# What Are Your Expectations From the Next Government?



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

Party leaders and other candidates often articulate and publish their agendas and plans for the next few years should they be elected.

As a voter, what do you expect or demand from those politicians? Feel free to provide us with your wish list. Maybe the parties haven't considered them, but would listen to voters' demands and incorporate them into their programs. 

Personally, I'd like to see tax cuts, TFSA/RRSP contribution room increases, child tax credits, health care upgrades, budget control. 

(I would be delighted see more hiking trails built in BC, but don't think that is up to the Federals.)


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Topo said:


> ... (I would be delighted see more hiking trails built in BC, but don't think that is up to the Federals.)


A lot of Federal park money in BC is being spent building a new bike path about 20ft into the forest, parallel to the road through Pacific Rim National Park to connect Tofino and Uclulet. Its a pretty major construction operation, essentially a new road bed.

Added: I'd like to see personal taxes simplified. Very few people I know even do their own taxes. So it's easier to lack an understanding of your income and the deductions/taxes that affect it.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> A lot of Federal park money in BC is being spent building a new bike path about 20ft into the forest, parallel to the road through Pacific Rim National Park to connect Tofino and Uclulet. Its a pretty major construction operation, essentially a new road bed.


This is certainly very good news. In a few of the smaller towns on Vancouver Island, there have been proposals to expand the trails, but the opposition says "we have enough of them."


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I am hoping a good half of the 'vote buying' goodies get forgotten post-election. It is ridiculous how all the parties are throwing billions here and billions there. I'd forego a tax cut IF the goodies were thrown to the wind AND the fiscal deficits were eliminated. 

If I had to accept a few of the vote buying goodies, I'd:
- take the personal deduction increase to $15k to help those below the poverty line
- eliminate the carbon tax on fuel used by farmers and ranchers, who are hit with a disproportionate carbon tax burden and can't raise product prices (don't think anyone thought of this)
- increase the GIS, but only by offsetting amounts from OAS currently collected by wealthy Canadians (tighten claw back thresholds by not indexing)


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Lead by example ... a simple one ... cut own salaries by 10%.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Government never acts they only react. The unintended consequences of their reaction just makes matters worse. Though they will never admit they made a mistake. My first choice would be to vote for someone that admitted they just make matters worse when they do something & somehow was able to guarantee they would do nothing. @ some point the lady that swallowed the fly needs to cut her loses. Swallowing a frog to eat the fly etc is failing.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

Sadly Libs will get in, i've resigned myself to that.
-Zero pipelines or major projects to proceed
-Dividend tax credit will be eliminated
-Capital Gains 50% exemption eliminated
-Likely job loss for me (industry heavily impacted by O&G)
-Gutting of telcos as Libs have declared war on cellphone bills (minimum 40% loss on telco shares)


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

robfordlives said:


> -Gutting of telcos as Libs have declared war on cellphone bills (minimum 40% loss on telco shares)


 @ some point the internet & cell phones will be shut down over BS concerns over electrosmog lol. The recent reduction in sunspots is causing global cooling which is why they change from promoting global warming to climate change. If the next sunspot cycle has a 30% reduction in sunspots as some of the experts are forecasting it will probably blow up the global warming bubble.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I expect they will continue to make bad decisions for foolish reasons, do favors for their criminal friends, and rip off the public every chance they get, as usual. That the private sector will continue creating wealth but not as fast as the public sector destroys it, and the slow slide down hill will continue.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

I wish that whoever gets in will introduce a cash for clunkers program. My old car is not looking too good. I would like to buy a Tesla (or even a Leaf!)


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Housing affordability is the number one election issue for most people I know, but that could be because I live in BC. :tongue:

I would like to see more measures to improve housing affordability, and hopefully not just "feel good" measures that only end up making things worse in the long run.

Case in point, the Conservative's housing policy seems to consist of encouraging people to take on more debt. Scheer wants to remove the B-20 stress test and extend amortizations to 30 years for first-time buyers. The NDP is also proposing 30 year amortizations. These policies are likely to have an inflationary effect on home prices, as well as increasing household debt levels (which are already the highest in the G7). Conservative, my ***...

