deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 10, 2011 14:07:14 GMT -5
dezi, I think SL and verrip just told you to speak for yourself lol You mean the hit on the liberals..LOL, possible, but for all I know , the conservative wing there might be super liberal here, and vice versa.. Getting back to the op, the fighter plane..I still think , for what I posted, it was not a reason to buy them though for our Economy, I thank you..as I always thanked the Canadians for their bravery back in the day when your folks in Iran got our people out of the country , the Diplomats who found refuge in your Embassy..that was a very brave thing to do and most Americans , like your politics haven't a clue.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 10, 2011 14:10:45 GMT -5
Dezi, I think you're missing Later's point. Modesty prevents me from commenting further.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 10, 2011 14:27:52 GMT -5
Amen.
The Liberals and Conservatives have spent decades putting it back together. I cannot count the number of people I know personally who fled Ontario because Rae's policies made their professional lives unbearable.
Mulroney was PM when I was born--as in, nearly three decades ago. My parents say he's a slimeball.
Saskatchewan is a "have" province. Ontario is not.
And... OK, I'll be Frank here... People in Saskatchewan are down-to-earth. They have money sense. They have problems with taking hand-outs and running up debts.
Canadians, as a whole, do not. Quebec, BC, and (to a much lesser extent) Ontario share that Americanesque belief that debt-to-GDP is all that matters, and even though GDP is currently stagnant, it will surely rise a lot if we just borrow a little more money. Maybe a little more. A little more. A little more. Oop, bank crisis--a little more. Oop, 10% unemployment--a little more. A little more.
Globally, we have barely witnessed the start of "austerity"--the reckoning for Keynesian thinking. We are going to see phenomenal pressure to borrow, spend, borrow, spend as the works collapses. It is the absolute worst time we could put a spend-happy baby-kisser like Layton into the PM's office. And four years from now is going to be a brand new absolute worst time to do so.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 14:39:58 GMT -5
And they elect NDP! You don't get to site one province not doing well after barely 3 years of NDP in power as proof they are not effective and then dismiss the evidence of a province that has had an NDP government for decades and is doing very well.
Dezi I meant that SL and verrip obviously don't share your ignorance of Canadian politics. Sorry.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 10, 2011 17:26:37 GMT -5
I'm saying the NDP can do well if their constituents keep them in check.
Saskatchewanites have the sense, restraint, and temerity to do so. Keeping budgets out of the red is part of the Saskatchewan public ethos.
The same cannot be said for Ontario and Quebec, who collectively make up most of Canada. Quebec is a spoiled brat who enjoys having the "have" provinces pay their kids' way into full-time daycare while their moms sit around all day sipping frappes. Ontario is better, but we still spend money like a drunken sailor compared to Saskatchewan.
An NDP government only works if its constituency doesn't have a massive sense of entitlement. I lived in western Canada most of my life. The mentality over there would be unimaginable to most Ontarians. Governments running deficits has people taking up their torches and pitchforks.
Here all I hear is, "We need to buy this. We need to spend more on that. We need better pensions for these. Oh won't somebody please think of the children!" It's that kind of mentality that turns the NDP from Saskatchewan-style-NDP to Ontario-style-NDP. The NDP becomes a WMD if the people don't utterly abhor deficits.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 17:54:03 GMT -5
Virgil that is the most convuluted and forced logic I have ever read to justify an unwarranted dissing of a political party. The fact is that the provinces doing the best in Canada have NDP governments. You can twist that around as much you like, but you can not change that fact. The proof is in the pudding buddy.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 10, 2011 19:31:52 GMT -5
What Canada is this in? We have, in the 2011-2012 year, the following provinces receiving equalization payments: Quebec ($7.815 billion) - Liberal Government Ontario ($2,200 billion) - Liberal Government Manitoba ($1.666 billion) - NDP Government New Brunswick ($1.483 billion) - Liberal Government Nova Scotia ($1.167 billion) - NDP Government Prince Edward Island ($329 million) - Liberal Government The following provinces will not qualify for equalization payments in 2011-2012: Alberta - Conservative Government Saskatchewan - Saskachewan Party Government Newfoundland and Labrador - Conservative Government British Columbia - Liberal Government Seems to me the NDP is featuring almost exclusively on the suck side of the equation.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 10, 2011 19:47:39 GMT -5
Liberal Party members would kiss the dirtiest ass in any Province if it gave them payments, and sell out their ideology in a heartbeat. That's what made them the Party they are today.
