Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Justin Trudeau - Suffering from Foot in Mouth - Canadian Style


Wetcoaster

Recommended Posts

NDP have already (and continue to) moved off the "fringe" and towards centre/moderate. I'd also like to note that the vast majority of countries that out rank us in all those livability/education/life expectancy yadda, yadda scores you see come out every year tend to be more socialistic (ie: left) in nature than us, not less.

This thinking that you can't have quality, well run social programs AND be fiscally responsible is idiotic. Numerous countries around the world do just that and out rank us on a great many livability/quality of life/education/health care etc standards. Why you wouldn't want to emulate that is beyond me.

Germany being an especially good example of this. They're pretty much propping up the entire EU and have excellent social programs, vast "green" initiatives and higher food/farming standards while retaining quality industries, manufacturing, tech etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NDP have already (and continue to) moved off the "fringe" and towards centre/moderate. I'd also like to note that the vast majority of countries that out rank us in all those livability/education/life expectancy yadda, yadda scores you see come out every year tend to be more socialistic (ie: left) in nature than us, not less.

This thinking that you can't have quality, well run social programs AND be fiscally responsible is idiotic. Numerous countries around the world do just that and out rank us on a great many livability/quality of life/education/health care etc standards. Why you wouldn't want to emulate that is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NDP have already (and continue to) moved off the "fringe" and towards centre/moderate. I'd also like to note that the vast majority of countries that out rank us in all those livability/education/life expectancy yadda, yadda scores you see come out every year tend to be more socialistic (ie: left) in nature than us, not less.

This thinking that you can't have quality, well run social programs AND be fiscally responsible is idiotic. Numerous countries around the world do just that and out rank us on a great many livability/quality of life/education/health care etc standards. Why you wouldn't want to emulate that is beyond me.

Germany being an especially good example of this. They're pretty much propping up the entire EU and have excellent social programs, vast "green" initiatives and higher food/farming standards while retaining quality industries, manufacturing, tech etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Ron, what's so bad about environmental protection? Workers rights? Even higher taxes?

We all want better roads, schools, hospitals, transit--but then when it comes time to pay for it everyone pisses and moans. Well, you can't have it both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even under the conservatives we have environmental protection and workers rights. It's not 1960. The NDP are guaranteed to up the cost of doing business which means less business. We will have a preview of it next year don't worry.

Of course we all want the government to give us stuff and for someone else to pay for it. The NDP do that by offering entitlements to people and getting big business to pay for it. It's no bolder than the local mayors council putting a deadline to the province to come up with funding. Every politician is bold with their promises so long as they don't get blamed by the people getting the benefit for making them pay for it.

Taxing the heck out of the business community is no more magic than any other form of taxation. It can and does alter behaviour, in this case more often than not by packing their bags and leaving town or simply shutting down entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything they have said my entire life?

OK, well not all the same. They might up the taxes even more on traditional villains like the banks and oil companies.

I seriously doubt there wouldn't be more regulations as well to add to the costs of all business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron, , the vast majority of countries routinely ranked ahead of say the USA (the self described "greatest country") in livability/education/health care etc have more social programs (including us). In other words, their people, overall (by those standards) are better off, happier, more educated, healthier etc with MORE social programs, not less.

So despite all this evidence and logic, people are still against social programs? Why is that? Is it just a feeling or sentiment of not wanting to pay for someone else's "free lunch"? Because all the evidence points to the contrary. Never mind that "sentiment" is a fairly poor way to make or vote on policy. I can also assure you that very few Canadians (or Germans, or Swiss or Japanese etc) actually think any of this is simply "free". We're quite aware that we pay taxes ;)

So help me understand, because I can't seem to find any logical argument for this line of thinking. It completely befuddles me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People aren't necessarily against social programs, but just want government to be fiscally responsible. Just writing blank cheques will just make things worse in the long-run.

I would say most people would want a vibrant private sector, which in turn will generate a bigger tax revenue for government, which in turn can pay for more programs. Make a bigger pie, not give a larger portion of a shrinking one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having personally experienced two NDP regimes in BC (Barrett and Harcourt/Clark/MIller/ Dosanjh), I am not looking forward to another. During economic good times they depressed the BC economy and it took years to "right" the ship. I shudder to think what would happen in fragile economic times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron, , the vast majority of countries routinely ranked ahead of say the USA (the self described "greatest country") in livability/education/health care etc have more social programs (including us). In other words, their people, overall (by those standards) are better off, happier, more educated, healthier etc with MORE social programs, not less.

So despite all this evidence and logic, people are still against social programs? Why is that? Is it just a feeling or sentiment of not wanting to pay for someone else's "free lunch"? Because all the evidence points to the contrary. Never mind that "sentiment" is a fairly poor way to make or vote on policy. I can also assure you that very few Canadians (or Germans, or Swiss or Japanese etc) actually think any of this is simply "free". We're quite aware that we pay taxes ;)

So help me understand, because I can't seem to find any logical argument for this line of thinking. It completely befuddles me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People aren't necessarily against social programs, but just want government to be fiscally responsible. Just writing blank cheques will just make things worse in the long-run.

I would say most people would want a vibrant private sector, which in turn will generate a bigger tax revenue for government, which in turn can pay for more programs. Make a bigger pie, not give a larger portion of a shrinking one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...