Provincial politics

Forum Sponsor
daught said:
Because at the end of the day I rather be in Sweden like place than in a US like place. PC was waaay to US like. That's why I voted a socialist party. Don't worry I am not delusional, I wasn't expecting NDP to turn ontario in to Sweden, but remember, life can be good at ~50% tax. It just has to be used efficiently. Which I doubt any one would in our society. Liberal money goes to the the slobs, PC money goes to the fat cats. The ones in the middle get screwed either way.
Click to expand...

No offense man, but your entire post is ****ing rhetoric. Let's discuss actual details of whats gonna happen over the next 4 years, like adults.

I'm reading through the 2014 budget which Wynne will introduce again in about 3 weeks. Here's a link: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2014/papers_all.pdf

Page 152 caught my eye. They boast about once again freezing MP's wages until the budget is balanced... well, that's great, but the freeze ended last year, and they took the opportunity to give themselves massive raises in that period. Super, now you're gonna freeze them again? Great, that's beautiful.
 
Last edited:
Or people are fed up with the system and stopped voting.

Schneller said:
+ 1

PCs won fewer seats this time than last time. Former conservative voters abandoned him and his platform.
Click to expand...
 
mmmnaked said:
No offense man, but your entire post is ****ing rhetoric. Let's discuss actual details of whats gonna happen over the next 4 years, like adults.

I'm reading through the 2014 budget which Wynne will introduce again in about 3 weeks. Here's a link: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2014/papers_all.pdf

Page 153 caught my eye. They boast about once again freezing MP's wages until the budget is balanced... well, that's great, but the freeze ended last year, and they took the opportunity to give themselves massive raises in that period. Super, now you're gonna freeze them again? Great, that's beautiful.
Click to expand...

There really is no argument who's better because no one is, I did not vote liberal anyways. I was just pointing out high taxes are not necessarily the end of the world, it can work.
 
mmmnaked said:
No offense man, but your entire post is ****ing rhetoric. Let's discuss actual details of whats gonna happen over the next 4 years, like adults.

I'm reading through the 2014 budget which Wynne will introduce again in about 3 weeks. Here's a link: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2014/papers_all.pdf

Page 152 caught my eye. They boast about once again freezing MP's wages until the budget is balanced... well, that's great, but the freeze ended last year, and they took the opportunity to give themselves massive raises in that period. Super, now you're gonna freeze them again? Great, that's beautiful.
Click to expand...

By way of comparison look at what Hudak's plan offered.

- 8 years (two full terms in government) to create one million (75,000) jobs, that the economic bounce-back could be be counted on to create anyway, or he'll quit

- cutting 100,000 government jobs in a way that sounded like slash and burn, when attrition alone would work pretty well (cutting those jobs means packaging the workers out)

- cutting taxes for businesses, in a place that has some of the lowest business taxes in North America (the developed part, at least), when that hasn't been working

- cut 'corporate welfare', which is precisely what is luring businesses away from this Province

There was no good choice.
 
^ I do believe the Liberal's budget plans to maintain and/or further cut those business taxes anyway, so I doubt Hudak had a grander vision.

And regarding the 100k job cuts, reading their actual platform doesn't make it seem like they would've just flat-out fired 100,000 people. Perhaps he stated differently elsewhere.. but it doesn't matter, they lost the election. I'm concerned about what we have in store for the next 4.
 
mmmnaked said:
^ I do believe the Liberal's budget plans to maintain and/or further cut those business taxes anyway, so I doubt Hudak had a grander vision.

And regarding the 100k job cuts, reading their actual platform doesn't make it seem like they would've just flat-out fired 100,000 people. Perhaps he stated differently elsewhere.. but it doesn't matter, they lost the election. I'm concerned about what we have in store for the next 4.
Click to expand...

The statement I heard him make was something like 'a combination of job eliminations and attrition.'
 
mmmnaked said:
Where's the pot of gold at the end of Wynne's rainbow? Seriously I'm curious which parts of their platform you found appealing. I read through the website and it sounds good... invest in education, invest in infrastructure, invest in social security, invest in a prosperity fund... it all sounds tantalizing, but then you look at the debt levels and you have to take a step back and ask, how the hell are we gonna pay for all this? There's not a single mention of THAT aspect on their site.

Genuinely curious. I'm stuck with this government for 4 years now, I need to understand why they got the votes.
Click to expand...

It's easier to pay down a debt with a thriving economy than when an economy is in recession. In a good economy, people pay more income taxes and they pay more sales taxes when they are working. Government spending on infrastructure boosts the economy because it gets more people working. When an economy is in recession, people spend less, pay fewer taxes, lose jobs, etc. reducing the revenue stream from which a government can pay down provincial debt. That's the theory. Hudak's cutbacks would likely trigger a recession. No problem if one is wealthy, you just trim back a little. But for people living on the edge already, trimming back causes them to chose between eating and paying rent and other bills.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
By way of comparison look at what Hudak's plan offered.

- 8 years (two full terms in government) to create one million (75,000) jobs, that the economic bounce-back could be be counted on to create anyway, or he'll quit

- cutting 100,000 government jobs in a way that sounded like slash and burn, when attrition alone would work pretty well (cutting those jobs means packaging the workers out)

- cutting taxes for businesses, in a place that has some of the lowest business taxes in North America (the developed part, at least), when that hasn't been working

- cut 'corporate welfare', which is precisely what is luring businesses away from this Province

There was no good choice.
Click to expand...

One has to wonder how many more times one will have to repeat the above for people to get it ... hopefully PC party will play this over and over in their boardrooms so they avoid this strategy in the future.

People should be concerned where this province is heading for many reasons, but this would be applicable regardless which of the three major parties would have won.
 
