Canadian politics maybe getting interesting!

[purpleoscar]

Because Alberta has always been in the midst of this economic boom, and has never taken a thing from the federal government, right?

You guys are so altruistic. Thanks!

Well if we follow the logic of Anitram the oil industry should be plundered. Is that altruistic? Why pay more provincial transfers when the oil industry is consumed under this plan. We pay PLENTY already.

Now you know why Westerners look at the East as envious. We are not just fields and streams like Trudeau said.

 

[anitram]

Then it makes less sense to root for the left if you don't benefit from it. The poor will always be asking for more money from programs because much of the money goes to bureaucrats. If the money was "enough" nobody would work.

That is because you think that I vote on my own financial self interest exclusively and that this is apparently how we all should vote. I couldn't disagree more.

I came to this country as a refugee. I had nothing but my family and the clothes on my back. I benefited greatly from the generosity of the Canadian people and the social safety net they provided for us when they owed us nothing. I studied hard, got a lot of scholarships, went to the best schools, got to a place in life where I could graduate straight into a 6-figure job. My brother went to the best schools, got a graduate degree. My Mom is a prof at one of Canada's top ranked universities. These things came because we worked hard, but also because most people in this country DON'T THINK LIKE YOU DO and see the value of helping those who are not doing as well as they are.

I will never vote the way you do, because I want to help more people get to where I am in life. I know what it is like at the bottom of a deep hole, and I will never, ever forget the generosity of those who took a position unlike yours. They gave me a chance; now it's my time to give that chance to somebody else.

 

[VintagePunk]

So what you're saying, anitram, is that sometimes good, decent, hardworking people must rely on Canada's social safety net due to situational forces outside of their complete control, and that they're not all lazy, blood-sucking deadbeats, content to live off of the public teat for the rest of their lives? I would have thought that signing up for welfare (because it's as simple as that, right? Anyone can do it) and living large off that monthly cheque would be the way to go.

 

[BVS]

Yeah like Alberta has never had recessions. Balancing budgets and lowering taxes works the same everywhere. The oil simply made the results happen faster but they wouldn't have happened if we kept the 30 billion in debt.

But hey I'm in a la la land in perfect Alberta.


It's not about feeling sorry for yourself. It's about running your own life instead of someone else. Those values are what made Alberta good.

I know easterners. They come out west to get jobs and they have a sense of arrogance and entitlement that westerners find bizzare. I'm not the only one who feels that way. Even some easterners admit it. That's why they left.

So tell me, where and how much time have you spent outside Alberta?

 

[purpleoscar]

So tell me, where and how much time have you spent outside Alberta?

Tell me if a tree falls in the forest and you weren't personally there did it actually fall?

Economics applies in all countries because they all involve humans. Gravity doesn't change when I go to another region.

I like how people use arguments against me but avoid asking those questions to themselves. Why would I go live in the East when they have less jobs because of higher taxes and provincial trade barriers. Maybe if they elected conservatives and actually allowed them to pay off debt and reduce the size of government to a managable level they would have more jobs.

What do you not get? Alberta froze spending, paid down debt, and the money freed from interest payments went into tax cuts and some spending. This is why many people from the east move here because they are sick and tired of the economics in the east. Talking to them gives me some perspective but also looking at politics in the east and their history of the National Energy Program shows me plenty. I don't have to live there to understand left-wing policies.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

so... never then?

 

[BVS]

Tell me if a tree falls in the forest and you weren't personally there did it actually fall?

Was the tree leaning left or right?

Seriously though, I'm taking that as a no, and from the rest of my post I take it that you are once again missing my point.

Economics applies in all countries because they all involve humans. Gravity doesn't change when I go to another region.

Gravity is constant. Economics deals with hundreds of factors, this is what you seem to be forgetting, or something maybe you've never understood, I don't know. It's a poor analogy. The factors and circumstances in Rwanda are different from Detroit, the factors and circumstances in Detroit are different from Alberta. So your blanket head in the sand generalizations don't work everywhere.

I like how people use arguments against me but avoid asking those questions to themselves.

No, actually everything I ask of you, I ask myself first.

What do you not get?

I don't get how someone can live so sheltered and think that their upbringing, their theories, their insights work for the whole world. I don't get that, not one bit...

 

[BoMac]

I don't have to live there to understand left-wing policies.

Left-wing policies aside, you seem to make a lot of assumptions about how we live in the east, and eastern life in general. You do not seem to understand, as anitram said, that some of us do not vote with our pocketbook. Some of us vote our conscience. And you do not seem to understand, that generalizing and stereotyping an entire segment of the population makes you seem out of touch with the reality of the situation.

