation not the get-rich-quick scheme of joining parties. That will eventually split the electorate along 50/50 lines sooner or later.

 

[Heshinsi]

The left in Toronto and Ottawa are voting Liberal and the left elsewhere are voting NDP.
It just so happens that Conservatives are doing strong in the GTA as well, better than the Liberals, and strong in some rural areas, better than the NDP. That gives us the results we have.

And that helps the PC party because all of the right funnel their votes to one party. That's what I was trying to say. Ok that second part makes sense.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Let's imagine a scenario where "Die Linke" left-wing party forms. You want to know why they would lose just as often to the Conservatives?

Trinity-Spadina. LIbs+NDP+Green = 87.44%
Sudbury Libs+NDP+Green = 85.82%

etc. etc.

Uber-socialists concentrate all into one riding, usually urban or with unionized labour force. It will create a situation like Quebec where all the federalist live in Montreal, so PQ wins in the regions even though they have less voter support. This is all assuming that the electorate doesn't split along 50/50 left-right lines eventually (more polarization in politics). Conservative votes are simply more efficient. The Republican gerrymandering strategy is the same. Corner Democrats into constituencies where they win with 70%+, but make the Republicans win with 55%-60%. If the vote is 50/50 then that's more seats for Republicans.

Also, the way the Liberals concentrated all their seats in Toronto is just asking to be slaughtered. What happened to the BQ? All their votes come from Quebec. NDP comes in and annihilates them in a span of a month (NDP has 42% of vote but 79% of seats). Looks like the same is going to happen here if these results hold up. Liberals play regionalist politics (gas plants, expensive subways to nowhere) and have only themselves to blame.

 

[Heshinsi]

Let's imagine a scenario where "Die Linke" left-wing party forms. You want to know why they would lose just as often to the Conservatives?

Trinity-Spadina. LIbs+NDP+Green = 87.44%
Sudbury Libs+NDP+Green = 85.82%

etc. etc.

Uber-socialists concentrate all into one riding, usually urban or with unionized labour force. It will create a situation like Quebec where all the federalist live in Montreal, so PQ wins in the regions even though they have less voter support. This is all assuming that the electorate doesn't split along 50/50 left-right lines eventually (more polarization in politics). Conservative votes are simply more efficient. The Republican gerrymandering strategy is the same. Corner Democrats into constituencies where they win with 70%+, but make the Republicans win with 55%-60%. If the vote is 50/50 then that's more seats for Republicans.

Also, the way the Liberals concentrated all their seats in Toronto is just asking to be slaughtered. What happened to the BQ? All their votes come from Quebec. NDP comes in and annihilates them in a span of a month (NDP has 42% of vote but 79% of seats). Looks like the same is going to happen here if these results hold up. Liberals play regionalist politics (gas plants, expensive subways to nowhere) and have only themselves to blame.

So what would we need to do to put in place a system that represents the voting population fairly? It irritated me in 2011 when Harper stated that his party was given a mandate by Canadians to be in power. No you weren't given a mandate to rule Mr. Harper. The clear majority of Canadians did not want you as their PM.

 

[Azih]

So what would we need to do to put in place a system that represents the voting population fairly?

Proportional representation. It's the most commonly used system of voting in democracies worldwide.

 

[gabbo]

Proportional representation. It's the most commonly used system of voting in democracies worldwide.

Pfft, next you'll try and tell the voting public that coalitions aren't evil specters

 

[BigJonsson]

Just have run-offs everywhere! Or at least ranked ballots

 

[KidDork]

Read that Huff piece and had to agree with it. If the NDP really cared about Ontario, they'd have supported the budget and not given Hudak a chance to get in. But hey, it's not like this has ever happened before, right?

 

[firehawk12]

Mandatory voting + federal/provincial/municipal holidays for all elections + proportional representation.

Only in my dreams though.

 

[gutter_trash]

I'm against mandatory voting because people who are not informed and chose to not participate, that is their choice.

do we really want badly informed people randomly voting for whatever because they are forced to go vote?

 

[Stumpokapow]

I'm against mandatory voting because people who are not informed and chose to not participate, that is their choice.

do we really want badly informed people randomly voting for whatever because they are forced to go vote?

There's no evidence that voters are more well informed than non-voters under the current system, nor does this argument take into account whatever possibility, albeit low, that compulsory voting would cause current non-voters to take time to educate themselves.