Similarly, the Liberal's first time buyer's incentive for homes valued up to 800K in Vancouver and Toronto is also likely to have an inflationary effect. To their credit, the Liberals would keep the B-20 stress test and also plan to introduce a 1% annual speculation tax on foreign property owners.

I'd like to see the federal government invest more into building non-market rental housing, something the NDP has promised to do. Jagmeet Singh has set this as one of his conditions for supporting a minority government. The NDP platform proposes building 500,000 affordable housing units and instituting a nationwide 15% foreign buyers tax.

Overall, it seems like a Liberal minority supported by the NDP would be the best outcome (though not perfect) in terms of housing affordability. :hopelessness::hopelessness:


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

^ Are you talking about affordability of on-the-market housing, or public/low income housing availability & affordability?
Singh's platform doesn't warrant a close look but I suspect he's on about the latter.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I don't see why banks shouldn't offer 100 year mortgage amortizations since our grand kids will be broke after paying for the BS promised in this election.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

nathan79 said:


> Housing affordability is the number one election issue for most people I know, but that could be because I live in BC. :tongue:
> 
> ...
> Overall, it seems like a Liberal minority supported by the NDP would be the best outcome (though not perfect) in terms of housing affordability. :hopelessness::hopelessness:



You wouldn't happen to be the Honorable Member from Skeena-Bulkley Valley, would you Nathan?


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Topo said:


> Party leaders and other candidates often articulate and publish their agendas and plans for the next few years should they be elected.
> 
> As a voter, what do you expect or demand from those politicians? .....


What voters expect and what politicians delivery are on opposite ends of the spectrum. So I suspect the same of nothing. We're headed for a minority government so expect A LOT of NOTHING!


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Eder said:


> I don't see why banks shouldn't offer 100 year mortgage amortizations since our grand kids will be broke after paying for the BS promised in this election.


Imagine your grandpappy left you a 100 amortization mortgage from 1923. I'm sure the $500 owing would bankrupt you.


----------



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I expect they will continue to make bad decisions for foolish reasons, do favors for their criminal friends, and rip off the public every chance they get, as usual. That the private sector will continue creating wealth but not as fast as the public sector destroys it, and the slow slide down hill will continue.


Exactly right Rusty. The problem is the average voter can be so easily bought with the promise of more benefits and lower taxes. We are now adding $20 billion to the national debt every year for the foreseeable future! I would vote for the politician who said he would reduce benefits and balance the budget. Who else would vote for that though. Probably 10 other old farts across the whole country.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Imagine your grandpappy left you a 100 amortization mortgage from 1923. I'm sure the $500 owing would bankrupt you.


That is the problem with socialists. They think debt can be inflated away. Sorry to break your bubble but inflation at 2% isn't going to do squat to reduce indebtedness in real dollars. The debt may be only 50% of its original equivalent in 36 years (@ 2% inflation), but in the meantime, interest payments will continue to eat away at higher percentages of the budget as deficits continue indefinitely. There is no free lunch.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

pwm said:


> Exactly right Rusty. The problem is the average voter can be so easily bought with the promise of more benefits and lower taxes. We are now adding $20 billion to the national debt every year for the foreseeable future!* I would vote for the politician who said he would reduce benefits and balance the budget. Who else would vote for that though.* Probably 10 other old farts across the whole country.


I would be in for that. But I take offense to being called an old fart. I have barely hit my mid life (crisis) yet. I get what you mean though. 

It's no wonder why households are in trouble right now in terms of debts. People are getting so accustomed to spend now, and pay - maybe never. It's becoming the norm that people just expect both their personal house and their government to keep spending. Critical thinking, prioritization, balanced budgets are being lost. It seems like its going to continue to spiral. 

People just want more. Don't cut services, get the rich to pay for it, or no one at all, just don't impact my standard of living. This mindset gets passed on to kids who are showing more and more of an entitlement mentality, which continues into their adulthood, and then their offspring. 

