• 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.
M

maharg

idspispopd
Walpurgis said:
You didn't mishear. Mulcair is raising the federal minimum wage to $15. I think this only affects people employed by the federal government who are making below $15, which I don't believe is a lot. Mulcair says that it will affect hundreds of thousands, some posters here said it will only affect thousands. Either way, it doesn't sound very useful to me. Mulcair did say tonight that he will try to get provinces to do the same but it's the first I've heard of that.
Click to expand...

This is the extent he can promise, effectively. And encouraging other jurisdictions to follow suite has definitely been a part of it from the beginning.

Minimum wage is provincial jurisdiction for anyone but federally regulated employees. The same people criticizing that pledge would be criticizing him for stepping on province's toes if he made a broader promise. In fact, they often already do (see any gutter_trash post about it).
 
F

Frustrated_me

Member
I didn't even know there was a debate, instead I was watching the US Republicans debate review on CNN.

JzKGOjM.png
 
V

vasametropolis

Member
The main problem I have with the Conservatives and NDP is that they both seem like they're content with painfully slow execution on economic plans.

I really liked Mulcair in this one, but at least the Liberals are going "You know what? Let's just say fuck it and swing for the fences"

You can't just keep playing oil. We have carbon taxes to discourage the use of fossil fuels and the like... we know it's on the way out and we're not doing anything to position ourselves as a prominent leader in another energy field or sector altogether, which we should be trying to do today, not tomorrow.

I do think this is a good time to wing it and see what happens. So, while I'm not a big fan of any of the leaders, I can only go one way. Green is pretty progressive too, but their plan has come across as wishy-washy to me and I'd consider that to be too much faith and a waste of a vote.

Marijuana would make a shit load of money and I don't know how this isn't a bigger talking point. I'm not even into it, but only idiots leave money on the table.
 
T

Tabris

Member
Watching the debate didn't change my views.

Harper: Change Nothing
Mulcair: Long Term Growth via making Canadians lives easier
Trudeau: Growth Now via infrastructure spending

But the thing that came out of this debate is how much Trudeau and Mulcair have increased the attacks on each other. I'm worried as no matter which way I lean, the most important thing to me is that we get out Harper, and this divisive nature between the Liberals and NDP that is exploding right now will hurt this.
 
dragonfart28

dragonfart28

Banned
vasametropolis said:
The main problem I have with the Conservatives and NDP is that they both seem like they're content with painfully slow execution on economic plans.

I really liked Mulcair in this one, but at least the Liberals are going "You know what? Let's just say fuck it and swing for the fences"

You can't just keep playing oil. We have carbon taxes to discourage the use of fossil fuels and the like... we know it's on the way out and we're not doing anything to position ourselves as a prominent leader in another energy field or sector altogether, which we should be trying to do today, not tomorrow.

I do think this is a good time to wing it and see what happens. So, while I'm not a big fan of any of the leaders, I can only go one way. Green is pretty progressive too, but their plan has come across as wishy-washy to me and I'd consider that to be too much faith and a waste of a vote.

Marijuana would make a shit load of money and I don't know how this isn't a bigger talking point. I'm not even into it, but only idiots leave money on the table.
Click to expand...

I remember some figures being tossed around about tax revenue from marijuana and it wouldn't be more than $2B a year which is a nice boost but no one is going to campaign their surplus based on that.

On fossil fuels, I agree that we need to make a shift but there's no need to do it so quickly. Oil prices are low but supply will eventually go down and that will raise prices again, so we should still exploit the resource sustainably as we gradually shift to renewables.

There is literally no need to go into deficit, either for infrastructure investment or long term growth.
 
T

Tabris

Member
dragonfart28 said:
I remember some figures being tossed around about tax revenue from marijuana and it wouldn't be more than $2B a year which is a nice boost but no one is going to campaign their surplus based on that.

On fossil fuels, I agree that we need to make a shift but there's no need to do it so quickly. Oil prices are low but supply will eventually go down and that will raise prices again, so we should still exploit the resource sustainably as we gradually shift to renewables.