Recessions happen because of big government and government interference in the free markets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-G7U0t3vu9E

Get ready for negative interest rates.

Schneller said:
It's easier to pay down a debt with a thriving economy than when an economy is in recession. In a good economy, people pay more income taxes and they pay more sales taxes when they are working. Government spending on infrastructure boosts the economy because it gets more people working. When an economy is in recession, people spend less, pay fewer taxes, lose jobs, etc. reducing the revenue stream from which a government can pay down provincial debt. That's the theory. Hudak's cutbacks would likely trigger a recession. No problem if one is wealthy, you just trim back a little. But for people living on the edge already, trimming back causes them to chose between eating and paying rent and other bills.
Click to expand...
 
BLUE_KAWI said:
Recessions happen because of big government and government interference in the free markets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-G7U0t3vu9E

Get ready for negative interest rates.
Click to expand...


Will never happen

We'll just continue to sell each other houses at inflated prices and we'll all be rich! Rich i tell yaaaaaaaa!

People are in debt up to their ears but the solution is to spend more!
 
Schneller said:
It's easier to pay down a debt with a thriving economy than when an economy is in recession. In a good economy, people pay more income taxes and they pay more sales taxes when they are working. Government spending on infrastructure boosts the economy because it gets more people working. When an economy is in recession, people spend less, pay fewer taxes, lose jobs, etc. reducing the revenue stream from which a government can pay down provincial debt. That's the theory. Hudak's cutbacks would likely trigger a recession. No problem if one is wealthy, you just trim back a little. But for people living on the edge already, trimming back causes them to chose between eating and paying rent and other bills.
Click to expand...

It's also sensible to borrow money, or refinance existing loans, when the interest rates are at record lows. This is why there are two very valid ways to work your way out of a recession; austerity and incentive spending. Back when Bob Rae was in the hot seat he started with the latter, then switched to the former, which is how he completely screwed things up. As I said both are valid but once you choose which way you'll be going, you have to stick to it.
 
Schneller said:
It's easier to pay down a debt with a thriving economy than when an economy is in recession. In a good economy, people pay more income taxes and they pay more sales taxes when they are working. Government spending on infrastructure boosts the economy because it gets more people working. When an economy is in recession, people spend less, pay fewer taxes, lose jobs, etc. reducing the revenue stream from which a government can pay down provincial debt. That's the theory. Hudak's cutbacks would likely trigger a recession. No problem if one is wealthy, you just trim back a little. But for people living on the edge already, trimming back causes them to chose between eating and paying rent and other bills.
Click to expand...

Other places have done cutbacks with good results:

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uplo...he-debt-burdens-of-ontario-and-california.pdf

Sounds like ontario will continue pouring on the debt
 
Rob MacLennan said:
California didn't just have debt; they were essentially bankrupt.
Click to expand...

C'mon Rob, your better than that. ;) What's your point? That only jurisdictions essentially near bankruptcy should result in debt reduction? That's a red herring argument. It doesn't matter what the impetus was as it didn't effect the outcome. California had good results with debt reduction. Period.

FWIW their near bankruptcy condition is self-induced through restrictive legislation and in fact California has much much much less debt than ON with a much much bigger economy.
 
Last edited:
kwtoxman said:
C'mon Rob, your better than that. ;) What's your point? That only jurisdictions essentially near bankruptcy should result in debt reduction? That's a red herring argument. It doesn't matter what the impetus was as it didn't effect the outcome. California had good results with debt reduction. Period.

FWIW their near bankruptcy condition is self-induced through restrictive legislation and in fact California has much much much less debt than ON with a much much bigger economy.
Click to expand...

No, the red herring is comparing things that are completely out of scale, as if they're identical.

http://blogs.wsj.com/canadarealtime...-much-worse-than-californias-at-first-glance/
 
FullMotoJacket said:
Declined. This riding will go to the PCs. Always has. Always will. Regardless of how I usually have or would have voted had I, it was a better option to send the message. Hopefully more will as well.
Click to expand...

Burlington went Liberal. You and BLUE_KAWI should open a business predicting the future so we will know hat WON'T happen.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
People; this isn't about union 'vote buying' or public workers coming out en masse, to somehow foil democracy. It's not about some basic failing of democracy because of some nebulous 'corruption.' If that was the case, if it EVER was the case, then we would have been right back where we were prior to the election. What this was, was a resounding refusal of Ontario to buy into the American style neo-conservative agenda. The election was Hudak's to lose and that's exactly what he did. If he had stuck to the traditional Progressive Conservative centre-right ideals he would have walked away with this election. Instead he talked about a slash and burn style of government, that simply isn't palatable to the majority of people in this Province.

In fact it's not palatable to people like me, who are centre-right by nature, and would be the natural supporters of the Progressive Conservative Party. Hard core conservative friends have been asking me about the mechanics of declining their ballots because while they could not support the Liberals and would never think of voting NDP, they simply could not buy into Hudak's politics. I voted for Harris and I couldn't vote for Hudak.

So please just get over it. The PC Party of Ontario did this to themselves. They made themselves irrelevant by acting like petulant children and refusing to work with a minority government, when they could have negotiated to have some of their views heard. They failed to garner support for a style of government that might have traction in the United States, but We. Are. Canadian. They failed at the basic concept of presenting a reasonable alternative to a government that is currently under criminal investigation.

Choose your champions wisely.
Click to expand...

Exactly this.

For those that need proof (as much as it can be 'proven') my riding has been PC, and voted solidly PC in the by-election earlier this year (49% vs. 40%). On Thursday, the Liberal candidate narrowly broke through by only 85 votes. What changed between then and now? Hudak announced his plan, that's what.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom