Looming Federal Election

[NAB]

You people who hate Harper must be really brainwashed with liberal propoganda. He has done a great job with his hands tied.
Jack Layton can smell blood, he sees that iggy is not going to win and now he has a chance to come out as number 2 , with a Harper majorioty and the demise of the lierbals, good bye iggy.

I agree about the great job re Harper Alberta, but not on your other point. I think what is most likely to come of all this is virtual elimination of Layton and the NDP. Mainly because so many of the hard left wing supporters can now find themselves better represented by Ignatieff and the Liberal Party. remember too, Ex NDP'r Bob Rae is still there ready to grab the reigns when Ignatieff finally blows it for the last time. Rae knows full well that the NDP are going no where fast.

Nab

[CJT84]

:So you're saying that before the industrial revolution the standard of living was higher? I come from the UK and I will debate you any time on its history.

The Industrial Revolution ushered in great changes in society, many beneficial, but many great hardships as well. And for the most part, those hardships fell on the working poor, while the rich got richer at the expense of those in the lower classes. It's true that "trickle down economics" provided plenty of jobs at that time in history, but they were not well paying jobs, and the working conditions were usually horrendous. It was only later, with the birth of trades unions, and the social activism of people like Dickens, that working conditions began to improve. The improvements did not result from the largesse of the mill owners or the compassion of government.

Trade unions had a role in improving conditions sure but so did the mill owners who realized that they could get bet workers if they improved standards and make more profit from a more efficient and skilled labour force. An example of this was the ban of alcohol and replacing it with tea on the job site.

It is human nature to be greedy and selfish, and the idea that enriching those at the top will enable them to be more generous to those at the bottom is mainly "pie in the sky" stuff. Sure, there are a few philanthropists who share their wealth but, for the most part, the rich keep as much of what they have as possible.

The rich keep it by investing it in companies and other assets. You sound more like they should give away money to people with no strings simply because you want it. Sorry but if rich people did that then how would money be valued? Money represents real value, if you are doing an activity worth more value than another person it is represented by more money. If the "rich" gave this to people not doing activity that was worth the money they get then how the hell would we know what anything would be worth? You discount investments entirely from your premise as if Warren Buffett or Carlos Slim or whoever hides billions in a vault somewhere like Scrooge McDuck. Take an econ course please.

I repeat that, it is in everyones best interest, for governments to provide a climate that benefits both new and exisiting business, BUT to take that to the umpth degree and design only policies that benefit business in the assumption they will voluntarily share their wealth is nothing but a pipedream. We need government policies which ensure that EVERYONE in society will benefit in some way from a healthy economy, not just those at the top.

What is business? Unless you're unemployed or a government worker, business is you. Business is individuals not some mythical scapegoat for the fact you don't think poor people get enough money. Everyone in society benefits from a free market, but it is not a guaranteed benefit. If the government said something like in Bourbon France where the rich landed gentry (rich by birth not by business) paid no tax and everyone else had to fund their largess than you'd be correct. You equate business people to aristocracy and the comparison is totally ludicrous. Why should anyone share their wealth? Instead they invest in something you or I do and we both profit from it, what's wrong with that?

[Merry]

You equate business people to aristocracy and the comparison is totally ludicrous. Why should anyone share their wealth? Instead they invest in something you or I do and we both profit from it, what's wrong with that?

There is nothing wrong with business people (or anyone else for that matter) investing in something in order to make a profit. I never suggested there was. But I do believe that people with lots of wealth and influence should not be allowed to use their wealth and influence to take advantage of the rest of us. And consequently I believe it is the role of government to protect society from that kind of thing.

Having served in local government, as well as on various boards, I have seen first hand the questionable influence of business people on the decision making process of many of these bodies, and I have no reason to believe it is any different at the Provincial and Federal Levels of government. For the most part the influence is self serving, and not necessarily in the best interests of the majority. And if ever it was, that was purely a spin off benefit.

I don't necessarily hold it against these business types that they were looking out for their own interests, because most of us do the same if given the chance. But I don't have any illusions either that most of them are attempting to exert influence on these boards and committees for the betterment of society as a whole.

Because of their position in society, these business people often have greater access to those in positions of power (i.e. government), so in order to provide balance to the decision making process I believe it is essential we elect governments who are willing to make an effort to look at BOTH sides of issues and not just blindly follow the edicts of business.