There is literally no need to go into deficit, either for infrastructure investment or long term growth.
Click to expand...

OPEC are projecting oil prices to remain in this realm until 2040.

But ignoring that, there is such a huge surplus right now of both crude and processed oil due to the current market. The US is stockpiling huge reserves right now. It's going to take a significant amount of time to go through that surplus if OPEC returns back to a more conservative supply feed.

So that should answer the whole shift to green energy tech conversation, that needs to happen now because oil won't be the same for quite a while.

Now on to the infrastructure investment. What we have here is the standard investment question. Does the interest rate cost over the next 4 years justify the return on investment. Most economists say it not only does, it makes better fiscal sense to invest now then stretch over 10 years in a surplus or balanced budget, because the revenue gains from the economic upturn that the investment brings exceed the interest costs (specifically because they are low) and return us to an even healthier budget by that year 4 onward.

i.e. Do you buy a lot of stock when it's low or a lot of stock over a long period at different prices because you don't feel comfortable leveraging at the low price for greater gains / ROI?
 
T

Tabris

Member
I'm also not a fan of increasing corporate tax rate. Taxing corporations higher, especially foreign corporations that have invested in offices and talent here, may cause them to move.

I am a fan of tighter regulation on those foreign corporations, but our low tax rate on them entices them to open up business here. It has corporations like Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, etc consider opening offices in cities like Vancouver.

Now individuals should be taxed higher. Especially the 10% bracket.. Because that taxing is not going to cause them to leave. I don't think any of the 3 parties are doing a good job on this and that's because stretching it from the 1% to a greater group like the 10 or even 20% is political suicide unless you can ensure you can get the 80% to vote for you.

EDIT - Here's our current federal tax brackets:

15% on the first $44,701 of taxable income, +
22% on the next $44,700 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $44,701 up to $89,401), +
26% on the next $49,185 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $89,401 up to $138,586), +
29% of taxable income over $138,586.

Just increase the top bracket. Everyone in the top bracket can live a comfortable life in any city in Canada. I've been in this bracket for a while and I would be happy to give more, maybe something like 35%, which would make it 50% for federal + provincial (in most provinces that is).

Oh, and Alberta has the worst provincial tax rates for equality. 10% across the board. You need $50k or below to be 5% and $100 and above to be closer to 15%.
 
G

gabbo

Member
Tabris said:
Watching the debate didn't change my views.

Harper: Change Nothing
Mulcair: Long Term Growth via making Canadians lives easier
Trudeau: Growth Now via infrastructure spending

But the thing that came out of this debate is how much Trudeau and Mulcair have increased the attacks on each other. I'm worried as no matter which way I lean, the most important thing to me is that we get out Harper, and this divisive nature between the Liberals and NDP that is exploding right now will hurt this.
Click to expand...

It's weird how things have slowly started turning against both of them in recent days after favouring them both for two months - and yet Harper seems in no better a positiob
 
M

matthewwhatever

Member
Tiktaalik said:
holy shit internet reporting that only 60k people watched this debate...

Harper's plan worked.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the total number of people who watched the YouTube feed. I doubt that viewership was significantly higher, though. I saw a tweet last night saying that 11 million people watched the broadcast consortium debate in 2011, so it seems reasonable to say that this go about 1% of that total.

Good thing Mulcair decided to follow Harper's lead and skip the most-watched debates!
 
T

Tabris

Member
matthewwhatever said:
That seems to be the total number of people who watched the YouTube feed. I doubt that viewership was significantly higher, though. I saw a tweet last night saying that 11 million people watched the broadcast consortium debate in 2011, so it seems reasonable to say that this go about 1% of that total.

Good thing Mulcair decided to follow Harper's lead and skip the most-watched debates!
Click to expand...

The recording of the debate is at 300k views now.
 
