Canada Votes 2006

[djfeelgood]

Gotta love what the man of a million promises has done so far though. At the next provincial election watch it be neck and neck.


As of summer 2005 conservatives had 44% of the popular vote where Liberals had 34%... I guess Ontario realized their mistake.

 

[anitram]

You must have mistaken me for a Liberal voter. I didn't vote for McGuinty nor would I, so what people think about him is irrelevant.

You brought up how wonderful Harris was for Ontario. So wonderful that after leaving in shame, poor Ernie Eves got totally run over by irate voters who couldn't stand the sight of another PC premier. In that respect, Harris did a wonderful job indeed. couldn't be better.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

Can someone please explain the media`s new love affair with Stephen Harper??

2 years ago it was Paul Martin and I`m not sure what`s changed to prompt this volte-face - (Martin was exonerated in the sponsorship scandal so I`m at a loss to explain this new-found love affair with Harper).

 

[djfeelgood]

Gotta love what the man of a million promises has done so far though. At the next provincial election watch it be neck and neck.

As of summer 2005 conservatives had 44% of the popular vote where Liberals had 34%... thats a decline of 10% for the liberals, the same number that the conservatives faced in 2003. I guess Ontario realised their mistake.

uggh i meant to click edit...stupid stupid stupid

 

[djfeelgood]

I have no idea, thats the media for ya...

This election will be won by the media not by the convictions of voters. But isn't that always the case.

 

[anitram]

The media has been extremely biased and I have on idea why. One of the universities (Carleton maybe?) did a study and found that while Harper has been front and centre in the papers, both Martin and Layton have been pushed back to tiny photos on page 5. Very strange turnaround indeed.

I can't wait to have a Conservative government. It'll be just like the good old days of Mulroney.

 

[djfeelgood]

This is the way I see it...

Whenever a government comes into power and induces reforms of any sort, there is flux and the population will get uneasy. Ontario was displeased with Harris because they had just been under an NDP government which is all heavy spending on the government side.

This is stark contrast with the tory theory. When you have a left wing government and then a right wing government the road isnt going to be smooth.

IMHO.. if people were to analyze better and see where the ball is going rather than where it is now then they would see the benefits of a certain government.

What it comes down to is not a particular scandal deciding your vote, but rather the foundational belief of the party. Regardless of the party there will be scandals, thats politics. But the net motion of the party is what I look for, and vote on.

I find it interesting to see how many Liberal voters and Conservative voters ditch their party and jump on the band wagon when there is a tiny scandal in the grand scheme of things.

Ironic how 18 of my posts on a U2 website are on a completely unrelated topic.

Might I add, that mulroney and his cabinet were considered 'red tories', very center center right.

 

[anitram]

This is the way I see it...

Whenever a government comes into power and induces reforms of any sort, there is flux and the population will get uneasy. Ontario was displeased with Harris because they had just been under an NDP government which is all heavy spending on the government side.

But that does not jive with what actually happened.

Ontario was not displeased with Harris because of Bob Rae. In fact, they were happy to be rid of him and Harris' constant references to fiscal responsibility is exactly what got him elected. That combined with welfare reform and other expense cutting.

Even when he ran for re-election, he was successful (although less so than the first time around). Therefore even at that time, Ontario was not "uneasy" enough to unseat him.

It was when the effects of his policies became obvious that the people were so utterly sick of him and the PC in general that they booted all of their asses out without question. It had nothing to do with an adjustment period - Harris' popularity was HIGH right after being elected! It had to do with the public taking some time to realize exactly how costly he has been.

I was a university student under Harris. If he were still in office, I really wonder if we'd be paying double the tuition now. McGuinty froze fees temporarily but that has run out now and already UofT is talking of raising law school tuition to $21K next year. It was Harris' cuts to eduction in general and universities specifically which forced a lot of these institutions to increase their fees as if though inflation was 80%. That's just one of his policies for which we are still paying to this day.

 

[djfeelgood]

I should have elaborated better...

What I meant to say, was we had become used to was Bob Rae's government had done. Quite different from the Tory approach. Therefore when the Tories came into power their policies seemed harsh and aggressive simply because Rae had set the norm. When in absolute terms it really was sort of the undoing of what Rae did in an effort to pull in the opposite direction. So in simple terms, yes it was Harris' doing but it seemed worse than it really was in light of the 'Rae days'. The adjustment was occurring when he began to lose the popular vote. By his last days I'd say that he had pretty much undone what Rae's gov't had done and should they have had one more term it could have been very different. But you never know.

Harris also instated standardized testing which i am a firm believer in.

