[Lemmy]

mtbr mtbr:

The Liberals are cheering for the recession to turn into a depression.

Well, I think every opposition party cheers the ruling party on to failure, so there's a fair bit of truth in your joke. A depression got WLM King and RB Bennett bounced from office.

mtbr mtbr:

win at all cost who cares about Canadians.

Hmmm, I sense a "pot and kettle" scenario! Isn't that exactly what Harper did when proroguing government and presenting the most disgraceful budget in Canadian history?

[SigPig]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Isn't that exactly what Harper did when proroguing government and presenting the most disgraceful budget in Canadian history?

And if he hadn't spent all that money in the budget people would have been saying that he was doing absolutely nothing to help the people or the economy. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[DerbyX]

SigPig SigPig:

People wanted to see a reversal following the policies of debt and spend of Mulroney. So don't try to say it had no political benefit. The Liberals CAMPAIGNED on that very issue when they were elected in 1993. And don't try and claim that most people were really concerned about the funding of programs because how much was being used for the debt. Most Canadians thought it was the right idea and supported it.

Actually not quite. In fact as early as they had posted their first surplus people were claiming Ottawa was awash in cash and demanding their share. To their credit the Libs stuck to their guns and used the surplus to pay down the debt as much as possible with the only the election years having smaller then possible debt payments.

People were tired of the massive deficits yes but once they were eliminated the majority (if not vast majority) viewed a surplus as "over-taxation". The Liberals realized that it was those good times when you must make payments and they did. They most certainly did not get full recognition for what they did because for the most part the public is uninformed about such things. Now I'd be all for running a zero sum budget (no surplus or deficit) but as long as we are in debt we aren't really doing that. I'd settle for a law saying that every year the government will commit 5 billion to debt repayment then budget accordingly so that any addiotional surplus is returned to the tax payers.

SigPig SigPig:

You people need to stop acting like Harper is the only dirty politician in the bunch. They are all the same. As I said, at the time promising to, and eventually paying down the debt was done because it was popular at the time and helped to grow the Liberals vote count.

I think your ire is falling on the wrong people then. It was the conservative hacks who blame the Liberals for absolutely everything. You have seen them. Holding Harper to the very standard he set for the Liberals is simply par for the course. To date Harper has done virtually everything he vilified the Libs for up to and including; use of the EI in GR, pandering to QC, and worst of all pandering for votes by running a deficit.

SigPig SigPig:

I agreed with the policy as well because the debt had become too large and we neeed to stabilize our books. But dont kid yourself into thinking they did it out of the goodness of their hearts. As a way of protecting the poor Canadian public from the soulless and evil conservatives.

I think they did. I think that most of them truly do think they are trying to make Canada a better place and I think that if all they cared about was voted then as soon as the deficit was eliminated and the surpluses began they could have easily threw cash at the provinces as a means to buy votes. They didn't and even facing an election loss Martin still managed to put away billions to debt repayment rather then a massive spending spree designed to elicit votes.

BTW, The people who say that the Liberals call the Conservatives evil and soulless are generally the people refering to the Liberals as corrupt commie fascists. I actually do think the Conservatives are trying to do what they think is best for Canada. I just don't want that for Canada is all.

[ryan29]

anyways i did some research on the ontario numbers , thing to remember is they don't often hold for opposition parties ( know these are provincial numbers not federal but they still apply to ontario obvivously ) . Even John Tory ( loser ) was actually ahead in a number polls in the months following his selection as new leader , in periods of 2005 which was a couple of months into his term as new leader he actually lead the liberals in the polls , some of them by margins of 5 % to 7 % give or take a little . so maybe iggy and the liberals might want to give that some consideration before they go and plan there victory party .


04/13/2005
35 lib
41 pc
18 ndp
5 green
-
Vector Research

04/11/2005
35 lib
41 pc
21 ndp
-
-
Environics




Ontario provincial election polls
http://www.nodice.ca/elections/ontario/polls.php

[SigPig]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Actually not quite. In fact as early as they had posted their first surplus people were claiming Ottawa was awash in cash and demanding their share. To their credit the Libs stuck to their guns and used the surplus to pay down the debt as much as possible with the only the election years having smaller then possible debt payments.

I would way people were more upset because they were posting such large surpluses and didn't repeal the GST as promised. It was more unhappiness about a broken promise then about the fact that they were paying down the debt.

DerbyX DerbyX:

People were tired of the massive deficits yes but once they were eliminated the majority (if not vast majority) viewed a surplus as "over-taxation".

Case in point.

DerbyX DerbyX:

The Liberals realized that it was those good times when you must make payments and they did. They most certainly did not get full recognition for what they did because for the most part the public is uninformed about such things.

Here you are just underestimating the majority of the Canadian public. You are basically saying that the Libs did what was necessary and we should just trust them because we don't know any better.

DerbyX DerbyX:

Now I'd be all for running a zero sum budget (no surplus or deficit) but as long as we are in debt we aren't really doing that. I'd settle for a law saying that every year the government will commit 5 billion to debt repayment then budget accordingly so that any addiotional surplus is returned to the tax payers.

Sounds good to me. I have never really seent he point of wasting money on interest payments for debt. That money could be better spent so why not eliminate the debt when possible. Unfortunately sometimes some temporary debt is necessary when times are bad. Reference the current situation.

DerbyX DerbyX:

I think your ire is falling on the wrong people then. It was the conservative hacks who blame the Liberals for absolutely everything. You have seen them. Holding Harper to the very standard he set for the Liberals is simply par for the course. To date Harper has done virtually everything he vilified the Libs for up to and including; use of the EI in GR, pandering to QC, and worst of all pandering for votes by running a deficit.

But its also the Liberals who try to blame Harper for EVERYTHING that goes wrong or decision they don't agree with anywhere in the country. Reference to someone else's attempt on this site to claim that it was Harper's fault that McGuinty was introducing the HST. Somehow a Conservative PM convinced a Liberal Premier to pass a very unpopular tax somehow McGuinty is not responsible. The partisan hacks are all the same on both sides of the debate. And that is what often gets in the way of intelligent discussion sometimes.

DerbyX DerbyX:

I think they did.

We are going to have to agree to disagree here. I think you are giving politicians a little too much credit.

DerbyX DerbyX:

I think that most of them truly do think they are trying to make Canada a better place and I think that if all they cared about was voted then as soon as the deficit was eliminated and the surpluses began they could have easily threw cash at the provinces as a means to buy votes. They didn't and even facing an election loss Martin still managed to put away billions to debt repayment rather then a massive spending spree designed to elicit votes.

BTW, The people who say that the Liberals call the Conservatives evil and soulless are generally the people refering to the Liberals as corrupt commie fascists. I actually do think the Conservatives are trying to do what they think is best for Canada. I just don't want that for Canada is all.

Fair enough. I guess it wouldn't be to far fetched to say that most are just trying to enact a plan for their vision of the country. But that being said they are still pandering for votes in the process. All decisions are guided by that and always will be.

[Lemmy]

SigPig SigPig:

And if he hadn't spent all that money in the budget people would have been saying that he was doing absolutely nothing to help the people or the economy. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Some people would say that, but those people wouldn't include me. I want my cake, but I don't want my children's, which is what this short-sighted spending implies.

[ryan29]

Canadaka Canadaka:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

This is the website I follow for Canadian polling.

http://pollingreport.ca/

CKA has an agreement with that site to use there polls, I display one here
http://www.canadaka.net/sections/politics.php

But yes, this poll is just once small example of the growing trend. The Liberals are back, wether you like it or not

more than likely this poll is an indicator of a leadership boost which occurs whenever a new party leader is choosen ( it can last for a week or two or a couple of months depending on the situation ) , John Kerry had one and even john tory had one, heck even mccain / palin had one . it doesn't mean there actually going to win in the end .

the liberals never really disappeared , but i didn't see too many liberal signs on homes in my riding last election they mostly seemed to be on public property instead . i think they still have a long way to go in regaining public confidence/ support ( based on what i saw first hand in ontario last election ) and iggy's comments this week on taxes likely did not help .

[DerbyX]

SigPig SigPig:

I would way people were more upset because they were posting such large surpluses and didn't repeal the GST as promised. It was more unhappiness about a broken promise then about the fact that they were paying down the debt.

No, it was actual grumbling about surpluses being "their" money. It never fails to amaze me how people view surpluses as "over-taxation" yet never view deficits as "under-taxation".

SigPig SigPig:

Here you are just underestimating the majority of the Canadian public. You are basically saying that the Libs did what was necessary and we should just trust them because we don't know any better.

DO you honestly think the majority of the public is well informed about the issues? If that were true then attack ads would have significantly less effect and tax cut promises wouldn't be such a deciding factor.

SigPig SigPig:

Sounds good to me. I have never really seent he point of wasting money on interest payments for debt. That money could be better spent so why not eliminate the debt when possible. Unfortunately sometimes some temporary debt is necessary when times are bad. Reference the current situation.

