2011 Canadian Election Thread

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Do Albertans honestly expect to ride the tarsands gravy train forever without any kind of consequences? I'm actually in favour of tarsands production but there is a need to start weening onto other viable economic sources.

Psst...we tend to get upset when people say "tarsands".

It's "oilsands".

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Socialized health care means very little when you can't find a family doctor, or live in a remote area where doctors won't work. Tuition costs are skyrocketing and the number of people leaving university with massive amounts of personal debt is staggering. In an economy that basically demands post-secondary education for even a mid-level job, this seems unsustainable.

Not being able to find a family doctor is actually a symptom of socialized health care, not a feature of underfunding it. When costs escalate, not inflating the charge out rate for family doctors to match other health care costs is what directly causes the shortages, provincial governments do this to shoe horn their budgets. This level of detail is actually a provincial responsibility. The NDP support the same federal funding mechanism through 2014 as the two other parites at which point they have an open ended pledge to create a new 10 year accord (Again nothing different than the other parties). They are not in control of the details regarding how family doctors make money. There is nothing different there.

As with post secondary education (Again a provincial responsibility), I don't really see how the Liberal platform does less for students. I'll admit the Conservatives don't have an answer on this.

The reason why the middle class is shrinking has nothing to do with domestic policy and everything to do with global trade. All of a sudden, doing menial tasks at a manufacturing plant doesn't buy you a single family home with a big yard and a nice family sedan. If people want those jobs back in Canada they're going to have compete on wage and productivity with other places in the world. Of course in order to compete we won't see wages at a rate that can buy middle class existance in Canada.

[burn_this_city]

I'd love to know when our pals from Victoria will step up and stop dumping 130 million liters of raw sewage into the Pacific? Something about people in glass housing.

[Reggie Dunlop]

I call 'em "cancersands."

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Ark2

This part is what really gets me. The federal government shouldn't have to be footing the bill so that kids can attend post secondary education. There are all kinds of ways that people can manage this as it is. In Ontario, we have OSAP (Ontario Student Assistance Program) which provides students with loans (got that? loans, as in, you have to pay them back one day). I'm sure other provinces have similar programs available to them. Additionally, there is also this thing called, "getting a job". My experience has shown that that is pretty helpful for saving up for post secondary education. When I was 14, I got a part time job at McDonald's and by the time I was 16, I had saved up enough to pay for my first year of university. By the time I was 18, I had enough to pay for two years. Summer jobs and a 1 year internship meant I could pay everything up front without even needing a loan. But yeah, why teach people any sort of responsibility when the government can just pay their way for them. Absolutely disgusting.

When were you in school? How much were your living expenses at the time? Tuition isn't the only thing that students have to pay for. I'm a student and I make ends meet but I've been fortunate to receive some help from my parents as well. The amount for student loans I was approved for would not have been enough to pay for tuition and living expenses, even with a part-time job.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

The mere fact you call them the "tarsands" tells me everything I need to know about your political leanings.

"Until the 1960s, everyone called them the tar sands. At that point, primarily as a way of communicating more clearly what product would eventually come out of the bitumen, the Alberta government started calling them the oil sands.

Both terms were used interchangeably until about ten years ago when this topic became politicized by the opponents of the way the bituminous sands were being developed. Tar sands sounds more sinister to the ear now. The proponents of the development seem to make it a point to always call them the oil sands.

Politicization came with the relatively recent fights over all the complicated social, political, environmental and emotional issues that now surround this topic.

But talk to any of the old timers and they will use the two terms interchangeably. For the old dudes there is no emotion associated with either term.

I like to use both terms in conversation as a way to see how people react - and then I know a bit about their point of view."

http://www.capp.ca/CANADAINDUSTRY/OI...x#yAPX4Obp7PV2

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'd love to know when our pals from Victoria will step up and stop dumping 130 million liters of raw sewage into the Pacific? Something about people in glass housing.

Tu quoque. Try again.

[Tinordi]

Will its all apart of idealogical perspective. But many, many many socially democratic governments have been extremely good economic managers. German is the clearest example. Much better entitlements and higher taxes there with an incredibly more productive economy.

It's just not a forged relationship between social democracy and economic ruin. And there are really very few observation points in Canada to conclude as such. NDP in MB and SK have been sound economic managers. In BC it's been more of a mixed bag but the new history on NDP in the 90s is that they weren't nearly as bad as the immediate prognosis made them out to be. THe only good example is Ontario. But then is that not the exeption that proves the rule?

As a former civil servant, I could say that the NDP might be the most beholden to the expert advice of the civil service and that would be a very good thing. Smart people and fiscal managers in the bureaucracy would provide very good advice if they were ever listened to.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Not being able to find a family doctor is actually a symptom of socialized health care, not a feature of underfunding it. When costs escalate, not inflating the charge out rate for family doctors to match other health care costs is what directly causes the shortages, provincial governments do this to shoe horn their budgets. This level of detail is actually a provincial responsibility. The NDP support the same federal funding mechanism through 2014 as the two other parites at which point they have an open ended pledge to create a new 10 year accord (Again nothing different than the other parties). They are not in control of the details regarding how family doctors make money. There is nothing different there.