As far as tuition fees rising, Ontario although it has the 2nd highest rates in Canada, has increased less than most other provinces as a percentage from '91 to '03

Also, although a Tory government may initially allow the rise in tuition fees due to the prinicples they run by, it will open the door to corporate sponsorship, like its done in the states. Or contrarily, A decrease in full public health care funding which is a farce anyways could be allocated to education, and then you'd see tuition drop.

cheers,
Aaron

 

[anitram]

Harris also instated standardized testing which i am a firm believer in.

Are you now?

Did you know that standardized tests (beginning with the predecessor to the SATs) were designed by Harvard and Princeton in order to keep Jews out of the Ivy League?

There is a reason for designing standardized tests - they were introduced in order to combat meritocracy and as such have deep flaws.

 

[angelordevil]

....what I found interesting about the link you provided Zoomerang96 is that 52% of Quebeckers would vote for the Bloc and the remainder would vote for a federal party - of those voting for the Bloc, quite a few are actually federalists and not separatists. What this poll tells me is that support for separation has not surpassed the 50% mark, despite all the fearmongering to the contrary in recent months.

This is an interesting point. Tonight's French debate will be interesting, as well (I think I'm tending to overuse the word "interesting").

So much is still up in the air, despite the polls. I think that the result of the election ultimately comes down to health care and fiscal responsibility. There's a whole lot of grey in between, but basically, the Conservatives are banking on corruption frustration to push them to victory, while the Liberals think that our hearts are with health care.

Over the next two weeks, these ideals will be refined and sharpened into uprecedented attacks, especially from the Liberals. If the Conservatives can stand the heat, the outcome is obvious.

But, keep in mind, Canadians have just this week emerged from the holiday fog of egg nog and Toblerone bars. The real race has just begun.

 

[djfeelgood]

Did you know that standardized tests (beginning with the predecessor to the SATs) were designed by Harvard and Princeton in order to keep Jews out of the Ivy League?

What relevance does that have for now? Do you think thats what will happen?

 

[The_Sweetest_Thing]

Harris did wonders for Ontario given that he was handed a plate with Bob Rae's feces on it.

He destabilized the teachers union which is far too powerful. Teachers in my opinion are overpaid and treat teaching youth more as a 'job' job than what it should be, a passion driven job. Not to mention they get 2 paid months off and a pension to die for. In 1997 teachers walked out for 3 weeks. For the love of learning? Bullshit.

Truthfully, have you ever TAUGHT? Do you have any idea how incredibly stressful and difficult it is to be a teacher? Don't you dare put them down. I have nothing but respect for the profession, and I think teachers deserve all the help they can get.

As for it not being a 'passion' job currently, that's a rather large generalization to make. I can name plenty of teachers that love what they do. The teacher shortage in Ontario might alert you to the fact that they're trying to recruit MORE teachers, regardless of how passionate they are. Are all bankers passionate about their jobs? what about doctors? please.

Bill 160, which is what Harris instiuted transferred control over educational matters from ELECTED school boards to government officials. It cut down teacher's preperation time (needed, as many of them now prep or mark at home), as well as removed school or board-wide influence on class sizes. What do we have to show for it? My university OAC Englsh class was 38 people. 38. It should have been 25. Don't give me the bullshit that Mike Harris helped education.

Here's a quote for you: Doug Devine, editor of the local Richmond Hill newspaper (25-09-97), summarized the criticisms towards Bill 160 with these words: "So let's recap. The Education Quality Improvement Act will result in fewer teachers teaching more students and fewer subjects in overcrowded schools with less time to prepare, less time to offer remedial help and less money to buy books, supplies and computers. Now, that should put Ontario's education system back on track!"

Bill 160 was essentially a cash grab needed to help the government achieve its tax cut. Bill 160 is just a move toward privatization (which explains why it was supported by richer families and middle class rejecetd it).

 

[The_Sweetest_Thing]

Walkerton was dealt poorly in media spotlight and really wasn't a government issue as it was a regional issue. And more importantly concerned a lying water inspector.

I'm not saying Walkerton was Harris's fault. I'm critcizing the way he handled it. Walkerton might not have happened had Harris not cut funding to to inspection services....

 

[anitram]

What relevance does that have for now? Do you think thats what will happen?

It's relevant because the construction of standardized tests has not really evolved since the days of the first ones.

Even today, scores are biased in favour of certain groups.

Therefore the tests have deep flaws in them and I really doubt very much that standardized testing has improved our educational system at all.

 

[boosterjuice]

I've been waiting for the Conservatives to hold a lead in an election race forever! Now that it's happening, it seems surreal.

 

[Zoomerang96]

yeah.

it seems surreally awful.

actually, it doesn't seem - it IS.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

Would a Conservative government be worth it if it means avoiding a referendum down the line in Quebec? (and perhaps separation too)

I'm not saying that's what will happen but it IS a possibility - if the Tories prove themselves a credible federal alternative to the Liberals then support for separation may decline thus negating any reason to hold a referendum.