Except that the economist were saying long before it hit the fan that Harpers tax cuts and spending plans were going to lead us right into deficit. Voila. The entire reason the Liberals did what they did was to avoid going right back into deficit the moment the economy cycled down. Harper blew that and now he cannot even raise taxes without further alienating his base support and eroding his ever decreasing support. Deficits can be a necessary event but he is setting us up for a massive long term deficit that will require another government to come in and slash the budget (guess which department will be targetted?) and/or crank taxes up.

SigPig SigPig:

But its also the Liberals who try to blame Harper for EVERYTHING that goes wrong or decision they don't agree with anywhere in the country. Reference to someone else's attempt on this site to claim that it was Harper's fault that McGuinty was introducing the HST. Somehow a Conservative PM convinced a Liberal Premier to pass a very unpopular tax somehow McGuinty is not responsible. The partisan hacks are all the same on both sides of the debate. And that is what often gets in the way of intelligent discussion sometimes.

Some certainly do but after the years of the Liberals being blamed for every conceivable event since confederation I think he deserves it especially since he himself was the most vocal. In fact those that blamed the Libs for everything usually blamed Harper as well.

As for what he is guilty of. Well we have already made the case that he set us on the path of deficit spending well before the economy tanked. In addition, its his budget. Regardless of whether the "people" wanted it or not. He had a choice. He could have said no. (thats a bit of historical rhetoric btw).

He made this bed. We shouldn't have gone from a 14 billion surplus to a 30 billion deficit in a single year.

SigPig SigPig:

We are going to have to agree to disagree here. I think you are giving politicians a little too much credit.

At least I'm giving it to them all fairly rather then trying to claim only the Libs care about people and the others don't like some on here.

In all actuality I do think they care. Its just that politics corrupts or at least makes it look like it. In reality they aren't any different then us.

SigPig SigPig:

Fair enough. I guess it wouldn't be to far fetched to say that most are just trying to enact a plan for their vision of the country. But that being said they are still pandering for votes in the process. All decisions are guided by that and always will be.

Of course they are. In the end we all get the governments we deserve. We respond to that pandering and thus it becomes necessary. We respond more vigorously to attack ads and thus they all focus on how bad the other guy is rather then how good they are.

Its like they all say "we suck less then everybody else".

The truth is that they do this because we the voters reward it in the end.

[SigPig]

DerbyX DerbyX:

No, it was actual grumbling about surpluses being "their" money. It never fails to amaze me how people view surpluses as "over-taxation" yet never view deficits as "under-taxation".

Ya it was their money taken from them through taxes that they just saw as a surplus. I still think that they equated the surpluses with the GST not being removed because it was claimed we couldn't afford it. People just saw the large surpluses and said to themselves "sure we can afford it. Give me my money back."

DerbyX DerbyX:

DO you honestly think the majority of the public is well informed about the issues? If that were true then attack ads would have significantly less effect and tax cut promises wouldn't be such a deciding factor.

I would say that the average voter has a satisfactory knowledge of the basic issues at hand in each election. Some are obviously going to better and soem will be worse, but on the whole the elctorate is relatively informed.
I don't really think attack ads have that much of an impact except with the grassroots supporters of the individual parties. There have been polls conducted that show a lot of CDNs don't agree with the use of attack ads because they don't offer anything that can be used in making their decisions. They would rather see and hear what the party stands for, not how much they hate the other guys. I would include myself in this group that would just as soon see them no longer being used.

DerbyX DerbyX:

Deficits can be a necessary event but he is setting us up for a massive long term deficit that will require another government to come in and slash the budget (guess which department will be targetted?) and/or crank taxes up.

He is not setting up the country for long-term deficits as they already have it budgeted for the next few years. Barring something going completely wrong such as the economy taking an even bigger dump, this government would bring us back to balanced spending.
I would like to know however, how the Liberals would have handled this situation without running a temporary deficit as well. I don't think it could have been done.

DerbyX DerbyX:

At least I'm giving it to them all fairly rather then trying to claim only the Libs care about people and the others don't like some on here.

In all actuality I do think they care. Its just that politics corrupts or at least makes it look like it. In reality they aren't any different then us.

I will agree that you are a bit more objective then some on here when it comes to critiquing both sides but you still tend to give them a pass on a lot. But thats politics I guess.

[kenmore]

How things change..now the torys want to turf him...its about time!

[SigPig]

kenmore kenmore:

How things change..now the torys want to turf him...its about time!

More baseless claims and empty rhetoric Kenmore? You're such a one-trick pony.

[kenmore]

Do you listen to the news? or do you just attend tory riding meetings? it was on the news to-day.. the torys are unhappy with his leadership.. or should I say lack of... and there are people in the party asking for a review..

