Quote:
And as of January 1st, salaried employees are now working only four days a week.
How would any of us like to have started the New Year with a 20 percent pay cut?
|
Although I understand what is trying to be communicated here, it was worded very horribly. Literally it reads like they get a 25% raise, since it does not say the actual salaries are reduced, just time worked. I thought the whole point of a salary is that you don't punch a clock.
Outside of that, you definitely quoted the best part of his speech (which is from the second link - I did not watch the video). The rest of the speech reads to me as a lot of empty rhetoric (normal for any politician), and a surprisingly large amount of rhetorical questions. It also seemed to me that his speechwriters are really trying to mimic the style employed by Obama.
This made me giggle a bit:
Quote:
We Liberals understand about leadership in tough times.
Canadians turn to us when times are tough.
Canadians remember.
Sound fiscal management, repeated surpluses, debt reduction, and tax cuts on profits, revenue and income. Strong financial performance and forward-looking social policies.
Canadians remember — we cleaned up the $42-billion deficit left behind by the Mulroney years.
We slayed that deficit, but at a steep cost.
Today, Mr. Harper is taking us back to those tough Tory times.
Just yesterday, he signaled that we should be prepared for a $64-billion deficit in the next two years alone. He wants to get the bad news out of the way before the budget.
I asked Mr. Harper not to play games like that.I wanted him to put the facts and figures on the table, not let them slip out at his convenience.I think he just can’t help himself.He thinks it is all just some kind of game.
|
I hate to break it to you Mr. Ignatieff, but unfortunately parliamentary politics is a game. Mr. Harper knows and understands this (as do all of his high level advisers), and that is why he is the prime minister. Maybe the liberals need to hire some younger political scientists who have at least heard of Riker.
Edit: He could also be playing the game, but using a strategy of pretending he is not (by denouncing it). Then he can look good without appearing overly strategical (which for some reason in Canada is often frowned upon). He cannot hold that up forever though, as eventually he will have to support something outside of his party's platform for strategical reasons. Then his denunciation of
the game could really backfire.
The math of politics is fun, and reading this speech really makes me want to waste hours of my time testing dominance and dispersion in the rhetoric of our current political landscape. Riker is fun!