You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Well the election just came to my front door. My local NDP candidate just came by. He was well informed of the Water Treatment industry I am currently a student of which impressed me. Beats all the junk mail I've been getting from the Conservative MP over the last couple years including a real gem of a Canadian flag print with her name on it.
Great. Good to know your making an informed decision based on the fact that your NDP candidate made a good impression with their knowledge of your specific specialty area of study. He must be trustworthy!
Hell if any candidate could engage me in a 5 minute conversation about my life, I'd give them the right to represent my money, my decisions AND possibly the whole country!
OTTAWA — Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff told the country through Twitter on Saturday that he's up for a one-on-one debate with Conservative leader Stephen Harper moderated by comedian Rick Mercer.
Last week, Harper proposed the two leaders face off in a two-person debate, since, he said, come election day the only real choice Canadians will have is between a Conservative government or a Liberal-led coalition.
Ignatieff responded: "Any time, any place."
But Harper backed down the next day, saying the Conservatives aren't interested in extra debates, and would rather focus on touring the country.
Mercer weighed in this weekend, saying via Twitter that he'd step in to host a showdown between Harper and Ignatieff.
"I'min," Ignatieff replied online.
Harper hadn't responded.
Liberal staff said Ignatieff writes his own tweets.
The one for-certain English-debate will be broadcast live on April 14, followed two nights later by the French-language debate.
Comedian Rick Mercer offered on Twitter to host a debate between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff — and the Liberal leader said he be game.
Photograph by: Bruce Stotesbury, The Victoria Times Colonist
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
Great. Good to know your making an informed decision based on the fact that your NDP candidate made a good impression with their knowledge of your specific specialty area of study. He must be trustworthy!
Hell if any candidate could engage me in a 5 minute conversation about my life, I'd give them the right to represent my money, my decisions AND possibly the whole country!
Did I state I was voting on a personal appearance alone or suggest I was voting for one party over another? No, I was simply saying I appreciate the appearance more than the massive amounts of junk mail and a waste of paper I've received from the Conservative candidate. It is your behaviour in responding to my post which seems more likely that of someone who would make brash, hasty decisions.
can someone, in an unbiased, concise way, break down for me in point form liberals vs. conservatives, in terms of their stances on taxes and credits for middle income?
can someone, in an unbiased, concise way, break down for me in point form liberals vs. conservatives, in terms of their stances on taxes and credits for middle income?
That's a very hard thing to do, yet here are some highlights:
Taxes:
Liberals will roll back the corporate tax decrease scheduled. They need to to pay for their campaign promises. They opposed the GST reduction, and may need to pursue something like this to fund their campaign promises that total $8B (corporate tax cuts are ~$4B).
Conservatives started the corporate tax cuts, and now we have one of the lowest corporate taxes in the first world. The reasoning is that businesses invest more in tax advantaged places. If it works, we end up with more business, more jobs, thus more corporate and income tax, and the tax cuts are offset by new income.
Credits:
Liberals are giving out all kinds of money in the $8B family values spending. Students, those who stay home to care for a sick relative, those performing home renovations, ... will all get extra $$$.
Conservatives are not really promising anything. We're running deficits for the next 4 years, so what promises they are making are for when the budget is balanced, ie no deficit. They have some interesting promises, yet it remains to be seen if the deficit can be eliminated, especially if they do not get a majority and have to continue spending to satisfy the opposition.
Yet please don't take just my word, do your own research. I am biased to the Conservatives, yet tried to give an unbiased view - yet it will have some bias
^thanks man! what about for individual, rather than corporate taxation??
also can anyone recommend an unbiased website which breaks down each pqrty's stances? i wish tv ads were informative rather than attacking ppl for personal shit i dont care about Posted via RS Mobile
^thanks man! what about for individual, rather than corporate taxation??
also can anyone recommend an unbiased website which breaks down each pqrty's stances? i wish tv ads were informative rather than attacking ppl for personal shit i dont care about
My post highlights both corporate and income taxes. Summed up, all the parties except the Conservatives are offering some sort of incentive that will have to be paid for. That either means higher deficits, or higher taxes. The Conservatives are offering tax incentives to individuals, yet only once the budget is balanced, and they need a majority to do that sooner.
The fitness tax credit for adults offered by the Conservatives is interesting to me, since I have more than $500 of fitness spending each year. The income splitting even more interesting for me and other high earners - yet actually doesn't benefit much of the middle class.
The NDP have so far not offered a lot, and people are criticizing Layton for it, saying his health is affecting the campaign. The CC rate issue has already been covered in this thread.
As for places to get info without bias - stay tuned to this. So far much of the campaign material has been posted, with bias both for and against. Its hard not to get any bias, especially from the media, so it is important to balance the bias for and against. The Globe and Mail and CBC are both left leaning, while the National Post is right leaning. I tend to read them all so I get a balance of opinions.
Essentially everything that I feel is stated here from another website
Quote:
I'll give you a reason, and I'll type it slowly as you don't seem to read to fast.
Between the time Chretien took over from Mulroney, and the time Harper took over from Martin, were Canada and Canadians better off
Now from the time Harper took over from Martin until this election, are Canada and Canadians better off?
