More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

BC's provincial election and STV referendum takes place Tuesday May 12th.
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19172
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by steven lloyd »

Nicklan wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
Glacier wrote:Someone on this thread is so full of *bleep* I can smell it from here.


That would have to be you LIBERALS ! :sunshine:


But don't take my word for it contact the economic development people and the Port in Prince Rupert and Kitimat, find out for yourself
Tell them Roger Langille sent you !


The people from Prince Rupert, Terrace and Kitimat will most likely re-elect their NDP incumbent. He’s done a good job and has no competition as far as viable candidates for the other parties go.

However, unless Gordon Campbell is finally charged with some of his crimes the Okanagan will most likely re-elect their Liberal candidates (and maybe even if he is charged with some of his crimes the Okanagan will still most likely re-elect their Liberal candidates). That being said, even if the race did happen to be close your posts would have sealed the deal and no one would vote NDP. If you’re trying to help the NDP you should stop.
Nicklan
Board Meister
Posts: 371
Joined: Mar 18th, 2009, 7:28 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Nicklan »

steven lloyd wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
Glacier wrote:Someone on this thread is so full of *bleep* I can smell it from here.


That would have to be you LIBERALS ! :sunshine:


But don't take my word for it contact the economic development people and the Port in Prince Rupert and Kitimat, find out for yourself
Tell them Roger Langille sent you !


The people from Prince Rupert, Terrace and Kitimat will most likely re-elect their NDP incumbent. He’s done a good job and has no competition as far as viable candidates for the other parties go.

However, unless Gordon Campbell is finally charged with some of his crimes the Okanagan will most likely re-elect their Liberal candidates (and maybe even if he is charged with some of his crimes the Okanagan will still most likely re-elect their Liberal candidates). That being said, even if the race did happen to be close your posts would have sealed the deal and no one would vote NDP. If you’re trying to help the NDP you should stop.


So what you are saying is that no one cares about jobs in British Columbia just so long as the Liberal Gangsters can continue to sell what ever is left, what is the plan when there is nothing left to sell to the Yanks or Middleeast then what, we have no fishery, mining or forestry left and the Liberals are just fine with that. Are you saying that British Columbians don't think they can do anything but low paying service jobs, as that is the Liberal beleaf ! :200:
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19172
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by steven lloyd »

Nicklan wrote: So what you are saying is that no one cares about jobs in British Columbia just so long as the Liberal Gangsters can continue to sell what ever is left, what is the plan when there is nothing left to sell to the Yanks or Middleeast then what, we have no fishery, mining or forestry left and the Liberals are just fine with that. Are you saying that British Columbians don't think they can do anything but low paying service jobs, as that is the Liberal beleaf ! :200:


No, what I am saying is that if you're trying to inspire people to challenge their thinking you're doing more harm than good.
Nicklan
Board Meister
Posts: 371
Joined: Mar 18th, 2009, 7:28 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Nicklan »

steven lloyd wrote:
Nicklan wrote: So what you are saying is that no one cares about jobs in British Columbia just so long as the Liberal Gangsters can continue to sell what ever is left, what is the plan when there is nothing left to sell to the Yanks or Middleeast then what, we have no fishery, mining or forestry left and the Liberals are just fine with that. Are you saying that British Columbians don't think they can do anything but low paying service jobs, as that is the Liberal beleaf ! :200:


No, what I am saying is that if you're trying to inspire people to challenge their thinking you're doing more harm than good.


You have a very strange way of stating it

The Liberals will only Rob the people further if re elected !

If I was the leader of your party, the first thing I would do would be round up all the Liberals that were involved in these deals like the BC Rail rip off and tose them ALL in Jail and see how long it took for them to talk. Then I would take back the railroad that was sold for nothing is that Fraud Of A Sale.
User avatar
logicalview
Guru
Posts: 9792
Joined: Feb 6th, 2006, 3:59 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by logicalview »

Nicklan wrote:...the first thing I would do would be round up all the Liberals that were involved in these deals like the BC Rail rip off and tose them ALL in Jail and see how long it took for them to talk. Then I would take back the railroad that was sold for nothing is that Fraud Of A Sale.