NDPers are just wannabees. They wannabee fully on the left, yet they wannabee gettin' the money, too. Juggling is for the circus.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 21:49:37 GMT -5
Transfer payments are but one little indicator, and not a very good one. They have more to do with how many seats the province has than anything. But even using transfer payments as one criteria, NDP still performed better for their province. The Sask Party is just another name for NDP. The UE rate for Sask is 4.9%. Even Alberta with the oil boom is sitting at 5.6%. The national average is 7.4%. Ontario and Quebec are 7.9%, BC is 7.3% and Newfoundland is at 12.3%. The people of Saskatchewan are working. I'm guessing all the businesses didn't take off.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 21:52:34 GMT -5
Another accusation with nothing to back it up. Sask isn't getting the transfer payments.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 11, 2011 0:36:01 GMT -5
As I've said, my concern is fiscal responsibility. Transfer payments are the premiere indicator of which provinces are living beyond their means at the expense of the rest of the country. Employment is a function of a hundred factors, only one of which is government policy. You seem determined to stick by the federal NDP and so I don't imagine my flogging deficit numbers will accomplish much. But how about we compromise on the following: if Mr. Layton gives hard cost estimates for NDP programs come the next federal election, and if additional costs are offset by additional taxes/revenue so that Canada isn't adding to the deficit, you and I will vote NDP together. If, however, Mr. Layton provides no hard cost estimates or intends to borrow heavily to fund NDP programs, you and I will say "No Thanks" to Mr. Layton and vote for a party that can keep us out of the red. Agree?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2011 9:04:46 GMT -5
Why hold the NDP to a standard you are not holding the Conservatives too. After all the work the Liberals did eliminating the deficit, Harper has it right back up there. Why are you okay with him doing that?
|
|
rovo
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:20:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by rovo on Jul 11, 2011 13:56:04 GMT -5
Virgil said: "We have, in the 2011-2012 year, the following provinces receiving equalization payments" As a non-Canadian, and one ignorant of Canadian politics and policies, can you please explain what an "equalization payment" is?
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 11, 2011 15:34:58 GMT -5
Another accusation with nothing to back it up. Sask isn't getting the transfer payments. Aha! Found your hot button, Later. You're toast now, lolol. ;D
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 11, 2011 15:57:24 GMT -5
Another accusation with nothing to back it up. Sask isn't getting the transfer payments. Aha! Found your hot button, Later. You're toast now, lolol. ;D As One who is just this topic, and am amused that you all can get into it in YOUR politics as we can..nice to see we are not alone in our partisan politics...thought we were the only ones who can get so involved and silly...welcome to the club. ;D
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 11, 2011 16:04:54 GMT -5
We are total lightweights:
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 11, 2011 23:17:09 GMT -5
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jul 12, 2011 9:15:17 GMT -5
Fixed
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2011 9:15:21 GMT -5
Virgil said: "We have, in the 2011-2012 year, the following provinces receiving equalization payments" As a non-Canadian, and one ignorant of Canadian politics and policies, can you please explain what an "equalization payment" is? From Wilipedia "In Canada, the federal government makes equalization payments to less wealthy Canadian provinces to equalize the provinces' "fiscal capacity" — their ability to generate tax revenues. A province that does not receive equalization payments is often referred to as "have province", while those that do are called a "have not province". In 2010-2011, six provinces will receive $14.4 billion in equalization payments from the federal government.[1] Until the 2009-2010 fiscal year, Ontario was the only province to have never received equalization payments; in 2009-2010 Ontario received $347 million,[2] while Newfoundland and Labrador, which has received payments since the program's creation, is now a so-called "have" province, and is now a net contributor and does not receive them. Canada's territories are not included in the equalization program - the federal government addresses territorial fiscal needs through the Territorial Formula Financing (TFF) program." As you can imagine, it is a bit of a sore spot with some provinces.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2011 9:38:28 GMT -5
True. Trudeau basically invented it. But Martin did get rid of it. I hate how he did it but since we already went through that pain it is annoying to see the "fiscally responsible party" run it back up. And I am talking deficit, not debt.
|
|
rovo
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:20:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by rovo on Jul 12, 2011 9:42:27 GMT -5
Canada's territories? What / where are these areas?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2011 9:45:06 GMT -5
The territories are up north. If you go from west to east you have Alaska, the Yukon Territory, the Northwest Territories, and the newest addition, Nunavit and then you hit Hudson Bay. Lots of land, very little population.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 12, 2011 12:02:27 GMT -5
I'm not. But the "stimulus measures" were (regrettably) something all parties agreed to.
Agreed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2011 13:36:22 GMT -5
You are just never ending in your excuses for Harper aren't you.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 12, 2011 14:46:33 GMT -5
The fact that all parties agreed to the stimulus measures isn't an "excuse". It's the lamentable reality. I'm not happy that Harper and Flaherty did it, but I still consider them the lesser of two evils. Plus--plus--the NDP only signed on to the 2010 budget after the Conservatives made major concessions to spend on a stimulus package for first-time homebuyers.
I might have considered voting Liberal in the last federal election had Mr. Ignatieff not trotted out carbon credits.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2011 14:53:26 GMT -5
Ignatieff wasn't an option.
Stimulus should start from the bottom. Trickle down is a myth and stimulus will do the most good going to people that live and spend in the community and have an investment in seeing it do well. Homeowners are going to be much more committed than flippers or investors.
|
|