For that matter, it's not even clear to me that voters that spend all day informing themselves about the issues are any better informed than people who don't know anything. I don't think memorization of MP names or scandals-du-jour have any impact on knowledge of empirical outcomes of policies. I certainly haven't noticed that the quality of political discussions I have with politics die-hards seem to reflect a more reasoned consideration than the quality of political discussions I have with randoms off the street.

But mostly I also don't buy exceptionalism arguments. Many countries practice compulsory voting right now and there's no evidence their electoral outcomes are notably worse or different than our own. There's no reason why something that doesn't produce a crazy outcome in other countries would magically begin producing crazy outcomes in Canada.

 

[Azih]

There's no evidence that voters are more well informed than non-voters under the current system, nor does this argument take into account whatever possibility, albeit low, that compulsory voting would cause current non-voters to take time to educate themselves.

For that matter, it's not even clear to me that voters that spend all day informing themselves about the issues are any better informed than people who don't know anything. I don't think memorization of MP names or scandals-du-jour have any impact on knowledge of empirical outcomes of policies. I certainly haven't noticed that the quality of political discussions I have with politics die-hards seem to reflect a more reasoned consideration than the quality of political discussions I have with randoms off the street.

But mostly I also don't buy exceptionalism arguments. Many countries practice compulsory voting right now and there's no evidence their electoral outcomes are notably worse or different than our own. There's no reason why something that doesn't produce a crazy outcome in other countries would magically begin producing crazy outcomes in Canada.

On one hand I do like the idea of putting in some policies that reinforce that voting is important and mandatory voting does do that. On the other hand I like the idea that people should have a choice in the matter. They could always spoil their ballots but honestly that's a far less visible protest than not participating at all.

 

[Boogie]

Mandatory voting + federal/provincial/municipal holidays for all elections + proportional representation.

Only in my dreams though.

Wait, you want mandatory voting?

Weren't you the one wringing your hands a while back that you might not even vote in 2015?

 

[firehawk12]

On one hand I do like the idea of putting in some policies that reinforce that voting is important and mandatory voting does do that. On the other hand I like the idea that people should have a choice in the matter. They could always spoil their ballots but honestly that's a far less visible protest than not participating at all.

If voting was mandatory and the same number of people spoiled their ballot as choose not to vote (30-40%), that would probably send a much bigger message. Imagine what kind of mandate a government would have if a third of the voting population decided all the parties were shit. lol

 

[maharg]

On one hand I do like the idea of putting in some policies that reinforce that voting is important and mandatory voting does do that. On the other hand I like the idea that people should have a choice in the matter. They could always spoil their ballots but honestly that's a far less visible protest than not participating at all.

In mandatory voting you don't have to spoil your ballot, you can just choose none of the above. AFAIK all systems of mandatory voting provide this explicit option.

Which means you get a much better breakdown of who's unhappy with the system vs. who just screwed up their ballot.

 

[firehawk12]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/david-cameron-s-top-secret-visit-to-canada-revealed-1.2639945

You can tell the writer was having a lot of fun with this one.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Quebec's turnout was 75% and Ontario will be lucky to crack 45%. I feel like mandatory voting would suppress and mask these numbers which show that democracy is dysfunctional in certain places. I want to know how engaged people are and mandatory voting would fly in the face of that.

 

[explodet]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/david-cameron-s-top-secret-visit-to-canada-revealed-1.2639945

You can tell the writer was having a lot of fun with this one.

Meanwhile all the comments at the bottom of the article are as miserable as they always are.

Lighten up, you jerks.
Not you guys, y'all are cool, I mean the commenters.

 

[Mr.Mike]

The polls have been very volatile. And if you look at individual pollsters there is a lot of inconsistency among them too.

Crazy how many seats change hands with only a few percentage points of change. Some tight races going on.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Ipsos just released their new poll and it has Conservatives up by 2 points, so it looks like Hudak will be back in majority territory by tomorrow.

I don't think the polls are relevant at this point. No one is paying attention. After the debates is when you'll start seeing major shifts (if there will be any).

 

[maharg]

Quebec's turnout was 75% and Ontario will be lucky to crack 45%. I feel like mandatory voting would suppress and mask these numbers which show that democracy is dysfunctional in certain places. I want to know how engaged people are and mandatory voting would fly in the face of that.