The Conservatives would need to move slightly more to the centre, however, if they wanted to be seen as a legitimate alternative in Quebec - Quebec isn't, as a whole, a right-leaning province that's for sure.

 

[The_Sweetest_Thing]

It's relevant because the construction of standardized tests has not really evolved since the days of the first ones.

Even today, scores are biased in favour of certain groups.

Therefore the tests have deep flaws in them and I really doubt very much that standardized testing has improved our educational system at all.

I'm associated with the education system now. Currently, all the literacy test is doing is:

a) identifying kids who are that far behind
b) either forve feeding them info or help so that they can match the standards of the test (i.e. writing enough 'practice' questions that when the real test rolls around they know how to answer)
c) most of these kids end up dropping out anyway. The ones that are failing are high risk students. The tests aren't changing that. They're just making it more obvious.
d) As test info is availabel online, it's allowing parents to pick and choose 'smart' schools to send their kids to. Consequently, schools that do poorly continue to do poorly, while other schools find a surge in academics. Of course, these results never mention that the large number of failures may be due to special ed, or ESL kids....

 

[bonoman]

People, this is a debate about the Federal Election, not Ontario.

Oh thats right Canada does revolve around you....

 

[Zoomerang96]

Would a Conservative government be worth it if it means avoiding a referendum down the line in Quebec? (and perhaps separation too)

I'm not saying that's what will happen but it IS a possibility - if the Tories prove themselves a credible federal alternative to the Liberals then support for separation may decline thus negating any reason to hold a referendum.

The Conservatives would need to move slightly more to the centre, however, if they wanted to be seen as a legitimate alternative in Quebec - Quebec isn't, as a whole, a right-leaning province that's for sure.

short answer - yes. it would be worth it.

there needs to be a strong federal presense in quebec, even if it's tory.

 

[bonoman]

from my liberal candidates blog:


My riding is one of the poorest in the province, so when I read the note that Harper was planning to repeal the income tax cut for people in the lowest income tax bracket, I thought it was a misprint. He mentions that he will be bringing in other cuts, but I’m not a fan of cuts where you have to pay to save (i.e. the GST) as it favours those with greater financial means. I was sent an example that illustrates how Harper’s GST cut will save Canadians:

• Less than twenty five cents on a Timex, but fifty bucks on a Rolex.
• Four cents on a hamburger, but 10 times that if you can afford steak and lobster.
• Forty cents on a pair of Levi's, but 20 bucks if you could afford to buy a Gucci suit.
• Two hundred and fifty dollars on a Dodge Caravan, but one thousand three hundred dollars on a Porsche Cayenne.


so who does it realyy support!

 

[djfeelgood]

I still don't understand that argument.

If someone spends 1000000 or 1$ they still saved 2%

For a person who can afford to spend only 10000$ a year, 200$ in savings makes a big deal, its a one night stay in a nice resort, something that would most likely be a treat for someone who typically cannot afford to indulge.

Somone who makes 100000$ saves 2000$, so what, he already probably lives a luxurious life so whats 2000$ more or less.

It's the same.

Why do people think its a moral obligation to tax those who may have worked hard tooth and nail to get a job that pays well.

Did anyone catch the debate tonight? Duceppes reference to Martin as Chretien was pretty amusing.

 

[trevster2k]

The GST tax cut is ridiculous. A person with $100000 or $10000 tax free income does not spend all that money on GST items, much of it goes to food, mortgage and other non GST taxed items. This takes away quite a bit of that money which is supposed to be saved by less GST. Also, according to the premise of saving through spending, umm, how does anyone save money if I have to spend my entire tax free $10000 (by tax free I mean after taxes) to save $ 100 ( $200 in 5 years, not now). I have no money to put into RRSPs, savings account or any investments for the future. You have to spend every single penny you earn to achieve that tiny saving. Plus you don't get a cheque at the end of the year with your savings on it to go to that resort ( which for $200 must be pretty crappy), it's incremental. A penny here, a penny there, it's invisible. It's a gift to the rich who can afford big ticket items (which most Canadians can ill afford) who don't need it, we are a country that supposedly takes care of ALL Canadians, so yes we do have a moral obligation to tax fairly. This cut benefits wealthy Canadians as opposed to the middle class and low income earners, which by the way is the majority of Canadians. The rich are this tiny speck at the top of our social pyramid, they have enough benefits.

If this policy is designed as a stimulus for the economy, it is also wrong. Canadians do not need spending incentives, we are doing a great job of spending. We have productivity problems, we need investment in R & D for the future. The fact that this is a major platform which the Conservatives feel is highly effective already shows me they are heading us down the wrong path.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

short answer - yes. it would be worth it.

there needs to be a strong federal presense in quebec, even if it's tory.