Looks like we have a new Sheriff in town folks.

Image
Not afraid to say "It".
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22597
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by fluffy »

In my eyes the problem is not with any particular party, but with government itself. Self-serving agendas have become the norm, truth is a matter of convenience, and the idea of actually keeping a promise has all but evaporated. Politics and government have become so completely devoid of honour and integrity that the very people we need in office, those who still hold onto values such as honour and integrity, have no desire to become involved in it. Liberals, NDPs, Conservative, Socreds, they're all cut from the same cloth.
How can a worker be both essential and unworthy of a living wage ?
User avatar
Merry
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 13007
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2008, 11:41 am

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Merry »

flüffy wrote: Liberals, NDPs, Conservative, Socreds, they're all cut from the same cloth.

Unfortunately you're correct fluffy. The object of the exercise these days seems to be "win at any cost", as opposed to wanting to implement policies considered to be for the good of the Province as a whole. It seems to be more of a power grab in order to implement policies that benefit the special interest groups which provide most of the party funding. And until we can elect individuals who love their country more than they love themselves, it's never going to change!
"In a world swathed in political correctness, the voting booth remains the final sanctuary where the people are free to speak" - Clifford Orwin
Al Czervic
Guru
Posts: 7805
Joined: Nov 29th, 2004, 10:30 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Al Czervic »

Pinkie wrote:
flüffy wrote: Liberals, NDPs, Conservative, Socreds, they're all cut from the same cloth.

Unfortunately you're correct fluffy. The object of the exercise these days seems to be "win at any cost", as opposed to wanting to implement policies considered to be for the good of the Province as a whole. It seems to be more of a power grab in order to implement policies that benefit the special interest groups which provide most of the party funding. And until we can elect individuals who love their country more than they love themselves, it's never going to change!


So the new Rental Assistance Program that helps lower income families pay their rent is a bad policy ? Or the new program that invests $ 1000 into a newborn BC babie’s long-term education account is a bad policy ? Expanding the SAFER program to senior’s who live in mobile home parks was a bad thing to do ?

None of the above BC Liberal Party Policies can be considered good for the province as a whole ? That is a fairly narrow and I submit unfair statement that you have made Pinkie. Although I will point out that the NDP voted against everyone of those ideas so maybe it is me who is wrong.
Back with a vengeance
User avatar
Merry
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 13007
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2008, 11:41 am

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Merry »

I prefer the route of govt. built affordable housing than "rental assistance" because in my mind all "rental assistance" does is allow landlords to keep rents artificially high. In a true market system, if enough people couldn't afford the rent, the cost of rents would fall. By subsidizing poor people to still rent at the higher price, we help keep rents artificially high. So in actual fact "rental assistance" is a subsidy for landlords IMO. That said, there are always going to be those who can't afford to pay market rent no matter how low it falls, and it is for those people I would like to see a system of govt. provided affordable housing.
"In a world swathed in political correctness, the voting booth remains the final sanctuary where the people are free to speak" - Clifford Orwin
Al Czervic
Guru
Posts: 7805
Joined: Nov 29th, 2004, 10:30 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Al Czervic »

Pinkie wrote:I prefer the route of govt. built affordable housing than "rental assistance" because in my mind all "rental assistance" does is allow landlords to keep rents artificially high. In a true market system, if enough people couldn't afford the rent, the cost of rents would fall. By subsidizing poor people to still rent at the higher price, we help keep rents artificially high. So in actual fact "rental assistance" is a subsidy for landlords IMO. That said, there are always going to be those who can't afford to pay market rent no matter how low it falls, and it is for those people I would like to see a system of govt. provided affordable housing.


The fact is government could never afford to build enough rental housing or keep pace with demand if everyone got a free ride. Even in CUBA where the right to housing is enshrined in the constitution there are still homeless people because the government cannot keep up with the demand for new housing nor can they keep pace with properly maintaining existing housing.