So, two things on this:
1) I agree that if your goal in making voting mandatory is to 'fix democracy' and increase engagement, it probably doesn't really do that.
2) On the other hand, it's absolutely a mistake to assume that everyone who doesn't vote goes that way because they don't want to. For a lot of people, other factors out of their control (their job, their kids, etc.) prevent them from doing it or drastically decrease the energy they have to bother. Mandatory voting in combination with requiring the election to take place on a day where most people don't work can help people who would otherwise be engaged become visibly engaged. It also, if well enforced, makes it so that discouraging people from voting is no longer a viable tactic to increase your vote share at the expense of the number of people voting. Shit like the Pierre Putine robocalls would be much more serious offenses and less likely to work.

On a balance I think the benefits outweigh the lack of actual increase in engagement. And again, mandatory voting always has an option to not vote for any of the options and that actually *increases* the visibility into the democratic legitimacy of the system. Right now you can't tell if non-voters are disengaged people or engaged people who legitimately would never vote for any of the options.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Well, Horwath intends to cut $600 million in spending.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queensp...ws_ndp_would_cut_600_million_in_spending.html

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath says government has to start living within it means and promised to trim provincial spending by $600 million if elected June 12.
Sounding more like a hardliner than a socialist, Horwath said there is too much waste in the system and that’s why her smaller cabinet would feature a “savings and accountability” minister whose sole responsibility would be to reduce the budget by 0.5 per cent.
“A Minister of Savings and Accountability will increase transparency, provide oversight and ensure that departments respect your tax dollars. The minister will work with cabinet to find common sense steps to streamline programs and provide more efficient service,” Horwath told a Queen’s Park news conference Wednesday.

...

In Toronto, Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak laughed when asked about NDP Leader Andrea Horwath's proposal.
Hudak, who was taking a sip of water when a reporter queried him, couldn't help but snorting.
“Only the NDP would create a new bureaucracy to reduce bureaucracy,” ‎he said.
Liberal party spokeswoman Rebecca MacKenzie said, “It's impossible to know what Andrea Horwath stands for any more. She has gone from calling herself a socialist to mimicking Rob Ford and Tim Hudak.”

God damn that liberal spokeswoman needs to tone it down.

Meanwhile, Hudak says a PC government will never run a deficit (?!?) by capping spending increases at the same rate as GDP growth.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ment-would-never-run-deficit/article18657146/

Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak is promising to bring in a new law capping spending increases at the same rate as GDP growth in a bid to ensure Ontario never again runs a budget deficit.

The Spending Within Our Means Act, unveiled Wednesday as part of the Tories’ platform launch, is Mr. Hudak’s firmest embrace yet of pro-cyclical spending and a total rejection of the Keynesian interventionism favoured by the governing Liberals. If Ontario were to face a recession in future, for instance, government spending would shrink instead of growing.

...

His 26-page platform also provides a blueprint for nearly every policy area. Highlights include:

Selling off government-owned property and allowing pension plans to invest in state enterprises, including Hydro One, Ontario Power Generation and the LCBO;
Expanding the role of community colleges, including by allowing courses to count for high school credit;
Encouraging universities to focus on more practical science and technology-based programs, and to tailor them to the needs of the job market;
Forcing unions to disclose financial information;
Raising literacy and mathematics testing standards in grade school;
Putting more emphasis on math teaching, including by changing curriculum to have children memorize multiplication tables and learn rote math algorithms.

Holy shit Hudak is a dumb ass. For someone who thinks he's being fiscally responsible he knows awfully little about economics (nothing really). I remember my highschool accounting/economics teacher complaining about how governments would do the wrong thing at each point in the business cycle (spending money when times were good and saving when times were bad, opposite of what would be ideal). I wonder how he would feel about these statements, he was pretty damn conservative. Christ, he might be thinking about voting NDP.

And somehow I don't think more rote learning is going to help teach kids any sort of meaningful math skills. "Rote math algorithims"? What is that even supposed to mean? God forbid we teach our kids critical thinking and problem solving so they can come up with algorithims themselves. (I'd like to take this time to mention that I think Computer Science should be a mandatory class)

Also, the thing with college courses counting for high school credit already happens. It'd be nice if they could research these things before they put them in their platform.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Encouraging universities to focus on more practical science and technology-based programs, and to tailor them to the needs of the job market;

*rolleyes*

 

[gutter_trash]

with a 24/h news cycle and mondo polls. Anti-Hudak voters will rally behind Wynne at the end.

For NDP voters, blocking a PC government is a bigger priority than electing an NDP government.

You guys needn't worry. Hudak has peeked, he only has downward to go + you have a full month left.

