Election Thread: Canada |TBA or October '09|

[Pierre the Great]

What confuses you, Pierre the Great?

I don't know where you were going with that picture. First you were like vote conservative to get rid of dion. I know what the flag is. That's a proud Quebecer and a proud Canadian. The type of people the NDP will attract with Mulcair as the Quebec spokesperson.

[zumpano21]

slashing up programs

failing on the environment

Afghanistan

health care

being bush's pawn

making canada a joke internationally

Harper in general

Using the house of commons like he has a majority

Honestly I'm hoping for a tie. Liberals and Conservatives. Then the parties will have to work together. If you don't want minorities start pushing for coalitions.

I think you should step back and see the forest for the trees. All of those issues listed above don't even register on the radar of the average Canadian who is generally pretty happy these days. Nothing can really upset a government riding a hot economy. And "Harper in general" doesn't exactly sound objective. This is an objective forum, not a lunchtime rant.

[Pierre the Great]

okay if harper is doing so great then why isn't the conservative party polling crazy numbers?

Guarantee you that's what the Liberals will run on because Liberals created this economy as well.

[Cataclaw]

I don't know where you were going with that picture. First you were like vote conservative to get rid of dion. I know what the flag is. That's a proud Quebecer and a proud Canadian. The type of people the NDP will attract with Mulcair as the Quebec spokesperson.

Like i said, my values lean Liberal/NDP, but in my riding, i may find myself voting conservative to help defeat the Bloc. I'll have to do without the moral satisfaction of voting for the party that represents me in order to beat the separatists. My conscience will live.

And yes, that flag is the Canadian Unity Flag (also refered to as the Canadian Duality Flag)

The blue stripes represent the proportion of french speaking Canadians within Canada. It is many things: a flag of Quebec pride, a flag of Canadian pride, a flag of unity, an anti-separatist flag, and in my opinion, it should one day become the official flag of Canada.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Cataclaw

[Pierre the Great]

Alberta would be up in arms if that happened.

But why vote conservative when bloc votes will go over the the ndp. ndp will have a better opportunity.

more federal parties then just the albertans contingent.

[Dirty Harry]

only a fraction of votes are needed to go to the npd/ndp from the bloc and ndp wins. Outremont was not a fluke.

Dude, Outremont definitely raised the NDP's status in Quebec, but don't present as some massive tidal change. It was a meaningless Bi-election that had no effect on the distribution of Parliament. I was lumped into that riding and I didn't even personally bother to vote (first time ever really) because it was such a pointless election. What was the overall turnout? 30% or 40%? Also that guy Mulcair was just a Liberal cabinet member.

[simonus]

I've been NDP too long to think that there is going to be some titanic NDP revolution in Quebec. Living in the US, I'm pretty out of the loop vis-a-vis Canadian politics, but I doubt that too many people are finding their way leftward right now.

It'd be nice for NDP to gain a bigger foothold in the province, but I'm not exactly holding my breath.

[Mont Royale]

okay if harper is doing so great then why isn't the conservative party polling crazy numbers?

Guarantee you that's what the Liberals will run on because Liberals created this economy as well.

The Conservative party may not be polling "crazy" numbers, but they're not much different from the numbers that gave them a minority government. So it's unlikely to lead to a change in government, which was the point being made.

Also, I doubt that the Liberals will run on the economy, because Harper has "been in charge for a long time now", as you mentioned in a previous post. To the minimal extent that there is a connection made, the Liberal contribution to the economy won't be seen as having much to do with Dion.

[Pierre the Great]

the next election won't be on the economy, people do not have that short of memory.

environment policy

foreign policy- bush's buddy, making canada seem not important in the world anymore

hypocrisy- having a senator in government, emerson bribe and so on.

ignoring western canada- don't think the liberals will go there but nobody likes harper here except the one kid from alberta who is told how to vote and has no real political opinion then "what my mom told me to do", typical albertan right winger wants a free alberta, wants to join the united states even. social conservative

the west is being ignored, environmental disasters are a brewing. The Athabasca river is now an environmental disaster and no one is going to clean it up.