I voted PC for AB knowing that social programs were going to be cut. Programs that impact my children and my parents. I don't love the impact that I am seeing, but I accept that this needs to be done to offset the out of control spending from the previous government. I think people need to wake up and realize that this spending is not sustainable.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Can't just look at "spending" on its own. Need to look at what that spending is generating and doing to the economy as a whole. No one wants debt, but a what cost?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Topo said:


> Personally, I'd like to see tax cuts, TFSA/RRSP contribution room increases, child tax credits, health care upgrades, budget control.


Seriously?

Why bother putting budget control at the end of that long list of expensive items.

We will be so far gone that by the time we get forced into budget control, all those are going to be decreased, not increased. Let's just hope it is decreased on your children's children, instead of us. Not sure we will make it but with the way Canadian's think about our countries finances, I can't think of any other hope that might save us then that.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

pwm said:


> Exactly right Rusty. The problem is the average voter can be so easily bought with the promise of more benefits and lower taxes. We are now adding $20 billion to the national debt every year for the foreseeable future! I would vote for the politician who said he would reduce benefits and balance the budget. Who else would vote for that though. Probably 10 other old farts across the whole country.


You may not remember but every election in Canada, the US, and England from 1970 to the 1990s included a promise to balance the budget. None of them ever did. My favorite was Ontario's Peterson government that promised to cut spending and balance the budget. Right after the election they announced they were cutting schools and hospitals. Everyone yelled, at least, all the government employees who worked for schools and hospitals. So Peterson said "O I thought you wanted spending cuts, if you feel that way we will forget the spending cuts". Next week he went out and bought himself a new jet airplane at taxpayers' expense.

That was the best. The rest never even bothered to pretend to do anything.

O wait I forgot the Chretien government, that cut spending by cutting transfer payments to the provinces. People were dying in hospital corridors but the federal government did not give up anything. No matter what they do you can expect the poor and working class to pay for it. Both in higher taxes and less services.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

It only took King Ralph a few years to fix Albertan budgets...but then of course Albertans were all supporting him to do it, unlike the #mefirst movement we are witnessing today.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

^ Even if you look at spending and what it's doing to the economy, one should consider how they are going to pay for this spending. Budgets really don't balance themselves.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

Eder said:


> It only took King Ralph a few years to fix Albertan budgets...but then of course Albertans were all supporting him to do it, unlike the #mefirst movement we are witnessing today.


He traded a cash deficit for an infrastructure deficit. The last couple govts traded it back again and now we have a cash deficit but our infrastructure is close to where it should be.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Forget spending cuts.

Tax the wealthy and cash rich corporations. 

Close tax loopholes for millionaires. 

Pay off the debt. 

Problem solved.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

nobleea said:


> He traded a cash deficit for an infrastructure deficit. The last couple govts traded it back again and now we have a cash deficit but our infrastructure is close to where it should be.


Redmonton was always his nemesis lol...remember how him & Lawrence Decore used to fight ...was awesome. I miss them both.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

OptsyEagle said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Why bother putting budget control at the end of that long list of expensive items.
> 
> We will be so far gone that by the time we get forced into budget control, all those are going to be decreased, not increased. Let's just hope it is decreased on your children's children, instead of us. Not sure we will make it but with the way Canadian's think about our countries finances, I can't think of any other hope that might save us then that.


I probably should have said "debt control" to better represent what I was thinking. I would not want tax cuts, etc if it means more national debt or loss of our coveted AAA status.

We should leave as good or better country for our children.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Topo said:


> I probably should have said "debt control" to better represent what I was thinking.


It's all the same thing. My point is that nothing will ever happen to reduce the deficit and control the debt until we stop asking for more stuff we cannot afford.

If the bill for that stuff you listed actually ended up on your personal credit card, I am sure some of it if not all of it would not be so important anymore. 

There is nothing on your list that isn't important, but my point is that why should parents today get more tax credits, that will simply be paid for by parents of tomorrow? Why should sick people today get more care then the sick people of tomorrow who will pay for it? Why should anyone pay less tax when the government is not collecting enough for what those same people are asking for and why in the world should anyone not pay a dollar of tax in a TFSA/RRSP when that dollar will still be needed and simply borrowed and paid back by another generation?

