• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Canadian General Election (OT) - #elxn42: October 19, 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
hopefully with more metro networks and pedestrian pathway in city cores people find the befits of public transport and tone away from car idolizing

Us Canadians aren't Americans we shouldn't try and chase some American ideals and views since us Canadians work differently... our small population relative to our spaced out main cities and big country means that we need to find ways to interconnect our country in more ways then one

fixing our infrastructure and evolving it to the next step is needed..... hopefully one day :(

Sure, if you want to spend billions on trains to nowhere...

  • Stephen Harper has managed to turn 10 consecutive federal budget surpluses of the Martin-Chretien era into 7 straight consecutive deficits.
  • nder Stephen Harper, household debt has exploded. The average household debt-to-income ratio (i.e., the amount of debt the average Canadian household owes for every dollar of their annual disposable income) has risen from $1.31 to $1.64
  • A significant contributor to household debt can be traced to rising housing prices. Mr. Harper's finance minister, Jim Flaherty, helped fuel the housing bubble with his irresponsible introduction of 40-year mortgages with zero down-payment.
  • the guy was pushing financial deregulation until the crash, then claimed victory for a system he had been actively dismantling.

This is all one-sided. Re: the surplus from the Martin-Chretien era, everyone would have turned a surplus. It's like saying Clinton is the GOAT president because of the fact that he was governing when the US economy was riding high, or that Obama sucks at managing and directing an economy because he happened to be president during tough times.

What about TFSA, lower corporate tax rate which has spurned development (and is attracting corporations to establish headquarters in Canada), lower taxes, etc. As a high earner, that's what I am most sensitive about and that's where the conservatives have my vote; reducing my tax bill is my #1 priority.

I reckon the CPC hasn't been perfect, though, but they cater to my needs.
 

S-Wind

Member
Sure, if you want to spend billions on trains to nowhere...



This is all one-sided. Re: the surplus from the Martin-Chretien era, everyone would have turned a surplus. It's like saying Clinton is the GOAT president because of the fact that he was governing when the US economy was riding high, or that Obama sucks at managing and directing an economy because he happened to be president during tough times.

What about TFSA, lower corporate tax rate which has spurned development (and is attracting corporations to establish headquarters in Canada), lower taxes, etc. As a high earner, that's what I am most sensitive about and that's where the conservatives have my vote; reducing my tax bill is my #1 priority.

I reckon the CPC hasn't been perfect, though, but they cater to my needs.

Ah, I see.

"I got mine. Fuck the rest of you."

You should have just come out and said it earlier. It would have saved time.

You are one of the prototypes of a right-winger.
 
Ah, I see.

"I got mine. Fuck they rest of you."

You should have just come out and said it earlier. It would have saved time.

You are one of the prototypes of a right-winger.

I'm a fiscal conservative, but socially progressive. It just so happens that the former is higher priority than the latter.

And it's not quite appropriate to put everyone in the same bucket.
 

TheOMan

Tagged as I see fit
I'm a fiscal conservative, but socially progressive. It just so happens that the former is higher priority than the latter. I've worked really hard to be where I am today and it's depressing to see the fruits of my labour spent in an inefficient manner (as much in Canada as anywhere else, really).

And it's not quite appropriate to put everyone in the same bucket.

I'm a high earner, run my own company and I too dislike how much tax I pay. However, can you not see how bad Harper has been for Canada and your fellow Canadians? How he continues to make a mockery of the PMO? The only PM to be held in contempt? And you're more concerned about your taxes?

Come on.

Edit: You should read this for some perspective and a reality check: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?referrer=
 

Dr.Acula

Banned
This is all one-sided. Re: the surplus from the Martin-Chretien era, everyone would have turned a surplus. It's like saying Clinton is the GOAT president because of the fact that he was governing when the US economy was riding high, or that Obama sucks at managing and directing an economy because he happened to be president during tough times.

What about TFSA, lower corporate tax rate which has spurned development (and is attracting corporations to establish headquarters in Canada), lower taxes, etc. As a high earner, that's what I am most sensitive about and that's where the conservatives have my vote; reducing my tax bill is my #1 priority.

I reckon the CPC hasn't been perfect, though, but they cater to my needs.

If the global economic situation is essential random, then we should at least elect leaders who aren't backward on policy like privacy and science.
 
for me it's Harper's stance on firearms which the the #1 deal breaker from ever voting for that Republican party

I am opposed to guns and I am for stricter gun control. I don't want Canada to become USA junior with high gun circulation and increase of crimes involving them
 

lupinko

Member
I would love high-speed rail in Canada.

But the predominant problem is that we exist in the American sphere of influence.

Cars = Personal Freedom

As long as we think like the Americans, we're going to be stuck. Trust me, I live in the city that had to, and still has to, deal with Ford Nation. The most American of all Canadian political movements.

High speed rail is amazing, look right now I live in Sendai, and getting to Tokyo by car is the same distance as a drive from Montreal to Toronto so 5-6 hours. But by using the Shinkansen (Bullettrain), it's only a 90 minute ride.

Also building it would create new jobs, infrastructure isn't cheap and the job creation maybe temporary but the end result is incredible and invaluable. Also sometimes it pays for itself really fast and turns a pretty penny.

Case in point the Canada Line skytrain that links Downtown Vancouver to YVR/Richmond.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
The sad thing about the right wing, fiscal conservative, low tax ideology is that it doesn't work at all and people don't save money.

The result of ultra low taxes is terrible infrastructure and weak services, and this costs Canadians.

Consider transportation. Vancouver just had a referendum on whether or not to add 0.5 cents to the sales tax in order to fund 10 years of extensive public transit, cycling and road network improvements throughout the region. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation lobbied against the tax, stating that people were taxed too much already. Of course the referendum failed.

What was unfortunately largely ignored during this exercise was the fact that those living in the areas best served by public transit are spending $10,000 less a year than those living in the areas with weak transit options (compare against the annual transit tax cost: $125). These conservative areas that strongly rejected the new tax are fooling themselves if they think they've saved themselves money. They will be paying much, much more in the status quo with weak public services and poor infrastructure.
 
Screw high speed rail, put in the hyperloop instead.

Sure, if you want to spend billions on trains to nowhere...



This is all one-sided. Re: the surplus from the Martin-Chretien era, everyone would have turned a surplus. It's like saying Clinton is the GOAT president because of the fact that he was governing when the US economy was riding high, or that Obama sucks at managing and directing an economy because he happened to be president during tough times.

What about TFSA, lower corporate tax rate which has spurned development (and is attracting corporations to establish headquarters in Canada), lower taxes, etc. As a high earner, that's what I am most sensitive about and that's where the conservatives have my vote; reducing my tax bill is my #1 priority.

I reckon the CPC hasn't been perfect, though, but they cater to my needs.

As a high earner, we still get taxed up the ass under the CPC. A different government won't result in much of an increase. TFSA is good, but only if the government increases the limits responsibly and based on evidence and information. CPC's current plan is pretty much the opposite of that.

That leads to a bigger problem in general with the current government. Harper and the CPC do not make policy decisions based on any evidence, stats, science whatsoever. There are countless examples of this (C-51, C-24, foreign policy, gutting scientific research, gutting information, gun policy, environmental policy, oil policy). I see very very little to be proud of what this government has accomplished. Canada has regressed in the last 8 years and thankfully at least 70% of Canadians realize that.
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
I'm a fiscal conservative, but socially progressive. It just so happens that the former is higher priority than the latter.

And it's not quite appropriate to put everyone in the same bucket.

I mean obviously his commentary was kinda rude, but on a literal level he's right. You identified your #1 priority was the government taking less of your money. They take it from you so they can give it to people who have less. You don't like that. Your position is literally that the most important thing is helping you.

Obviously he came off as abrasive and hostile. If it were much more hostile it'll be near insults and bans territory. But his characterization of your position, beyond the tone, is accurate.