Up to this point I believe the Harper Government has done a good job of trying to provide the kind of balance I'm referring to but, as I stated earlier, I'm worried that they have only done so because of their minority status and, if given a majority, will veer much further over to the right. And, for all the reasons I've stated previously, I don't think that's a good idea. However, you obviously disagree, and that is your right.

[Glacier]

The United States has always favoured a more right wing form of government (even when ruled by the Democrats) and look what a mess they're in.

Pray tell us which right wing policies those were? Over the past 15 years, I'd say the Canada has taken a more right-wing approach in many respects (less government spending, less government interference, etc.).

I do agree with you that the election won't change much of anything. I predict that the end of the day, the Liberals will gain about 5 or 6 seats at the expense of the Conservatives, while the NDP and Block stay about the same. This is based on a general perception I get over people being slightly less statisfied with the Conservatives this time around.

[NAB]

The interesting thing is that now Ignatieff is saying he is prepared to fight the election on the economy, and we will be given an opportunity to choose what is behind the blue door or the red door. If I understand his "promises" correctly to this point he is going to cancel the purchase of the new jets, build a stadium in Quebec City, stall the reductions in corporate taxes for a year or so, do a bit more than Flaherty proposed for low end seniors and post secondary education, and "address" the doctor shortage.

He hasn't, that I am aware of anyway, indicated much else, but I have to assume that he may do something about the prison expansions (I doubt it though), and to do the things needed to shift the economy back to the Liberals now centre left wing vision he will simply re-jig the budget - perhaps increase and re-jig the GST/HST and the sin and fuel taxes, and increase the deficit (slow down our march back to balanced budgets) - plus maybe up individual income taxes.

That all suggests to me that the lion's share of Ignatieff's vision for the economy will come from once more gutting our military and justice system / policing budgets, and perhaps going for something along the lines of Dion's Green Shift taxation in order to up his envirocredentials.

By the way. Talking about Green - we don't seem to be hearing much from Elizabeth May yet. No indication of any deals struck with Iggy regarding not running a Liberal against her in an effort to get her a seat in parliament at least. If she runs where she apparently plans to, I doubt she is going to be very impressed with her showing.

Nab

[steven lloyd]

I predict that the end of the day, the Liberals will gain about 5 or 6 seats at the expense of the Conservatives, while the NDP and Block stay about the same. This is based on a general perception I get over people being slightly less statisfied with the Conservatives this time around.

People might be slightly less satisfied with the Conservatives, maybe even a bit uncomfortable with the perceived lack of ethics and accountability (that didn't stop the people of BC relecting Gordo for even more flagrant concerns) - but voting for the Federal Liberals ? Why, ... that would just be Iggyotic !!!

[rmshort]

Hey, roll the dice.
People die for this chance. An election is a good thing. Anywhere anytime. If the minority government can not keep it civil...........

Harper has been negative. Bottom line.

[dudlee]

You know what the Fiberals will say if they win , right ? OOPS , we found that things are far worse than we thought so all those promises during the election won't be happening .Just remember Trudum said that he would not lay off government workers and he would not raise business taxes either , and in less than a month after being back in , he did both .Remember Chretien , I will not raise taxes , "He lied , He promised the GST would go away , it stayed, he campaigned on his RED BOOK and he never fullfilled one promise from it . He signed us to the Kyoto Accord and increased emissions by 50% and never met one target , he devalued our dollar to 58 cents , making imported goods go up by almost 100%. When he came in Gas was 28 cents per liter , when he left , it was over a dollar . He downloaded fed debt to the provinces to make it look like he balanced the Budget and in the last Liberal year of terror , he Stole the $60 Billion EI Surplus to try and make it look like he balanced the budget . My Question is "What did you do with the other $47.5 Billion ?"

Canada is in pretty good shape right now and that scares the hell outta the Fiberals , because in the past , with the lack of reporting and social networking , people actually believed what the Fibs said , but this time they don't and we have been given huge amounts of info from the Conservatives , instead of the one sided Propaganda spewed by the CBC . The only real province crying for an election is Ontario , the rest of Canada does feel the need for one right now

[Urbane]

I predict that the end of the day, the Liberals will gain about 5 or 6 seats at the expense of the Conservatives, while the NDP and Block stay about the same. This is based on a general perception I get over people being slightly less statisfied with the Conservatives this time around.


People might be slightly less satisfied with the Conservatives, maybe even a bit uncomfortable with the perceived lack of ethics and accountability (that didn't stop the people of BC relecting Gordo for even more flagrant concerns) - but voting for the Federal Liberals ? Why, ... that would just be Iggyotic !!!

Steven, I think a lot of other people are agreeing with you:

John Ivison Mar 24, 2011 – 5:31 PM ET

Aaron Lynett / National Post

Majority government in the pending federal election is there for the Conservatives to lose, if you believe a new poll taken after the budget this week.

The Ipsos Reid poll for Postmedia News has the Tories entering the campaign in majority territory at 43%, almost 20 points ahead of the Liberals, who have fallen back to 24% support. The Harper government recorded a healthy lead over the Liberals in almost every region — ahead by 16 points in Ontario (46 versus 30), seven points in Quebec (25 versus 18) and 28 points in British Columbia (50 versus 22). It also leads among young people, the middle-aged, seniors, men and women.

Unless Michael Ignatieff is playing a long-strategic game and targeting the under-18s, it would seem fair to suggest his attempt to unseat Stephen Harper as Prime Minister has not started quite as well as he might have hoped.

NDP support was unchanged at 16%. One of the curiosities of the campaign will be how Jack Layton balances seat preservation and his apparent non-aggression pact with Mr. Ignatieff. In 2008, the NDP beat the Liberals into second place in 17 ridings and were runners up to the Grits in another 13 seats. They are mortal political enemies, so this entente cordiale will unravel in short order, one suspects. The tussle between the NDP’s Thomas Mulcair and the Liberal’s Martin Cauchon in Outremont is just one contest that is unlikely to be a handbags-at-five-paces affair.

The new poll will allay Conservative fears that the influence-peddling allegations surrounding former prime ministerial advisor, Bruce Carson, is set to dent their support. Not even its salacious nature enabled it to make the leap into hyperspace needed to get a political story well understood in the universe beyond the alternate region of space known as Ottawa.

Not that anyone is cracking open champagne corks in the Prime Minister’s Office. Most seasoned observers think the gap is closer to 10 points than 20. This poll was taken hours after the government had promised to spend billions of dollars on Canadians and Mr. Ignatieff had turned around and said they weren’t going to get the cash after all.

When the election is finally called, it is likely that the polls will start to narrow, reflecting an end to the Conservative Party’s pre-writ advertising spending advantage. We can expect to see a barrage of Liberal attack ads next week, once the financial playing field is leveled, with the aim of bringing the Grits within striking distance of the Tories by the time of the leaders’ debate in week four.

Still — a 19-point difference is a huge lead with which to enter a campaign. It raises the question: Was everyone in the Opposition Leaders’ Office sniffing glue when they decided to force an election? The trend-lines on most public opinion polls have shown that the Conservatives were rising, and the Liberals sinking, since the turn of the year when Mr. Ignatieff made it clear he was intent on calling time on the Harper government again. The Ipsos poll suggests that one half of Canadians (obviously not all Conservatives) believe the opposition parties should vote for the budget to avoid an election.

The Liberal Hail Mary play is based on the assumption that Mr. Ignatieff will out-perform expectations that languish at about the same subterranean level as a Chilean coal mine. Having followed him on his mini-campaign last summer, there’s no doubt he will surprise some people with a level of warmth and self-deprecating humour that doesn’t come across in the House of Commons.

But, even if the Ipsos poll does prove frothy, the gap is massive. To overhaul the Conservatives in terms of seats, the Liberal leader would have to possess the charisma and acumen of a JFK — and Mr. Ignatieff is no Jack Kennedy.

It’s only if you believe the real goal is to hold the Conservatives to another minority, in order to form a coalition of losers with the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, that the drive to bring down the government starts to make sense.