Why?


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

OptsyEagle said:


> It's all the same thing. My point is that nothing will ever happen to reduce the deficit and control the debt until we stop asking for more stuff we cannot afford.
> 
> If the bill for that stuff you listed actually ended up on your personal credit card, I am sure some of it if not all of it would not be so important anymore.
> 
> ...


If they couldn't be done responsibly, perhaps they should not be done at all. I was thinking there is enough waste elsewhere that we could cut to offset the financial burden.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Topo said:


> If they couldn't be done responsibly, perhaps they should not be done at all. I was thinking there is enough waste elsewhere that we could cut to offset the financial burden.


That's what everyone says when they ask for a goodie they know we cannot afford.

I have mentioned, many times on this board, all the easy cuts have been done by the lightweight leaders we have elected, in the past. Why would anyone, in a deficit run government, not cut something that no one would complain about? Obviously they would, so lets move on from that idea.

We are at a stage in finances, where the deficit has grown so large, the only way to bring it to zero, is to cut the things that actually are important. Had we felt this way, 30 years ago, it would not be true, but today it is. We need to cut and raise everything you suggested we increase and reduce. We need to cut seniors benefits. We need to cut child care benefits. We need to raise taxes on the middle class. We need to stop spending money on foreign aid and reduce military spending. We need to stop adding contribution room to TFSA's. We need to stop supporting aboriginal peoples. 

Now how many votes would that platform get in a country of spoiled children, who always believe that there is money in some hidden place or will point at other people who they feel have more then they need and should be more then happy to contribute it.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> ... I have mentioned, many times on this board, all the easy cuts have been done by the lightweight leaders we have elected, in the past. Why would anyone, in a deficit run government, not cut something that no one would complain about?


Because those connected to TPTB would lose out and complain behind the scenes.

Ontario sets up Smart Systems for Health to setup electronic health records. Waste is documented, a few heads roll (where they are hired by other provinces to do pretty much the same work) and everything is renamed "eHeath" to show it is different. 

Then waste is found in eHeath where rinse and repeat.


Two rounds of waste, similar issues in both rounds - next to nothing of value produced for the money spent and years down the line there's lawsuits that are costing even more.


So yes - waste that is connected to no one that there won't cause an outcry for has been cut. I doubt that means there's no waste left to cut - otherwise there would be nothing for the auditor or the media to complain about.


Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> So yes - waste that is connected to no one that there won't cause an outcry for has been cut. I doubt that means there's no waste left to cut - otherwise there would be nothing for the auditor or the media to complain about.


Sure. A few dollars here and there, no doubt. But we need to cut $27 Billion dollars, a year. $27 Billion dollars. You are not going to find that between the couch cushions. We have been spoiled so deeply and for so long, that we have moved far away from improving efficiencies and cutting out free coffee to employees, to get us where we need to be. We now need to start cutting into real meat.

...and I am not sure we have even given birth to a leader who can pull that off in a country as spoiled as Canada. So far I have not seen one. Doug Ford is trying but I don't think he has the stuff to pull it off, but we will see. Certainly none of the Federal candidates have what it takes...or even care.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

The Ontario one is well over $1 billion so I'm not sure why you figure it's all going to add up to a small amount.

Agriculture Canada sent over $800K to a meat company to find a way to produce “a higher quality sausage that is more resistant to splitting or bursting while cooking.”
Somehow this was supposed to result in more jobs.

The Phoenix pay system is a sink hole consuming all kinds of cash that could have been limited or avoided.

Does the taxpayer really need to be paying to fly about three Ontario MPs and a secretary of the local association to a Calgary "spending" announcement event when there's already a local MP? IIRC, the "spending" was previously announced so it seems more appropriate to have a press release.

Do the various departments, crown corps and agencies really need to be spending $3.2 million or so, mostly on promotional products like pens at $78 a pen, flashlights at $85 each or iPads to give to public sector employees?

