Official CP Election Day Thread - Do Not Post Results Until 8pm Mountain Time.

[PYroMaNiaC]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I agree, but should we voting for a party just becuase they will bend over the fastest for crooked corporations?
I personally have a moral dilema with simply taking it up the *** from the corp, simply because they don't want to lose profits.
Apperently that makes me a moron.

The idea is that business creates jobs. Jobs create economic growth. If the business leaves, who do you work for?
Look, I'm not saying that you're entirely wrong. There does have to be a better balance. But to tax corporations too much will make them leave. Canada has to be comptitive because our neighbors to the south have encouraged a business, entreprenurial atmosphere with some really nice tax incentives. And it's so close, it's not that tough to pick up and move. And then we complain about the brain drain.
There has to be compromise in there somewhere.

As far as crookedness goes, in this day and age of information, there isn't a whole lot that doesn't get exposed sooner rather than later.

[PYroMaNiaC]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Ontario prospering has nothing to do with the Liberal Party. They prospered under Mulroney too. It's their geography and access to large American markets and ports that lures industry.

Just like how in the next decade, Alberta's access to energy will lure industry - no matter what political party is in charge.

Actually, I didn't say it was because Ontario prospered. I said the prevailing thought was they were catered to - whether Albertans feel that accounts for their prosperity is another thought.

You are right though. But it still doesn't discount the idea that Albertans feel ignored. Why else would they call Ontario voters sheep, then? If it wasn't for their need for a more balanced voice in Ottawa?

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

You mean moreso than we are now? Canada is already one of the most respected countries in the world for our freedom, tolerance of diversity, strong economy, commitment to UN Peacekeeping, and human rights standards. I don't know about you, but I proudly wear my Canadian flag whenever I'm travelling overseas.

I mean much moreso than we are now! Canada is the Stuart Smalley of nations: as far as we're concerned, we're good enough, smart enough, and (doggone it) people like us! Well, people DO like us...much like people tend to like the runt of the litter. Of course, when the important issues come up, we get about as much influence on the international stage as Stuart would get...and that's pretty much a bunch of snickers and pity.

I'll point out that "influence" is not the same thing as "respect," but they would seem to be related. You can't have the former without the latter. And isn't it influence which is truly important? If we hope to be able to improve the world, and by extension our country, we need to have some influence on important issues.

Are we respected for...
Freedom? No more than any other Western democracy.
Diversity? Perhaps.
Economy? No better than 15th in per-capita GDP; WHY is our per-capita GDP about 25% lower than that of the USA when we have abundant resources and fewer social problems? We have the most advantageous trading position in the world, sharing a border with the world's most prosperous economy...WHY can't we take advantage of that? On a related note, WHY isn't anyone else asking these questions?
Peacekeeping? Yeah, we invented it in the 60s, but I think we'd get some more respect if we were not only committed to peacekeeping, but capable of executing it in more than 1 place at a time.
Human rights? A concept that exists only minimally in many parts of the world. It's wonderful to invent new "human rights" in our own country, but do you really think that China cares? I don't see much leadership in terms of assisting freedom of speech, for example, in China. Maybe if we gave some respect to the real rights (e.g. election gag law, terrorism security certificates), the rest of the world would feel more compelled to follow along than when we attempt to focus on trivial definitions (e.g. marriage).

G'night.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

You mean moreso than we are now? Canada is already one of the most respected countries in the world for our freedom, tolerance of diversity, strong economy, commitment to UN Peacekeeping, and human rights standards. I don't know about you, but I proudly wear my Canadian flag whenever I'm travelling overseas.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Must be nice in those Euro 4-5 star hotels or hostels...

Oh my goodness......never lived anywhere but Canada. Bit on that, Bananada is number one! BS haven't ya!

[duncan]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Living in southern alberta during the mad cow scare, I assure you that the liberals didn't really give a hoot regarding the region losing tons of money. They let it slide like the softwood lumber dispute.

That isn't just an Alberta issue. I live in a heavy rural area of western Ontario. The biggest portion of our population survives on beef/dairy farming. Farmers lost farms, and when the feds wanted to promote Canadian beef, they flew it in to Ottawa from Alberta, and completely forgot Western Ontario. Continuously, the ani-Ontario speal is thrown out, and the entire province is judged around Toronto. Toronto is one of 6 distinct areas, Northern Ontario miners, Western Ontario farmers, and Southern Ontario Factory workers feel little connection to the Urbanites. Western Ontario had all but 1 riding go Conservative, and the only Liberal to survive was my MP.

[HOZ]

Martin's last speech shows why he was such a pathetic leader...


"My dedication to the Liberal family will never wane," he said. "I have always been and I've been at the service of our party, today, tomorrow and always."

A party hack through and through.

A true statesman would have said this....

"My dedication to Canada will never wane," he said. "I have always been and I've been at the service of our country, today, tomorrow and always."

But this is a guy who fires Canadian sailors and hides his ships under foreign flags to avoid taxes he and his party imposes on the rest of us.

Good bye Dithers!

[duncan]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Ontario prospering has nothing to do with the Liberal Party. They prospered under Mulroney too. It's their geography and access to large American markets and ports that lures industry.

Just like how in the next decade, Alberta's access to energy will lure industry - no matter what political party is in charge.

Ontario didn't prosper under Mulroney, big business sure did, but Ontario suffered under his FTA and transfer of Nuclear Power to his Quebec riding. Bruce Nuclear, one of Canada's largest Nuclear facilities, saw half of its reactors shut down. They were the largest employers in my riding. Mulroney helped finance a plant in his riding, while hundreds of Ontario jobs were eliminated. Then the FTA was instituted, and Gearco shut its doors and went stateside (250 jobs), Champion opened an American Plant and cut its local workforce by 60% (a further 600 local jobs), Schaeffer industries closed its doors (150 jobs), and finally Lakeport went south (150). A town of 7500 lost over 1300 jobs in a 3-4 year span. With the elimination of factories, push to please Quebec (Meech Lake) and closing of mines, Ontario was hit hard by the MUlroney years.

