Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[evman150]

Originally Posted by rubecube

On a provincial level, it seems like the NDP have been largely better at running things than their conservative counterparts. You would obviously know better than I would when it comes to Manitoba, but it seems like BC and Manitoba (despite having their own problems) aren't the trainwrecks of right-wing nonsense that Alberta and Saskatchewan are at the moment.

If only there were more politicians like John Horgan: thoughtful, caring, dedicated, and genuine. He was pretty much impossible to dislike. It was a shame that his premiership was cut short by health issues, but overall the NDP in BC has been popular and successful over the past seven years.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Poilievre told a sovereign citizen convoy group camped out at the Nova Scotia / New Brunswick group that he saw them on the side of the highway as he was driving back from PEI and decided to stop and “say hello.”

“Everyone’s happy with what you’re doing,” Poilievre says.

Just saw the video on CBC news. This kind of bulls*** is why this assclown will never get my vote.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by direwolf

Just saw the video on CBC news. This kind of bulls*** is why this assclown will never get my vote.

It's becoming a pattern. And a strange one at that.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1783226909209342252

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I mean this is a false dilemma in a country that has a viable third party. You can vote against Trudeau and also not vote for right-wing nutjob.

Viable third party?

Green text or Green Party?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

The reality is they're taking from doctors, business owners, everyday middle class who have invested for their retirement.

Canada still has a lower corporate capital gains tax than the US and most peer nations do. Most other countries have a 100% inclusion rate on corporate capital gains and tax it the same as regular income. Canada is one of the few places that still gives tax breaks for corporate capital over corporate income, and a 66.7% inclusion rate doesn't change that. Regardless of the histrionics from people who use corporations as a loophole to create an unlimited RRSP with a preferential tax rate.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Canada still has a lower corporate capital gains tax than the US and most peer nations do. Most other countries have a 100% inclusion rate on corporate capital gains and tax it the same as regular income. Canada is one of the few places that still gives tax breaks for corporate capital over corporate income, and a 66.7% inclusion rate doesn't change that. Regardless of the histrionics from people who use corporations as a loophole to create an unlimited RRSP with a preferential tax rate.

Are you referring to an Individual Pension Plan with your last statement?

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Canada still has a lower corporate capital gains tax than the US and most peer nations do.

Things like the QSBS exemption factor pretty massively in the US. That lets venture funding pull out $10 million in gains tax free, or 10x their initial investment- whichever is greater.

It's a huge thumb on the scale for the venture capital ecosystem there.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I mean this is a false dilemma in a country that has a viable third party.

No it doesn't as the polls show, and Singh wanting to have the federal NDP stay under the Liberal shadow instead of making itself a viable alternative. Perhaps you want to let them know they are a viable third party as they certainly don't act like it.

The NDP is closer to the Green Party and PPC in polling numbers than they are to Canada's current top choice. Heck they are likely to go down to 20 seats or less and that is with the addition of 5 seats in parliament.

https://338canada.com/federal.htm

Being at 17% while Liberals have been in a freefall is downright awful.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

No it doesn't as the polls show, and Singh wanting to have the federal NDP stay under the Liberal shadow instead of making itself a viable alternative. Perhaps you want to let them know they are a viable third party as they certainly don't act like it.

The NDP is closer to the Green Party and PPC in polling numbers than they are to Canada's current top choice. Heck they are likely to go down to 20 seats or less and that is with the addition of 5 seats in parliament.

https://338canada.com/federal.htm

Being at 17% while Liberals have been in a freefall is downright awful.

This really has nothing to do with whether or not they’re a viable third option.

Rube’s point was that this isn’t and never is a binary choice between the Liberals or the Conservatives. And his point that the NDP may be better financial stewards than either of the two “top” choices that people default to.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This really has nothing to do with whether or not they’re a viable third option.

Rube’s point was that this isn’t and never is a binary choice between the Liberals or the Conservatives. And his point that the NDP may be better financial stewards than either of the two “top” choices that people default to.

Green Party, PPC, Bloc are also a choice.

None are viable to form a government as they currently are but they certainly are a choice, so your argument is nonsensical. The NDP in its current state is as viable as the others mentioned. And considering the NDP is in a coalition with the Liberals, and will ho and hum about the budget for a bit and proceed to support it after claiming victory on a half baked compromise, they really are just Liberals at this point and do not have much separating them as a party (hence why they aren't gaining support). Their flailing around on carbon tax certainly is not helping them, and likely hurting their ideological base.