The "I'm a social liberal" deflection doesn't really change much about the characterization. It changes it to "I've got mine, but you can have some as long as it doesn't come from me"

Obviously everyone has some degree of self-interest. We don't have a 90% marginal tax on people earning 25k or whatever. So it's not like the progressive position is "Comrade Robin Hood". But is it really surprising that someone would react to "My number one priority is me" with -- admittedly rudely in tone -- "Wow that's selfish".

I don't necessarily want to pay more tax but if someone asked me my #1 priority, I'd say building a better country together. I don't think people, even arch-conservative people, would characterize that as indicative of my poor character.
 

MikeyB

Member
This is all one-sided. Re: the surplus from the Martin-Chretien era, everyone would have turned a surplus. It's like saying Clinton is the GOAT president because of the fact that he was governing when the US economy was riding high, or that Obama sucks at managing and directing an economy because he happened to be president during tough times.
Exactly. My earlier point was that performance of the economy has very little to nothing to do with the current government. So Harper managing the helm well doesn't make any sense. But as long as you're going to claim that, you'd better take the full picture into account.

More generally, I'm fiscally conservative. I'm not cracking six figures yet, but I see the efficient allocation of public money to be pretty damn important. (That's why I would have favoured retaining the GST and tinkering with income tax instead). This government has crippled their ability to efficiently spend the money they gather and be held accountable for it. They've certainly been good at pinching their pennies. But if they cannot allocate the money they do gather in a sensible way, I don't know if that makes us any better off except in Moody's books.

You and I may disagree on this point, but I want to pay taxes so that we can accomplish things as a society that we cannot accomplish independently. Military, health, education, infrastructure, etc. If the person holding the wallet has no process for determining how to spend it or complete and utter disregard for a process, and doesn't want to show me the receipts, the fact that they're as reluctant to open the wallet as I'd like them to be is cold comfort when they do.
 

lacinius

Member


Really... so that's the banner you want to fly after all this time? But after so much bluster for so many years, what did it really all amount to for so much "rampant corruption" as you call it...

In the end, the [Gomery] Commission concluded that $2 million was awarded in contracts without a proper bidding process, $250,000 was added to one contract price for no additional work, and $1.5 million was awarded for work that was never done, of which $1 million had to be repaid.

How about another Con-bot talking point, the banner for which still gets unfurled when needed... I speak of the much heralded "Billion Dollar Boondoggle" associated with the HRDC scandal... remember that one? But when all was said and done what did that really amount to...

The billion dollar figure was the total value of the almost 17000 case files the HRDC was handling... after reviewing all 17000 files, totaling about $1.3billion, it was found that there were only six overpayments made, at a total loss to the government of about $3200.

Yes, that's three thousand, two hundred CDN dollars... but that certainly was more than enough for yet another CON-bot "Billion Dollar Boondoggle" talking point to be born and championed time and again since all that went down back in 1998.

Anyway... just a little perspective on a couple of popular and often repeated CON-bot talking points.
 
Exactly. My earlier point was that performance of the economy has very little to nothing to do with the current government. So Harper managing the helm well doesn't make any sense. But as long as you're going to claim that, you'd better take the full picture into account.

More generally, I'm fiscally conservative. I'm not cracking six figures yet, but I see the efficient allocation of public money to be pretty damn important. (That's why I would have favoured retaining the GST and tinkering with income tax instead). This government has crippled their ability to efficiently spend the money they gather and be held accountable for it. They've certainly been good at pinching their pennies. But if they cannot allocate the money they do gather in a sensible way, I don't know if that makes us any better off except in Moody's books.

You and I may disagree on this point, but I want to pay taxes so that we can accomplish things as a society that we cannot accomplish independently. Military, health, education, infrastructure, etc. If the person holding the wallet has no process for determining how to spend it or complete and utter disregard for a process, and doesn't want to show me the receipts, the fact that they're as reluctant to open the wallet as I'd like them to be is cold comfort when they do.