Always remember Pauline Marois, she polled ahead in majority territory early during Qc election and she lost badly on April 7th bringing the Liberals to a majority

 

[Mr.Mike]

*rolleyes*

You might like this article.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...uided_attack_on_arts_and_science_degrees.html

A dangerous and growing urban myth in Canada is that university students enrolled in liberal arts and science programs are acquiring skills employers don’t need. This is bogus.

This is profoundly misguided for two reasons. First, the purpose of education is not only to train workers. Considering challenges such as climate change, economic turmoil and international conflict, we need workers who are also knowledgeable citizens. We want Canadians to be critical thinkers and innovators, to have a passion not just for their professions but for being good parents, community builders, global participants and for effectively choosing, challenging and engaging their governments.

Increasingly Canada has an innovation-based, knowledge economy that relies on brain not brawn. It’s true that we create much wealth through resource extraction and manufacturing, but a growing number of these jobs require higher education. In resource-based Alberta, 40 per cent of new jobs require university credentials and another 26 per cent require college. That adds up to a whopping two thirds of all new jobs.

But we should aspire to be more than just hewers of wood and drawers of oil. We need large and small companies that can innovate and compete globally. The private and public sectors require a workforce that can think critically, solve problems, have big-picture awareness and learn lifelong. One of Canada’s biggest manufacturing companies is the $8-billion Toronto-based Celestica. More than 50 per cent of its Canadian plant employees have a college diploma, and 40 per cent have a university degree.

The so-called economy-wide “skills gap” does not exist. There may be short-term mismatches in some locations. But a TD Economics survey found there has been no change in recent years of firms reporting difficulty finding skilled employees. We have an oversupply of skills, not a shortage. There are two million unemployed and underemployed versus 200,000 job vacancies. Even the trades increasingly require higher education. Auto mechanics are swapping wrenches for a mouse. The car is becoming a bunch of computers connected to networks. Increasingly cars are diagnosed through technology and fixed by installing new software.

The only skill most young people are short on is experience. The real problem in Canada is the lack of a persistent demand for labour. Our chronic youth unemployment rate is well over 15 per cent. Any discussion of a skills gap effectively blames the students, their families and workers for the problem of unemployment. This is not a problem of skills; it’s a problem of public policy. The route to job creation is encouraging entrepreneurship. Fully 80 per cent of new jobs come from companies that are five years old or less.

I can certainly appreciate the Liberal Arts. I know I'm looking forward to taking some history courses now that I've switched to a major where I have room to take some. (Engineering at my school only has room for two non-technical electives, Computer Science is much better in this regard).

Gearing our educational system to produce whatever skills are currently in demand would be an ultimately futile effort to chase a fad. In demand skills come and go real quick nowadays, and that's fine, as long as our grads are capable of life long learning. Which is the sort of thing that really should be the focus of our educational system. The real "in-demand" skill of the 21st century is the ability to adapt to an ever changing economy and learn new skills as they come.

 

[firehawk12]

If you are a lefty and want to see someone on the left spank a conservative government, Shorten's speech response to the Australian budget is amazing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrxAlX6aOy8

I wonder if people here would care if you had to pay 7 bucks each time you wanted to visit a doctor.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

So, two things on this:
1) I agree that if your goal in making voting mandatory is to 'fix democracy' and increase engagement, it probably doesn't really do that.
2) On the other hand, it's absolutely a mistake to assume that everyone who doesn't vote goes that way because they don't want to. For a lot of people, other factors out of their control (their job, their kids, etc.) prevent them from doing it or drastically decrease the energy they have to bother. Mandatory voting in combination with requiring the election to take place on a day where most people don't work can help people who would otherwise be engaged become visibly engaged. It also, if well enforced, makes it so that discouraging people from voting is no longer a viable tactic to increase your vote share at the expense of the number of people voting. Shit like the Pierre Putine robocalls would be much more serious offenses and less likely to work.

On a balance I think the benefits outweigh the lack of actual increase in engagement. And again, mandatory voting always has an option to not vote for any of the options and that actually *increases* the visibility into the democratic legitimacy of the system. Right now you can't tell if non-voters are disengaged people or engaged people who legitimately would never vote for any of the options.

Pierre Poutine is illegal under both systems. I'll chalk that up to anomaly.

Overall, forcing people to the ballot box feels like a form of manipulation to me. There's no guarantee that apathetic people are going to pick "none of the above." They are being coerced into voting for someone who they know nothing or very little about. It doesn't enhance the democratic process. Ontario should find ways to work its way up to 75% like Quebec did. Quebec politicians aren't any better than Ontarian politicians in quality, but I do think they and the entire system are better at getting people engaged, even if the stuff that got people engaged was Marois's Charter or separatism, or Charest's tuition hikes.

