Canada Kicks Ass
2019 Canadian Federal Election

REPLY

Previous  1 ... 46  47  48  49  50  51  52 ... 55  Next



PluggyRug @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:07 am

I can see Wexit gaining traction.

   



peck420 @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:07 am

DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Personal debt used as a way to borrow income from the future only works if future income increases.

Unsurprisingly, lol, the PBO has a calculator for this...they should run for office, ffs...

https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/default/files/Documents/ElectionProposalCosting/Tool/index.html?lang=en

Edit to add:

Make sure the "Show Back-end" box is selected, if you would like to see the std. debt types and correlated interest rates in the calculator.

   



llama66 @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:10 am

BeaverFever BeaverFever:
peck420 peck420:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Demonstrates my point though. Sovereign debt is not the same as personal debt.

Not really.

For a middling power like Canada, national debt acts internally in pretty much the same way as personal debt.

It is only internationally that it acts any differently.

If our leadership was smart, the only concern for Canada would always be the debt servicing costs, not debt to GDP ratios, and how they compare to other nations.



As I’ve posted time and again on here that is false. A nation with Sovereign currency can never run out of its own money. FULL STOP.

A Nation with sovereign debt can refinance its debt indefinitely as unlike personal debt it doesn’t have to be paid off before a retirement date or death date and governments can raise income whenever they want and never have to worry about unemployment. Governments can monetize an almost infinite supply of assets (selling government owned land, property, property rights etc).

Most or all of the major western economies have been carrying debt for 50 or even 100 years, the UK debt even goes back over 300 years

Your right, look at great nations like Zimbabwe when it tried to print it's way out of debt.

   



bootlegga @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:15 am

DrCaleb DrCaleb:
llama66 llama66:
Proportional Representation must be considered or this country will die. It's too big geographically for FPTP


That's exactly why Trudeau reneged on his promise of PR. If favours the Right in votes, as we can see the CPC picked up the popular vote, but is shut out of Government once again.

Which really disappoints me, because Scheer was the biggest liar of the campaign. Trudeau was the second biggest liar, and Jagmeet was a surprisingly good liar too. All of them spent their time dissing one another, and telling lies about one another. And the people of Canada rewarded them for it with their votes. No one discussed policy. No one discussed how they were going to tackle problems Canada faced, except May. And what does she get for it? Ignored or ridiculed.

Sad.


I don't think it does favour the right - it favours the left. The CPC may have got more votes than the Liberals, but that is because Alberta & Saskatchewan voted 70% in favour of them - in Vancouver and in central and eastern Canada, in ridings the CPC lost, they often barely got 25% of the vote.

And the reality is that more than 55% of Canadian voters choose Liberal, NDP or Green in this election.

That means with STV or ranked ballots, you're going to get more progressive MPs, because very few NDP, Green or Liberal voters are going to rank the Conservative candidate second.

Look at Edmonton Centre - James Cumming won with 42% of the vote, but with STV/ranked ballots, the NDP votes might have gone to Boissonault and he might have gotten a seat.

   



bootlegga @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:16 am

peck420 peck420:
If our leadership was smart, the only concern for Canada would always be the debt servicing costs, not debt to GDP ratios, and how they compare to other nations.


Agreed.

   



bootlegga @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:19 am

PluggyRug PluggyRug:
I can see Wexit gaining traction.


Except BC isn't interested in joining Alberta and Saskatchewan and the territories cannot succeed, so it's really much, much smaller than that image.

And landlocked to boot.

   



DrCaleb @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:25 am

bootlegga bootlegga:
I don't think it does favour the right - it favours the left. The CPC may have got more votes than the Liberals, but that is because Alberta & Saskatchewan voted 70% in favour of them - in Vancouver and in central and eastern Canada, in ridings the CPC lost, they often barely got 25% of the vote.

And the reality is that more than 55% of Canadian voters choose Liberal, NDP or Green in this election.

That means with STV or ranked ballots, you're going to get more progressive MPs, because very few NDP, Green or Liberal voters are going to rank the Conservative candidate second.

Look at Edmonton Centre - James Cumming won with 42% of the vote, but with STV/ranked ballots, the NDP votes might have gone to Boissonault and he might have gotten a seat.


I was talking Proportional Representation. You are talking ranked ballots. You made my point for me. ;)

If the CPC got 45% of the popular vote in PR, they would have 45% of the seats. They don't.

$1:
First past the post can reward regional strength, with the Conservatives able to squeak out a plurality of seats thanks to their advantage in the West and outside of Toronto in Ontario. Meanwhile, the Liberals are penalized in Quebec for trailing the NDP among francophones, despite being ahead provincewide.

But it tends to be most beneficial to the leading party. The Conservatives took 46 per cent of seats in 2008 with just 38 per cent of the vote, while they captured 54 per cent of the seats with 40 per cent of the vote in 2011. When the Liberals were in power they were the ones who benefited, taking 44 per cent of the seats in 2004 with 37 per cent of the vote, and majorities from 1993 to 2000, while falling well short of 50 per cent support.