Maybe they've mismanaged the country in recent years, but I still feel like, for what matters to me, they are still the best alternative (or the least worst).

I mean obviously his commentary was kinda rude, but on a literal level he's right. You identified your #1 priority was the government taking less of your money. They take it from you so they can give it to people who have less. You don't like that. Your position is literally that the most important thing is helping you.

Obviously he came off as abrasive and hostile. If it were much more hostile it'll be near insults and bans territory. But his characterization of your position, beyond the tone, is accurate.

The "I'm a social liberal" deflection doesn't really change much about the characterization. It changes it to "I've got mine, but you can have some as long as it doesn't come from me"

Obviously everyone has some degree of self-interest. We don't have a 90% marginal tax on people earning 25k or whatever. So it's not like the progressive position is "Comrade Robin Hood". But is it really surprising that someone would react to "My number one priority is me" with -- admittedly rudely in tone -- "Wow that's selfish".

I don't necessarily want to pay more tax but if someone asked me my #1 priority, I'd say building a better country together. I don't think people, even arch-conservative people, would characterize that as indicative of my poor character.

I don't mind them taking from me - it just has to be spent in an efficient manner, which is not synonymous with how Government usually spends its (my) money. I don't mind paying more tax on a % basis than people who have less, but I would also like to enjoy the same tax cuts that lower earners are enjoying, given that I contribute to the economy much more than they do.

We already have a great country; we have universal health care, an amazing welfare net (probably too amazing in some way - I see lots of abuse), abundant natural resources (which we should have managed better, IMO, and built a sovereign wealth fund like Norway for instance), great and affordable education system, good pension system, etc.

I'm not being selfish. I started with nothing and had to work very hard to get where I am. Canada, as it currently is, is a very good land of opportunities, but you have to work hard and even take risks

You want to stimulate the economy? Lower the income tax (progressive, but reduce the gap between top and bottom) and increase consumption tax (and make it even across the board). Canadians are overtaxed; partly one of the reasons why Canada is not a fertile ground for startups and innovation; government not doing enough to lower brain drain or attract new businesses.


Really... so that's the banner you want to fly after all this
time? But after so much bluster for so many years, what did it really all amount to for so much "rampant corruption" as you call it...

[...]
Anyway... just a little perspective on a couple of popular and often repeated CON-bot talking points.

I'm not sure Quebecers will think about it like that...

"CON-bot" - really. Are you going to spell Microsoft with a $?
 

lacinius

Member
I'm not sure Quebecers will think about it like that...

"CON-bot" - really. Are you going to spell Microsoft with a $?


For those that blindly repeat ignorant talking points such as "Billion Dollar Boondoggle" like some party automaton are more that by their own choice rather than even trying to be an informed party supporter.
 
The reason why deficits are scary for some Canadians is because we went through a credit downgrade back in the 80s/early 90s because of our growing inability to pay back our deficit. Or, to put it another way, deficits and debt are bad when there's insufficient growth.

I found this interesting and decided to look into it. Correct my if I'm wrong but the gist I got was that Mulroney came into power on the promise of decreasing the deficit and making John Turner look like a weak idiot. To decrease the deficit he lowered taxes, because conservatives all over the world live in a fantasy land, and privatized a bunch of organizations making them cost more but not directly on the government books so when recession hit the deficit ballooned because there was no longer any revenue. So, now everyone's afraid of deficits. It's reassuring to know that there's consistency in the world: when conservatives get power deficits increase and money is misspent.

Yes, that's three thousand, two hundred CDN dollars... but that certainly was more than enough for yet another CON-bot "Billion Dollar Boondoggle" talking point to be born and championed time and again since all that went down back in 1998.

Yeah, and that's like 3 dollars in real money.

I don't mind them taking from me - it just has to be spent in an efficient manner, which is not synonymous with how Government usually spends its (my) money. I don't mind paying more tax on a % basis than people who have less, but I would also like to enjoy the same tax cuts that lower earners are enjoying, given that I contribute to the economy much more than they do.