There's also the $12 million given to Loblaws to install new refrigeration systems.



You are probably right that cutting waste won't cover everything but it seems likely there's billions that could be used more effectively.



Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Everything you mentioned is pocket change compared to a $27 Billion deficit. Hardly even worth thinking about until that giant size leak, I mentioned, is shored up to some degree. Everything else would be a distraction and we have been distracted long enough.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

I think I would start with foreign aid. The way we are going, we are going to be the ones needing it. Why are we spending so much on foreign aid (I don't have the dollar figure) when we can't even pay our own deficits. I would also like to see a reduction in politician salaries, it's absolutely ridiculous how much we are paying them, along with their out of hand expense claims.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I think foreign aid has its place in limited quantities to help selected nations, with the right governments in place, to help them advance their institutions and rule of law. Plus certain humanitarian aid still will be necessary. A 25% cut doesn't seem outlandish if it is focused well. 

Ethiopia may be a good recent example where a new government is trying to make huge strides to enter the modern world after decades of strife. http://cidpnsi.ca/canadas-foreign-aid-2012-2/ and a common sense way to cut it 25% http://cidpnsi.ca/25-cut-to-foreign-aid-common-sense-check/ I'd question why some of the pink and red countries are getting aid anyway.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> Everything you mentioned is pocket change compared to a $27 Billion deficit. Hardly even worth thinking about until that giant size leak, I mentioned, is shored up to some degree. Everything else would be a distraction and we have been distracted long enough.


With several running into the billion mark, I can't help but wonder what was else is out there.
Either way, IMO going after both seems more appropriate than assuming everything that can be done, has been done.


Cheers


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Cutting starts everywhere and it adds up. But it will take some serious cutting to find $15B. Imagine eliminating $3B or so servicing the debt IF we had no national debt. Pie in the sky though when we are just adding new debt every year.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I think the government will choose the other option. Raise corporate and wealth taxes back to where they were when revenue was sufficient for spending needs.

The Liberals, NDP and Green appear to choose this option. Only the Conservatives and PPC would choose major spending cuts as their option.

Personally, I don't think Canadians will support big spending cuts, if Ontario's PC government is any example.

Ford is so unpopular that he has become the elusive Bigfoot..........rarely seen and then only for a quick glimpse.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> Cutting starts everywhere and it adds up. But it will take some serious cutting to find $15B. Imagine eliminating $3B or so servicing the debt IF we had no national debt. Pie in the sky though when we are just adding new debt every year.



altaRed u were, i believe, the preacher of fiscal restraint who paradoxically demanded 100 new canadian warships at an estimated cost of $10 trillion (based on current shipyard quotes for combat vessels now under construction)

you said canada needs 100 new navy & coast guard ships including 33 new icebreakers to defend our coasts from foreign attackers. You know, all those predatory foreign armadas that keep on invading our shores.

so sorry but in that moment i came to disregard you as any kind of responsible federal budget critic .each:


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

These days the Conservatives seem to be positioning themselves as a kind of Santa Claus, who's going to rain down money on Canadian families.

I listen to Scheer speak, and I hear promises for a bunch of tax credits. He even says things like "additional money in your pocket". What is this? Trying to imitate the NDP?

Scheer is all over the place on this stuff. Yeah, he's against climate change (ok fine), but opposed to the carbon tax -- even though conservative thinkers and big companies around the world see the carbon tax as the most effective, market driven pricing method. Weird.

He talks of fiscal restraint, and says the Liberals and NDP are over spending, then stands in front of the camera and talks about endless credits and handouts to people. Weird.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

To be blunt, I think Scheer is coming off as amateurish and incoherent. He spent so much time making character attacks, that he's left himself looking weak on policy and lacking real direction.

Or maybe his campaign manager, Hamish (previously of the alt-right Rebel Media) was overly focused on emotion-based public manipulation. I presume that's Hamish's specialty, after his time at Rebel. Disgusting stuff, from a disgusting circle of right wing nuts.