W

winisus

Neo Member
I watched the whole debate. JT shouted over everyone while they were speaking and had no solid facts about his plans just "I won't be like harper" tommy the commie talked about his wife and kids more than any of his real plans for the economy..just trying to tug on heart strings? Harper came across as a boring businessman in a meeting laying out facts and a solid plan for the next 4 years.. I will take the boring businessman over the other clowns
 
I

Impeccable

Member
windhys said:
I watched the whole debate. JT shouted over everyone while they were speaking and had no solid facts about his plans just "I won't be like harper" tommy the commie talked about his wife and kids more than any of his real plans for the economy..just trying to tug on heart strings? Harper came across as a boring businessman in a meeting laying out facts and a solid plan for the next 4 years.. I will take the boring businessman over the other clowns
Click to expand...

It's always fascinating to me how people can see such different things from the same event.


Edit: Oh... wow, didn't expect that post history. Interesting.
 
G

Goldenroad

Member
I had a pretty set direction in mind for how I was going to vote, and now I really don't want to vote for any of these clowns. Oh well, Ralph Goodale (L) (former Finance Minister) is in our riding and has gone, pretty well, unchallenged for the last 20 years. It's not like one vote will make a difference here anyway. He's actually a pretty good man and should probably be the leader of that party right now.
 
A

Azih

Member
Tabris said:
I'm also not a fan of increasing corporate tax rate. Taxing corporations higher, especially foreign corporations that have invested in offices and talent here, may cause them to move.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but a race to the bottom on this is not a good look for Canada. In any case the corporate tax rate right now is crazy low historically as well as compared to other G7 nations, Mulcair is raising it a bit from that. It's a pretty moderate approach.

The National Post is giving the debate to Mulcair. This is one hella weird election cycle. It's moments like these that are most likely to get real reform carried out. Seriously guys, look up PR which the Greens and the NDP have promised. This is the moment for it.
 
L

Ledhead

Member
windhys said:
I watched the whole debate. JT shouted over everyone while they were speaking and had no solid facts about his plans just "I won't be like harper" tommy the commie talked about his wife and kids more than any of his real plans for the economy..just trying to tug on heart strings? Harper came across as a boring businessman in a meeting laying out facts and a solid plan for the next 4 years.. I will take the boring businessman over the other clowns
Click to expand...

'Tommy the Commie'. Oh god, this is the CBC comments section all over again.
 
dragonfart28

dragonfart28

Banned
matthewwhatever said:
...according to an NDP-commissioned poll of 350 people, only 10% of whom voted Trudeau last time around. Doesn't that mean the real story is 40% of Bloc and NDP voters in his riding are now going Liberal?
Click to expand...

Even if you were to take the margin of error, it's still in NDP's favour.

This riding should be a close one to watch.
 
A

Azih

Member
gutter_trash said:
the NDP's $15 minimum wage is so badly worded that it is deliberately misleading to make people think that it is a national minimum wage for EVERYBODY when it is not

it only applies to Federally regulated workers
Click to expand...

It's the only thing Mulcair can promise that he can implement right away. And it's a good enough idea that the Liberals voted for it, yeah?
 
G

gutter_trash

Banned
Azih said:
It's the only thing Mulcair can promise that he can implement right away. And it's a good enough idea that the Liberals voted for it, yeah?
Click to expand...
god!!!

I'm talking about the way they are advertising it. In big letters MINIMUM WAGE $15!!!!

but without the mention of it being restricted to Federally regulated workers ONLY.

It is misleading
 
M

matthewwhatever

Member
dragonfart28 said:
Even if you were to take the margin of error, it's still in NDP's favour.

This riding should be a close one to watch.
Click to expand...

Except the methodology was flawed from the get-go, with a sample that isn't at all representative of the riding. But sure, as long as you ignore math -- which, judging from the "costing" they've released, the NDP seems pretty comfortable doing -- we can pretend it fits into the fake narrative that the Dippers are trying to push.
 
M

mo60

Member
dragonfart28 said:
Even if you were to take the margin of error, it's still in NDP's favour.

This riding should be a close one to watch.
Click to expand...

I think the difference between the NDP candidate and trudeau will be between 1% and 5% on election day in that riding if this poll is even good.
 
C

CitizenVectron

Member
The Nanos poll has been a statistical tie for a week now, so I wouldn't put any stock in any party leading it unless they jumped 5% or something and held it.
 