The "independents" that voted for Harper last time, now despise him. The West is not happy. He spends too much time in Quebec for their liking.

[jetsniper]

except the one kid from alberta who is told how to vote and has no real political opinion then "what my mom told me to do", typical albertan right winger wants a free alberta, wants to join the united states even. social conservative

I have friends like that. It's ######ing annoying.

[Pierre the Great]

Its annoying yet comical, because they're so desperately putting on this u.s. social conservatism mask, which is who they apparently want to be, but for some reason the act isn't working and they come off just stupid/funny. Like they're not serious at all.

[jetsniper]

I should mention for the record Cataclaw, I really like that flag. This is the first time I've ever seen it but I wouldn't have any problem at all if that became our official flag. I'd almost prefer it.

[Cataclaw]

I should mention for the record Cataclaw, I really like that flag. This is the first time I've ever seen it but I wouldn't have any problem at all if that became our official flag. I'd almost prefer it.

From a strictly aesthetic perspective (putting asside the unity symbolism) i think the touch of blue puts a bit of contrast on the flag and really sets it off. Looking strictly at design and ignoring historical and/or symbolic value, i think the unity flag is a nicer flag than the current Canadian one.

Pierre: The NDP are hardly that strong. In my riding, the NDP are miles behind the Conservatives. If would take more than just a couple of Bloc-goers switching to change the tide. No, the battle in my riding and my others like it will be between the blues and the other blues.

[Pierre the Great]

yes i know the ndp isn't strong but the NDP a future Quebec leader waiting in the wings in Mulcair, Layton's days are numbered. We're thinking that depending on what shapes up in this election i.e. somebody gets a majority. Layton is gone and Mulcair becomes the leader. At the last convention he completely blew everyone away. While everyone within the NDP caucus loves Jack and how he's brought the party back, there's that whole right wing monikers the blog people like to put on him which i think is immature and stupid.

I'm just saying NDP has needed an opening in Quebec, the only way that opening would happen is if the referendum politics of the province stopped and it has. There's no more only one federalist option in Quebec. There's 3 and the so called sovereignty camp is splitting. The only problem the party has is that it needs recognizable candidates that will happen. But as the Bloc disintegrates and the politics move from "which party can i get the most out of for Quebec" to "which party reflects my views" the NDP going to be the benefactor of that change in thinking.

Its a new era in Quebec, we aren't used to seeing. BQ doesn't have a platform for which to stand on, their trump card is gone, Liberals can't rely on "we are the only option" card now either because that era is dead and gone.

[Jean]

For once my riding will be interesting to watch.. it used to be hardcore liberal territory but the bloc won it last time due to sponsorship.. now with the Conservatives and NDP rising and Bloc and Liberal falling, Gatineau is a riding that anybody could take. The winner will almost assurely have less than 35% and likely less than 30. Same thing in Hull.

Tough Liberals cant win with Dion. Hes getting rejected in his own province for christ sake. The best they can hope for is to maintain the Conservatives to a minority IMHO. They dont even deserve that much, under Dion's leadership the Liberals have been absolutely pathetic. Canada's real opposition is the NDP.

[Pierre the Great]

My christmas wish is to see the Liberals and NDP switch places politically don't know when though the liberal diehards will jump off their sinking ship.

[Dirty Harry]

Dion announced he's moving the Liberal's more to the left. What a great plan lol, give up the centre/right and split the socialist vote with the NDP/BLoc/Greens.

[Pierre the Great]

Dion announced he's moving the Liberal's more to the left. What a great plan lol, give up the centre/right and split the socialist vote with the NDP/BLoc/Greens.

Most Liberal voters think the Liberals are left anyways and so do the party members. lol

[Zowpeb]

Surprisingly, other then on the issue of the environment the Green party takes a right wing stance on a number of issues...and also has a pretty "out in left field" stance on others. They simply can't be taken seriously IMHO. Creating a party with one over-riding mission is simply ridiculous. For that reason I also find the BQ an equally ridiculous party.

The NDP is a joke. I'm sorry to all you NDP supporters but they waddle up to the trough of entitlement worse then the Liberals. The NDP answer to everything is to create a social program and throw money at it. Rarely have I ever seen an NDP response that actual tackle the root cause issues.

I get the impression that many of you are either still in school or in your early 20's...I think it's fascinating that young people have always voted for very left wing parties and then moved to the right as they got older.

Canada has a number of parties to vote for BUT there are really only 2 parties that carry weight...the Conservatives and the Liberals. Over the years I've voted for both, right now I vote Conservative because I think the Liberals scammed this country for too long and they need to be taught that the voter will not stand for it. I also think the Conservatives have done a fine job running the country.

I do have some questions PTG:

1) Why is it a problem that Harper is "running things like a majority"? It's a sign of someone who is a shrewd politician who is getting his policies in place within the framework of government he was elected to. He moves issues forward and it would be quite easy for the opposition to shoot them down. They don't...but you think that Harper should be "blamed" for this? Or blamed for not taking advantage of the Liberals not being prepared? I can 100% guarantee that if the Liberals were in power you would say it was good leadership. LMAO.

2) Why do you consider him Bush's crony? To be honest I don't really see it. Can you name 4 issues that prove this point???

3) Dion can NOT run on the environment effectively. He and the Liberals failed on the environment for FAR longer then the Conservatives. The Conservatives are setting smart goals that are attainable...every method of continuous improvement involves moving this forward at a sustainable pace. The Liberals, the Kyoto Accord and many other international attempts to help the environment are aimed at controlling "some" countries and not others, they are made with unattainable goals with methods that are open to abuse. The Conservatives are taking the right approach in protecting Canada's interests and moving foward with attainable goals and incrementally raising the bar over time. JMHO. I'm a big believer of the environmental cause and I see people abuse the entire philosophy on a daily basis due to lack of information, misinformation, and preying on the fears, that the NDP, Liberals and Green Party are attempting to convey in their attempt to gain power.

4) Afgahnistan? What's the issue exactly? That the Conservatives have continued what the Liberals started? I don't see that the Liberals can make much of an argument that Canada should actually leave Afgahnistan. It is highly irrational to think that simply leaving is in the best interest of anyone...you can only imagine the turmoil that this course of action would leave behind.

5) When did Canada become a joke internationally? Why do you think that?

6) Why is health care the issue for Harper? Health Care is in the realm of provincial politics. Perhaps you could take issue with federal transfer payments and the relation to health care but I think it's an argument easily fought.

The reason the Conservatives trail in the polls has little to do with Harper and everything to do with people voting along party lines. People vote Liberal because they are the Liberals. Immigrants often vote for the Liberals because of the simple definition of the word and because the Liberals were likely in power when the came here. Canadians often vote Liberal because their parents did, or because the Liberals tend to be centrist and maintain the status quo, or because that's simply how they vote because it's safe and easy. I honestly believe it's that simple...consider the apathy in elections, now consider how educated people actually are on the issues, now consider how POOR a job the media does at conveying the platforms of anything not Liberal...THAT'S why the Liberals poll well and it's hard for any other party to gain a foot hold.

[Pierre the Great]

1. When you are in a minority government it means bi-partisan cooperation you work with other parties to get things done, not throw down legislation that you know the opposition won't agree with at all. He's not working with other parties, he's dictating, you can only do that when you're in the majority, in my opinion. look what happened to Clark...

2. Its not just the environment, like having the same environmental standards as the U.S. which in most cases means weakening the laws, foreign affairs, Bush has no credibility he never has, so he uses other leaders to do his work for him. Environment, AIDS, U.N., NATO, Middle East politics etc. Its more like this, there's this joke we had back in the states about the brits, anything we do no matter how crazy the idea is, they'll follow along like sheep. Sure enough this is the case, Canada used to not be like that. Foreign Affairs sovereignty so to speak. Plus he's made no bones about it in the past that he looks to the south, wrote an editorial in the ny times telling Americans he was sorry that Canada wasn't going to Iraq, etc.

3. I don't trust the Liberals to do anything productive, they live in the past glories of ex prime ministers. The problem with the Conservatives is that they don't do anything. The programs that they originally cut then re-instituted saying it was there idea when it was old Liberal programs with a new name. Conservatives aren't doing anything to address smog, environmental disaster that is Alberta, deforestation in B.C. Conservatives say its in Canada's best interest, no its not. Its in the corporations best interest. All conservative parties are like this, only ones that aren't are in Europe. And I've addressed the issue of the big polluters, its called societal pressure for change from the outside to cause change in the inside. Think of it as an underground movement. If we all shun the big polluters, much like we do with every other subject (nuclear weapons, apartheid), eventually we will break the governments that aren't listening. Its worked in other international disagreements it most certainly will work with environmental issues.

4. What is the goal of us being in Afghanistan. What exactly is our mission. It needs to be defined, along with what do we want the commitment to be, then is this what Canada really should be doing, or is our talents better used elsewhere. Why isn't other NATO countries not wanting to go into South Afghanistan. Why are we taking the brunt of the causalities, when I believe the goal was to be peace keepers. Why was Turkey replaced as the official spokes-country for NATO. That should of never switched.

5. See Harper and Bush, anyone who is associated with Bush these days automatically becomes a joke, and that's not just personal opinion, I'm afraid.

6. Go back to his campaign that got him into 24 Sussex, he has not addressed it

Completely agree about the Liberals and I know we're on different sides of the political spectrum. Its just people being lazy. lol the whole if its "Liberal" that must mean they're good worked for the B.C. Liberal Party which is So-cred. lol

I've never seen the Liberals as centric, they're opportunists. When prevailing winds go a bit to the right, they go with it, if it goes to the left, they follow it. They're a fad party, whatever fad is in, they'll go in that direction especially 90's and 00's Liberals. The media is a joke, all the papers here are right wing, all of them, owned by the same company. (how sad)

But the people voting for Liberal are the ones that suffer the most because in reality the issues that need to be addressed aren't going to be addressed by an opportunist minded party for which the Liberal party has become. Then I get the Liberal loyalists saying "if Layton hadn't pulled the government, we'd have this and this and this" yeah yeah blah blah blah blah, they fail to mention that Martin was inept, and if they had gone on much longer, It would have been Liberal elections of '84 repeat. Plus Harper had to get to power, capped as a minority so the people could judge what kind of leader he would be, plus Harper can't rule forever so you might as well give him his chance now and then get him out of the way once he eventually loses. (who's the heir? tories don't have one, that's their future biggest weakness imo federal version of the adq)

I disagree with you on the Greens, they're a threat a big threat, they aren't a one issue party, if they were Elizabeth May would be running out here on Vancouver Island and easily win. But instead she's running in Central Nova, McKay's riding, and she's doing it for a reason. Her party was the Progressive Conservative Party, the Greens have made no bones about it, they're hopping mad that the PC party is gone. They are the "new P.C." party if you want to put it bluntly. That's how they're going to run.

libertarian green is the best I can peg them as. They're bread and butter voters are in the old P.C. wing and the right of centre Liberals. That's a big chunk of votes. I said a year ago and I'll say it again when people saw NDP polling drop and Green voting go up (NDP is now back to where they were). Greens are more of a threat to the Conservatives and right of centre Liberals then the NDP.

What was the "mantra" of the 90's Liberals? Socially left, economically centre to centre right in some cases. that's the green party of canada. libertarian green.

[Zowpeb]

1. When you are in a minority government it means bi-partisan cooperation you work with other parties to get things done, not throw down legislation that you know the opposition won't agree with at all. He's not working with other parties, he's dictating, you can only do that when you're in the majority, in my opinion. look what happened to Clark...

2. Its not just the environment, like having the same environmental standards as the U.S. which in most cases means weakening the laws, foreign affairs, Bush has no credibility he never has, so he uses other leaders to do his work for him. Environment, AIDS, U.N., NATO, Middle East politics etc. Its more like this, there's this joke we had back in the states about the brits, anything we do no matter how crazy the idea is, they'll follow along like sheep. Sure enough this is the case, Canada used to not be like that. Foreign Affairs sovereignty so to speak. Plus he's made no bones about it in the past that he looks to the south, wrote an editorial in the ny times telling Americans he was sorry that Canada wasn't going to Iraq, etc.

3. I don't trust the Liberals to do anything productive, they live in the past glories of ex prime ministers. The problem with the Conservatives is that they don't do anything. The programs that they originally cut then re-instituted saying it was there idea when it was old Liberal programs with a new name. Conservatives aren't doing anything to address smog, environmental disaster that is Alberta, deforestation in B.C. Conservatives say its in Canada's best interest, no its not. Its in the corporations best interest. All conservative parties are like this, only ones that aren't are in Europe. And I've addressed the issue of the big polluters, its called societal pressure for change from the outside to cause change in the inside. Think of it as an underground movement. If we all shun the big polluters, much like we do with every other subject (nuclear weapons, apartheid), eventually we will break the governments that aren't listening. Its worked in other international disagreements it most certainly will work with environmental issues.

4. What is the goal of us being in Afghanistan. What exactly is our mission. It needs to be defined, along with what do we want the commitment to be, then is this what Canada really should be doing, or is our talents better used elsewhere. Why isn't other NATO countries not wanting to go into South Afghanistan. Why are we taking the brunt of the causalities, when I believe the goal was to be peace keepers. Why was Turkey replaced as the official spokes-country for NATO. That should of never switched.

5. See Harper and Bush, anyone who is associated with Bush these days automatically becomes a joke, and that's not just personal opinion, I'm afraid.

6. Go back to his campaign that got him into 24 Sussex, he has not addressed it

Completely agree about the Liberals and I know we're on different sides of the political spectrum. Its just people being lazy. lol the whole if its "Liberal" that must mean they're good worked for the B.C. Liberal Party which is So-cred. lol

I've never seen the Liberals as centric, they're opportunists. When prevailing winds go a bit to the right, they go with it, if it goes to the left, they follow it. They're a fad party, whatever fad is in, they'll go in that direction especially 90's and 00's Liberals. The media is a joke, all the papers here are right wing, all of them, owned by the same company. (how sad)

But the people voting for Liberal are the ones that suffer the most because in reality the issues that need to be addressed aren't going to be addressed by an opportunist minded party for which the Liberal party has become. Then I get the Liberal loyalists saying "if Layton hadn't pulled the government, we'd have this and this and this" yeah yeah blah blah blah blah, they fail to mention that Martin was inept, and if they had gone on much longer, It would have been Liberal elections of '84 repeat. Plus Harper had to get to power, capped as a minority so the people could judge what kind of leader he would be, plus Harper can't rule forever so you might as well give him his chance now and then get him out of the way once he eventually loses. (who's the heir? tories don't have one, that's their future biggest weakness imo federal version of the adq)

I disagree with you on the Greens, they're a threat a big threat, they aren't a one issue party, if they were Elizabeth May would be running out here on Vancouver Island and easily win. But instead she's running in Central Nova, McKay's riding, and she's doing it for a reason. Her party was the Progressive Conservative Party, the Greens have made no bones about it, they're hopping mad that the PC party is gone. They are the "new P.C." party if you want to put it bluntly. That's how they're going to run.

libertarian green is the best I can peg them as. They're bread and butter voters are in the old P.C. wing and the right of centre Liberals. That's a big chunk of votes. I said a year ago and I'll say it again when people saw NDP polling drop and Green voting go up (NDP is now back to where they were). Greens are more of a threat to the Conservatives and right of centre Liberals then the NDP.

What was the "mantra" of the 90's Liberals? Socially left, economically centre to centre right in some cases. that's the green party of canada. libertarian green.

I think this may be the most interesting post I've seen you right yet...here's my take:

1) Just because he was voted into to a minority government does not mean he HAS to work with the other parties. It means he has to be more creative in attempting to pass the legislation he wants passed...which means working as a coalition from issue to issue typically. However, he has found the Liberals are too weak to call the election and the NDP and BQ do not want to appear to be the ones to call the election and annoy the electorate. So, they say: "hey, it's up to the Liberals to call it"...when they know they won't...so they play both ends against the middle and try to look like the innocents. In the end it's smart politics and smart leadership by Harper that is allowing him to move the legislation they believe is best for Canada forward. In fact, I think it speaks volumes of his ability to make intelligent decisions.

2) Canada does not have the same environmental standards as the US. We are stricter in almost every facet. In fact, Canada is very similar to Californian standards...which are the strictest in the US and far stricter then Federal standards. Granted they are still behind many other countries. As for Aids, the UN, Nato, etc...Canada donates big dollars to HIV/AIDS research/aid but the media will always cry for more. They decided to take care of Canadians FIRST and are worrying about aid to other countries second...I FULLY applaud them for that. Would you give money to a homeless person if your mother couldn't afford to eat?? THAT's the attitude I see from the left...they try to make you feel guilty and shove you into giving hard earned money to people who are suffering the consequences of their own actions(or lack of actions). The US has tried to claim our northern waters as their own and tried to claim it as open waterways...we've really ramped up our sovereignty on that area. We fight the US on trade all the time. We refuse to send them our fresh water under NAFTA. Harper fights the US and Bush when it's in our best interests. The Liberals fought them because many Canadians identified themselves as Canadians with the philosophy of "we're not American"...I've lived on both sides of the border and I see that philosophy very clearly from many Canadians and the Liberals played to that tune.

3) Correct me if I'm wrong but the current standard on de-forestation is that they must replant anything they cut down...and that the government subsidizes this...which is what the US forest industry takes issue with generally. I also understand that they are quite limited on the area's they are allowed to cut. Admittedly, I don't follow this issue closely from SW Ontario. I fully agree the Liberals are opportunists...but I think most politicians are to some degree. Many of the smog issues in Ontario are coming from the Ontario Liberals not shutting down the coal plants(despite promises to do so), the City of Toronto running the TTC ineptly and an "environmental" Mayor who is actually CLUELESS on how to make any sort of valid environmental move...instead he runs after technology that isn't ready yet, chases token issues, etc. The issue is as much a provincial one as a Federal one...and even a municipal one. You can not force China, Brazil, US and India, not to mention MANY 3rd world countries with cheap labour and no environmental laws, to "follow-suit" due to public pressure from what, shame? LMAO

4) I'm sorry but the entire concept of peace keeping in a war zone is a good way to get Canadian soldiers killed. Let them do their job...which is to put down the Taliban, find Al Qaida and help stabalize the area. Afgahnistan is NOT Iraq. The reasons for going were different and that's why we're in one and not the other. People need to remember that. Should Canada's role be decreased and other nations increased after this period of time...yeah, others need to step up to the plate, BUT I think it's pretty fair to say that we have an obligation to see this through to some sort of reasonable conclusion.

5) I do not associate Harper and Bush in the least...that's a liberal media fabrication.

6) Health Care is very clearly defined as a Provincially run institution. The Federal government supports it through transfer payments. The transfer payments probably should be increased for health care. However, health care in Canada needs a complete overhaul and review. The problem is that the NDP, Liberals, and most politicians will point to anyone who says this and scream bloody murder to the media that some devil is trying to destroy publicly funded health care through privatization...whether that was the goal or not. People need to wake up and realise that we have MAJOR problems with our health care system. For example: if I don't constantly bug my doctor to actually give me test results, they actually forget to call me. It's took them 4 weeks just to send my referal to a surgeon...and 3 more months to actually get to my appointment. Next week btw. This is to remove a lump that is likely nothing but no one knows for sure...for all they know it could actually be cancer...doubtful but still a possibility. Throwing money at the health care system would not solve this issue...not even close. It's not just a lack of funding...it's that doctors abuse the public system and many have lost sight of what it means to be in that profession.

[Dirty Harry]

Surprisingly, other then on the issue of the environment the Green party takes a right wing stance on a number of issues...and also has a pretty "out in left field" stance on others. They simply can't be taken seriously IMHO. Creating a party with one over-riding mission is simply ridiculous. For that reason I also find the BQ an equally ridiculous party.

Yeah the Greens are pretty ridiculous and all over the place, but talking strategically the 1-5% of the vote they earn in ridings would be votes that would otherwise be headed to a lefty party instead of the conservatives. So thats more vote splitting the liberals have to deal with since theyre positioning themselves as environment champions (even the NDP is backing away off that a bit since it turns out that a radical restructuring of the economy isn't too popular with manufacturing unions that are a core constituent).

The NDP is a joke. I'm sorry to all you NDP supporters but they waddle up to the trough of entitlement worse then the Liberals. The NDP answer to everything is to create a social program and throw money at it. Rarely have I ever seen an NDP response that actual tackle the root cause issues.

Their record of governing is also catostrophicaly bad whenever they've managed to win a provincial election.

I get the impression that many of you are either still in school or in your early 20's...I think it's fascinating that young people have always voted for very left wing parties and then moved to the right as they got older.

That's because the financial status of most students can be summed up with two words: No DePosit

When the socialist party is telling you that they'll give you free tuition and housing, it sounds like a good deal.

Although capitalism is always slurred as selfish and greedy, A socialist vote is actually the selfish one. Most socialists either do it because they want someone else's money (pretty selfish), or if they actually have money and vote socialist anyways its because it satisfy's some guilt they feel about whatever (so selfishly satisfying some emotional problem at society's expense).

Socialism is innately selfish from the perspective of humanity. By taking the wealth that the most productive people have created and redistributed it to unproductive people, you're incurring a huge oppurtunity cost on the compounding growth of the absolute growth of humanity. Basically you're sacrificing the prosperity of future generations so more people can have material goods now.

I guess socialists just don't care about their children, grand children and great grand children and are unwilling to make sacrifices for their future benefit.

[simonus]

c'mon Harry and Zowpeb, I can't speak for other NDP-type guys, but I think I'm a relatively productive guy. I'm not poor and I'm not sitting on a huge trust fund. I don't want (or need) a ton of entitlements and I'm not particularly guilty about my earning potential or inherited wealth. I'm in my later 20's and I don't feel any pull to the right. I'm finishing up at a top tier law school and I have pretty decent job prospects. I want children and I want them to live comfortably. I'm not completely anti-capitalist and I don't want to live on a commune. I just think that a left wing government is a better way to run things.

[Dirty Harry]

I just think that a left wing government is a better way to run things.

How do they run things better? And to what end?

Edited December 6, 2007 by Dirty Harry

[Zowpeb]

As for the Green party and the old PC contingent...I fully disagree that they will pull votes from the Right wing group.

For a couple reasons:

1) They have no real consistent, well drawn out, plan on things not related to the environment.

2) The right wing philosophy that they do have on many issues not related to the environment does not jive with most of the people who actually are concerned with the environment.

3) Many right wing people do not buy into the "all in" philosophy as being the way to immediately solve the world's climate issues. For reasons that are not simply economics but of simply the best way to make changes that will have the best impact. You won't see many right wing thinkers saying that credits are a good idea...jmho.

I really believe they will steal votes from the NDP primarily.