For low income people currently renting and struggling to pay the bills it would take years for them to get any financial relief. Providing rental assistance subsidies now provides instant financial relief for low income families.

I think one of the reasons why I would never last in Politics is because instead of looking for votes I would not allow people that think the way Pinkie does to vote for me. Honestly Pinkie please vote for the NDP on May 12. Trust me when I say your home is in that party. It really is.
Back with a vengeance
User avatar
Merry
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 13007
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2008, 11:41 am

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Merry »

Al Czervic wrote:The fact is government could never afford to build enough rental housing or keep pace with demand if everyone got a free ride.

Who said anything about "everyone" getting a free ride? I'm talking about people who have absolutely no chance of affording to pay market rent in the area in which they live. But even govt. built affordable housing wouldn't be free - just affordable. There's a difference.

Honestly Pinkie please vote for the NDP on May 12. Trust me when I say your home is in that party. It really is.

You may be right Al (although I doubt it), but if you go read my post in the election thread you'll understand why I'm hesitant to give them my vote.
"In a world swathed in political correctness, the voting booth remains the final sanctuary where the people are free to speak" - Clifford Orwin
Al Czervic
Guru
Posts: 7805
Joined: Nov 29th, 2004, 10:30 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Al Czervic »

Pinkie wrote:
Al Czervic wrote:The fact is government could never afford to build enough rental housing or keep pace with demand if everyone got a free ride.

Who said anything about "everyone" getting a free ride? I'm talking about people who have absolutely no chance of affording to pay market rent in the area in which they live. But even govt. built affordable housing wouldn't be free - just affordable. There's a difference.

Honestly Pinkie please vote for the NDP on May 12. Trust me when I say your home is in that party. It really is.

You may be right Al (although I doubt it), but if you go read my post in the election thread you'll understand why I'm hesitant to give them my vote.


I so do not mean to sound insulting. It’s just that I find your posts all have a central theme that if the world were perfect thinks could work they way you often think they should.

However in the real world; rightly or wrongly; things work much differently and government policy needs to be reflective of that and I submit in many cases it is. It’s like the issue of raw long exports; in an ideal world we would not have raw long exports. However we have raw log exports for a variety of reasons. This is why no government tin the history of BC has gone and banned them.

I am digressing here I just find that those who live in the “bubble” of the perfect dream world tend to be NDP’ers…this is why I suggest you vote for the NDP. I don’t mean that to sound offensive it is just my perspetive.
Back with a vengeance
Nicklan
Board Meister
Posts: 371
Joined: Mar 18th, 2009, 7:28 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Nicklan »

Al Czervic wrote:
Pinkie wrote:
Al Czervic wrote:The fact is government could never afford to build enough rental housing or keep pace with demand if everyone got a free ride.

Who said anything about "everyone" getting a free ride? I'm talking about people who have absolutely no chance of affording to pay market rent in the area in which they live. But even govt. built affordable housing wouldn't be free - just affordable. There's a difference.

Honestly Pinkie please vote for the NDP on May 12. Trust me when I say your home is in that party. It really is.

You may be right Al (although I doubt it), but if you go read my post in the election thread you'll understand why I'm hesitant to give them my vote.


I so do not mean to sound insulting. It’s just that I find your posts all have a central theme that if the world were perfect thinks could work they way you often think they should.

However in the real world; rightly or wrongly; things work much differently and government policy needs to be reflective of that and I submit in many cases it is. It’s like the issue of raw long exports; in an ideal world we would not have raw long exports. However we have raw log exports for a variety of reasons. This is why no government tin the history of BC has gone and banned them.

I am digressing here I just find that those who live in the “bubble” of the perfect dream world tend to be NDP’ers…this is why I suggest you vote for the NDP. I don’t mean that to sound offensive it is just my perspetive.


