[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

(at least until they grow as weary and corrupt as every Canadian party in steady power eventually gets).

they already are, and Justin still has overwhelming support.  It's not like the party really changed since the Chrétien years, anyway.

[Grey Fox]

Viper, I understand that argument when it comes to Quebec politics & we have a 3rd option that you like.

But, who do you want to lead the federal government? We had 10 years of Conservative rule, half were disastrous. The 3rd option you don't like.

[saskganesh]

In regards to interesting time in British Columbia, keep in mind that the Speaker is usually appointed from the governing party. So no matter who forms the government, the razor thing edge becomes micro-thin and so every month  that government survives would be a parliamentary miracle. I think we're looking at 3-12 months before another election. As for the exact timing, donor and voter willingness/risk of fatigue will be decisive.

[viper37]

But, who do you want to lead the federal government? We had 10 years of Conservative rule, half were disastrous. The 3rd option you don't like.

what was so disastrous about paying less taxes and getting better services?  what about having no weird semi-legit financing deal for the political parties?  What about having a Prime Minister who does not market his time to rich foreigners?  Or one that doesn't go on trips to billionaire's island on tax payer's dime?

I still fail to see what was disastrous for you or for me during Harper's reign.  You think you didn't pay enough taxes?  You should have paid more?  Do not worry, the Liberals are going to fix that for you, in order to reign in the deficit.  You will be poorer in the long run, you will have less opportunity to advance in your carreer, but you will be happy.

I agree that right now, there is not much of an option.  I'm worried about Scheer's stance on social conservatism, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[crazy canuck]

In regards to interesting time in British Columbia, keep in mind that the Speaker is usually appointed from the governing party. So no matter who forms the government, the razor thing edge becomes micro-thin and so every month  that government survives would be a parliamentary miracle. I think we're looking at 3-12 months before another election. As for the exact timing, donor and voter willingness/risk of fatigue will be decisive.

Yeah, that is why I think the prime issue for the Greens is going to be implementing proportional representation before the government falls.  This chance may never come again for them.

I also think it would be wise for the NDP/Greens to elect a Liberal Speaker.

[Barrister]

Yeah, that is why I think the prime issue for the Greens is going to be implementing proportional representation before the government falls.  This chance may never come again for them.

I also think it would be wise for the NDP/Greens to elect a Liberal Speaker.

The precedent has certainly been set in BC however that changing the voting system should be approved by a referendum.  And last time around the referendum failed.

[Grey Fox]

But, who do you want to lead the federal government? We had 10 years of Conservative rule, half were disastrous. The 3rd option you don't like.

what was so disastrous about paying less taxes and getting better services?  what about having no weird semi-legit financing deal for the political parties?  What about having a Prime Minister who does not market his time to rich foreigners?  Or one that doesn't go on trips to billionaire's island on tax payer's dime?

I still fail to see what was disastrous for you or for me during Harper's reign.  You think you didn't pay enough taxes?  You should have paid more?  Do not worry, the Liberals are going to fix that for you, in order to reign in the deficit.  You will be poorer in the long run, you will have less opportunity to advance in your carreer, but you will be happy.

Every other sphere of public life.

[viper37]

But, who do you want to lead the federal government? We had 10 years of Conservative rule, half were disastrous. The 3rd option you don't like.

what was so disastrous about paying less taxes and getting better services?  what about having no weird semi-legit financing deal for the political parties?  What about having a Prime Minister who does not market his time to rich foreigners?  Or one that doesn't go on trips to billionaire's island on tax payer's dime?

I still fail to see what was disastrous for you or for me during Harper's reign.  You think you didn't pay enough taxes?  You should have paid more?  Do not worry, the Liberals are going to fix that for you, in order to reign in the deficit.  You will be poorer in the long run, you will have less opportunity to advance in your carreer, but you will be happy.

Every other sphere of public life.

like what?  How were you affected adversly, more than under Chrétien's rule?

[Grey Fox]

But, who do you want to lead the federal government? We had 10 years of Conservative rule, half were disastrous. The 3rd option you don't like.

what was so disastrous about paying less taxes and getting better services?  what about having no weird semi-legit financing deal for the political parties?  What about having a Prime Minister who does not market his time to rich foreigners?  Or one that doesn't go on trips to billionaire's island on tax payer's dime?

I still fail to see what was disastrous for you or for me during Harper's reign.  You think you didn't pay enough taxes?  You should have paid more?  Do not worry, the Liberals are going to fix that for you, in order to reign in the deficit.  You will be poorer in the long run, you will have less opportunity to advance in your carreer, but you will be happy.

Every other sphere of public life.

like what?  How were you affected adversly, more than under Chrétien's rule?

Not everything is personal, you know. Under Harper, scientific study got less funding, Census bureau got less funding. The Arts got less funding. There was a distrust of journalist & of journalism. Media companies continued on getting bigger. Industry Canada produced no articulate broadband policy for Canada in the 21st century. Bell's influence grew by a staggering amount. Harper introduced a bs benefit (UCCB) that was taxable. Taxable!