Those Conservative numbers may rise higher still if enough Canadians become convinced that this has been the opposition parties’ plan all along. There’s an element of truth to the line that Canada was formed after the last ice age — after which things slowed down. Canadians are traditionalists and one of those traditions is that the party that is first past the post wins the race.
[email protected]
National Post

[NAB]

Steve Murray: Opposition leaders painted into the corner

The Post’s Steve Murry posits what may be going through the heads of Opposition leaders after reading new poll results that put the Tories in a commanding 19-point lead. Click through to see his cartoon

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/pho ... he-corner/

[butcher99]

I agree butcher. That's why I beleive we should not make change based on budget projections as is now being contemplated, but rather on actuals at the end of a fiscal period. But the opposition don't care for that approach, as the actuals are very much in the Conservative Government's favour. Personally, I would sooner make a decision based on what HAS been done, not on what some ex-spurts think will occur. In that regard. none of the opposition parties have a leg to to stand on as they have accomplished nothing but gabbleflab and stalling. heck, in the case of the Liberals they haven't even managed to get their own house in order. How could we possibly trust them to be able to keep Canada's house in order?

Nab

I don't know about in their favour. The biggest deficit in Canadian history and it is not getting any better despite promises that it will take care of itself and then we pile on tax cuts on top of that.
I am not so sure the liberal house is not in fairly good order. The conservative party says it is not, but then you only have to look at the mess they are in to make you scratch your head.

Conservatives will in all probability get back in with the same 38% or thereabouts of the vote and a minority government and again attempt to govern like they got 60% of the vote.

[butcher99]

Steve Murray: Opposition leaders painted into the corner

The Post’s Steve Murry posits what may be going through the heads of Opposition leaders after reading new poll results that put the Tories in a commanding 19-point lead. Click through to see his cartoon

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/pho ... he-corner/

Funny how 43% of the vote with a margin of error of 4 or 5% translates into a 19 point lead.

[Gone_Fishin]

Steve Murray: Opposition leaders painted into the corner

The Post’s Steve Murry posits what may be going through the heads of Opposition leaders after reading new poll results that put the Tories in a commanding 19-point lead. Click through to see his cartoon

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/pho ... he-corner/

Funny how 43% of the vote with a margin of error of 4 or 5% translates into a 19 point lead.

Sucks to be a Socialist, butcher. The NDP and Iggy are going to get slaughtered in this election.

Canadians want a leader with common sense and a clear vision for the future. That leader is, without a doubt, Stephen Harper. The polls are bang on.

[NAB]

Steve Murray: Opposition leaders painted into the corner

The Post’s Steve Murry posits what may be going through the heads of Opposition leaders after reading new poll results that put the Tories in a commanding 19-point lead. Click through to see his cartoon

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/pho ... he-corner/

Funny how 43% of the vote with a margin of error of 4 or 5% translates into a 19 point lead.

Looks like 19% to me butcher. And I don't know where your margin of error of 4 - 5% comes from. Normally professional polls like Ipsos Reid are much more accurate than that. Still, if you don't want to read the whole article, here's the nubs of it. It is not surprising PM Harper chose to go for an election rather than cater to the whiny oppositions unreasonable demands to avoid one. The Conservatives are as close to majority territory as they ever will likely be, so why not go for it? Iggy and the Liberals need to be trimmed back a notch or two before Ralph Goodale pops a blood vessel .

"The Ipsos Reid poll for Postmedia News has the Tories entering the campaign in majority territory at 43%, almost 20 points ahead of the Liberals, who have fallen back to 24% support."

"But, even if the Ipsos poll does prove frothy, the gap is massive. To overhaul the Conservatives in terms of seats, the Liberal leader would have to possess the charisma and acumen of a JFK — and Mr. Ignatieff is no Jack Kennedy."

Full article: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/201 ... oint-lead/

[Urbane]

Looks like 19% to me butcher. And I don't know where your margin of error of 4 - 5% comes from. Normally professional polls like Ipsos Reid are much more accurate than that. Still, if you don't want to read the whole article, here's the nubs of it. It is not surprising PM Harper chose to go for an election rather than cater to the whiny oppositions unreasonable demands to avoid one. The Conservatives are as close to majority territory as they ever will likely be, so why not go for it? Iggy and the Liberals need to be trimmed back a notch or two before Ralph Goodale pops a blood vessel .

That's my take on it too Nab. Things may change during the campaign but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the Conservatives get a majority. While the opposition leaders were telling everyone that the Conservatives had lost touch and that Canadians were opposed to what the government was doing the poll numbers shot up for the government. Again, we'll see what happens but at the moment that cartoon you posted with what the opposition leaders must be thinking after seeing that poll rings true. I think it may be an entertaining campaign and I can only hope we get our money's worth - $400 million's worth.