I concur. I`ll take 18 months of the Tories in power if that`s what it takes for Quebec anger towards the Liberals to subside and support for separation to decline to the point where talk of a referendum would be almost non-existent. (as it was pre-scandal)

 

[djfeelgood]

Truthfully, have you ever TAUGHT? Do you have any idea how incredibly stressful and difficult it is to be a teacher? Don't you dare put them down. I have nothing but respect for the profession, and I think teachers deserve all the help they can get.

I guess I was jaded with a bunch of apathetic high school teachers, one who was a sexual predator. One who didnt have the required documents to teach. And had to be corrected by students on several occasions.

Fact of the matter is, there has been no change in the average intellectual scores of students entering universities Pre and post 'common sense revolution' If you can do the same thing for cheaper why not?

Mandatory teacher testing should be done simply because a teacher better know what they're talking about if they're gonna teach my kid. 35 people per class? University profs can teach 250 students chem 101 with a failure rate not that far off a high school science course, a prof doesnt even have formal teacher training. Fact of the matter is children in Asia and europe get taught in as much as 50-60 people per class with a fraction of the funding, and most of them can come here and be light years ahead of us canadian students.

Also, 8:30 am to 3:30 pm? 3 months off? There are far worse jobs out there for far less.

And I apologize for my generalization. There are good teachers out there and ones who love what they are doing. It was unfair of me to do so.

My humble opinions,
Aaron

 

[lmjhitman]

35 people per class? University profs can teach 250 students chem 101 with a failure rate not that far off a high school science course, a prof doesnt even have formal teacher training. Fact of the matter is children in Asia and europe get taught in as much as 50-60 people per class with a fraction of the funding, and most of them can come here and be light years ahead of us canadian students.

you're joking, right? the university demographic is hardly comparable to a regular classroom. in a regular classroom the the teacher has to be able to accomodate the esl kids, the special needs kids, truant kids, kids living in situations so horrendous that grades may not be their first priority. considered in that light, 35 is a completely unacceptable number.

a university classroom has the cream of the crop - the ones who have the intellectual, psychological, and social skills to succeed in school, most likely with a lot of family support. and they are adults who are PAYING to be there. so they can fuck off all semester and skip the final exam and it's no skin off the prof's back, it's just a waste of tuition money on the student's part.

my friends who have taught in asia tell me that the teachers there are well within their rights to beat students who misbehave (if some of our lovely asian interferencers could shed some more light on this, i'd appreciate it). my guess is that beating up one student would probably ensure that the other 59 students in the room stay fairly well behaved.

teachers are also very well respected in asia. you don't have people ignorantly spouting off about their short work days or insinuating that they are just glorified babysitters. the kids growing up in this culture then respect teachers as well. i could teach 60 kids too if i knew that each and every one of them (and their parents) respected my authority as a teacher in that room. but in canada, that's rarely the case, so we have to adjust our numbers accordingly.

Also, 8:30 am to 3:30 pm? 3 months off? There are far worse jobs out there for far less.

bullshit.

unless you're going to send kids to school year-round (which is an option in many places in canada, so feel free), you'll just have to accept that teachers' schedules will be similar (NOT identical) to students' schedules.

and as for the 8:30 - 3:30 schedule, i have NEVER met a teacher who got to school when the students arrived and then left as soon as the students left. when i was teaching full-time, i got to school at 7:30am and left at 6pm at the EARLIEST. and that was just regular day of teaching, prepping and marking - never mind the days where i gave up my lunch hour for student activites, or afterschool when i held homework help or exam prep sessions for students, attended staff meetings, professional development activites, parent conferences, collaborated with other teachers, or participated on the number of committees i was a part of. i think i more than made up for having 6 weeks off in the summer by working 12-14 hour days during the school year. many teachers pursue professional development activities during the summer as well, such as attending conferences, or taking additional coursework. in alberta, many of them mark the departmental exam taken by the students in june. not all of us while away the summer days on the beach.

pardon the rant, but i get really frustrated when people portray teachers as lazy and incompetent. if you want to put a price on my time and expertise as a professional, just remember that that's the same price you're putting on your child's education. you will get what you pay for.

 

[angelordevil]

The GST tax cut is ridiculous....This cut benefits wealthy Canadians as opposed to the middle class and low income earners, which by the way is the majority of Canadians. The rich are this tiny speck at the top of our social pyramid, they have enough benefits.

We'll see what happens with the GST. It gets thrown around more than smiling babies in the midst of an election setting, then nothing really changes afterwards. The GST really helped drive the Liberals' surpluses for years following Chrétien’s 1993 promise to axe it. It will be hard for any party to put that kind of apple pie back in the fridge.

In terms of helping the working class, and those less fortunate, It's worth noting how both the Liberals and Conservatives supported a proposal last fall that would have lead to billions in corporate tax cuts.

 

[The_Sweetest_Thing]

Imjhitman, I love you.

 

[dandy]

lmj, bang on.