I *like* traditional "Progressive Conservative" policies. I have voted PC in the past, when there was a good balance of respect for progressive social values, plus fiscal restraint. But Scheer just isn't making a good case for the party, unless you happen to be in Alberta and really really hate Trudeau.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I don't know about many actually hating JT. I don't. 

It is just that he is the pinnacle in hypocrisy, thinks he is above the law at least twice, is self-absorbed in photo-ops, wouldn't know middle class if it hit him between the eyes, and is as conceited as anyone who has had a silver spoon upbringing. Other than that, a pretty decent guy. Thought I should say something nice given that J4B has become a shill for JT in a flurry of very recent posts. 

Out here, it is not going to matter how I vote on Monday. The local CPC incumbent is likely a shoo-in as are most seats in the interior of BC.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

I'm thinking J4B may be on JT's payroll. The luv for the liberals on this forum is getting out of hand. Personality wise he seems like a bit of "douche" to me. After listening to the debate I don't have high regards for any of them. It's actually quite sad. Not surprising. Who in their right mind would want to go into politics.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It is my crystal ball that barring a spectacular twist in the next few days, we will have a 'hung' parliament. Most likely a neutered Liberal rump supported by both the NDP and Greens for a possible majority (assuming the Greens get more than one seat). Most likely means another election in under a year. The Tories better hold another leadership convention pretty quick!


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Synergy said:


> I'm thinking J4B may be on JT's payroll. The luv for the liberals on this forum is getting out of hand.


No, I'm just fair. I'm able to appreciate a good team when I see one. When you see people doing a good job, it's natural to appreciate them.

A large % of this country supports the Liberals or at least has progressive/liberal values. You seem to be shocked to encounter someone like me, which suggests to me that you don't get out much.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Conservatives should ask themselves why their ideology is rejected by 65% of Canadians, instead of blaming their shortcomings on ignorant or stupid voters.

A Liberal/NDP coalition government might be good for both parties. It might even pave the way for a permanent merger of the progressive parties.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Where is everyone?


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

kcowan said:


> Where is everyone?


Let me know when it's all over!


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> The Tories better hold another leadership convention pretty quick!



they could hold the party but who would attend?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

OptsyEagle said:


> I have mentioned, many times on this board, all the easy cuts have been done by the lightweight leaders we have elected, in the past. Why would anyone, in a deficit run government, not cut something that no one would complain about? Obviously they would, so lets move on from that idea.
> 
> We are at a stage in finances, where the deficit has grown so large, the only way to bring it to zero, is to cut the things that actually are important. Had we felt this way, 30 years ago, it would not be true, but today it is. We need to cut and raise everything you suggested we increase and reduce. We need to cut seniors benefits. We need to cut child care benefits. We need to raise taxes on the middle class. We need to stop spending money on foreign aid and reduce military spending. We need to stop adding contribution room to TFSA's. We need to stop supporting aboriginal peoples.
> 
> Now how many votes would that platform get in a country of spoiled children




the only thing i immediately disagree with is the reference to spoiled children. All citizens will never desire to make those ^^ cuts. No citizens will voluntarily sign up for those ^^ cuts. Subsets of citizens whether spoiled or not do not matter.

in considering whether the above ^^ cuts are necessary & if so, how to work them, we should understand that the US is not taking this route. They have instead chosen hyper debt. Our economy is so intertwined with the neighbour to the south, is it reasonable to expect that we can somehow manage to avoid hyper-debt while they embrace it?

next i think it could be useful to examine histories of countries whose debt did spiral out of control. What happened to those countries? in many instances, hyper-inflation, collapse of the currency, often followed by civil uprisings, dictators, wars.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

History teaches us deflation can be tough but can bring out the best in people while inflation appears at first to bring benefits but ruins the virtuous and brings out the worst in people.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> AltaRed said:
> 
> 
> > The Tories better hold another leadership convention pretty quick!
> ...


J4B in an Indian suit with a liberal sign surrounded by blackface guards.

Pardon my bad humor but I just can't see how JT is a good choice to lead our country.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Synergy said:


> J4B in an Indian suit with a liberal sign surrounded by blackface guards.
> 
> Pardon my bad humor but I just can't see how JT is a good choice to lead our country.