It's why I posed the question to you, and you did not answer. It's why BVS posed the question, and you answered, but not his question specifically.

So, I'll ask again: How much time have you spent in the East and how many easterners have you interacted with?

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I think the better question is where and how much time have you spent out of your house?

 

[purpleoscar]

That is because you think that I vote on my own financial self interest exclusively and that this is apparently how we all should vote. I couldn't disagree more.

I came to this country as a refugee. I had nothing but my family and the clothes on my back. I benefited greatly from the generosity of the Canadian people and the social safety net they provided for us when they owed us nothing. I studied hard, got a lot of scholarships, went to the best schools, got to a place in life where I could graduate straight into a 6-figure job. My brother went to the best schools, got a graduate degree. My Mom is a prof at one of Canada's top ranked universities. These things came because we worked hard, but also because most people in this country DON'T THINK LIKE YOU DO and see the value of helping those who are not doing as well as they are.

I will never vote the way you do, because I want to help more people get to where I am in life. I know what it is like at the bottom of a deep hole, and I will never, ever forget the generosity of those who took a position unlike yours. They gave me a chance; now it's my time to give that chance to somebody else.

What are you talking about? Conservatives aren't going to roll back the government to the point of the 1800's. This is exactly what the left does. They try and scare people into thinking that people will starve to death and the government will be wiped out under conservatives. You can trim the government to its essentials without starving the population and wiping out government.

We have less poverty in Alberta but we've also not eliminated ALL social programs. The argument is not to wipe out government and live in anarchy. Is that what you think happened in Alberta? Alberta is not a libertarian paradise.

The problem is that with the social programs we have people still complain that we need more and more. No matter how big the government gets people will ask for more. There is actually a limit you can tax people before they take their business (and jobs) elsewhere. Having a job is better than a social program. These programs are supposed to be temporary for healthy people. The rest of the public gets more money from work than from programs. If you want more jobs you can't over tax or else the desire to take risks in starting businesses and moving businesses to Ontario becomes less worth it compared to other regions.

There are plenty of immigrants who originally voted liberal for the same reasons you gave but now are voting conservative because when they get good jobs and they have to pay closer to half their paycheque they change their minds. People want to have an incentive to work. If you want social programs you have to PAY for it. When you add more layers of bureaucracy to administer social programs more money gets eaten up in paying them than going to the people who ask for programs. Putting more money into the hands of people who don't compete and therefore aren't efficient leads to a lower standard of living and it means it takes longer to find new jobs when you are inbetween jobs. The higher the taxes the harder you have to work to keep your job. The market is actually fragile and doesn't stand still when you increase taxes on it. You can actually kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Just look at Quebec and their higher than average unemployment even during the boom. Those economic policies are disappointing and talking about people helping you and giving back doesn't justify those policies. With large bureaucracies I see a lot of taking and little giving back.

BTW charities receive more money during an economic boom than a bust which just another example of why social programs and the poor rely more on not overreaching in the economy.

 

[purpleoscar]

I don't get how someone can live so sheltered and think that their upbringing, their theories, their insights work for the whole world. I don't get that, not one bit...

Well if this is what you believe then how did the west get wealthy in the first place? There's a serious lesson to made between the conquistadors of Spain robbing gold and the trading countries of England and Netherlands collecting it. Alms for the poor in the ruling classes didn't create the middle classes. Competition for labor and trade did. Does Rwanda have the same structures we have like private property rights, constitution, trade, justice? Maybe if they understood how it works and could implement them they wouldn't need our aid. Our ancestors didn't always have these policies or rights. Cultures may have lots of strength but they are not set in stone or else we wouldn't be talking right now on computers or going to school or voting at all. If anything we can see in history is that change is possible.

The one constant in all countries is that they involve humans and I don't think they would prefer bad policies if they knew better. Even if they know better they may not be in a position to create a successful revolution to kick out the bullies holding them back. Democracy wasn't handed to us it was fought for.

 

[BVS]

I think the better question is where and how much time have you spent out of your house?

 

[BoMac]

Well if this is what you believe then how did the west get wealthy in the first place? There's a serious lesson to made between the conquistadors of Spain robbing gold and the trading countries of England and Netherlands collecting it. Alms for the poor in the ruling classes didn't create the middle classes. Competition for labor and trade did. Does Rwanda have the same structures we have like private property rights, constitution, trade, justice? Maybe if they understood how it works and could implement them they wouldn't need our aid. Our ancestors didn't always have these policies or rights. Cultures may have lots of strength but they are not set in stone or else we wouldn't be talking right now on computers or going to school or voting at all. If anything we can see in history is that change is possible.