The problem with this position is that you guys complain that government mismanages money, so you call for less revenue and continue to elect the people who mismanage money creating a negative feedback loop that destroys governments and economies. Obviously the left mismanages money too. Everyone does. But conservatives operate under the principle that government is inherently ineffective. If that's the basis of a governing party's belief system, confirmation bias will guarantee that when they are in power they will ensure that the government is inefficient and ineffective.

You can't keep blaming it on external factors and Harper's been in power long enough to ensure that some of his policies are now mature enough to be effecting the country. An effective government would've diversified the economy so something like global oil prices wouldn't have such a great effect on your economy. Effectively redirecting the economy will likely require higher taxes, deficits and spending. The conservatives aren't promising that.
 
Maybe they've mismanaged the country in recent years, but I still feel like, for what matters to me, they are still the best alternative (or the least worst).

I don't mind them taking from me - it just has to be spent in an efficient manner, which is not synonymous with how Government usually spends its (my) money. I don't mind paying more tax on a % basis than people who have less, but I would also like to enjoy the same tax cuts that lower earners are enjoying, given that I contribute to the economy much more than they do.

We already have a great country; we have universal health care, an amazing welfare net (probably too amazing in some way - I see lots of abuse), abundant natural resources (which we should have managed better, IMO, and built a sovereign wealth fund like Norway for instance), great and affordable education system, good pension system, etc.

I'm not being selfish. I started with nothing and had to work very hard to get where I am. Canada, as it currently is, is a very good land of opportunities, but you have to work hard and even take risks

You want to stimulate the economy? Lower the income tax (progressive, but reduce the gap between top and bottom) and increase consumption tax (and make it even across the board). Canadians are overtaxed; partly one of the reasons why Canada is not a fertile ground for startups and innovation; government not doing enough to lower brain drain or attract new businesses.

This post is just complete and utter nonsense from beginning to end.

1) Remember the very first thing the Conservatives did after taking power? One of the core pillars of their campaign? They cut the GST by two points, even though they knew doing so would blow a massive hole in the budget. The fact they were willfully, knowingly implementing bad fiscal policies from the beginning puts the lie to any claims that their mismanagement has only started in the last couple of years. They've been rotten and flawed from the get-go.

2) I'd like to know what it is you do that makes you so much more valuable to the economy than low-income earners. Honest question: what do you do? If you're going to claim to be such an important part of the economy that you deserve more than your share of benefits, you have to back it up. I'm willing to bet that your job is a lot less valuable to the economy than some person earning minimum wage to do menial labour, but please, share with us what makes you more worthy.

3) You know what pays for universal health care, our amazing welfare net, keeping our natural resources, our great and affordable education system, our good pension system, etc.? Think about it for a second, then let us know how you plan to keep doing all those things by cutting taxes. NOTE: Using discredited bromides imported from the Heritage Institute about lower taxes spurring growth doesn't count as an actual answer.

3a) Please give us evidence of the welfare system being abused? Anecdotes about your friend's friend's aunt's sister-in-law apparently living high off government cheques don't count.

4) Working hard and taking risks is much easier if you have some form of social safety net. A safety net which, we've already established, you're unwilling to pay for.

5) Which is it? Does Canada's high tax regime make it unattractive for foreign businesses, or:

What about TFSA, lower corporate tax rate which has spurned development (and is attracting corporations to establish headquarters in Canada), lower taxes, etc. As a high earner, that's what I am most sensitive about and that's where the conservatives have my vote; reducing my tax bill is my #1 priority.

If you're going to claim something, be consistent. It's not one or the other. We're actually taxed lower than most other G7 countries, so ranting about being overtaxed at all levels makes no sense.

5a) TFSA limits only help people who have a spare $5-10k lying around to throw into savings accounts. That's great you have that much to throw into the bank, but only very high-income earners can afford to do that. Raising TFSA limits only helps the wealthy, like every other Conservative policy.
 