The federal NDP is not a viable alternative party right now and are not taking measures to become one. It's the 'viable' part that is in contention, not that they are a choice.

That's the problem when you choose to join a coalition in the shadows of the main party for short term gain rather than attempt to stand out to the population as an alternative. In a year they be will fully back to irrelevance and forced to redefine themselves.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

On a provincial level, it seems like the NDP have been largely better at running things than their conservative counterparts. You would obviously know better than I would when it comes to Manitoba, but it seems like BC and Manitoba (despite having their own problems) aren't the trainwrecks of right-wing nonsense that Alberta and Saskatchewan are at the moment.

I don't know how the NDP in BC works, but the NDP in Manitoba is basically the PC party that is called the NDP party.

The name is meaningless.

The policies are the same without the 5+ years of being in power corruption that always happens.

[Ozy_Flame]

The current state of federal parties makes me believe the best course of action is to continue a minority government while making majority coalitions to pass legislation, in the absence of any particular electoral reform. Also not uncommon in European politics to see coalitions govern.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Green Party, PPC, Bloc are also a choice.

None are viable to form a government as they currently are but they certainly are a choice, so your argument is nonsensical. The NDP in its current state is as viable as the others mentioned. And considering the NDP is in a coalition with the Liberals, and will ho and hum about the budget for a bit and proceed to support it after claiming victory on a half baked compromise, they really are just Liberals at this point and do not have much separating them as a party (hence why they aren't gaining support). Their flailing around on carbon tax certainly is not helping them, and likely hurting their ideological base.

The federal NDP is not a viable alternative party right now and are not taking measures to become one. It's the 'viable' part that is in contention, not that they are a choice.

That's the problem when you choose to join a coalition in the shadows of the main party for short term gain rather than attempt to stand out to the population as an alternative. In a year they be will fully back to irrelevance and forced to redefine themselves.

Well, no, they aren’t the Liberals, they’re the NDP. You might have trouble distinguishing them and you might struggle to see them as more viable than, say, the PPC party, but they objectively are and any suggestion otherwise is just… what did you call it? Right, nonsensical.

[Firebot]

^Israel shows why coalitions can be a really bad thing, giving voices to fringe elements that have no business being in power while silencing a large segment of the population and further radicalizes a government above what the population voted for.

I've never been a fan of coalitions.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Well, no, they aren’t the Liberals, they’re the NDP.

Maybe you should remind them of that. Right now they are just Liberal junior and are clearly failing to separate themselves as an alternative.

[Ozy_Flame]

We have a single fringe party that gets any votes (the PPC) and even then if the Cons were a minority ruling government, they probably wouldn't create a coalition with the PPC due to sheer numbers and optics. They would likely vote with the Bloc and/or the NDP, which they have known to do in the past.

Canada also doesn't have the severity of existential threat that Israel does, which impacts their politics.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Maybe you should remind them of that. Right now they are just Liberal junior and are clearly failing to separate themselves as an alternative.

For the first time in...forever...? the NDP are getting their policies pushed through government. This is the most success they have ever had. Voting for the NDP is entirely reasonable if you don't like Trudeau but still want progressive policies, and understand the realities of a parliamentary democracy. In short, it's fine, they are fine.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

they probably wouldn't create a coalition with the PPC due to sheer numbers and optics.

Harper wanted to create a coalition with the Bloc and NDP to topple Martin and the Liberals. Could you imagine that coalition?

When power is involved, there is a will, optics be damned. That's why I don't like coalitions or the premise of coalitions, even if it personally benefits my view. Sometimes the political views align, usually it's a disaster.

[Ozy_Flame]

Would you consider the Bloc and NDP to be 'fringe elements' in the same way you contextualized the risk in Israeli political coalitions?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

^Israel shows why coalitions can be a really bad thing, giving voices to fringe elements that have no business being in power while silencing a large segment of the population and further radicalizes a government above what the population voted for.

I've never been a fan of coalitions.

I’m not sure that really describes the situation with the NDP in any way. This is a party that has been a really solid part of the Canadian political landscape forever, not some fringe party full of radicals.

They’ve accomplished less than I would’ve hoped in working with the Liberals but more than they would have without. I get the eager to desire to paint them as the junior Liberals but it’s just not based on much.