• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Politics in 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
>If you want to compete with workers making a dollar a day in emerging markets, see jobs continue to move overseas and see a rise in precarious labour and retirement poverty, by all means, support the prevailing system.

In the big picture and over the long term, I want to see workers in emerging markets make more than a dollar a day.  For that to happen, I have to accept some job offshoring and stagnant wage growth in Canada.
 
I'm actually curious Kilo. Do you have mutual funds? An RRSP, RESP or TFSA?

What would you do if you discovered that the managers of the fund, or the business which the fund invested in are making less than they could, or are in fact deliberately following business practices which reduce the profits of the companies and returns to the shareholders (mutual fund unit holders)? Don't forget a great many people in Canada depend on the returns of their mutual fund investments in order to pay for future expenses, finance their or their children's education or have comfortable retirements.

If you believe they are failing their fiduciary duty to their shareholders, then you would probably turn your righteous wrath upon the companies and mutual fund managers.

So of course they will do whatever they can to leave high tax/high regulatory environments that restrict their ability to make a profit for their shareholders and owners. More taxes mean less money to invest in new products and services, and indeed less money to carry out even basic O&M just to keep in operation, much less hire new workers. And since the CPP is invested in many of these companies in the same manner as a mutual fund, they also have many of the same incentives as the management companies who deal in mutual funds: http://www.cppib.com/en/what-we-do/our-investments.html

Of course, the CPP, US Social Security and most Western government retirement funds do have one advantage over private management firms like Trimark or Fidelity: they are also Ponzi schemes which use current taxpayer contributions to pay current retirees, either directly like the US, or to top up returns like we do.

So unless you are going to divest yourself of all investments (including CPP) and only live on what taxpayer monies the government is willing to give to you for your vote, then you really should pay attention to how things work in the real world.
 
‘Canada failed terribly, the provinces failed terribly,’ Chiefs disappointed after climate talks with PM, Premiers
March 3, 2016 by Brandi Morin

http://aptn.ca/news/2016/03/03/canada-failed-terribly-the-provinces-failed-terribly-chiefs-disappointed-after-climate-talks-with-pm-premiers/

Provinces oppose Trudeau's carbon floor-price proposal
SHAWN MCCARTHY AND IAN BAILEY
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Mar. 02, 2016 12:52PM EST
Last updated Thursday, Mar. 03, 2016 7:39AM EST

https://www.google.ca/search?q=premiers+reject+carbon+tax&oq=premiers+reject+carbon+tax&aqs=chrome..69i57.9291j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=premiers+reject+carbon+tax&tbm=nws

And now a little ditty from Lighthouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTDzDviQvDo

PS:  Anybody taking book on which comes first?

A  Just watch me.
B  Fuddle Duddle
C  The Flying Finger
 
Rocky Mountains said:
GDP - $1.5 trillion
Stimulus spending promised $ 10 billion
7/10th of 1 %
$285 per capita

That will stimulate nothing.  I suspect that much of Trudeau's infrastructure spending will be social infrastructure that will come with future costs that will make us poorer.  He has done an elephant dump on pipelines.  There are 4 pipelines, each valued at $10 - 15 billion, proposed.  They will cost the government nothing and bring in hundreds of billions in future revenue.  All he has to do is get out of the way.

I thought the whole problem with Canada's economy was high oil prices and Dutch disease.  Why hasn't the economy rebounded from low oil prices and a low dollar?  It is because the Canadian economy is so bound up in a socialist quagmire and government indecision that nothing is happening.  It's Ontario's turn at bat and they're striking out.


If I had the slow clap meme I would put it here.  [:)
 
Chris Pook said:
PS:  Anybody taking book on which comes first?

A  Just watch me.
B  Fuddle Duddle
C  The Flying Finger
It appears "we will do this my way after a colaberative negotiated process or I will force you to do it my way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-price-cap-and-trade-first-ministers-meeting-vancouver-1.3473524
 
MCG said:
It appears "we will do this my way after a colaberative negotiated process or I will force you to do it my way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-price-cap-and-trade-first-ministers-meeting-vancouver-1.3473524

It's unfortunate.

Canada may already be carbon neutral, so why are we keeping it a secret?

http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/canada-may-already-be-carbon-neutral-so-why-are-we-keeping-it-a-secret

I'm guessing that the reason is two-fold.

There is no opportunity in "The Earth Abides".

There is money to be had from scared people.
 