[Proculation]

kenmore kenmore:

Do you listen to the news? or do you just attend tory riding meetings? it was on the news to-day.. the torys are unhappy with his leadership.. or should I say lack of... and there are people in the party asking for a review..

Harper needs to step down before the next election if they want to win.

[SigPig]

kenmore kenmore:

Do you listen to the news? or do you just attend tory riding meetings? it was on the news to-day.. the torys are unhappy with his leadership.. or should I say lack of... and there are people in the party asking for a review..

I do pay attention to the news. But I have yet to see or hear one thing about people wanting him removed. But hey if I I'm wrong then fine. Since you obviously have access to so many news sources perhaps you could provide a link? Or some sort of reference? Of any kind?

[DerbyX]

SigPig SigPig:

Ya it was their money taken from them through taxes that they just saw as a surplus. I still think that they equated the surpluses with the GST not being removed because it was claimed we couldn't afford it. People just saw the large surpluses and said to themselves "sure we can afford it. Give me my money back."

This is why I believe that most Canadians were ill-informed. The Liberals said way back in 93 that they intended to run surpluses with the express purpose of bringing down the debt. If at the first sign of a surplus they simply refunded the difference to the tax payer then we wouldn't be paying it down. Thats why I believe paying down the debt returned very little politically because every year people saw 10-20 billion dollar surpluses and kept thinking "why am I paying taxes"? The GST thing was a broken promise but they won 2 more majorities after it so the public wasn't that offended. In the end it was accumulative scandals that brought them down.

SigPig SigPig:

I would say that the average voter has a satisfactory knowledge of the basic issues at hand in each election. Some are obviously going to better and soem will be worse, but on the whole the elctorate is relatively informed.

I think if the parties were required to submit their platforms in secret to be published without anybody knowing whos was whos then most people would be surprised who they actually support.

SigPig SigPig:

I don't really think attack ads have that much of an impact except with the grassroots supporters of the individual parties. There have been polls conducted that show a lot of CDNs don't agree with the use of attack ads because they don't offer anything that can be used in making their decisions. They would rather see and hear what the party stands for, not how much they hate the other guys. I would include myself in this group that would just as soon see them no longer being used.

Unfortunately the effectiveness of attack ads has been well established. Its the minuses that keep sinking governments more then the pluses of the other guys.

SigPig SigPig:

He is not setting up the country for long-term deficits as they already have it budgeted for the next few years. Barring something going completely wrong such as the economy taking an even bigger dump, this government would bring us back to balanced spending.

I strongly disagree. You don't run back to back 30 billion dollar deficits without committing yourself to them in the long term. Lets examine the situation. He is adding at least 2 billion per year simply in interest payments to the tax bill. He can't simply raise taxes without becoming the full on tax and spend government he claims the Liberals are and he can't slash spending to nearly any department nor cut prov transfers. Alberta is now screaming for over half a billion more and I think he owes the province that supported him with every seat a little something. He has spent big already and will have to spend even more in Ontario just to break even with the Libs who have rebounded in a big way. He has shifted more of the tax burden onto the Canadian tax payer with his foolish GST cut and now cannot rescind it without destroying his credibility. Even allowing for the economy to rebound fully in 3 years we still have an increased debt load and inflation to account for and we are only getting even and thats the most optimistic outlook there is.

He has already broken more then a few military purchase promises simply because we cannot afford them anymore. I'm hearing that the reason Mackay is taking a hardline over the helos isn't so much they aren't up to snuff but so that we have a politically viable excuse to cancel/put on long hold their purchase. In fact the only true option he has to cut spending and save billions is the military because they have pretty much burned their bridges with every party but the CPC and have nowhere really to turn if he sticks it to them (moreso).

For once I actually feel some pity for him because he has truly sunk himself but then I remember he dug his own grave.

SigPig SigPig:

I would like to know however, how the Liberals would have handled this situation without running a temporary deficit as well. I don't think it could have been done.

Thats not a completely fair question because they would have handled the surplus differently and taken different tax choices. Actually I'm surprised the vocal cons think they would run a deficit considering they say the Libs were going to hike taxes across the board.

SigPig SigPig:

I will agree that you are a bit more objective then some on here when it comes to critiquing both sides but you still tend to give them a pass on a lot. But thats politics I guess.

It all depends on who I talk to. To reasonable people looking for political debate I will reciprocate. Most of the time I get nothing but hacks who just attack the Libs regardless so I usually respond in kind. Harper gets it because well he really really hates the Liberals. Its not even a well kept secret and his hate is the reason we are where we are right now.

Canada was very very well placed to weather this storm without the massive deficit and without slashing spending or hiking taxes. He couldn't see past his partisan hate to work with the opposition and do his job.