M

matthewwhatever

Member
Yeah...looking at CBC's poll tracker, there's precisely one poll (Environics) over the last week and a half that has a spread of more than 4 points. Even Forum, who have been the most favourable NDP pollsters so far this election, now have it at CPC 32-NDP 30 (which is down 10 points from where they had them two weeks ago)-LPC 28. There's still a long time to go, and any party could suddenly break away, but I have a hard time imagining what would cause it.

Of course, it's also possible that the CPC is getting their usual under-representation in the polls with their voters unwilling to tell pollsters how they're voting, and we're just headed for another Conservative minority.
 
M

matthewwhatever

Member
gutter_trash said:
http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/20150917 Ballot TrackingE.pdf

National number not important.
Regional breakdown, that is what matters;

Atlantic:
LPC: 51.3%, NDP: 32%, CPC: 12.1%

Quebec:
NDP: 47.8%, LPC: 23.5%, CPC: 14.7%, BQ: 9.2%

Ontario:
LPC: 39.6%, CPC: 32.3%, NDP: 21.6%,

Prairies:
CPC: 50.2%, NDP: 25.6%, LPC: 19%

BC
NDP: 30.8%, CPC: 29.3%, LPC: 28.6%. GRN: 10.6%


looks like BC will be this year's bell weather
Click to expand...

Not even that is particularly helpful, since there's even a lot of variance within those regions. Like, look at BC (according to Mainstreet Technologies):

“This poll has good news and bad news for all the parties. In the Islands, the NDP leads with 28% of all voters, followed by the Conservatives with 23% and the Liberals and Greens tied at 16% support. In Greater Vancouver, the Liberal party leads with 28% ahead of the Conservatives (27%) and the NDP (23%) with the Green Party at just 6%. The Conservatives hold a substantial lead in the rest of BC with 35% over the NDP (26%) and the Liberals (15%) with Green support at 8%.”
Click to expand...

Ontario is probably similar -- I assume the CPC owns most of rural Ontario, the suburbs are a toss-up between the Liberals and the Conservatives, and urban areas are a Liberal-NDP split.
 
dragonfart28

dragonfart28

Banned
We'll still be in gridlock after this debate and I think that isn't good news for Harper as this was his opportunity to leverage the issue of the economy to get a majority.
 
M

maharg

idspispopd
matthewwhatever said:
Not even that is particularly helpful, since there's even a lot of variance within those regions. Like, look at BC (according to Mainstreet Technologies):



Ontario is probably similar -- I assume the CPC owns most of rural Ontario, the suburbs are a toss-up between the Liberals and the Conservatives, and urban areas are a Liberal-NDP split.
Click to expand...

Even just from Nanos itself day to day the regional breakdowns swing like drunk monkeys. Wanna talk about trying to draw conclusions from 300 people? Well, drawing conclusions from 100 people for a whole sixth of the country is gonna be way worse, especially if you're watching it daily.
 
P

Pedrito

Member
Two people on RDI just said they will change their vote from the NDP/Libs to the CPC because of the niqab. How myopic do you have to be? Not only is this a minuscule issue in the grand scheme of things, but it's baffling that anyone would think the CPC stance's on this issue is based on gender equality.
 
dragonfart28

dragonfart28

Banned
G

gutter_trash

Banned
Harper's distinction that there are two types of Canadians ''Immigrant'' and ''Old Stock'' is a big a GAF IMO, how far does the moniker of ''immigrant'' go and does it apply to children born in Canada of immigrant parents?

what is a Canadian?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Politics... be always careful what you wish for.
4
963
TehDark replied
  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
5K
ManaByte replied
Satya Nadella: Annual letter to stockholders. Content on new platforms will continue
4 5 6 7 8
352
21K
noob smokes replied
Ontario General Election 2018 |OT|
4
852
bloodydrake replied
Jacinda Ardern is next prime minister of New Zealand (after 9 years of right wing)
2 3
114
17K
30yearsofhurt replied
Top Bottom