The one constant in all countries is that they involve humans and I don't think they would prefer bad policies if they knew better. Even if they know better they may not be in a position to create a successful revolution to kick out the bullies holding them back. Democracy wasn't handed to us it was fought for.

What are you babbling about? You quoted something and didn't even address it!

Answer the questions and/or comments directly!

 

[BVS]

Well if this is what you believe then how did the west get wealthy in the first place?

What I believe? Where was there a declarative about what I believe in that quote?

Once again you are taking one of your HUGE leaps of logic, why don't you focus on the here and now and the discussion at hand...

 

[purpleoscar]

What are you babbling about? You quoted something and didn't even address it!

Answer the questions and/or comments directly!

The point everyone is trying to make is that economics is different for different people in different regions in different countries and therefore my argument only works in Alberta.

I don't agree with that, so my answers show that. Do you think travelling to Toronto is going to make me vote liberal? Many easterners move to Alberta and keep voting liberal. Why should my beliefs be contained by personal travel? Liberals would like westerners to vote liberal and that's why they campaign in Alberta.

If personal travel was all that was needed then each region could argue for nation status on their own.

It's just a way to avoid arguing about economics. People on this site are more interested in politics than economics.

 

[purpleoscar]

Left-wing policies aside, you seem to make a lot of assumptions about how we live in the east, and eastern life in general. You do not seem to understand, as anitram said, that some of us do not vote with our pocketbook. Some of us vote our conscience. And you do not seem to understand, that generalizing and stereotyping an entire segment of the population makes you seem out of touch with the reality of the situation.

It's why I posed the question to you, and you did not answer. It's why BVS posed the question, and you answered, but not his question specifically.

So, I'll ask again: How much time have you spent in the East and how many easterners have you interacted with?

I've answered the question. Obviously no I haven't lived in the East. What does travel have to do with learning economics? I answered the question with another question to see if it applies to the people asking me.

I don't care where a politician lived as long as they have good policies. If Angelina Jolie visits more countries than me does she understand economics more than you or I? It's a desperate argument.

 

[BoMac]

The point everyone is trying to make is that economics is different for different people in different regions in different countries and therefore my argument only works in Alberta.

I don't agree with that, so my answers show that. Do you think travelling to Toronto is going to make me vote liberal? Many easterners move to Alberta and keep voting liberal. Why should my beliefs be contained by personal travel? Liberals would like westerners to vote liberal and that's why they campaign in Alberta.

If personal travel was all that was needed then each region could argue for nation status on their own.

It's just a way to avoid arguing about economics. People on this site are more interested in politics than economics.

Wow.

You're once again putting words in my mouth. Read what I wrote earlier: "Left-wing policies aside...." I'm not asking the question because I want you to vote liberal. I don't care how or for whom you vote, frankly. I believe that divergent opinions and views are essential to making a society healthier and stronger.

Once again, I'll repeat. I'm asking because you continue making assumptions and general statements about easterner's way of life, yet it seems like you've never spent any sustained amount of time in the east, or interacted with very many easterners (who live in the east, not those that moved to Alberta.)


ETA: Re: the post above this one. It's not about understanding economics! I want to know how you base your comments on our way of life in the east. OUR WAY OF LIFE. NOT ECONOMICS.

 

[BVS]

I've answered the question. Obviously no I haven't lived in the East. What does travel have to do with learning economics? I answered the question with another question to see if it applies to the people asking me.

I don't care where a politician lived as long as they have good policies. If Angelina Jolie visits more countries than me does she understand economics more than you or I? It's a desperate argument.

You're missing the point, and I'm beginning to wonder if it's on purpose. You seem to believe one policy will work everywhere, and that's just pure ignorance. You live in a pretty privileged area of the world, and your answer to those that don't have that priviledge always seems to be well move somewhere else, get a better degree, etc... But you don't get it, that's not an option for everyone. You also make these awful and ignorant generalities and stereotypes about everyone. Your policies don't work for those who were born into poverty, they don't work for the ill that can barely afford healthcare, they don't work for a majority of the population of the world. So quit pretending they do. Educate yourself a little bit about what goes on outside Alberta...

 

[BVS]

People on this site are more interested in politics than economics.

Here's just another shitty generalization of yours...