---

Harper wants to force employers to pay FTWs more. Does no one else get offended by the smell of election season? Either way, despite the intentions, I like the idea. But I think instead of forcing their to pay go higher, I think there should be an employer payroll tax. If we are going to have FTWs to make us more prosperous, we may as well do it the right way.

 

[maharg]

Pierre Poutine is illegal under both systems. I'll chalk that up to anomaly.

I didn't say it was legal under either system, I said it would be a much more serious offense. Mislead a few hundred people into paying a fine and having a criminal record and shit gets real.

Overall, forcing people to the ballot box feels like a form of manipulation to me. There's no guarantee that apathetic people are going to pick "none of the above." They are being coerced into voting for someone who they know nothing or very little about. It doesn't enhance the democratic process. Ontario should find ways to work its way up to 75% like Quebec did. Quebec politicians aren't any better than Ontarian politicians in quality, but I do think they and the entire system are better at getting people engaged, even if the stuff that got people engaged was Marois's Charter or separatism, or Charest's tuition hikes.

This doesn't really address anything I said. You basically ignored the upsides (which were explicitly NOT about increasing engagement) I listed entirely.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

No, that's what I meant when I said mandatory voting is manipulative. It forces people to vote for parties they otherwise would not have voted for under voluntary voting. How many people in Australia pick "none of the above"? I doubt it is 55%. And I don't think mandatory voting has been proven to make average voter more knowledgeable or more engaged.

You want to separate the apathetic from the cynical (with the none of the above option). I don't think forcing the apathetic to vote is democratic, chances are apathetic people are not going to pick none of the above since that option sounds so cynical.

 

[Mr.Mike]

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario...ts_for_ttc_mississauga_brampton_hamilton.html

A Progressive Conservative government would derail planned LRT expansion along Finch and Sheppard Aves. and in Mississauga, Brampton and Hamilton, says Tim Hudak.

“Instead of ripping up the roads and making your traffic worse, we’ll build on the real strengths of the system,” he told reporters at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre against the backdrop of GO Trains at Union Station.
“That’s why we’ll do more frequent GO service and we’ll expand our highway capacity as well, the 400, the 410, the 403.”

Noting gridlock in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area is costing the Ontario economy $6 billion — and 25,000 jobs — a year, Hudak pledged to “take urgent, decisive action to fix this GTA traffic problem.”
“Our priority is to get you home faster. We will put scarce resources into GO service, roads and subways, instead of permanently closing lanes to put an LRT on a politician’s resume.”

If the Tories win the June 12 election, they would merge the Toronto Transit Commission, GO Transit and other services into one regional transportation authority.
Hudak claimed his proposal would create 96,000 jobs — part of the 1 million he believes he could generate over eight years by cutting taxes and reducing bureaucracy.

What is with this Conservative obsession with subways? LRT is a hell of a lot more conservative than subways, but I guess the Conservatives aren't really conservative.

Anyway,more lanes aren't going to put a dent in traffic congestion. The 401 is already the widest road in North America, for all the good it's down for Toronto traffic. And keeping a lane open is absolutely not going to reduce congestion more than some LRT would.

Although merging together various transit bureaucracies to create a more holistic approach to transit in Ontario does seem like a good idea. Not that I'd expect Hudak to fund it properly.

 

[Zombie James]

Trick question, but when will Hudak make an announcement that doesn't cancel something or get thousands of people laid off?

 

[maharg]

Trick question, but when will Hudak make an announcement that doesn't cancel something or get thousands of people laid off?

Well that's how you make jobs. By firing people. Obviously.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Trick question, but when will Hudak make an announcement that doesn't cancel something or get thousands of people laid off?

As much as I don't like his ideas, he really set the agenda for this election. Wynne tried to make it about pensions by picking an imaginary fight with Harper (stupid) but Hudak quickly changed the channel to jobs/economy which isn't exactly the Liberal's strong point given the state of Ontario's economy.

 

[gabbo]

As much as I don't like his ideas, he really set the agenda for this election. Wynne tried to make it about pensions by picking an imaginary fight with Harper (stupid) but Hudak quickly changed the channel to jobs/economy which isn't exactly the Liberal's strong point given the state of Ontario's economy.

Hudak's opening salvo probably shouldn't have been firing hundreds of thousands of public servants.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

Hudak's opening salvo probably shouldn't have been firing hundreds of thousands of public servants.

