NDP Call for Action

[fluffy]

I got a postcard in the mail today, a request from our NDP Member of Parliament Richard Cannings asking whether or not I support the NDP's "call for action to reduce income inequality." While this is increasingly becoming an issue for many I can't responsibly reply at all without some idea of just what said "action" will entail, and it's a little disconcerting that the mailing invites people to make a decision on little or no information. I spent some time searching for additional information but all I could find dated back to 2014. In addition to that, this was written in the all-to-brief request: "No one working full-time should have live below the poverty line. But that's the reality for too many working families. Successive governments have allowed the gap between the richest Canadians and the rest of us to grow." "The rest of us" ??? Is he actually counting himself among the poor at an MP's salary of $170K a year?

[rustled]

Quite agree, fluff. This sounds like another vague effort toward making the minimum wage a liveable wage, whatever that means.

I'd rather they take concrete action by helping remove unnecessary barriers to better paying jobs in the resource and industrial sectors.

[southy]

Very little out there on this, but I do recall Thomas Mulcair using it in his election campaign.

[fluffy]

You'd think that it would be a foregone conclusion that there would be people out there that preferred to make informed decisions rather than just jumping on a flavour-of-the-week bandwagon.

[fluffy]

Someone on another site pointed out that if you dipped a stick into this little campaign it would come out dripping with Leap Manifesto.

[Rosemary1]

They want people to sign up for support of their Leap Manifesto on web too which by their own admission is still up for debate and is about as vague as the card that Fluffy received. Fortunately there are still some voters who demand more substance than feel good catchy sound bites from our political parties and politicians.

[JagXKR]

My card is already in the mail with a very nice "X" in the no box.

[twobits]

Someone on another site pointed out that if you dipped a stick into this little campaign it would come out dripping with Leap Manifesto.

The name would more appropriately be the "Leap to Poverty for Everyone Manifesto". It is nothing but communist philosophy hiding under the guise of environmentalist concerns. Even half of the NDP membership realizes this as nothing more than a teaspoon of honey along with the Hemlock.

[Tony]

Since they only have 44 seats out of 338 it doesn't really matter what they want to do, it will never get passed.

[fluffy]

Since they only have 44 seats out of 338 it doesn't really matter what they want to do, it will never get passed.

Federally, Mr. Trudeau's government is going to be a hard one to defeat for a while. That's the Canadian way, we don't so much elect new governments as we fire the old ones, and usually without a lot of thought as to what we are replacing them with. Unless Mr. Trudeau screws up in a major way he's likely safe for at least another term after this one. Provincially though, we could have an interesting race next year with Mr. Horgan at the lead of the BC NDP. He's a shrewd politician, and plays a lot better to the camera than Mr. Dix ever could. On the same token, Ms. Clark has those same qualities and there's nothing that stands out in the way of huge scandal or political missteps. The NDP might be able to get some mileage out of the Liberals refusal to put a stop to corporate and union political donations, but it's my guess that the NDP have their fingers pretty deep into that pie too.

The biggest buzzwords these days are "environment" and "climate change". The Leap Manifesto runs from the point that we have to kill the fossil fuel industry to make any headway on environmental issues and that simply isn't true. I can't see BC NDP getting behind that any more than their counterparts in Alberta did, especially since that is basically what lost the last election for Mr. Dix.

Great article here about the folly of killing Canada's fossil fuel economy:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-on-the-leap-manifesto-bold-action-can-mean-big-failures

[youhavegottobekidding]

"income inequality"......such a far fetched idea.....As a human being we are ALL equal at the beginning of our lives, but as we progress, some do not progress to where they want to be. A lot of factors come into effect. Maybe the one person applies themselves and chooses a field of work that is better pay than another. We can't ALL have the same pay. Life is just not like that. We have to live within our means. Taxing us that have more is NO solution...but it IS the NDP way......just look to Alberta for proof.

[twobits]

"income inequality"......such a far fetched idea.....As a human being we are ALL equal at the beginning of our lives, but as we progress, some do not progress to where they want to be. A lot of factors come into effect. Maybe the one person applies themselves and chooses a field of work that is better pay than another. We can't ALL have the same pay. Life is just not like that. We have to live within our means. Taxing us that have more is NO solution...but it IS the NDP way......just look to Alberta for proof.

No, taxing those that strive to succeed is not a solution. It just penalizes motivation and innovation. Why work harder if it is just going to be taken away anyway? In a convoluted way, excepting the truly disabled and disadvantaged, maybe the better approach would be a declining tax scale where the more you earned, less was taken away in taxes. That was tongue in cheek btw but would do far more to motivate skill sets and effort than providing a guaranteed wage to stay at home.

[fluffy]

Well they could do some tightening up on tax law. I don't see any reason why some CEO pulling down $10M a year should be able to avoid his tax bill through offshore tax havens. I read an article somewhere that said the top 100 earners in Canada make the equivalent of an average worker's annual salary by lunchtime on the first working day of the year. Personally I don't see how anyone could be worth eight figures, but if they can swing it then all the power to them. Just pay your freakin' taxes. It's not like you can't afford it.

[twobits]

Well they could do some tightening up on tax law. I don't see any reason why some CEO pulling down $10M a year should be able to avoid his tax bill through offshore tax havens. I read an article somewhere that said the top 100 earners in Canada make the equivalent of an average worker's annual salary by lunchtime on the first working day of the year. Personally I don't see how anyone could be worth eight figures, but if they can swing it then all the power to them. Just pay your freakin' taxes. It's not like you can't afford it.

There is that problem and I totally agree. No azz sitting in a chair is worth millions in salary. The only pass I give to absurd remuneration is that that is earned by some innovation or invention that paid a royalty, license fee or true reflection of increased share value that brought an equal and proportionate wealth to the stock holders.