We have a massive deficit, coming off of a surplus and having paid down over 10% of the national debt, and the Conservatives are putting out ads about how they are the best to manage fiscal issues? Flaheraty is on the news right now speaking incredibly stupid rhetoric. He's claiming the Liberals, who brought us out of a $45 billion dollar deficit are fiscally irresponsible and only want to tax and spend. He's taking credit for Canada's mortgage crisis not being a bad as the US.
I don't care if you agree with the legalization of abortions or personal use of marijuana. These are moral issues and you need to vote on what you believe in. What I'm talking fiscal policy, the actual running of the government, and fiscal responsibility. If you actually believe the Conservatives have been better than the Liberals you've got your head in the sand and need to look at the facts and read your history books.
As for leaders, I can't comment on what Ignatieff or Layton have done as a PM as they haven't been in that position. I can comment on Harper, and the man has prorogued parliament twice, been found in contempt, been in a bubble with regards to openness, been all over the map with regards to policy, and worst of all, has had his thumb on his employees so that they are inneficient and can't do their job.
If you want to talk about other areas, such as Harper's senate reform, that would be fine. I'm even willing to talk about how most of this people on this board pretty much despise religion, yet many want an evangelical to be our PM.
1. The Conservatives have a huge donation money making machine.
2. The Liberals are a close second.
3. Who cares about the PQ.
4. The vote subsidy benefits the Green party the most - yet last election when May was bounced from the debate, guess what happened? The Green party averaged > $100K/day in donations, generating more than the vote subsidy.
5. The NDP I don't care about, so someone will have to look it up and post it. My guess is they have a mix of wealthy hippy/yuppy people willing to donate, and a bunch of poor people incapable of donating.
Thus for 3 of 5 parties, the vote subsidy doesn't really matter, and none of us care if the PQ benefits.
The reasons to end it are:
1. The parties that lose the election can essentially remain in campaign mode cause they get money right after the election. This means if we end up with another minority - guess what? The opposition can gear up for another untimely election sooner than later.
2. It is your tax dollars and we're in a deficit.
3. Most of the parties have no issue raising funds without the subsidy.
What a load of crap. The NDP have had their chance to vote for Senate term limits that the Conservatives introduced, which would make the upper chamber more fair as it would turn over more often. The Conservatives also support an elected Senate, rather than the appointed Senate of today.
All the NDP has to do is support the Conservatives on these measures and they'd be done already - so they can go to hell for being hypocrites.
Essentially everything that I feel is stated here from another website
Quote:
We have a massive deficit, coming off of a surplus and having paid down over 10% of the national debt, and the Conservatives are putting out ads about how they are the best to manage fiscal issues? Flaheraty is on the news right now speaking incredibly stupid rhetoric. He's claiming the Liberals, who brought us out of a $45 billion dollar deficit are fiscally irresponsible and only want to tax and spend.
Please do your research instead of reading crap that is wrong. The deficit spending is to appease the opposition and avoid elections. Go back to each year and see how the opposition hated the budget unless it included spending.
The Conservatives have promised no new spending until the deficit is gone - while the Liberals have promised to spend $8B of money we do not have, or at least $4B if corporate tax rates are rolled back. The Conservatives are the sound fiscal choice right now... sadly followed by the NDP. The Liberals are as bad as the PQ right now.
We have a massive deficit, coming off of a surplus and having paid down over 10% of the national debt, and the Conservatives are putting out ads about how they are the best to manage fiscal issues? Flaheraty is on the news right now speaking incredibly stupid rhetoric. He's claiming the Liberals, who brought us out of a $45 billion dollar deficit are fiscally irresponsible and only want to tax and spend. He's taking credit for Canada's mortgage crisis not being a bad as the US.
You can't look at numbers like that. The entire western world went into a huge recession - are you expecting us to still be in the black? We weathered through the recession quite well - but now is the time to bounce back.
I personally don't think the Liberals with their plans to spend money, and put corporate taxes back up will help anybody. We want companies to open up here... There's a reason why a lot of people move to the states for work...
right right. You mean companies like GE who made something like 20 billion in the USA but paid 0 tax to the USA?
Give me a break.
Do you think they would move anywhere else if they have to pay taxes?
There's a reason many US companies are headquartered in Delaware, and why many companies funnel profit through Iceland/Ireland/... low taxes.
Welcome to a global world, stop thinking small potatoes.
March 13, 2006: During a speech in Kandahar, Harper pledges Canada won't “cut and run” from Afghanistan. (isn't this is what canada doing now??
May 17, 2006: House of Commons votes to extend Afghanistan military mission for two years.
July 1, 2006: Conservatives lower GST by one percentage point, to six per cent, fulfilling a campaign promise.
Nov. 22, 2006: Quebecois formally declared a nation.
Dec. 12, 2006: Commons passes Conservatives' Federal Accountability Act, which tightens political donation rules, provides for a parliamentary budget officer, and offers more protection for whistleblowers.
May 3, 2007: Commons passes Conservatives' Fixed Election Dates Act, which provides for elections every four years unless a government is defeated in the Commons. Harper would ignore the law the following year.
Nov. 13, 2007: Harper announces that the government will call a public inquiry into dealings between former prime minister Brian Mulroney and disgraced businessman Karlheinz Schreiber.
Jan. 1, 2008: Conservatives move up second GST reduction and cut the tax by another percentage point, to five per cent.
Jan. 16, 2008: Government creates controversy by firing Linda Keen, head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Keen refused to bend to political pressure and approve a restart of the nuclear reactor at Chalk River, Ont., which had been deemed unsafe.
Jan. 22, 2008: Commission led by John Manley recommends Canada stay on in Afghanistan under certain conditions, including a gradual switch to a training mission and the purchase of new equipment, including transport helicopters.
March 13, 2008: Commons extends Afghan mission to July 2011.
April 15, 2008: Elections Canada and RCMP raid Conservative party headquarters seeking documents on Tory election spending. It's part of a long, legal battle between the party and the elections agency over interpretations of campaign financing rules.
June 11, 2008: Harper offers formal apology to natives for abuse in residential schools.
Sept. 7, 2008: Harper ignores his own fixed election date law and calls a vote for Oct. 14, saying Parliament has become dysfunctional.
Oct. 10, 2008: In a prediction that would soon come back to haunt him, Harper says: “This country will not go into recession next year and will lead the G7 countries.” The country promptly plunged into recession.
Oct. 14, 2008: Conservatives returned to office with a stronger minority of 143 seats. Liberals take 77, Bloc 49, NDP 37, and independents two.
Nov. 27, 2008: Fiscal update by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty proposes an end to per-vote subsidies for political parties, sparking opposition outrage. In the next few days, Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc agree to defeat the government in the Commons and replace it with a Liberal-NDP coalition, propped up by the Bloc.
Dec. 4, 2008: With a potentially fatal non-confidence vote looming, Harper asks the Governor General for permission to prorogue Parliament until Jan. 26, 2009. Permission is granted. (sneaky..lol)
Jan. 27, 2009: New budget offers billions in stimulus money to fight recession, forecasts deficit of $33.7 billion, leaves political party subsidies untouched.
Sept. 9, 2009: In a fiscal update, Flaherty revises budget deficit to $55.9 billion.
Dec. 30, 2009: Harper again prorogues Parliament, saying the government wants to “recalibrate,” and consult people on the next stage of its economic plan.
April 9, 2010: Helena Guergis fired from her cabinet job as minister of state for the status of women and kicked from Tory caucus amid murky allegations about her husband's business dealings. The RCMP subsequently finds no evidence of wrongdoing but Harper does not reinstate Guergis.
June 17, 2010: Government replaces mandatory long-census form with voluntary survey, provoking protests from opposition parties, economists, social agencies, religious bodies, municipalities and provinces.
June 26-27, 2010: Canada hosts G8 summit in Huntsville, Ont., and G20 summit in Toronto. Controversy rages over the huge cost of the weekend summits — more than $1 billion — and an indiscriminate police crackdown on peaceful protesters.
July 21, 2010: Munir Sheikh, head of Statistics Canada, resigns over the decision to kill the mandatory long-form census.
Oct. 12, 2010: Canada abandons its bid to win a seat on the UN Security Council after one round of voting. It's the first time in 50 years Canada fails to win such an election.
Nov. 16, 2010: Harper says Canadian troops will stay on in Afghanistan past the 2011 deadline, but in a non-combat role.
Tool, you may care about what you bolded, yet most Canadians do not - you don't even hear these issues being brought up by the opposition cause they know it too.
Jan. 16, 2008: Government creates controversy by firing Linda Keen, head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Keen refused to bend to political pressure and approve a restart of the nuclear reactor at Chalk River, Ont., which had been deemed unsafe.
Did anyone else feel bothered by the fact the Conservatives simply ordered the restart of a nuclear reactor despite reports that it was old and unsafe???
Why do they even bother with safety reports on things like this?
I know the Green's fully costed platform is also available. I wish to heck that Elizabeth Mae would join the liberals, despite her being in a tiny party she's still the most credible and intelligent of the party leaders.
Not sure about the Conservatives and NDP as of yet.
As for CPP - The Con's increased what we pay into CPP and what ever party comes into power will have to do the same. As increasingly Canadians are pushed out of the housing market, they're going into retirement with out and tangible equity and fewer RRSPs and on top of all that, living longer, meaning more and more people are relying on their CPP and the further income top ups to survive in old age. The rates we're paying now are more to sustain us from 65 to 70-75, not into our 90s.
Layton's actually being surprisingly reasonable and honest with his assessment.
You can't look at numbers like that. The entire western world went into a huge recession - are you expecting us to still be in the black? We weathered through the recession quite well - but now is the time to bounce back.
I personally don't think the Liberals with their plans to spend money, and put corporate taxes back up will help anybody. We want companies to open up here... There's a reason why a lot of people move to the states for work...
Excuse me. The Con's increased our debt PRIOR to the recession.
__________________
~ Just another noob looking for a clue
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