I would say vote for what ever party decides that they will back the traditional Industries of British Columbia. And I don't mean who will sell them to American or Asian or Middle eastern. I mean the same as all those countries do that is back only their own people , their own industries and business, not take the bribes as many of these countries also operate everything based on ho pays the biggest bribes, and they are doing VERY well in BC and Canada for some reason ! :nyah:
User avatar
Homeownertoo
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3903
Joined: Nov 10th, 2008, 1:50 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Homeownertoo »

Pinkie wrote:I prefer the route of govt. built affordable housing than "rental assistance" because in my mind all "rental assistance" does is allow landlords to keep rents artificially high. In a true market system, if enough people couldn't afford the rent, the cost of rents would fall. By subsidizing poor people to still rent at the higher price, we help keep rents artificially high. So in actual fact "rental assistance" is a subsidy for landlords IMO. That said, there are always going to be those who can't afford to pay market rent no matter how low it falls, and it is for those people I would like to see a system of govt. provided affordable housing.

There are a number of problems with this analysis. You are assuming that the reason rents are too high for some people is due to market dysfunction. That is not the case. The market cannot provide housing to match all income levels, in this case the lowest ones, because a plethora of gov't rules regarding housing quality and acceptable levels of accommodation prevent it. The fact is, the market is not permitted to provide housing for people. So subsidizing rents does not subsidize landlords, it just ensures those receiving the subsidy can afford the existing market rate. Rents are not kept "artificially high" because they can't go lower anyway. Your alternative, for the gov't to supply the housing, is quite mind-boggling. How can the gov't, notorious for its inefficiency, build and run housing at lower cost than the market? It can't. All you do is end up providing an even larger taxpayer subsidy to house people, meanwhile inevitably politicizing the delivery of low-income housing. See the history of rent-control laws for an elaboration of the dysfunctions that politics introduces into housing.
“Certain things cannot be said, certain ideas cannot be expressed, certain policies cannot be proposed.” -- Leftist icon Herbert Marcuse
“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs.” -- Hillary Clinton, 25/10/2014
Nicklan
Board Meister
Posts: 371
Joined: Mar 18th, 2009, 7:28 pm

Re: More NDP Lunacy. $ 10 Billion on Bonds?

Post by Nicklan »

Homeownertoo wrote:
Pinkie wrote:I prefer the route of govt. built affordable housing than "rental assistance" because in my mind all "rental assistance" does is allow landlords to keep rents artificially high. In a true market system, if enough people couldn't afford the rent, the cost of rents would fall. By subsidizing poor people to still rent at the higher price, we help keep rents artificially high. So in actual fact "rental assistance" is a subsidy for landlords IMO. That said, there are always going to be those who can't afford to pay market rent no matter how low it falls, and it is for those people I would like to see a system of govt. provided affordable housing.

There are a number of problems with this analysis. You are assuming that the reason rents are too high for some people is due to market dysfunction. That is not the case. The market cannot provide housing to match all income levels, in this case the lowest ones, because a plethora of gov't rules regarding housing quality and acceptable levels of accommodation prevent it. The fact is, the market is not permitted to provide housing for people. So subsidizing rents does not subsidize landlords, it just ensures those receiving the subsidy can afford the existing market rate. Rents are not kept "artificially high" because they can't go lower anyway. Your alternative, for the gov't to supply the housing, is quite mind-boggling. How can the gov't, notorious for its inefficiency, build and run housing at lower cost than the market? It can't. All you do is end up providing an even larger taxpayer subsidy to house people, meanwhile inevitably politicizing the delivery of low-income housing. See the history of rent-control laws for an elaboration of the dysfunctions that politics introduces into housing.


The market today can not provide housing is correct
However that has only been the case sence the governments decided that we should be a service economy, for the 400 or so years before that we had no problems to manufacture or for home to be availabe for 98%. Some people always needed public housing due to reasons like handy caps etc...
The only reason that housing is so high is due to the fact of the imigrant investment programs, that allow a person to become a Canadian and get a Canadian Passport so long as they can spend 750,000 dollars on a house and show that they got the money to do so legaly!
Another great Liberal Gangster SCAM !
As all the Land Developers are Gordo's buddies, and they got very rich at the expense of everyone else !
Gordo has got to GO !

Return to “B.C. Provincial Election 2009”