Coalition Deal To Topple Minority Tory Govt- [Update Parliament Prorogued until Jan]

[DFO]

What a freaking mess - no easy solution. I'm astonished by Harper's piss poor judgement on this whole saga. Why would he push this agenda at a time like this? All I want them to be dealing with is some sound financial policy - not this partisan crap. I'm a conservative but they won't get another vote of mine until Harper is replaced.

I would hope that a new election is called with a new leader for the Conservatives.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Then hopefully after the election, Harper ties a can to her butt and sends her on her way.

There's not going to be an election. Only a coronation.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by DFO

What a freaking mess - no easy solution. I'm astonished by Harper's piss poor judgement on this whole saga. Why would he push this agenda at a time like this? All I want them to be dealing with is some sound financial policy - not this partisan crap. I'm a conservative but they won't get another vote of mine until Harper is replaced.

I would hope that a new election is called with a new leader for the Conservatives.

I think he has no choice but to push his agenda. The guys didn't co-operate with him for the last 3 years, what makes you think they help him pass a sound financial policy now?

There is no financial plan that all 4 parties can agree one.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

They also present an assinine spend/tax heavy program thats going to do nothing but hurt the economy instead of help it.

I could see what you were saying if Canada had billions of dollars in unfunded obligations and mountains of debt creating pressure on interest rates and currency values, much as the U.S. does. But really--how does government spending hurt the economy by itself?

I could see the argument that government stimulus would be temporary in its effects--or that in the long term deficit spending might be harmful. But the notion that spending money in the short term is going to harm the economy isn't really consistent with current economic theory.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Further to that last point, here is Paul Krugman's take on fiscal policy and the economy. He's talking about the U.S., but our economic fortunes are tied to theirs, like it or not:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/op...gman.html?_r=1

Krugman is a pretty well-respected economist. He won one of those Nobel Prize thingies. My inclination is to think he knows what he's talking about. Note in particular the historical argument:

The idea that tight fiscal policy when the economy is depressed actually reduces private investment isn’t just a hypothetical argument: it’s exactly what happened in two important episodes in history.
The first took place in 1937, when Franklin Roosevelt mistakenly heeded the advice of his own era’s deficit worriers. He sharply reduced government spending, among other things cutting the Works Progress Administration in half, and also raised taxes. The result was a severe recession, and a steep fall in private investment.
The second episode took place 60 years later, in Japan. In 1996-97 the Japanese government tried to balance its budget, cutting spending and raising taxes. And again the recession that followed led to a steep fall in private investment.

[ikaris]

I wonder what people would think if Harper prorogued the government? That would stop this coalition (he would need permission from the GG).

Would that be a dictatorship like response? Just contrasting this to the egregious comparison of this coalition to a coup d'etat...

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Then she is putting her and Quebec's interests ahead of Canada's interests.

Which would be a concern that many federalist Canadians had with her from the beginning.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think he has no choice but to push his agenda. The guys didn't co-operate with him for the last 3 years, what makes you think they help him pass a sound financial policy now?

There is no financial plan that all 4 parties can agree one.

The only reason the last minority Conservative government lasted so long (more than 2.5 years) was because of Liberal support (or absence, which is essentially allowing the Conservatives to govern). If Harper didn't try to be partisan, this problem would never have happened.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I could see what you were saying if Canada had billions of dollars in unfunded obligations and mountains of debt creating pressure on interest rates and currency values, much as the U.S. does. But really--how does government spending hurt the economy by itself?

I could see the argument that government stimulus would be temporary in its effects--or that in the long term deficit spending might be harmful. But the notion that spending money in the short term is going to harm the economy isn't really consistent with current economic theory.

Exactly, this is an economic stimulus without a plan. Throw money at the problem and hope it goes away.

It makes no sense to throw money at the auto industry until we know what their plans are, and what the U.S. government is going to do about it. We could end up throwing money at Ford/GM etc and they could still close the Canadian plants down throwing workers out on their ass. Its useless to throw money into forestry and mining when purchasing is down across the board. Whats this Stimulus basically going to be? Lets pay the workers to stay home. Plus I can tell you now, if you take away the corporate tax breaks in a shaky environment, how many international companies with offices in Canada are going to just shut thier doors because there's no advantage to operating up here any more.

In what looks like a long term economic problem, throwing money at it is not going to make it go away.

Compared to other G20 countries, Canada is ahead of the curve. we don't have the banking problems that these other nations are going through. We have a stable or slightly growing GNP, we don't have run away unemployment. and the government will have a small surplus at the end of the year.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by ikaris

The only reason the last minority Conservative government lasted so long (more than 2.5 years) was because of Liberal support (or absence, which is essentially allowing the Conservatives to govern). If Harper didn't try to be partisan, this problem would never have happened.

Liberals should have brought the government down immediately then.
Abstaining for a year did nobody any good.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Jean has a tough call to make.

Either we have a coalition between these three parties or we have an election.

An election will return much the same result .

How about during the election then...that the leaders campaign on working with other parties and let those chips fall where they may? I mean if its abundantly clear there will never be a majority again, then it is imperative that this problem be addressed by those seeking office so as to know where everybody stands.

Dion campaigned AGAINST this very thing...6 weeks ago, and it apparently cost him badly.

Make it part of the process if need be, but dont tell me that Canadians voted 6 weeks ago to see a coalition government that will include 25% of cabinet posts for the NDP. Especially in these economic times.