Azih

Member
The assault on government science and the destruction of Revenue Canada as a premier data gathering organization through eliminating the long form census just completely destroys any counter argument about Harper's Cons providing any form of good governance.

You need data, information, statistics etc. to make good informed decision (the whole crux of good governance). How the hell was the Conservative crippling of Statistics Canada justifiable? Everybody in the private sector is now blathering on and on about 'Big Data' and Harper deliberately and maliciously destroyed the data gathering capability of the Canadian government.

Not even joking but I am still enraged about this.
 
The assault on government science and the destruction of Revenue Canada as a premier data gathering organization through eliminating the long form census just completely destroys any counter argument about Harper's Cons providing any form of good governance.

You need data, information, statistics etc. to make good informed decision (the whole crux of good governance). How the hell was the Conservative crippling of Statistics Canada justifiable? Everybody in the private sector is now blathering on and on about 'Big Data' and Harper deliberately and maliciously destroyed the data gathering capability of the Canadian government.

Not even joking but I am still enraged about this.

Yup, of all the fucked up shit Harper has done, gutting science and information has to be on top.
 

Brandson

Member
I don't know why other parties aren't on the offensive over Canada's low dollar. More than any other policy, I would argue that that affects Canadians the most. Any benefits of a very minor increase in manufacturing in Canada as a result is totally negated by the fact that everything costs 20-30% more than it used to because most products Canadians buy come from other countries. I don't understand why Conservative supporters aren't more upset about this too. Particularly since Poloz took over from Carney, it's been a disaster for Canadians.
 

Pedrito

Member
I don't know why other parties aren't on the offensive over Canada's low dollar. More than any other policy, I would argue that that affects Canadians the most. Any benefits of a very minor increase in manufacturing in Canada as a result is totally negated by the fact that everything costs 20-30% more than it used to because most products Canadians buy come from other countries. I don't understand why Conservative supporters aren't more upset about this too. Particularly since Poloz took over from Carney, it's been a disaster for Canadians.

Because all minor currencies are getting crushed right now vs. the USD. I'm all for blaming the Cons for everything bad they've done, but they have little to do with what's happening with the CAD. It was even lower under the Liberals when Canada wasn't totally a petro state.

It's much more complicated than just saying "they should have diversified the economy" or "focus on green energy".

The CAD is not a big reserve currency. Never was, never will be. It was artificially high lately because of oil and its current value is more normal.
 

MikeyB

Member
Shouldn't forget that they essentially legalised usury in their early days. They revised the criminal code to exempt payday lending from the 60% cap on interest.
 
New EKOS poll: http://ipolitics.ca/2015/08/28/ekos-poll-duffy-awakening-slumbering-electorate/

NDP - 34%
CPC - 28%
LPC - 27%

Federal-vote-interntion-long.jpg

By region:

 

Tiktaalik

Member
What is interesting is the apparent convergence of the university and college votes. Traditionally, the Liberals have always led with university graduates, while the Conservatives have been the go-to party for the college educated. In recent months, however, both camps seem to have parked themselves with the NDP. These findings are eerily reminiscent of the Alberta election earlier this year where the educated vote rallied around Rachel Notley’s NDP, propelling them to a majority win.

Hey you damn kids I hope you vote this time!!
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Scanning their previous poll it looks like:

BC
Greens down, Libs up, NDP up

Alberta
Cons down, Greens down, Libs up, NDP up

Sask
NDP down, Libs up

Manitoba
Cons down, Libs down, NDP up

(NOTE: Sask/Man small sample size caution!)

Ontario
Libs up, Cons down, NDP down

Quebec
NDP way the f up, Libs, Cons down

Atlantic
Libs way up, Cons down.
 

Brandson

Member
Because all minor currencies are getting crushed right now vs. the USD. I'm all for blaming the Cons for everything bad they've done, but they have little to do with what's happening with the CAD. It was even lower under the Liberals when Canada wasn't totally a petro state.

It's much more complicated than just saying "they should have diversified the economy" or "focus on green energy".