JT has had to grow rapidly from a man child (entitled and immature) since he won the leadership to being a battered adolescent trying to grow up fast going into this most current election. I knew it was going to be a tough 4 years when he was more interested in selfies with celebrities and rock start status at his first Davos trip rather than really spending time trying to be a statesman at that World Economic Forum. And when he was speaking at Davos, he was pushing his Canadian ideological (and impractical) agenda instead of trying to forge alliances with world leaders. Like an immature Trump always dumping on the prior government (which mature leaders do not do), Trudeau had yet to learn how immature that is (and he is still doing it). Davos was a very low point from which he has tried to mature out of since that time. 

I do give him credit (or at least his handlers) with maturing relatively quickly and for the most part, surviving significant mistakes and embarrassments. He still has trouble using photo ops (his drama background) rather that taking on serious substance and 'walking the talk'. He still has not learned that he must temper his unrealistic ideological vision with practical and pragmatic decision making. He should not be having to struggle with some 32% of the vote after one term, but it is a reflection of his 4 years of bungling. As the NP said, governance has been his weak point.

Barring a surprise, he will still be our PM after Monday so we should all wish him continued success in growing up to a mature statesman and taking this country forward. Canada needs decent leadership to prosper, or at least hold its own, in a world of OECD heavyweights. We should all wish him well.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

At least here in Canada we don't get overly excited as to who forms our government. I hope that Sheer can pull it out of his hat but am OK with Lib minority as long as they refrain from joining the NDP. The main thing is to get out & vote, and by the looks of the advance polls we should have a great turn out.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> A lot of Federal park money in BC is being spent building a new bike path about 20ft into the forest, parallel to the road through Pacific Rim National Park to connect Tofino and Uclulet. Its a pretty major construction operation, essentially a new road bed.
> 
> Added: I'd like to see personal taxes simplified. Very few people I know even do their own taxes. So it's easier to lack an understanding of your income and the deductions/taxes that affect it.


Taxes are easy, people just can't follow directions.

Pacific Rim National Park is really really nice.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I expect various levels of incompetence and a mixture of bad policy and very bad policy.

I also expect future attacks on freedom of speech and a stronger anti-science attitude towards pretty much everything, from environment, social and economic policy.

I don't think it matters which party, just that some will go full stupid right away, while others may hold off a bit.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Just imagine that we get a new member on here. They come on and tell us their business is struggling. They keep buying more equipment, have big expenses and spend on advertising but the consumers are upset that their prices keep increasing. All their credit cards are maxed. They pay themselves a huge salary every month so they are well off personally but their company is really struggling. They do have a few valuable products for sale that they can't get out of the warehouse because there is too much junk in the way. They are looking to appoint a new CEO.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I expect they will continue to make bad decisions for foolish reasons, do favors for their criminal friends, and rip off the public every chance they get, as usual. That the private sector will continue creating wealth but not as fast as the public sector destroys it, and the slow slide down hill will continue.


I have only read the first and last few posts in this endless thread, but I think Rusty said all that needed to be said in post #9. It is why I never vote in elections. Whatever for? To make any of those gangsters feel like I support any of them? 

"In order to get power and retain it, it is necessary to love power; but love of power is not connected with goodness but with qualities that are the opposite of goodness, such as pride, cunning and cruelty." -- Leo Tolstoy


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Mechanic said:


> Just imagine that we get a new member on here. They come on and tell us their business is struggling. They keep buying more equipment, have big expenses and spend on advertising but the consumers are upset that their prices keep increasing. All their credit cards are maxed. They pay themselves a huge salary every month so they are well off personally but their company is really struggling. They do have a few valuable products for sale that they can't get out of the warehouse because there is too much junk in the way. They are looking to appoint a new CEO.


You just described an American tech company with $5 million in assets capitalized at $30 billion that is the latest hot IPO.


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

socialized losses from both the gov and business sector, privatization of growth and success.

the one who is fugged the most? the non-corporate taxpayer.


----------