As with post secondary education (Again a provincial responsibility), I don't really see how the Liberal platform does less for students.

Except that the NDP has talked about federal student debt forgiveness for doctors who practice family medicine for 10 years, so there is at least some incentive there. To be fair, I believe the CPC has offered something similar for doctors who practice in remote areas.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by evman150

Are people's "lives" really in the balance here? Or is it something else?

In this thread you have shown a commitment to using important terms very loosely in order to fit your world view. Such a rhetorical practice is detrimental to any meaningful discussion.

We each have our perspectives:

Originally Posted by Garth Wood

As one of the unfortunates who had to live through the NEP, allow me to try and expand a bit on why Albertans in particular are wary of Federal interference in Alberta's constitutionally-protected resource base.

First, others here have said "they remember stories of suicides." I don't remember stories: I remember actual suicides. I knew people who lost their homes (some sold them for $1.00, others simply walked away), I knew couples that declared personal bankruptcy and whose marriages dissolved, and I remember standing in an unemployment line at the Edmonton Northwest UI office, as well as spending the better part of the next year looking for work. I never found any; instead, I went and applied for student loans and went back to post-secondary education (it was either that or starve). What I remember most is that none of the above tragedies were necessitated by some fundamental aspect of the existing economic milieu -- they were all precipitated by the divine fiat of an arrogant, vainglorious fool of a Prime Minister with an astonishingly weak understanding of economics and the limits of government intervention. It's little wonder that there are people out west who would like nothing better than the chance to urinate on PET's final resting place.

I also remember the blinding speed with which the damage was done -- from the announcement to the commencement of the meltdown of Alberta's economy was only a matter of a few weeks. For some people, unemployment was almost instantaneous -- I knew individuals who were terminated by the end of the week of the announcement, and I heard about others who were fired the very next day. Not that it helped their erstwhile employers survive; they too soon went under.

The NEP, for all the damage it did, is not the central issue, however. For many Albertans, the NEP simply represented the truth of the statement "The best guide to future behaviour is past behaviour." This is almost infallible in areas like the psychology of marketing, and it's a pretty good guide to other areas of life, too. The NEP represented the latest (and to date, the most profound and successful) attempt to economically rape the residents of Alberta for the benefit of Central Canada. In essence, people killed themselves because Trudeau wanted to deliver gasoline and heating oil to the residents of Ontario and Quebec for a few measly cents less per litre.
If they get the chance, what would the Liberals do next? "The best guide to future behaviour is past behaviour." Unfortunately, this is a pretty good guide for how Albertans are likely to respond to another NEP-style meddling. Contrary to popular perceptions in Central Canada, most Albertans (and I include myself, a self-declared "reluctant separatist" in this) see themselves as more magnanimous and more patriotic than Centralers, and thus more willing to allow the Feds to interfere if it's either "good for Canada" or if fighting the Feds would cause undue hardship and suffering for other Canadians, even those we perceive as being profoundly ungrateful for the massive (and per capita, massively disproportionate) economic contributions we've made to Confederation.

I have no idea whether this attitude of deference on the part of Albertans is changing, but I do know that we have long memories, and there's an entire generation of people in Alberta who have much more power and sophistication than a quarter of a century ago (age and experience is actually good for something!). NEP II, in any form whatsoever, would be unlikely to pass muster in the same way that the original ultimately did.

And if you love Canada, that's not a good thing.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by evman150

Because that's all that matters, right?

Lets talk about how much was lost during the NEP.

Tell me how you justify voting in a government that costs people their jobs, livelihood, homes, possessions.

Oh right I forgot, its for the "good" of the country.

Give me a break, I have no problem with helping the rest of Canada maintain their standard of living, but I will absolutely not abide my hard work being wiped out because a government wants to pull the brakes on the industry I work in, just to fund absolutely asinine social programs that will not only not result in their promises, but will end up setting ALL of Canada back decades.

Take an economics course, and learn what happens when un-controlled spending and taxation is allowed to reign, then come talk to me about what matters.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Lets talk about how much was lost during the NEP.

Tell me how you justify voting in a government that costs people their jobs, livelihood, homes, possessions.

Oh right I forgot, its for the "good" of the country.

Give me a break, I have no problem with helping the rest of Canada maintain their standard of living, but I will absolutely not abide my hard work being wiped out because a government wants to pull the brakes on the industry I work in, just to fund absolutely asinine social programs that will not only not result in their promises, but will end up setting ALL of Canada back decades.

Take an economics course, and learn what happens when un-controlled spending and taxation is allowed to reign, then come talk to me about what matters.

I'd agree with you except for the fact that the CPC is just as guilty as spending as anyone. Do we really need new fighter jets and mega prisons in a country with a declining crime rate and an international mandate for peacekeeping?

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

As a former civil servant, I could say that the NDP might be the most beholden to the expert advice of the civil service

I can't be the only one who burst in to laughter at this point.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by rubecube

When were you in school?

Graduated last year.

How much were your living expenses at the time?

Outside of tuition, around $500 a month. Admittedly, my parents would help me out with groceries but it's not as though I wouldn't have been able to afford that myself if need be.