 

[VintagePunk]

What does travel have to do with learning economics?
...
If Angelina Jolie visits more countries than me does she understand economics more than you or I? It's a desperate argument.

Not to join in the pile, here, but I just wanted to make a comment about this.

No, travel or awareness of how others live won't necessarily make one learn economic theory better. But what it WILL do is to help one broaden their outlook a little more, and maybe come to the realization that there's no one-size-fits-all answer for every economic problem. I've readily admitted that beyond the basics, I know very little about economic theory, and yet I still know that in each situation, there are so many variables that come into play that it's impossible to apply the same fix to each one.

It's fairly obvious that you've been to school and done a lot of reading about various subjects. However, what you really need to look at in a more human way is not the theory, but the application of the theory. I think that's where a wider view of the world and its intricacies might be helpful to you. Your posts show that you have very little understanding of how regions of the world are vastly different, and on a more micro level, that families and individuals live under very different circumstances, too, and thus have different needs. If everyone started off on a level playing field with exactly the same sets of circumstances, then maybe your theories would fit, but they simply don't. People and their situations are vastly different, and that's not something you can necessarily learn from a textbook.

 

[VintagePunk]

Parliament suspended after GG agrees to Harper request

OTTAWA -- Parliament was suspended midday Thursday after Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean agreed to a request from Prime Minister Stephen Harper to interrupt the session, a decision that means his government has staved off certain defeat in a non-confidence vote scheduled for next week.

Nice. Way to delay the democratic process from taking place. It's very clear that all he's interested in is protecting his own ass during this time, when the politicians of the country should be focussed on more important things, like, you know...people potentially starving for the next couple of years.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I fail to see how this is going to solve any of his problems anyhow. Isn't this going to piss of the opposition even more? And when Parliament does resume, what is stopping them from voting non-confidence at that point?

 

[VintagePunk]

I fail to see how this is going to solve any of his problems anyhow. Isn't this going to piss of the opposition even more? And when Parliament does resume, what is stopping them from voting non-confidence at that point?

All it's doing is delaying the inevitable.

 

[BoMac]

I fail to see how this is going to solve any of his problems anyhow. Isn't this going to piss of the opposition even more? And when Parliament does resume, what is stopping them from voting non-confidence at that point?

This was his one and only available option. He may be delaying the inevitable in terms of the confidence vote on the January budget, but at least he can run on the budget in the election campaign. Were there to be an election now, the opposition would be hammering him on that fiscal update, which is not much to run on.

 

[financeguy]

I look at the history of Keynesian economics and then I infer from that. Stimulus packages are short-term. Keynesian economics is popular because economists need jobs beyond just teaching, and politicians usually look to Keynesians to increase government intervention. Keynes believed that once the debt was incurred then during the next boom the government should then pay it back. This can happen but it usually is unpopular and requires spending cuts. Harper only wanted to do a little stimulus because what's happening in the U.S. is not working.

The reason for stimulus is to encourage people to spend with low interest rates and forcing tax dollars (or debt/future tax dollars) to go to infrastructure expenses to create make work jobs. If you have good finances it doesn't really matter, but if you have tons of debt I don't see how listening to economists and spending more from borrowing would help you.

At least you get the savings idea. The savings rate is historically low so at least some people like you get it.

Yes I am aware that the east is more left-wing but I think I'm as human as anyone in the east so I feel that what works for healthy individuals here works in other countries let alone other regions.

Ireland used to be a third world country but not anymore.

Your last sentence seems to bear little relation to the rest of your post. In terms of its social welfare system, Ireland is much closer to the continental Europe model than the US model. Also, currently, Ireland's economy is in s***. See here:- http://www.davy.ie/content/pubarticles/dotiecr20081204.pdf

Neither is Ireland's saving ratio particularly impressive over the last few years (although not as bad as the US). On the other hand, the savings ratio has improved slightly recently (as referenced in the above link), which I imagine meets with your approval.

 

[Badyouken]

He's also hoping that some Liberal, NDP or Bloc MPs will start questioning the coalition and back off...

 

[VintagePunk]

I think he's also hoping that time will sway more of the public opinion his way. Look forward to a holiday season full of attack ads.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

oh bloody hell, that's all I need...

more of those stupid anti Dion ones

 

[VintagePunk]

I'd like to know the GG's reasons for agreeing to this, because she's on the hook for this now, too. I can't help but wonder if things would be different if the Liberals had a stronger leader in place, someone who resonated with both French and English speaking Canada.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Way to get a long Christmas break.