2011 Canadian Election Thread

[FiftyBelow]

Harper Rally/"news conference" on CBC online right now.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Slava

In an ideal world I'd prefer the elimination of the RESP program, and all of the funding that is similar so that all of the funds went straight to post-secondary institutions. Ideally for Canadian citizens post-secondary education would all be free....but there I go again, sounding like a communist!

Please no. The value of a university education is watered down enough. If you give it to everyone then it becomes absolutely worthless. Next, people will be saying that the government should be paying for everyone to go to grad school.

[starseed]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Please no. The value of a university education is watered down enough. If you give it to everyone then it becomes absolutely worthless. Next, people will be saying that the government should be paying for everyone to go to grad school.

I tend to agree with this. If everyone has an education, how can we continue to have a class based society? Unfortunately, we have to consider decreasing the amount of people getting access to advanced learning if we wish to compete in the global market. We need a large segment of the population to remain in the low-skilled labour sector if our economy is to prosper. I mean, the only alternative to that, would be to create skilled jobs (or attract them to Canada) to accomodate the large pool of talent and skilled workers... and that would be hard!

[opendoor]

Why do people assume that more heavily subsidized post-secondary education would lead to more people getting degrees? Countries such as Finland, Germany, Belguim, Italy, Austria, Finland, France, Switzerland, and Ireland all have lower degree completion rates compared to Canada despite having free or nearly free post-secondary education for citizens. Conversely, the United States has one of the highest rates with about 31% of the 24-65 population having a university degree.

The number of spots would remain fairly similar, it's just the biggest barrier for entry would be academic, not financial. I'm not saying I agree with doing that, but fully funded post secondary education doesn't mean free school for all, just those that can meet and maintain the academic standards. The idea behind that would be that you'd have people who want to be there and are able to excel in their field taking up the spaces in universities as opposed to kids who are more or less killing time and partying at university on their parents' dime.

You'd still have a larger sector of the population for low skilled work because there would tons of people who didn't have the aptitude or ambition for post secondary education. Frankly I think universities giving degrees to anyone who has the cash and can maintain a bare minimum GPA devalues a post secondary education more than having a more heavily subsidized system with rigorous standards ever would.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by starseed

I tend to agree with this. If everyone has an education, how can we continue to have a class based society? Unfortunately, we have to consider decreasing the amount of people getting access to advanced learning if we wish to compete in the global market. We need a large segment of the population to remain in the low-skilled labour sector if our economy is to prosper. I mean, the only alternative to that, would be to create skilled jobs (or attract them to Canada) to accomodate the large pool of talent and skilled workers... and that would be hard!

Sigh... utter nonsense here. A university education is just a piece of paper that says you are better than the people that didn't get one. That's all. It doesn't create "skilled" workers. The most important thing today is work experience, because that's where actual skills are developed. As for you suggesting that we could do away with a class system, completely laughable. So everyone is going to have white collar jobs, yeah? All needs for labour related jobs are just going to disappear because we now can attract all these "skilled jobs"? lol... maybe one of these skilled jobs will be to create robots that now do the work that everyone is overqualified for. I've heard some really stupid things before, but this is on a new level. Absolutely frightening that people who think this way get to vote.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Sigh... utter nonsense here. A university education is just a piece of paper that says you are better than the people that didn't get one. That's all. It doesn't create "skilled" workers. The most important thing today is work experience, because that's where actual skills are developed.

What utter nonsense.

In any non-trades-based program, a university education not only teaches you the facts of whatever program you're in, but trains your mind and provides you with intellectual tools - reading comprehension, logic, writing skills, etc. It's like boot camp for your brain and provides more intensive and targeted training in those areas than you can get on the job in most professions.

Ask any employer, and they'll tell you that a university educated hiree is, all else being equal, a much more valuable resource than someone with only a high school education not only in their ability to do the work from day one, but their ability to grow into the position.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Mike F

What utter nonsense.

In any non-trades-based program, a university education not only teaches you the facts of whatever program you're in, but trains your mind and provides you with intellectual tools - reading comprehension, logic, writing skills, etc. It's like boot camp for your brain and provides more intensive and targeted training in those areas than you can get on the job in most professions.

Ask any employer, and they'll tell you that a university educated hiree is, all else being equal, a much more valuable resource than someone with only a high school education not only in their ability to do the work from day one, but their ability to grow into the position.

Absolutely, but my point is, when there are as many people that have university degrees as there is today, it means that much less. A bachelors degree, on its own, is pretty well worthless today, where as in the past, it meant everything. What I deem as nonsense however, is starseed suggesting that we should do away with a class system.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Absolutely, but my point is, when there are as many people that have university degrees as there is today, it means that much less. A bachelors degree, on its own, is pretty well worthless today, where as in the past, it meant everything. What I deem as nonsense however, is starseed suggesting that we should do away with a class system.

There are only about 12-15% of society that have university degrees today. About 22% or so actually enter post-secondary education programs to begin with.

I don't mean this as a shot at all, but my guess you're either in university, just out or work in a job that requires university education? I say that because I felt the same way (that basically everyone had a degree) before I started working in society and saw just how many people had never gone to anything past high school, etc. From my point of view you can definitely tell the difference, usually in their written work.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't mean this as a shot at all, but my guess you're either in university, just out or work in a job that requires university education? I say that because I felt the same way (that basically everyone had a degree) before I started working in society and saw just how many people had never gone to anything past high school, etc. From my point of view you can definitely tell the difference, usually in their written work.

Yeah, you got me. I just graduated. Seems like a bachelors doesn't count for #$@% which means I'll have probably end up having to get my MBA.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by zamler

Pretty much everything you've posted in this thread has been laughable, or just plain useless IMO.

I'm not surprised. Ignatieff has absolutely no hope of running this country properly, he is so out to lunch it scares me to think of what he'd do as PM. But that doesn't stop people from voting for him. There are a lot of people that have an unreasonable hate towards Harper, and will vote for anyone but him.

Let me get this straight--I want to be sure I understand.

People who vote Liberal: People who harbour an unreasonable hate towards Harper, and will vote for anyone but him.

People who vote Conservative: People who correctly harbour a reasonable hatred toward Ignatieff, and will vote for anyone but him.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Yeah, you got me. I just graduated. Seems like a bachelors doesn't count for #$@% which means I'll have probably end up having to get my MBA.

Well hopefully you'll find that the Bachelors does mean more once you get out there. I felt the exact same way until I started working with/for people without degrees....and just had to shake my head some days! Its not that people with degrees are "smarter" or anything like that. I just saw it evident in some of the written work and thought to myself "really? they're sending it out to a client like that?" or similar things.

[Bertuzzied]

So again Harper gives a fairly good tax credit idea, $500 in fitness credits to adults but it doesn't take effect until the budget is balanced. Why?

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Let me get this straight--I want to be sure I understand.

Clearly you don't understand. Ignatieff is not capable of running this country. People that vote for him only out of hatred for Harper don't care much for having a capable PM in office (probably the same people who think a coalition government is a great idea). People that harbour "hatred" for Ignatieff and will never vote for him have substantial reasons for doing so.

Nice attempt to be clever, but fail.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by zamler

Clearly you don't understand. Ignatieff is not capable of running this country.

... because... ?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

So again Harper gives a fairly good tax credit idea, $500 in fitness credits to adults but it doesn't take effect until the budget is balanced. Why?

Because there's no money right now hehe.
It's a lure..
"you vote for us and give us a majority, we'll balance the budget and you'll get THESE THINGS!"

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by zamler

Clearly you don't understand. Ignatieff is not capable of running this country. People that vote for him only out of hatred for Harper don't care much for having a capable PM in office (probably the same people who think a coalition government is a great idea). People that harbour "hatred" for Ignatieff and will never vote for him have substantial reasons for doing so.

Nice attempt to be clever, but fail.

Actually, you're the one who doesn't get it. I'm not really Ignatieff's greatest fan, but your attitude sums up "blind partisanship" completely.

Anyone who disagrees with you is sadly deluded. Anyone who agrees with you is righteous and enlightened. This seems so obvious to you that you don't even bother with little things like "evidence" or "argument."

A discussion along those lines is pointless. There is no argument that will persuade you that you were wrong, and no evidence that will demonstrate to you that you have been mistaken. I could show you a video of Stephen Harper bludgeoning an old lady with a cricket bat and it would make no difference.

[transplant99]

NEP Part 2?

I have not heard this reported anywhere else as it is in this piece, so maybe a whole lot of nothing.

“It’s a big number,” Leach said. “It puts that ability to grow and take advantage of that resource at risk.”
Ted Menzies, Conservative MP and minister of state for finance in the Stephen Harper government, called the plan “reckless.”

“This massive Ignatieff-Liberal tax hike would slam the brakes on our recovery and kill jobs across the country,” Menzies said. “It is a reckless policy that would do irreparable harm to our economy at a time when our recovery remains fragile.”

“This policy could have come out of the Trudeau Liberals,” said University of Calgary economics professor Frank Atkins on the heels of the Grit campaign platform released Sunday.

http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alber.../17861511.html

[burn_this_city]

Cap and trade is a joke. If they're serious about limiting GHG emissions, help the industry develop a CCS network in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Cap and trade is a joke. If they're serious about limiting GHG emissions, help the industry develop a CCS network in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

While I garee that cap and trade isn't the way to go, the real solution is a carbon tax. Just watch the innovation explode when you have a way for corporations to save money. No one wants to talk about that because of the potential smear campaign, but that is actually how you reduce emissions.

[CaptainCrunch]

I would be fine with a carbon tax depending on execution. What really killed the Liberals and the concept of Carbon taxes is when they decided that Ontario Manufacturing would be exempt under Dion.