Tuition isn't the only thing that students have to pay for. I'm a student and I make ends meet but I've been fortunate to receive some help from my parents as well. The amount for student loans I was approved for would not have been enough to pay for tuition and living expenses, even with a part-time job.

The big thing is, kids need to start saving money before they go to University. Things are pretty manageable when you've got a decent chunk of money sitting in your savings account but I knew lots of kids in high school that either spent their pay cheques as soon as they got them (on some very none essential things, btw) or didn't even bother getting a part time job. Frankly, I have no sympathy for these people and I don't see how it is everyone else's responsibility to make sure that they get to go to university.

At any rate, I've heard that in countries where post secondary education is paid for by the government, they don't even see significant increases in attendance, so what are we really accomplishing here?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

If you're in the oil patch, there is but one certainty of a NDP minority or NDP/Liberal coalition majority and that is utter extinction of our good fortune of the past decade.

Cap and trade plus the end of 'subsidies' (which is really just accelerated depreciation that every other industry gets to enjoy in a different form), plus a ban on tanker traffic on the west costs pretty much means that the value of all of our upstream oil companies would pretty much get ripped in half (Since a lot of the value in our companies is based on future expectations). So cash out your options on Monday, sell your shares in Oil and gas stocks, and bank stocks. Put those proceeds into US stocks, real return bonds, bank preferred stock and the typical oligopoly utility companies like Bell, Rogers, and Telus (The NDP support stricter Canadian ownership regulations for telecom companies from the CRTC).

Those who over leveraged on Calgary Real Estate and bought above their means, or bought multiple properties on high leverage will be bankrupted. Prices will crash by a lot. We're going to be reduced to Winnipeg status. A lot of the economic buzz around here at the moment centers around the massive amount of money that is getting spent on capital expenditures investing in future growth in the oil sands over the next few decades. Simply maintaining what we have (Productionwise) takes an awful lot less employees and at much lower salaries. This is an economic disaster for Alberta.

So on the topic of cap and trade, who has the best plan? I'm clearly not in favour of any...but all of the parties are proposing it! It's one of my main arguments regarding the fact that there isn't much difference between the fiscal policy of the Liberals and CPC. The tankers on the coast though, is another issue and to me the Liberals miss the boat there.

The cutting of the subsidies is something common to all three parties as well....might be better marketing from the CPC here, I don't know.

I guess if those are two major reasons why the CPC is going to be better to the oilpatch though then the doomsday clock is closer to midnight then I thought!

In reality the oilpatch can probably make a go of things without a subsidy for the time being? I feel like my paying about $1.20/litre this morning is giving a good, healthy margin and hopefully they can make do. As a fiscal conservative I would just say there are other areas where the government can be effective and subsidizing corporations likely isn't one of them.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'd agree with you except for the fact that the CPC is just as guilty as spending as anyone. Do we really need new fighter jets and mega prisons in a country with a declining crime rate and an international mandate for peacekeeping?

Exactly. Sure the NEP was ill-conceived, but Stephen Harper would rather spend billions on imprisoning and killing people rather than helping and healing them.

How's that for specious rhetoric?

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Graduated last year.



Outside of tuition, around $500 a month. Admittedly, my parents would help me out with groceries but it's not as though I wouldn't have been able to afford that myself if need be.



The big thing is, kids need to start saving money before they go to University. Things are pretty manageable when you've got a decent chunk of money sitting in your savings account but I knew lots of kids in high school that either spent their pay cheques as soon as they got them (on some very none essential things, btw) or didn't even bother getting a part time job. Frankly, I have no sympathy for these people and I don't see how it is everyone else's responsibility to make sure that they get to go to university.

At any rate, I've heard that in countries where post secondary education is paid for by the government, they don't even see significant increases in attendance, so what are we really accomplishing here?

I walked to and from school in a blizzard ten miles uphill both ways with temperatures over 100 degrees, why the hell can't you?

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'd agree with you except for the fact that the CPC is just as guilty as spending as anyone. Do we really need new fighter jets and mega prisons in a country with a declining crime rate and an international mandate for peacekeeping?

I will let the good Captain explain why we need new fighter jets, as he can explain it much better than I can. Yes we do need them.

Not sure about the mega prisons, simply don't have enough information about them to give a reasoned answer.

The difference is that the CPC will keep the corporate tax rate lower than the other parties, which is good for business.

If you think the CPC is bad for spending, wait until Jack gets his hands on the purse strings of the country. Every homeless and unemployed person will be driving Ferrari's.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'd agree with you except for the fact that the CPC is just as guilty as spending as anyone. Do we really need new fighter jets and mega prisons in a country with a declining crime rate and an international mandate for peacekeeping?

These are replacing jets we have that get used everyday with our existing mandates, and even then we're replacing them with fewer jets. It's not like this purchase is hawkiish or departing from who we are already as a people.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

If you think the CPC is bad for spending, wait until Jack gets his hands on the purse strings of the country. Every homeless and unemployed person will be driving Ferrari's.

Wow. There's just no reasoning with someone who posts something like this.