They didn't build a deep sea port in the Arctic.

[viper37]

Not everything is personal, you know. Under Harper, scientific study got less funding,

And the PQ gained power in Quebec and did the exact same thing: focusing on non fundamental research.
And the PLQ maintained more or less the same system.
And then the PLC took power and named some nutjob as Science Minister.  The kind of person who believes in vast scientific conspiracies by doctors and Big Pharma.  And that is better how... ?
And the funding has remained the same..  But it's better now because it's the Liberal Party?

Census bureau got less funding.

This was problematic, I agree.  But it's not really better under the current administration.

The Arts got less funding.

And that is very good.  Arts depend way too much on government support.  If you want to make a movie that will be seen by 1000 people in Montreal and Toronto, charge these people more.  Don't charge me for stupid, boring and silly stories done a thousand times before.  Don't tell me it's great art because it's been done by a gay dude, that's just intoxication.

There was a distrust of journalist & of journalism.

And that was totally justified.  Trudeau is doing the same as Harper and no one notices.  Talk about bias?  Or is that a taboo subject?  Medias should never be criticized for doing a bad job?

Ministers of the Liberal party still refuse to answer questions that do not satisfy them.
Justin Trudeau refuses to answer questons on his travel expenses.
Liberal Ministers are spending like never before on travel.  That barely registers as a blip on the radar.  Yet, an 8$ orange juice was a crime against humanity.  Because that was a Conservative minister.

Media companies continued on getting bigger.

That was no different as before and after the Cons.

Industry Canada produced no articulate broadband policy for Canada in the 21st century.

Actually, a lot was done toward getting broadband to remote areas.  Not that it would matter to you, but people in small places around Rimouski are currently enjoying the benefits or Harper's policies, as Telus is expanding its fibre optic network.

Bell's influence grew by a staggering amount.

And right now, it's going down?

Harper introduced a bs benefit (UCCB) that was taxable. Taxable!

Previously, you got nothing.  Then you got something.  But it was taxable, so it was awful.  Only others should pay taxes?

They didn't build a deep sea port in the Arctic.

We had one in Churchill.  Your dear Liberal Party sold it.  And then the company shut it down at the end of 2015.  I still see no plans from the Liberal government to reopen a port on the Arctic.  How is this terrible for the Conservatives but not for the Liberals.

The Conservatives announced plans for a refueling station, the Nanisivik Naval Facility, and construction is well under way.

And btw, they did fund an highway between Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk, the only other port on the Arctic.

Again, I see nothing wrong here.

[HVC]

I voted Harper a few times (we have too many elections), but lately he started swinging in a moral stance that I didn't approve of. as a testament to Canadian values it's a large part of why he lost.

[Barrister]

I voted Harper a few times (we have too many elections), but lately he started swinging in a moral stance that I didn't approve of. as a testament to Canadian values it's a large part of why he lost.

"swinging in a moral stance"?  Meowtf?

[Jacob]

I voted Harper a few times (we have too many elections), but lately he started swinging in a moral stance that I didn't approve of. as a testament to Canadian values it's a large part of why he lost.

"swinging in a moral stance"?  Meowtf?

Are you meowtf-ing the sentence construction? In that case you could read it as "exhibiting a moral stance".

If you are meowtf-ing the substance then yeah, I can only agree with HVC that Harper's flirtation with xenophobia (the "barbaric practices hotline" et. al.) was distasteful.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah, that is why I think the prime issue for the Greens is going to be implementing proportional representation before the government falls.  This chance may never come again for them.

I also think it would be wise for the NDP/Greens to elect a Liberal Speaker.

The precedent has certainly been set in BC however that changing the voting system should be approved by a referendum.  And last time around the referendum failed.

Well, one at least.  But it will be small comfort to those who do not want proportional representation.  The last referendum required a high percentage of support on the logic that such a significant change requires significant support.  This time round I suspect the threshold could be as low as 50% +1.  If it is that low it will be interesting to see if the rank and file NDP really want to share power with the greens into the forseeable future in coalition governments under a proportional representation government.

I voted Harper a few times (we have too many elections), but lately he started swinging in a moral stance that I didn't approve of. as a testament to Canadian values it's a large part of why he lost.

"swinging in a moral stance"?  Meowtf?

Are you meowtf-ing the sentence construction? In that case you could read it as "exhibiting a moral stance".

If you are meowtf-ing the substance then yeah, I can only agree with HVC that Harper's flirtation with xenophobia (the "barbaric practices hotline" et. al.) was distasteful.

Yeah, the irony is that we found out after the election that Harper had nothing to do with the tip line, but it was a good indication that even he was starting to lose his grip on the social conservative wing of the party. 

[Barrister]

Yeah, the irony is that we found out after the election that Harper had nothing to do with the tip line, but it was a good indication that even he was starting to lose his grip on the social conservative wing of the party.

I think you're the one losing your grip.

The kind of nationalist rhetoric that the "cultural practices hotline" tries to tap into has little to nothing to do with social conservatism.