In other words, there is little incentive for the party in power to change the system that got it there.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/electo ... -1.2857321

   



raydan @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:32 am

If we got rid of political parties, we wouldn't need PR... just saying.

   



Sunnyways @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:36 am

If Canada had PR, we’d probably see more coalitions and the likely combinations would not include the Tories unless they got an outright majority. They are quite different from the other parties in their policies.

   



Winnipegger @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:38 am

My first reaction: we spent months campaigning, a lot of people put in a hell of a lot of work, and we spent copious quantities of cash, yet the final result was what I could have predicted a year ago! What have we accomplished?

Judy Klassen quit as a provincial MLA in Manitoba to run federally in the same area. The provincial Liberals barely had party status, when she quit they didn't. For the provincial election, all the other Liberal MLAs got re-elected, but none new. That means provincial Liberals still don't have party status. Yet, Judy failed to win a federal seat. She's now unemployed. Bad decision; that hurt the party.

In my riding, the Liberal candidate who defeated me for the nomination got almost exactly the same percent of the vote as the Liberal candidate for 2004 & 2006. The guy who replaced me for 2008 when my nomination was disallowed was the first Liberal in my riding to get less than 10% of the vote. The lady who batted her beautiful eyes at senator Rod Zimmer and was manipulated in for 2011 was the only Liberal to do worse! She was clueless. In 2015 it was a close 3-way race between NDP, Conservative, and Liberal, but she still came 3rd. But this time it's back to normal; she got the same result as 2004 & 2006.

Liberals lost the popular vote, but won a minority. Duh! We all saw that coming more that a year ago.

When Trudeau campaigned, he kept going farther and farther to hard extreme left-wing. He kept repeating the word "austerity" when he actually meant keeping spending within the government's means. Spending within your means is *NOT* austerity. Everything he said that, I wanted to vote against him. I'm a fiscally responsible Liberal, aka blue Liberal, aka centrist Liberal. Trudeau promised to balance the budget in 2019 and surplus in 2020. I never agreed with a deficit in the first place, running a deficit was a very very bad idea. And he promised the first budget would have a deficit of *LESS* than $10 billion, but his first budget announced $29.4 billion! After the audit, the first year had a deficit of "only" $17.8 billion; that was not as bad but still more than $10 billion. This March Trudeau and Morneau announced a surplus of $3.1 billion for the first eleven months of the first year 2018/2019. That's a tiny surplus, really just a contingency fund, but it meant a balanced budget. They could have had a balanced budget for 2019 and surplus for 2020, fulfilling their election promise. I was surprised and impressed. Then they just had to screw it up! For this year's budget, they went on a spending spree; they returned us to double-digit billion dollar deficits. The budget has projections for this fiscal year and 4 years in the future, they project double-digit billion dollar deficits that whole time. All they had to do was do nothing, continue their sound fiscal and financial policies, they could have said they're good money managers and fulfill their election promises. But no, they had to screw it up.

You don't abandon your political base in a vain attempt to seduce voters from other parties. That just stupid, but that's exactly what they did. I joined the Liberal party when Paul Martin became leader, yet I had a very difficult decision to make, do I vote against them? I won't tell you how I voted, but I did not at all feel comfortable voting for them. CBC had Christy Clark on, she said the federal government has been NDP for the last 4 years, running under the guise of Liberals. I agree, and Trudeau's rhetoric this election was even worse.

   



DrCaleb @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:39 am

raydan raydan:
If we got rid of political parties, we wouldn't need PR... just saying.


That makes no sense. How can you hate 'the other guys', if there are no other guys? [huh]

   



raydan @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:41 am

DrCaleb DrCaleb:
raydan raydan:
If we got rid of political parties, we wouldn't need PR... just saying.


That makes no sense. How can you hate 'the other guys', if there are no other guys? [huh]

I hate them all so it makes no difference for me.

   



Strutz @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:52 am

raydan raydan:
If we got rid of political parties, we wouldn't need PR... just saying.

Like I said a few pages back... I'd like to see more Independents get elected.

   



DrCaleb @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:53 am

Winnipegger Winnipegger:
In my riding, the Liberal candidate who defeated me for the nomination got almost exactly the same percent of the vote as the Liberal candidate for 2004 & 2006. The guy who replaced me for 2008 when my nomination was disallowed was the first Liberal in my riding to get less than 10% of the vote.


Didn't know you ran! Kudos for trying!

   



Winnipegger @ Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:54 am

Sunnyways Sunnyways:
If Canada had PR, we’d probably see more coalitions and the likely combinations would not include the Tories unless they got an outright majority. They are quite different from the other parties in their policies.

Traditionally Liberals and Progressive Conservatives have both been in the centre. Both very similar, more similar to each other than any other party. In 1993 we the voters destroyed the PCs because they violated their mandate so dramatically. We didn't let them recover. They had to merge with the Reform Party (in the guise of "Alliance") in order to become a major party. The CPC is not PC, they're hard right-wing. But remnants of PCs are still within the CPC. Trudeau's Liberals are not Liberal.

   



REPLY

Previous  1 ... 46  47  48  49  50  51  52 ... 55  Next