Jed said:
If I had the slow clap meme I would put it here.  [:)
The economy was suffering from dutch disease if your name was Thomas mulcair.

Don't think anyone else was buying what he was selling.
 
>It appears "we will do this my way after a colaberative negotiated process or I will force you to do it my way."

Basic progressivism.  No surprises there for me.
 
MCG said:
It appears "we will do this my way after a colaberative negotiated process or I will force you to do it my way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-price-cap-and-trade-first-ministers-meeting-vancouver-1.3473524
A.k.a., "don't MAKE me do it!"
 
In case you missed the announcement three days ago, the PM is on 60 Minutes on Sunday
 

Attachments

  • 60 Minutes.JPG
    60 Minutes.JPG
    41.3 KB · Views: 157
Rifleman62 said:
In case you missed the announcement three days ago, the PM is on 60 Minutes on Sunday

It was just a puff piece.....meh
 
Interesting article that I fully agree with

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/to-win-again-conservatives-must-tap-into-hope-not-anger/article29072811/
Canada works best when there’s vigorous political competition. That’s why the conversation Canadian conservatives have been having of late, at the Manning Centre Conference in Ottawa, in Alberta and among Ontario Progressive Conservatives at their convention on the weekend, is important.

A glance at conservatives south of the border should make everyone here recognize how poorly voters are served when political parties fall to fractiousness and infighting.

Parties are messy, imperfect organisms – they often make the choices that reinforce, not reverse, their weaknesses. As Canadian conservatives think about the road ahead, some research we’ve done into the Canadian psyche is worth a look.

In Canada’s last election, lots of voters were fed up with the prime minister. There wasn’t much happiness with the incumbents, but there were also doubts about the challengers.

In truth, there wasn’t enough anger or fear to elect anyone.

For the New Democrats, it probably felt like second nature to seek out and stoke anger on the campaign trail. Surrounded by partisans of the left and the far left, theirs was a group chat among people furious about 10 years of public policy that insulted their values.

What’s more, the NDP was led by a man whose eyes lit up at every opportunity to express his revulsion with Stephen Harper’s Conservatives.

Whether authentic emotion, or skilled presentation, or competitive fire, it didn’t matter much in the end. One eternal truth about public anger is that it can’t be manufactured – it exists or it doesn’t. Even the most intense, fiery orators can’t make those who wake up in the morning feeling okay about their lives go to sleep convinced that they are in much worse shape than they thought.

Our recent data (from Abacus polls) on the mindset of Canadians revealed some fundamental realities about our collective psyche. While this data form a snapshot in time, and these patterns may fluctuate over time, they won’t shift fundamentally.

More than 80 per cent of us describe ourselves as happy, optimistic and hopeful. Only 23 per cent of us say we’re angry.

One of the secrets of the success of the Liberal strategy was the choice to campaign on optimism rather than anger.

Perhaps this had more to do with the natural outlook of Justin Trudeau rather than a cold-eyed backroom calculation. Either way, looking back on the election results, while there are always many variables at play, one that stands out for me is that both the Conservatives and New Democrats mined for anger, when there wasn’t enough to go around.

Most days, Mr. Trudeau and the Liberals had the field of optimism, hope and happiness almost to themselves.

When you read the commentary of many conservatives today, there’s a common theme – a disbelief that people are happy, a conviction that they should be angry, a sense that “sunny ways” is a concoction of the Liberals and the hated mainstream media.

But any new Conservative leader should take a cold-eyed look at how Canadians describe themselves.

Eighty per cent are happy – 23 per cent are angry.

Eighty-three per cent are hopeful – 42 per cent are cynical.

Ninety per cent are open-minded – 58 per cent are set in their views.

Seventy per cent are progressive. Forty-four per cent are conservative.

Much of this isn’t really about specific public-policy preferences.

Many voters are interested in a wide range of conservative-oriented policies. Less red tape, lower taxes, safety from crime, open markets, entrepreneurship – it’s not hard to get people to back candidates who campaign on these ideas.

But too often in the past decade, conservative ideas have been served up with the hair-on-fire, attack-dog mentality typified by Ezra Levant.

The idea that to sell a good idea you must create an enemy and vilify them is far from the cleverest idea the conservatives ever had. It’s one of the worst. It’s their kryptonite.

When conservative partisans mock optimism, they are making fun of eight in 10 voters. It’s bad math.