And cutting corprate taxes across the board. Not exactly the two opening moves I'd lead with for slashing the deficit.

 

[BigJonsson]

And cutting corprate taxes across the board. Not exactly the two opening moves I'd lead with for slashing the deficit.

Better or worse than last election?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hudak-defends-foreign-worker-comments-1.1038585

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Hudak will call a judicial inquiry into the gas plant scandal if elected. Hopefully all parties can commit to the same.

edit: The most surprising thing is how the Conservative/NDP campaign is mostly positive, but the Liberal campaign is viciously negative. I heard the people who were running Martin's campaign are running Wynne's so that would make a lot of sense.

 

[gabbo]

Better or worse than last election?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hudak-defends-foreign-worker-comments-1.1038585

Worse. The foreign workers wasn't the mess it is publicly now. No uproar for public employees heads at the moment, and it's not like we're feeling sorry for major corps either

 

[elty]

NDP still has no real platform, other than some populism move like car insurance or energy rebate.

I guess the best plausible result is:

- PC wins a weak minority
- no more 30% corporation tax cut
- replaced 100K layoff with salary review
- relax apprentice ratio to 1:2
- merge all the redundant bureaucracy and trim the top/middle top management
- lower the $$ for the FIT program
- reduce # of ministry
- lower auto insurance by reducing fraud (increase penalty and enforcement?)
- Year 3, Tim Hudak tries to do something outrageous, fail miserably and get someone better to replace him

 

[Azih]

I kinda like the idea of tax credits to job creators. Better than the PC plan to just give tax cuts and hope for the best (even though corporations have historically just taken tax credits as extra profit and sat on it rather than re-invest).

And didn't someone on this thread point out that companies are now hiring apprentices and then as soon as they graduate to full tradespeople dumping them and hiring new cheaper apprentices? Won't the looser regulation just encourage more of that?

Edit: Here it is

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=111308053&postcount=3985

 

[gutter_trash]

owner of Sun News Media hurt in a bicycle accident

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/05/20/pierre-karl-peladeau-bicycle-accident_n_5358202.html

 

[BigJonsson]

Now Hudak wants to help skilled foreigners get citizenship out of University? Last campaign he wanted to give incentives for hiring Ontarians over "foreigners".....

 

[elty]

I kinda like the idea of tax credits to job creators. Better than the PC plan to just give tax cuts and hope for the best (even though corporations have historically just taken tax credits as extra profit and sat on it rather than re-invest).

And didn't someone on this thread point out that companies are now hiring apprentices and then as soon as they graduate to full tradespeople dumping them and hiring new cheaper apprentices? Won't the looser regulation just encourage more of that?

Edit: Here it is

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=111308053&postcount=3985

Is the wage actually regulated, as in, the employer must give a raise when the apprentice become journeyman? This is like if an accountant clerk get a CGA destination, I don't think the boss is obligated to give a raise (thus there is no need to fire anyone, but the new CGA is free to find a better job).

I am not a huge fan of those self regulated industry college. I know someone who is forced to join one. She needs to pay $250 annual fee, gets 0 benefit (not even a bone like discounted cell phone plan or cheaper group insurance) and absolutely nothing in return. Salary is the same. Meanwhile there is no financial information about the college - it looks like all the member fee went to those fat cats.

 

[firehawk12]

Oh god, anyone watch Power and Politics today?
Carolyn Bennett debating Jim Karygiannis over the Liberal party position on abortion. This is why I don't want the Liberals to represent the Left, because the crazies in the Liberal party are saying how Justin Trudeau has turned them into "second class citizens".

Why can't the NDP be a serious opposition party? Why do I have to choose between a shitty party and a shittier party?

(Also, why can't an atheist ever be a political leader so we can move beyond this stupid shit and solve real issues?)

 

[gabbo]

Oh god, anyone watch Power and Politics today?
Carolyn Bennett debating Jim Karygiannis over the Liberal party position on abortion. This is why I don't want the Liberals to represent the Left, because the crazies in the Liberal party are saying how Justin Trudeau has turned them into "second class citizens".

I take it this was two Libs on opposite sides of Justin's recent pro choice move?

 

[firehawk12]

I take it this was two Libs on opposite sides of Justin's recent pro choice move?

Yes. Karygiannis is a former MP who resigned to run in the Toronto council race.

A lot of his stuff was "I'm glad I'm off the leash now and can speak my mind". Makes you wonder how many old timey Liberals still feel that way.