[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

Broad minds, varied experiences, a healthy mix of backgrounds in a party seems much more important, and the force of conviction can sometimes work wonders at getting your ideas implemented. 

I agree.  But at the very least that range of varied experience within the party needs to include some competance in financial/economic matters.  Conviction alone can be, and often is, disasterous.

[Oexmelin]

I agree.  But at the very least that range of varied experience within the party needs to include some competance in financial/economic matters. 

Sure. Where I usually disagree is when we tend to equate competance in financial/economic matters with adherence to specific policies.

[Barrister]

I don't mind people having little to no experience in party politics. Career politicians often frighten me more, and one can't on the one hand complain that politics attract only second-rate individuals, and on the other hope that stellar candidates would have focused their early lives on becoming MPs. Political flair can be developped elsewhere. Broad minds, varied experiences, a healthy mix of backgrounds in a party seems much more important, and the force of conviction can sometimes work wonders at getting your ideas implemented. 

Which is not to say that some NDPs (or, in Quebec, some Conservatives) do not appear quite... ehm... thin, as far as ideas or capacity are concerned.

I wouldn't want everyone to be a career politician.

But governments are completely different beasts.  It is not easy to get your agenda put forward.  You need to have some people with experience or you'll get eaten alive.

I remember in '93 when Reform came to town they made a number of blunders - and that was merely as an opposition party.

And I've seen a few articles that in Quebec in particular the NDP's candidates are extremely thin on qualifications.  After all nobody expected they would have a chance at winning.

[Josephus]

I don't know about that - your house is in Toronto after all...

Nah....I'm in the burbs, Oshawa.  Remember, I took the Go Train up to meet you. 

[Barrister]

Meh - it's all Toronto to me.

[crazy canuck]

Meh - it's all Toronto to me.

Hick

[Jacob]

They themselves would have had no difficulty getting elected as NDP candidates.  What I think you mean is that they would never have had a shot at being in government because the Federal NDP is unelectable - which rather supports my point.

If the NDP significantly beats the Liberals this election, those guys are going to be kicking themselves 

Just as there is such as a pattern in some Canadian Provinces.  In some circumstances that ended in disaster (Ontario and BC)  but you are ignoring my point that it is because of that fact that the Provincial parties are where the less extreme more able NDP members are located. 

Again why would you think that when the NDP provincial leader who was just recently elected in BC says he wants to do just that.  So much for assuming the NDP would be sane...  The problem with the NDP is that they have never had to put forward a serious economic platform because nobody thinks they would govern.  If they do govern there is no reason to believe they would not empliment the kind of tax systems there members have always advocated for.

Well, the NDP claim they've put forward serious economic platforms. I'll be honest, I haven't read them in detail. What are their main weaknesses?

I couldn't quite parse the part of your post that I italicized above - you're saying the provincial NDP is less flaky than the federal one? You might be right. But in general I believe the responsibility of government tends to take the edge off 9 times out of 10 in a mature democracy.

We'll see about the tax system if they do win (so probably not). I doubt they'd go as crazy as you imply, much like Harper hasn't gone all US style hard right with his social policies and health care. Yeah, sure, they'll make some gestures here and there, but I don't see it being super drastic.

No, I was responding to your assertion they would be reasonable.  If you wanted a worse case scenario I would point you to a list of disasterous policies in Ontario and BC and the picture becomes very bleak.

I'd like to hear about those disasters, actually. My impression was that they were not particularly better or worse than any of the other disasters that have been attributed to parties as they were on their way out of government. I may, of course, be wrong which is why I'm asking for more from your point of view about them.

Given past experience I am not willing to take the risk.

And I expect you'll vote accordingly

Which gives rise to the whole discussion of how insane that is.

Alternately, you're over reacting. Of course, you'd probably say the same thing to the people who fear a Conservative majority.

[Jacob]

The Globe has endorsed Harper.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/the-globes-election-endorsement-facing-up-to-our-challenges/article2001610/

Jacob, you might want to read what they have to say about Layton.

I will

[Neil]

The Globe has endorsed Harper.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/the-globes-election-endorsement-facing-up-to-our-challenges/article2001610/

Jacob, you might want to read what they have to say about Layton.

I will

You should also read the delicious rage in the comments section.

[crazy canuck]

Well, the NDP claim they've put forward serious economic platforms. I'll be honest, I haven't read them in detail. What are their main weaknesses?

The lack of any detail of how they are going to pay for everything they are promising.  The only way they could do it is to significantly raise taxes.

I doubt they'd go as crazy as you imply

Givent the fact you are not familiar with what happened in BC and Ontario during NDP rule it is not surprising that you might be prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt.  I am not.

[Jacob]

Givent the fact you are not familiar with what happened in BC and Ontario during NDP rule it is not surprising that you might be prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt.  I am not.

I was asking for your take and instead you try to score cheap points. Weak.

As it happens, I lived in Ontario while Rae was in gov't, and BC with Clark at the helm.

Rae got left holding the bag for a nasty North America wide recession. Yes, his budget could have gone stronger on stimulus (though I doubt that's what you'd have wanted) or he could've cut spending significantly during a recession, but in the end he got blamed for a recession that was not of his making.

As for Clark, yeah we got the fast ferries debacle and the casino scandal. While they were salacious enough for political hay-making, they're hardly the stuff of economic nightmares.

From your earlier posts, I thought you might have some interesting arguments and analysis about Rae and Clark's economic policies, but I guess not?

... and to address your edit:

The lack of any detail of how they are going to pay for everything they are promising.  The only way they could do it is to significantly raise taxes.

Yeah, if there are no details about how they're going to pay for what they're promising that's a bit concerning. They do, of course, claim that it's all in their plan for those who read it.

In any case, if they end up with the responsibility they'll have to make the numbers add up. If they just go sky high with deficits, they'll get hammered in the media and destroy themselves so I don't think they'll do that.

[crazy canuck]

I was asking for your take and instead you try to score cheap points. Weak.

The history is long and involved.  It is not amenable to a post.  If you want to look into it for yourself then do some research.   Google will likely not be of much assistance since we are going back to a time before the digital age was really borne.   Unfortunately, it seems more and more that if you cant link it, it never happened.  However, there is a reason people still say the Liberals under Bob Rae would be unelectable in Ontario - even after all these years and a change of party.  And there is a reason people in BC are saying the new NDP leader Adrian Dix cannot win because of all the baggage he holds from his involvement with the last NDP government in this Province.

Both experiences were disasters.

And btw I did give you specific policies that were disasterous.  Your response was you doubted the NDP would repeat those mistakes.  I dont see any evidence to suggest they would not.

Yeah, if there are no details about how they're going to pay for what they're promising that's a bit concerning. They do, of course, claim that it's all in their plan for those who read it.

Go read it.  Its a four page "costing document" which is really just a spread sheet with lots of pie in the sky assumptions.  For example, they are expecting a substantial amount of revenue from something called "tax haven crackdown".  Like they are going to do a substantially better job then any other government in taking money abroad .  Thats just one easy example.

In any case, if they end up with the responsibility they'll have to make the numbers add up. If they just go sky high with deficits, they'll get hammered in the media and destroy themselves so I don't think they'll do that.

Again, why do you assume that to be true.  That is exactly what they did in BC and Ontario.  And that is exactly why the Globe is critical of them.

[Jacob]

I guess we'll see. Or, more likely, not see

[Josephus]

That Globe endorsement might be worth its weight in gold for Harper. Normally a fairly centrist paper with many Liberal readers, it just might make Iggy supporters, especially in T.O. switch their allegiance to Harper.

I think the Harper minority/majority is going down to the wire.

[Neil]

For example, they are expecting a substantial amount of revenue from something called "tax haven crackdown".  Like they are going to do a substantially better job then any other government in taking money abroad .  Thats just one easy example.

They could simply have any corporation doing business in Canada pay tax on their gross revenue rather than net profits.  Or the net profits of the parent corporation and all subsidiaries.