When some conservatives reject new ideas about the environment and the economy, the 90 per cent of Canadians who are open-minded wish the Conservative Party was a little more open-minded regarding this agenda. Ontario’s PC Leader Patrick Brown seemed to embrace this idea on the weekend, offering his support for a revenue-neutral carbon-pricing plan.

In the jargon of U.S. primary politics, there’s a lot of talk about a “path to victory.”

In Canada, anyway, cynical and angry is not much of a path. Occasionally, those who travel it will get lucky. But conservative ideas have a far better chance of success if presented as the product of open minds, and optimistic thinking about the future of each and every one of us.

I doubt this will happen by next election, most Conservatives I meet are still just angry,angry people and for some reason believe that most people are angry along with them.

Hint. Looking at JTs poll numbers, sitting in the high 40s and his approval numbers currently in the 60s, not a lot of people are angry. But they still come across that way.

They may need to find their own sunny ways leader. Again not likely to happen before 2019.
 
Angry, or passionate? 2 completely different emotions that can easily be spun by people with an agenda to fit their outcome. There are a lot of angry Conservatives, but I find they're the same number as the angry Liberal/Dippers.
 
I must say that I didn't detect much "happiness" amongst Trudeau's supporters during the recent election.  In fact they seemed to be positively angry.  Or was that just anger at not being allowed to be happy?
 
Chris Pook said:
I must say that I didn't detect much "happiness" amongst Trudeau's supporters during the recent election.  In fact they seemed to be positively angry.  Or was that just anger at not being allowed to be happy?
Angry at harper and the CPC maybe. Not exactly something that could be used to draw support
PuckChaser said:
Angry, or passionate? 2 completely different emotions that can easily be spun by people with an agenda to fit their outcome. There are a lot of angry Conservatives, but I find they're the same number as the angry Liberal/Dippers.
very true. Angry rank and file in all parties, even more on the net.

However, there is a problem when that anger is present at the top levels of a party,including the party leader.i don't think anyone can say that the ndp or CPC ran positive passionate campaigns.

The attack ads were not a message of hope. The hijab issue was not brought up in a positive manner. The raging of 10 years of harper mismanagement wasn't positive either.

In the end, the passionate negativity doesn't do well when most of the country isn't angry.
 
Altair said:
Angry at harper and the CPC maybe. Not exactly something that could be used to draw support very true. Angry rank and file in all parties, even more on the net.

However, there is a problem when that anger is present at the top levels of a party,including the party leader.i don't think anyone can say that the ndp or CPC ran positive passionate campaigns.

The attack ads were not a message of hope. The hijab issue was not brought up in a positive manner. The raging of 10 years of harper mismanagement wasn't positive either.

In the end, the passionate negativity doesn't do well when most of the country isn't angry.

You've bought hook, line and sinker what the media was selling about Harper being angry. I don't think I've ever seen him flustered, or angry. He also certainly didn't call someone a piece of shit in the House of Commons, like another "positive" party leader....

Your 10 years of "mismanagement" is a red herring. However, everything that's wrong with the country is Harper's fault, and now the Liberals are here on their white horse to save us from this evil. Evil like a memorial for Afghanistan, or for our Victoria Cross winners. That sort of evil Harper plot just won't do.
 
PuckChaser said:
You've bought hook, line and sinker what the media was selling about Harper being angry. I don't think I've ever seen him flustered, or angry. He also certainly didn't call someone a piece of crap in the House of Commons, like another "positive" party leader....

Your 10 years of "mismanagement" is a red herring. However, everything that's wrong with the country is Harper's fault, and now the Liberals are here on their white horse to save us from this evil. Evil like a memorial for Afghanistan, or for our Victoria Cross winners. That sort of evil Harper plot just won't do.
That was the line Thomas mulcair was using, not a argument I was making. Although I could have made that more clear.

Harper angry? No. He wasn't. But can you say with a straight face that he ran a positive campaign? 

When most of the country is feeling optimistic and hopeful, running a negative campaign as the CPC and to a lesser extent, the NDP did is a great miscalculation of the electorate.

And come 2019, if the country is in the same mood and the CPC pick a Jason Kenney it will be clear they didn't learn a thing from the 2015 election.

A lot of CPC supporters seem very angry at the trudeau goverment and for some reason think that most of Canada thinks the same way as they do. Like living in a echo chamber, I'm not sure if they realize trudeau is doing rather well right now.
 
Altair said:
I'm not sure if they realize trudeau is doing rather well right now.

Considering he hasn't actually done anything, I'm not sure how you define "well".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top