Now, former Champion owner Sully sure liked Mulroney, with his new American plant, he bought 2 new jets and built a new hanger. Gearco owner Hill put a new indoor pool and maids quarters on his house. Our number of local Millionaires levelled out and our unemployment and lower class grew. Ottawa has had their tongue in the ear of Toronto and Quebec for 20 years, but the rest of Ontario has seen little.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Martin's last speech shows why he was such a pathetic leader...


"My dedication to the Liberal family will never wane," he said. "I have always been and I've been at the service of our party, today, tomorrow and always."

A party hack through and through.

A true statesman would have said this....

"My dedication to Canada will never wane," he said. "I have always been and I've been at the service of our country, today, tomorrow and always."

But this is a guy who fires Canadian sailors and hides his ships under foreign flags to avoid taxes he and his party imposes on the rest of us.

Good bye Dithers!

And your latest rant show's why you're a pathetic poster. The leader of a party gives a resignation speech to that party. He wasn't resigning from Canada. He was communicating to his party, about his party as he resigned from it. You take one sentence from an entire speech and hold that out to be why he was a loser but instead show thats you. As Transplant would say Un-frickin-believable.

[Resolute 14]

Well, he might have pulled the wrong statement (out of context), but he was right. Martin is a loser, and both the Liberals, and Canada would be much better off if that party can shed it's 90s corruption and arrogance. That has to begin at the top, and not just Martin.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

II'm no historian, but I doubt there's ever been as much turmoil in the country's politics as there has been in the last 5+ years. While there have been scandals, the present availability of information has (perhaps) made the population realize how F'd up the political system is.

Before you make a claim like that you should read a history book. Specifically, look at what it took to get the trans-Canada railway built. That was a huge scandal that took down governments and ruined careers.

As for information, we get it a lot faster now but back in those days political speeches were often published in their entirety (definitely not the 'soundbite' mentality). The newspapers weren't just accused of bias, they were openly and fervently biased.

Conservatives get their chance to show what they've got. Liberals aren't going to want to go to the polls until they get a new leader and raise some cash. Now is the Conservative opportunitye to show why they deserve a majority.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

Well, he might have pulled the wrong statement (out of context), but he was right. Martin is a loser, and both the Liberals, and Canada would be much better off if that party can shed it's 90s corruption and arrogance. That has to begin at the top, and not just Martin.

That's fine, but he wasn't talking about that at all. He was essentially critiquing his speech and getting it wrong.

[Resolute 14]

He was critiquing Martin's attitude, and used the wrong speech.

[Flame On]

He was critiquing Martin's attitude, and used the wrong speech.

So there's a speech he meant to post that showed he had the wrong attitude from last night after he lost and gave up his position? Where is it?

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I've never bought this argument. Suppose the government lowers corporate tax rates. The Acme Corporation had been selling widgets for $10 each because that's the highest price the market will bear. Are they going to lower their prices, passing the savings on to their customers simply because they pay less in tax now? Or are they going to keep the extra profit to themselves?

This is a totally different argument. I totally agree that companies will keep the prices up, so they make extra profit. I hate it, but it's reality.

On the other hand, they aren't going to deliberately take less in profit if their expenses go up either. They're going to pass those expenses on to the customer.

Two totally different cases and arguments.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Maybe some coporations that are making record profits could handle some tax hikes and take it out of their profits.

Could handle some tax hikes and take it out of their profits? In an ideal world, yes.

Would they? Heck no. We see all the time what a small jump in oil prices does to the price at the pump. Oil companies could stand to take it out of their profits, but do they? NO.

How about when the Interest rate goes down. Banks could keep their rate up and take it out of their profits, but do they? NO.

Every year, you see companies who make $500 million one year and $450 million the next year suddenly have layoffs because they aren't as profitable anymore. Can't they just take that out of their profits? NO.

Welcome to the real world. They are out for every cent of profit they can make. To deny it is ridiculous. I don't like it.. I hate it even. Too much profit is just a sign of greed.... but it's reality.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

If it was an American cow that had BSE, we would have done the same thing - and rightfully.

You mean like their almost total inaction when there was an American cow with BSE?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by calculoso

This is a totally different argument. I totally agree that companies will keep the prices up, so they make extra profit. I hate it, but it's reality.

On the other hand, they aren't going to deliberately take less in profit if their expenses go up either. They're going to pass those expenses on to the customer.

Two totally different cases and arguments.

That isn't completely true. If they were already maximizing profits before, raising the prices isn't going to do much of anything except lose them more money if it is a profitable product.

Of course, that depends on the industry. Ideal situation, supply/demand curves are perpendicular to each other, it wouldn't make much of a difference (Oil companies wouldn't be included here).

[Tron_fdc]

Another cold hard fact about big business.....if the economic environment isn't profitable (ie they are taxed too high) they leave. Corporations have responsibilities to shareholders first......everything else second.

I can commend the NDP for thinking that money for their social programs will come out of Alberta. But to think that revenue is sustainable is ridiculous IMO.

[ken0042]

Just wondering something in regards to the Green Party; at one point last night CBC had them leading in one of the polls. Obviously they ended up losing, but does anybody know what riding that was, and/or how close they actually came to getting a seat?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Just wondering something in regards to the Green Party; at one point last night CBC had them leading in one of the polls. Obviously they ended up losing, but does anybody know what riding that was, and/or how close they actually came to getting a seat?

It was in BC i believe, but no idea which riding it was.