Even more ludicrous would be to see EITHER Ignatieff or Dion sitting as PM...as one wasn't ever considered for the highest office and the other was roundly beaten in a an effort to achieve just that.

And Duceppe.....well we all know that he has Canada's interests at the very bottom of his list, so he should be no where NEAR any policy making.

That's why this is a coup and a joke.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Exactly, this is an economic stimulus without a plan. Throw money at the problem and hope it goes away.

It makes no sense to throw money at the auto industry until we know what their plans are, and what the U.S. government is going to do about it. We could end up throwing money at Ford/GM etc and they could still close the Canadian plants down throwing workers out on their ass. Its useless to throw money into forestry and mining when purchasing is down across the board. Whats this Stimulus basically going to be? Lets pay the workers to stay home. Plus I can tell you now, if you take away the corporate tax breaks in a shaky environment, how many international companies with offices in Canada are going to just shut thier doors because there's no advantage to operating up here any more.

In what looks like a long term economic problem, throwing money at it is not going to make it go away.

Compared to other G20 countries, Canada is ahead of the curve. we don't have the banking problems that these other nations are going through. We have a stable or slightly growing GNP, we don't have run away unemployment. and the government will have a small surplus at the end of the year.

Fair enough--I agree that bailing out the auto industry immediately is a little shortsighted. However, that's not the only form "stimulus" can take. I'd personally like to see a stimulus take two forms: modest tax cuts, and some spending--with the latter focused on infrastructure programs that create jobs, and some enhanced entitlements for the poorest Canadians to stimulate consumer spending. In other words, the objective of a stimulus should be to increase employment and put more money in the pockets of consumers.

I actually don't favour bailing out the auto industry unless there are massive strings attached--that is--the money goes to preferred shares, or is a loan--and is contingent on development of energy efficient vehicles, and based on a sound fiscal plan demonstrating that the manufacturers are solvent through this crisis and in the future--and will keep their factories in Canada open. Otherwise, there's no percentage in a bailout. Auto companies in North America have themselves to blame for their woes in large part--they need to show that they have changed their strategic outlook before they get a single cent of government money in my view.

[Ronald Pagan]

It makes no sense to throw money at the auto industry until we know what their plans are, and what the U.S. government is going to do about it. We could end up throwing money at Ford/GM etc and they could still close the Canadian plants down throwing workers out on their ass. Its useless to throw money into forestry and mining when purchasing is down across the board. Whats this Stimulus basically going to be? Lets pay the workers to stay home. Plus I can tell you now, if you take away the corporate tax breaks in a shaky environment, how many international companies with offices in Canada are going to just shut thier doors because there's no advantage to operating up here any more.

You might need a parachute for all those assumptions you're jumping to.

First you've assumed that you know what the stimulus plan looks like, bail outs for the auto sector. I'd like to know where you get this inside information. It's most like conjecture based on some topical economic issues.

Second, you've demonstrated very little understanding of macroeconomics.

Stimulus plans stimulate demand. Government's spend money to get people to spend more money either through job creation or higher real income. This is the multiplier effect. The amount that the government spends will be smaller than the total net economic effect. It's good policy, it's worked before. There are limits, of course, to its usefulness and applicability but most economists now agree that in these times, it would be good policy.

But thanks for your armchair analysis. It has been noted.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

It makes no sense to throw money at the auto industry until we know what their plans are, and what the U.S. government is going to do about it. We could end up throwing money at Ford/GM etc and they could still close the Canadian plants down throwing workers out on their ass. Its useless to throw money into forestry and mining when purchasing is down across the board. Whats this Stimulus basically going to be? Lets pay the workers to stay home. Plus I can tell you now, if you take away the corporate tax breaks in a shaky environment, how many international companies with offices in Canada are going to just shut thier doors because there's no advantage to operating up here any more.

A likely stimulus plan would be compromised primarily of infrastructure spending. This would create jobs and create a tangible benefit for our future as well. This is exactly what Obama will be implementing in the US. If this stimulus plan has anything to do with the auto industry, that would be disgusting, and I would then agree with you.

It's really hard to say without knowing the details of this stimulus package. It would be prudent for the country to know and understand that before the GG allows any sort of coalition government.

[GirlySports]

The TSX is down 700 points already.
Canadian dollar seems steady still.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Liberals should have brought the government down immediately then.
Abstaining for a year did nobody any good.

They eventually did when the Conservatives put forth something that was completely unacceptable to the Liberals. The reason they didn't bring it down earlieris because the Conservatives brought pretty moderate programs that the Liberals would be agreeable to (kind of what is supposed to happen when you have a minority government).

[peter12]

TSX bombs this morning. Down 630 points. Our 1.95 per vote in action.

[peter12]

Fair enough--I agree that bailing out the auto industry immediately is a little shortsighted. However, that's not the only form "stimulus" can take. I'd personally like to see a stimulus take two forms: modest tax cuts, and some spending--with the latter focused on infrastructure programs that create jobs, and some enhanced entitlements for the poorest Canadians to stimulate consumer spending. In other words, the objective of a stimulus should be to increase employment and put more money in the pockets of consumers.

That's fine, but judging from Layton's comments in the call, that money will go right to the unions in Ontario and Quebec.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The TSX is down 700 points already.
Canadian dollar seems steady still.

Could have something to do with the DOW being down almost 400...

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The TSX is down 700 points already.
Canadian dollar seems steady still.

I sold everything I have in my self-directed account this morning. I'm looking to buy back when Encana and CNRL become penny stocks.