40th Canadian Federal Election - Welcome to another Conservative Minority (whee!)

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

GST on prostitution.

Well, they just lost my vote, I suppose they're going to tax blow to.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I think the problem as to why the two don't exist side-by-side in one party is that fiscally responsible does not jive well with showering "disaffected" people and groups with taxdollars. Socially progressive in the minds of Canadians means spending gobs money on social programs, spending money on gobs of social programs = deficit which equalts debt, which equals higher taxes which equals poorer eocnomy.

I know this won't be a popular opinion on this site, but the Chretien and Martin Liberals fit the balance of fiscal restaint while being socially progressive. They balanced the budget and gave us record surplusses for the better part of a decade while at the same time reducing personal and corporate taxes, all while having a progressive social agenda.

[troutman]

Tax rates around the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world

The max in Sweden is 59%

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Not at all.

Many of the socially-progressive things I care about are either free or relatively cheap. I'm talking about stuff like safe and legal abortion, legalized gay marriage, etc.

Those are both cheap and jive with "socially progressive," but then you get the people who will come up with statistics showing one particular group making less money, and recommend some "social spending" to "rectify the situation." Of course as leader of a free and open "Socially progressive" society you couldn't sit around and let the marketplace run its course if it "Systematically disadvantages" anyone.

The problem with the "Sharing and caring" government model is that everyone has a story that will break your heart and once you capitulate to one cause, every other one (even the most illegitimate) lines up at the trough and if you don't give in there will be other parties questioning how much of an injustice it was for you to deny their sob story.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I know this won't be a popular opinion on this site, but the Chretien and Martin Liberals fit the balance of fiscal restaint while being socially progressive. They balanced the budget and gave us record surplusses for the better part of a decade while at the same time reducing personal and corporate taxes, all while having a progressive social agenda.

I can agree with this statement with regards to Martin. I was actually genuinely optimistic he would be a good PM.

[troutman]

http://www.voteoutanders.com/

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Those are both cheap and jive with "socially progressive," but then you get the people who will come up with statistics showing one particular group making less money, and recommend some "social spending" to "rectify the situation." Of course as leader of a free and open "Socially progressive" society you couldn't sit around and let the marketplace run its course if it "Systematically disadvantages" anyone.

The problem with the "Sharing and caring" government model is that everyone has a story that will break your heart and once you capitulate to one cause, every other one (even the most illegitimate) lines up at the trough and if you don't give in there will be other parties questioning how much of an injustice it was for you to deny their sob story.

See my previous post. During the Chretien/Martin years, none of your doom and gloom about bankrupting the country became reality. The economy expanded, unemployment went down, taxes (both personal and corporate) were lowered, the budget was balanced, and we began paying down our national debt. You may not agree with everything they did while in power, but those above facts are indisputable.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Taxes are a necessary evil; get used to paying them. Without taxes we wouldn't have things that you take for granted and think our essential -- not just big ticket services like healthcare and education, but also run-of-the-mill things like highway construction, fire departments, and dozens of other things you use all the time.

Absolutely. My point is that government should be constrained to necessary services, not recklessly expanding itself into sectors where it doesn't necessarily provide the best service possible. Government is good at some things, not ALL things.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

See my previous post. During the Chretien/Martin years, none of your doom and gloom about bankrupting the country became reality. The economy expanded, unemployment went down, taxes (both personal and corporate) were lowered, the budget was balanced, and we began paying down our national debt. You may not agree with everything they did while in power, but those above facts are indisputable.

Chretien was pushed HARD by the Reform party, both inside and outside the Ottawa bubble. Preston Manning can take almost full responsibility for the Liberals' responsible fiscal record during the 1990s.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

See my previous post. During the Chretien/Martin years, none of your doom and gloom about bankrupting the country became reality. The economy expanded, unemployment went down, taxes (both personal and corporate) were lowered, the budget was balanced, and we began paying down our national debt. You may not agree with everything they did while in power, but those above facts are indisputable.

Only troubling thing was the dollar. It dipped under 60 cents.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I know this won't be a popular opinion on this site, but the Chretien and Martin Liberals fit the balance of fiscal restaint while being socially progressive. They balanced the budget and gave us record surplusses for the better part of a decade while at the same time reducing personal and corporate taxes, all while having a progressive social agenda.

Yeah except you forgot to mention that they balanced the budget by axing provincial transfers and when you factor in EI premium and CPP increases and bracket creep that was allowed to increase for a significant period in their reign there were no personal tax savings. Then when times got good they jacked spending up year after year and purposely under budgeted to show a large surplus to which they then showered on selective causes without contributing more to pay down the debt.

[Mccree]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Only troubling thing was the dollar. It dipped under 60 cents.

A lower dollar was really crappy for importers but really really good for exporters and I think that is a great reason the ecomony expanded as it did. Our products were cheapr when compared to other currencies.

But I do agree that a 60 cent dollar is too low but a Cdn dollar on par is not a good thing. Where is the happy medium I am not sure.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Only troubling thing was the dollar. It dipped under 60 cents.

Which is actually good for our economy. A low dollar significantly increases exports -- this is basic Econ 101 stuff. Yes, it sucks for Canadian consumers and tourists travelling elsewhere, but it's a very good thing for businesses that export their products.

Chretien was pushed HARD by the Reform party, both inside and outside the Ottawa bubble. Preston Manning can take almost full responsibility for the Liberals' responsible fiscal record during the 1990s.

Seriously? The Liberals had a majority for the entire time Manning was involved in federal politics. They were free to set any fiscal agenda they wanted, regardless of any pressure from the Reform party.

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by troutman

http://www.voteoutanders.com/

I'd like nothing more, but he's won the riding by increasing majorities every time. The more he's hated, the STRONGER his margin of victory.

Bah. He feeds on rage.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Which is actually good for our economy. A low dollar significantly increases exports -- this is basic Econ 101 stuff. Yes, it sucks for Canadian consumers and tourists travelling elsewhere, but it's a very good thing for businesses that export their products.

Extreme short term yes, long term no. A country that sells products and services because they are better and not because they cheaper will be much better off in the long-term. We also lagged (Still lag) in terms of productivity meaning that we needed/still need a cheap dollar to compete with American industry manufacturing even after medical and pension costs were taken into account. Optimally the government should be focusing on imroving productivity instead of hijacking the currency to impriove the economy.

[metal_geek]

It's all JUNK...... I'm personally so irritated by the political garbage in this country.. Partisan politics will never account for anything more then saying whatever to please people during an election, and doing as little as possible upset people when your're in power. The role of the other partys are to say excatly the opposite of the government, no matter if it's good bad or ugly for the country.

Personally I think the conservatives have done a decent job, but I'm utterly dismayed by the equalization payment garbage they've come up with reagarding the Oil royalties. The liberal green shift is same pot different kettle. They're all just ways to transfer wealth to places that have "seats"...

The whole thing about "fixed" elections is garbage too. The liberals are saying.."breaking your own law" and the conservatives are saying "this gov is not functioning"... None of this has anything to do with whats right for the people of this country....

My hope is that the election leaves the balance of power in the gov... EXCATLY the same way it is now, so people see just how little the people in power care about "average" Canadians vs thier partisan politics. I'd Love to see the parliment open up with excatly the same make up and watch as they try to blame each other for "wasting" taxpayers money, and listen to the constant threats to bring down or disolve the gov again..

GARBAGE....
________
Lovely Wendie99

[troutman]

Originally Posted by The Goon

I'd like nothing more, but he's won the riding by increasing majorities every time. The more he's hated, the STRONGER his margin of victory.

Bah. He feeds on rage.

Maybe I'll run under the Rhino banner. My Mom's astrologer always said I would have a great career in politics.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by troutman

Maybe I'll run under the Rhino banner. My Mom's astrologer always said I would have a great career in politics.

Either that or the Natural Law party!

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

1. NPD minority - The Liberals and Conservatives have both had their shots and neither has done particularly well. Time to give the NDP a shot. Maybe they can repair some of our ailing social programs and health care system.

Thankfully, only about 9% of Canadians agree with your preferred choice.

The US would quickly become a fine place to live if the NDP ever got into power.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Thankfully, only about 9% of Canadians agree with your preferred choice.

The US would quickly become a fine place to live if the NDP ever got into power.

This may be one of the few times I've ever agreed with Resolute in a thread about Canadian politics!