The CAD is not a big reserve currency. Never was, never will be. It was artificially high lately because of oil and its current value is more normal.

The BOC continued to lower interest rates in the face of a weakening currency to ostensibly boost manufacturing though. While interest rates are not the only factor that contributes to the value of the dollar, lowering rates only makes it worse. There is certainly more the government could do to boost the dollar, or at least limit further devaluation. I don't see any such efforts going on right now.
 

Yikes. Glad I won't be around to see NDP reign. If it's anything like the Sterling Pound earlier this year, I'd short the loonie. Financial markets are not exactly fond of socialist parties winning elections (GBP gained 1-2% nearly instantly when Tories won as the markets had priced in a Labour win). If an NDP win hasn't properly been priced in (which is possible considering how volatile polling has been overall), I'd be tempted to short CAD.
 
Yikes. Glad I won't be around to see NDP reign. If it's anything like the Sterling Pound earlier this year, I'd short the loonie. Financial markets are not exactly fond of socialist parties winning elections (GBP gained 1-2% nearly instantly when Tories won as the markets had priced in a Labour win). If an NDP win hasn't properly been priced in (which is possible considering how volatile polling has been overall), I'd be tempted to short CAD.

And Norway, Sweden, Finland?
 
I don't want the NDP or Liberals to win a majority though, as it will be tempting for them to abandon democratic reform.

the only way that can happen is if one of the leaders makes a major blunder that it sticks in the end.

if all leaders continue stay boring, generalist and uninspiring, the outcome will remain as a minority of some sort
 

Weiss

Banned
I don't know who I want to vote for, but I'm somewhere between Liberal and NDP, I guess.

Harper needs to go. He's destroying the Canadian identity.
 
Canada is better off following the path of those countries then trying to chase the U.S shadow

Norway is pretty much a one-trick pony and now that oil isn't doing so well, they are starting to suffer. Sweden has huge immigration problems and Finland... is Finland.

Not sure Canada should follow their path at all.
 
Norway is pretty much a one-trick pony and now that oil isn't doing so well, they are starting to suffer. Sweden has huge immigration problems and Finland... is Finland.

Not sure Canada should follow their path at all.
I mean education policy (like Finland).... infrastructure and social reforms

Canada's immigration is different then those in Europe... our country's identity is built on immigration through the years

we should use our tax money towards our country's growth rather then obsessing in global affairs when we really don't need to.
I mean we are part of Nato.... in another continent far from were most wars are happening and have the USA as our neighbours and ally

why are we wasting money crazy military expenses

lately we've been trying to emulate the USA when that isn't what we are
 

Prax

Member
$60 billion for infrastructure probably also means COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS right?
Think about the possibility of cable/optic high speed network lines for all of Canada!
That's my.. hope anyway!

Whichever party promises the most money for: Public Transport (TTC), Internet (wireless or physical lines), Sustainable/New Energy Research would probably get my vote.

Right now it's the Liberals due to the $60 billion infrastructure plan, which I assume would lift all of Canada economically too, as more citizens would be able to participate and compete on a global scale since life will be made easier to do so.
 

gabbo

Member
$60 billion for infrastructure probably also means COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS right?
Think about the possibility of cable/optic high speed network lines for all of Canada!
That's my.. hope anyway!

Whichever party promises the most money for: Public Transport (TTC), Internet (wireless or physical lines), Sustainable/New Energy Research would probably get my vote.

Right now it's the Liberals due to the $60 billion infrastructure plan, which I assume would lift all of Canada economically too, as more citizens would be able to participate and compete on a global scale since life will be made easier to do so.

I don't believe the Liberals infrastructure plan includes new internet lines, though I'd love for that to be the case
 

Prax

Member
I don't believe the Liberals infrastructure plan includes new internet lines, though I'd love for that to be the case

With that article about "the trouble with 60 billion is what to spend it on!" .. they better include it. lol
Let's.. someone suggest it to them. What a great idea! All the young peeps will be into it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom