Look out

Good article.

It's sure going to stir up Shit Weasels though.

I expect denial.

Ed

It has all been written about in a book "Crimes and Mercies" by James Bacque, I think his name was. It would be interesting to read your memoirs.

jnewcomb

What the hell are you trying to say?

If one wanted an example of pointless prose you couldn't do much better than this:

Of course those journalists' observations are NOT meaningless if the observations are understood by readers to have meaning.

Kilian's point is simply that 'observations' which depend upon jargon and loaded language - and he provides all kinds of examples (good ones) - are essentially meaningless as analysis because they rely upon knee jerk reactions and not an understanding of Dix as a man, a politician and a leader.

Only idiots could find meaning in such trivial nonsense.

And that is, sadly, what one must conclude a lot of British Columbians actually are - idiots.

Dix & the Media

It appears that The Tyee has been targeted by the BC Liberals & their PAB drones. Check out the tone of the comments above from:
1) Dave49 2) Brian White 3) jnewcomb 4) AlwaysaVoter

The same super-rich who own the mainstream media are the same gang who own the BC Liberals. The rich have never found a shortage of trolls who will sell their souls for enough cash.

Replying to your replies...

First thanks for writing me. But if you follow me at @ChristyClarkFan you'd learn I'm supposed to be making a YouTube reply to this news story here at BCLib Airpower HQ.

Now to your replies...

Frank: Great historical reply :-). I just remember the way Stalin used hordes to fight after I read some of Antony Beevor's works.

North of Hope: Oh, please... you are just asking for a University of Punditry smackdown. Here goes:

Let me tell you the net provincial migration in the last years of the BCNDP was OUT. OUT from under Glen, Adrian and the like. OUT from the tax hikes that in the words of John Horgan put capital on strike. OUT also went wealth creators.

IN under the BCLiberals was real environmental policy such as the Carbon Tax Shift. IN under the BCLiberals was tax relief so capital would flow again. IN under the BCLiberals was the Olympics, Sea to Sky, many new ferries that work and 3 German ones that sorta work, oh and a Vancouver Convention Centre massively over budget but usable.

Oh and if Dix makes Premier BC Politics will be just as dirty and patronage-filled as Chicago's with their dirty Blackhawks too to boot.

Sorry, but I got a YouTube to polish. PowerPoint slides made except for one more quip to transcribe... got the music set up... gonna launch a really good one.

Vox.Pop... oh this is no drone...

Nope, buddy. BCLibs are under my example pushing forward against the Left to win some more. Complacency? That's a Blackhawk trait or something like that.

to Christy Fan

You say, "Sorry, but I got a YouTube to polish. PowerPoint slides made except for one more quip to transcribe... got the music set up... gonna launch a really good one."

Keep cooking up your message. Give us some facts to back it up!

Um! Chrisie's Fan

Maybe you need to do a little more reading dude and a little less u-tubing:

Between 2001 and 2009, an average net figure of 6,200 people moved to B.C. from other provinces. This compares with an average net figure of 13,000 per year between 1991 and 2001.

You my friend, should step back from the balcony before you fall off.

There is no way you, or anyone else, can make the Campbell/Ms Christy chicken hawk fly.

as John Greg said

Christy Fan, Get real. re "Class war is kinda hard... It is the rich who pay less taxes."

You really do hate poor people, working people, and the truth don't you.

Get the message!

Wow, that provoked quite a in lieu of flowers reply...

Okay folks the YouTube in question is up at http://youtu.be/t1aD_nbYCWQ?hd=1 . Thank you Crawford, there are framing ops underway to stop Dix. The business community which creates the job is just frightened in a way Mike Farnworth wouldn't have done.

That said, I think we all are **not** interested in picking on poor people. Alise Mills has repeatedly stuck up for the "middle class". Furthermore, if you watched my YouTubes you'd notice I salute poverty reduction plans...

Frank, it's kinda an oversight on my part.

Bobby Peru

That post is offensive hate speech - I won't respond to it - but I have pushed the 'Offensive' button

West

How about providing your official statistics then. Like I did.
Interprovincial only please, offshore influx is not relevant to this discussion is it.

Statscan will be acceptable.

Cheers

Thank you Bobby Peru...

Great sortie. Thanks much.

Really like this:

"Certainly the frame looks pretty tight and form fitting around Dix who has already stated anti-business policies? If Dix is a victim of framing, he certainly donated the nails for that carpentry job. Maybe Dix's policies might have made him a "moderate liberal in the 1970s", but Kilian ought to realize we live in 2011, when many of Dix's ideas have been proven wrong. Dix and the NDP now have to believe that private wealth creation is the foundation for a healthy economy and society. Tough to swallow, eh?

"BC people are too wary of the NDP to elect Dix on the basis of a platform that primarily favours unions and social welfare, that only gives a superficial nod to building a "green economy" (whatever that means). But you know what? Dix and the NDP union goon squad can't help themselves and have to run to the tune of "working class hero." Dix may want to run and win on the basis of social justice, but the people he will hurt the most- the middle class are very scared of who he will make pay for social justice."

And appreciate this re: Christy Clark versus Adrian Dix on ethics, "Accuse her of anything you want. But, has Crown charged her or confronted her with anything related to BC Rail that would force her to withdraw her candidacy? Speak of all the litany of evils that your hatred can muster, but show me her "memo to file.""

Oh and the pummelling? I'd really watch YouTube for more YouTubes of great BCLib sorties to take the fight (and frame) to Adrian.

Hap

you didn't read my piece...I said the only stats which mean anything are net stats - and that's what I quoted.

you're a clever guy - you could find them yourself if you really wanted to.

I'm way too busy...the point simply is, as has been the case all along, that the argument about how bad the NDP years were - relative to the BCLiberal ones - is a phony and disingenuous argument.

In fact (and especially for the people who NEED the intervention of government) is that the BCLiberal regime has been a disaster according to ANY METRIC.

If the BCLiberal regime has been a disaster...

Then why the support?

You are at least average in intelligence G West. You should figure out WHY and then move forward.

Just some counsel from a University of Punditry grad student.

Keep it on track please West.

(Nice try with the sidestep about poverty.
If the Canucks had your stickhandling skills we wouldn't be at game 7)

For starters - what does 1982 to 1986 have to do with this?
Next - your own stats show exactly what I said. Starting in 97 provincial migration was outbound. In fact the decline trending downward started in 94 didn't it, after trending upwards for years on end. Why? Why the reversal?

The stat is important for an obvious reason. WHY would people leave this province in increasing numbers to seek employment in other provinces if things were so good here as is claimed. And I'll just keep on asking WHY until that question is answered.

And as you also know BC's interprovincial migration is also skewed by the fact this province is the #1 destination for retirees from outside the province. Thay aren't looking for work. Take them out of the equation and then the numbers would be even more revealing wouldn't they.

Christy Fan

Well, let's take you as an example. Your support isn't based on actual data as far as I can tell. Its based on ideology.

I realize you're young but conservative people tend to be over 60 and/or male.

Perhaps we'll see provincially what we're seeing federally. Under 45's and woman switching their support to the NDP.

happy

I'm not GWest but I assume your post was directed at me.

Perhaps people were leaving BC because things were going really well in Alberta?

"And I'll just keep on asking WHY until that question is answered. "

And I guess I'll keep on asking why more people moved here when the NDP was in power?

As for why the 80's are important, John Corman once said on here, quoting a book by the Cdn Taxpayer's Fed, that BC had never had outward migration until the NDP was in power. Well, BC had outward migration when Liberals 1.0 were in power (the Socreds).

If you think this stat is important then why did people leave BC in the 80's and the late 90's? Why is net inward migration falling for the last two years?

And why did more people move here in the early 1990's than in the early 2000's?

happy

As for stickhandling, why is the rate of child poverty compared to the rest of Canada not important?

To paraphrase your own words, why would our child poverty rate be so high if things were as good here as is claimed?

Frank, you're dreaming...

I hate reposting a link but at http://youtu.be/t1aD_nbYCWQ?hd=1 Alise Mills explains that the lady vote is trending to BCLibs. Thanks in part to Dix.

Furthermore, I'm only 29. Support for the BCLibs is ideological, you're certainly right there.

Oh and "happy" - keep firing!

Frank, you're dreaming...

I hate reposting a link but at http://youtu.be/t1aD_nbYCWQ?hd=1 Alise Mills explains that the lady vote is trending to BCLibs. Thanks in part to Dix.

Furthermore, I'm only 29. Support for the BCLibs is ideological, you're certainly right there.

Oh and "happy" - keep firing!

Christy Fan

I assume your post was so nice you had to say it twice?

I have no idea who Alise Mills is but I can tell you the pollsters are in the field every day right now and they're not shy about posting demographic information.

Frank Graves of Ekos provided the data I quoted. Under 45's and women are the strength of NDP support.

As for the Liberals, they're in 3rd place in BC.

"Oh and "happy" - keep firing!"

I'm sure we're both hoping for him to come back.

From iPolitics

"Also today, a new study from the Fraser Institute reported that in 2010 the average Canadian family spent more than 41 per cent of its annual income directly or indirectly on taxes of one sort or another — more than it paid for the basics of food, clothing, and shelter combined."

I guess that's what happens when you have right-wing governments at almost every level across Canada.

Of course there's always the chance that the Fraser Institute is now a communist organization trying to unseat the PM but I'd have a hard time buying that based on their past record.

Frank

No, my post was for West. However....

"Perhaps people were leaving BC because things were going really well in Alberta?"

Things were going REALLY well for Alberta before the economic collapse a few years ago but people were still coming to BC from other provinces, not the other way around.

"And I guess I'll keep on asking why more people moved here when the NDP was in power?"

Because of the Asian stampede in thier hundreds of thousands, thats why. But BC residents that already lived here were leaving to look for work as the provincial economy was underperforming compared to the rest of the country as reflected in three credit downgrades. Here only.

"Why is net inward migration falling for the last two years?"

It fluctuates up and down. But when it goes negative thats a whole different animal and you can ask me that question then.

"And why did more people move here in the early 1990's than in the early 2000's?"

The economy was doing well and there were jobs when Harcourt was elected it so people were coming. But within a few years our provincial economy started trailing the ROC and there were no jobs (unless you worked for the government that is) and that trend continued until the change in government.

happy

"No, my post was for West."

Why? I posted the numbers, not him and you were referring to MY numbers.

"Because of the Asian stampede in thier hundreds of thousands, thats why"

Unless those Asians moved here from other provinces they wouldn't show up in the stats from BC Stats on inter-provincial migration. Nice try though.

"Things were going REALLY well for Alberta before the economic collapse a few years ago but people were still coming to BC from other provinces, not the other way around."

And they moved here in the early 1990s in bigger numbers than they arrived in the early 2000s. Why would that be? I guess I'll keep asking that question till I get an answer.

"But BC residents that already lived here were leaving to look for work as the provincial economy was underperforming compared to the rest of the country"

Actually, over 40,000 people have left BC every year from 2010 back to 1975 except for 1983 and from 1990 to 1995. Why would that be?

"It fluctuates up and down. But when it goes negative thats a whole different animal and you can ask me that question then."

Will you answer it or will you do what you're doing now and what you do with stats you don't like such as the child poverty rate? Or will you answer my question about child poverty when the inter-provincial numbers go negative?

A bit off-topic...

...but how does the "best comment" thing work?

Does a human decide which posts can be recommended or is there some kind of algorithm that makes that choice?

The reason I ask is because often intelligent and well-written posts won't have the recommend option available, whereas a post that says something like "great article, I really enjoyed it" will.

Users have the option of flagging *every* post as offensive so I find it strange that only a small number of posts can be recommended as a "best comment". This doesn't seem very fair or democratic.

But maybe I'm missing something and one of you kind folks can fill me in. Thanks!

Ramone

Ramone

Its my understanding that only your own posts can't be recommended but I could be wrong.

@Ms Christy's fan

Why? Because there are a lot of stupid people in this province who believe the garbage they hear in the media instead of trusting the evidence of their own eyes...

Are you a ceiling fan or a reciprocating fan?

Ramone

Actually, you CAN recommend your own posts but you have to sign out first then click on the All Comments tab (the BEST COMMENTS tab is the default when you're not logged in.) Then find the comment you want to recommend and check away.

As for the rating, it's done by the moderators - on the recommendation of readers OR on their own.

It's a human decision, not an automatic one.

Often times there's a considerable lag from the time a post is made until it's rated.

happy

Where'd I say anything about poverty?

I just said the net migration figures are widely available AND, in my opinion, are the only ones which really matter. This is especially the case when we're talking about results over a period of, say, 10 years.

Otherwise, as certain posters here (I won't name any names today) have the unfortunate tendency to focus all their attention on one or two years. Honesty in politics (and economics) requires a somewhat more attenuated perspective...That's why the comparisons between the NDP 90s and the Campbell 00s are so interesting - because they show so clearly how utterly dishonest the flag wavers like Ms Christy's fan are.

@G West...

Turbofan at full afterburner.

That silly comment aside, calling people stupid isn't how to win friends & influence people...

Frank

Sorry, I miscommuinicated. It was you who posted the numbers from BC Stats. But why does Stascan summarise the period we are talking about with this statement?

"As is the case for Alberta, British Columbia has had positive net migration almost every year from 1972 onward with the exception being the late 1990s and the early years of the millennium, when between 5,200 and 17,500 more residents departed than arrived. Beginning in 2003, net interprovincial migration has again been positive, reaching a five year high of 13,400 residents in 2007."

Confusing to me. You?

"And they moved here in the early 1990s in bigger numbers than they arrived in the early 2000s. Why would that be? I guess I'll keep asking that question till I get an answer."

Already answered. The economy was ahead of, or at least on par with the ROC in 1990. However after the NDP started implementing thier policies we started down the path of credit downgrades and job losses. Mills were shut down in the 90's too.
But Glen promised us THREE new aluminum smelters to take up the slack, remember that?
Good times, good times.

"Will you answer it or will you do what you're doing now and what you do with stats you don't like such as the child poverty rate? Or will you answer my question about child poverty when the inter-provincial numbers go negative?"

Thats terribly convoluted for me but I'll give it a try.
I believe its not solely the responsibility of the provincial government, it should be a national responsibility as Natives are highly over-represented in the numbers, which opens up a whole new can of worms also.
Thats not excusing anybody, just my opinion.
And while not having the stats at my fingertips as I know you do, I believe I read over the last year or so and while still at the high end of the scale the rate has been dropping and is now close to the national average, is that correct?

West

"Where'd I say anything about poverty?"

You didn't, as explained above my trigger finger was too quick. Sorry to you and Frank.

Thanks happy

I appreciate the apology..

Christy's fan:
Influencing YOU is the LAST thing on my mind - and, I don't want YOU as a friend either - any more than I think I'm Mary Polak's friend because I spent an hour listening to her reinforce every single impression I had of the woman before I'd met her.

happy

"Confusing to me. You?"

Not just confusing, its blatantly wrong. Is this actual StatsCan data or is it one of those "reports" they have third parties write for them?

Because BC Stats is the source of the numbers I posted and although I rounded off in the thousands to save typing they have the exact counts.

"Already answered. The economy was ahead of, or at least on par with the ROC in 1990. However after the NDP started implementing thier policies we started down the path of credit downgrades and job losses"

Your explanation would be fine except for a couple of things. One, the net migration was so much in BC's favour in the early 1990s that when you add those years to the losses in the latter half of the 1990s it still equates to more people in absolute numbers (and much much more in relative numbers) than net migration has been under the Liberals.

Two, net migration under the liberals has been mediocre. The best year of the NDP saw just over 40,000 more people come to BC from other provinces than left. The best year for the Liberals was 15,000. And to put a political spin on it, the Liberals have been claiming we have the lowest taxes and the best economy every year for the last 10. That claim simply isn't reflected in the migration numbers.

Third, you say trends aren't important, only actual negative numbers. I disagree. The trend before the NDP left office was that net migration losses were already coming down. 2000's losses were almost half of 1999's.

One can wave one's hand and say the 40,000+ in 1993 is meaningless and only the 14,000 lost in 1998 and 1999 are important. But is that fair? After all, 5 years before that 40,000+ the Socreds had negative migration numbers.

The NDP has never claimed that the Asian crisis of 1997-98 didn't hit us hard. It affected our GDP, our employment numbers and so on. But GDP went up after 1998. Employment increased and lots of other indicators also returned to pre-1997 levels.

So to sum up, your argument is that net migration outflows in the late 1990s were a result of NDP policies finally coming home to roost.

My argument is that if that were true then net migration outflow would have increased in 2000 and 2001. It didn't. It was a temporary blip and not indicative of problems in the BC economy.

happy

As for the natives, its BC that leads Canada, not Saskatchewan and Manitoba in spite of those two provinces having higher ratios of natives in their populations. But I agree that Canada should be ashamed of the poverty in our native communities. Hopefully the next government will address this issue.

"I believe I read over the last year or so and while still at the high end of the scale the rate has been dropping"

I believe the rate has been dropping in most provinces. Although the rate has declined in BC its also declined in the other provinces so we're still #1.

One caveat though is that the poverty numbers we're given always seem to be a few years old. The child poverty numbers may have fallen prior to 2008 but social advocates believe it may be on the rise again given the current economy.

G West...

Go ahead, tell us all about your Polak Hour... was it happy?

I dare you.

Also tell us what the BCNDP did in the 1990s that is so glorious. Go ahead... you're still stuck there along w/ Andrian, right?

Frank

My Statscan summary was taken directly from the link I provided in my first post. This one:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-209-x/2004000/part1/interprovincial-eng.htm

Net migration. I'm standing my ground on this one with you and West. You can add all the offshore immigration you want, it doesn't detract from the fact BC residents who were already living here were leaving in higher numbers than Canadians in other provinces were arriving here.
The net migration, as you pointed out was higher under the NDP. No argument. But as I pointed out there were hundreds of thousands of new immigrants from Asia during that period which has since cooled down considerably. Not as many condo towers going up in Vancouver now as there was during that frenzy.
And yes, the Asian crisis of 97-98 is noted a lot here as beyond the NDP's control. True. So why then, when we had what was widely reported as the largest financial meltdown since the Great Depression a few years ago, certainly far worse than the Asian flu, everyone blames the libs for the current budget deficets?
Should they not be given the same "let" that NDP supporters demand for thier party for circumstances beyond thier control?

happy

"You can add all the offshore immigration you want,"

What are you talking about? I haven't added any offshore migration. As I said before, those stats are inter-provincial numbers.

"it doesn't detract from the fact BC residents who were already living here were leaving in higher numbers than Canadians in other provinces were arriving here."

I never argued otherwise, what I argued was your "analysis" of that fact.

"The net migration, as you pointed out was higher under the NDP. No argument. But as I pointed out there were hundreds of thousands of new immigrants from Asia during that period which has since cooled down considerably."

And again, I didn't count any of them.

"So why then, when we had what was widely reported as the largest financial meltdown since the Great Depression a few years ago, certainly far worse than the Asian flu, everyone blames the libs for the current budget deficets?"

You would have to ask your side that since y'all attacked the NDP's 1997-1998 economic record mercilessly in the late 1990s and even here on the Tyee for the first few years. We on the Left are just giving back a little of what you gave out.

Frank

It seems we, or perhaps its just I, are having trouble arguing what is "net" immigration.
You've made some points, I've made some, I think its redundant to keep arguing it over and over in this case.
Its a topic that might be better thrashed out over a beer or two, not here.

And - in my opinion - the main reason the NDP's economic record was attacked mercilessly, as you put it in the late 90's, was because while the ROC was performing well in the 90's during a period of extended prosperity BC racked up, what was it, six consecutive deficets starting in 1990? And three credit downgrades. This started well before the Asian flu. Well before.

happy

Maybe you should go back and read some of WIll McMartin's articles on the subject.

I know you can find them for yourself.

The fact the NDP was attacked mercilessly in this province is hardly something new. It's simply flavour of the month in Campbell-land.

If you want a prosperity face off comparing the 90s to the naughts I'd be prepared to do that any time...but you're gonna have to include the size of the accumulated debt into the bargain my friend and in that category there's no question which regime has the gold medal.

happy

The numbers are clear More people from other provinces moved to BC when the NDP was in power than when the Socreds or Liberals were.

You say all that matters is that there was a short period under the NDP where the net migration was negative. So what, there was also periods under the Socreds and Liberals.

As for economic growth the statistics are very clear. The economy performed better under the NDP.

You're simply looking for anything to attack the NDP with.

If the frame fits, Dix, then wear it well....

Meanwhile, this board was mired on BC emigration/immigration figures as a key indicator of a terrible economy. They are not as significant as BC being classified as a "have not" province during the Glen Clark years. You see, it takes more than mere economic stats to determine great or dismal economic performance. It's also about a feeling, how people felt about their economic circumstances under Glen Clark.

You don't have to ask many people (non-union workers and independent, self-employed business people) and enough of them will tell you it felt terrible. Our "have not" status was memorable, right up there with NFLD, NB. Bad enough?

Thanks, Christy Fan- I'm only trying to encourage everyone to use some objectivity in their partisan arguments. Ignoring Dix's ethical shortcomings is everyone's problem. Sensible parties don't select candidates like Dix to lead the province.

However, it's the NDP themselves, not some grand Liberal conspiracy (they could only wish they could be that smart) or media frame job that is hurting them. Christy Clark looks very good relative to Dix. The tougher match ups would have been Clark vs Horgan or Farnsworth. Or Falcon-Dix; now that would have been a cage match flying with bile. While NDP'ers say the Liberals have been an economic disaster, Dix presents himself as an even worse disaster for BC. That's a hard sell.

Will Dix show a kindler, gentler side? Maybe. But, since he announced his tax policies against business early in his nomination campaign, one can presume that he isn't scared to launch frontal attacks against BC businesses. And those childish NDP ads about "Christy Crunch" are only clever for NDP insiders who think they are so funny. They fail to address middle class voters' fears of the NDP and most of all, Dix.

This election is a fight for survival, one last hope for the NDP to be relevant as a party in BC. If they can't win from the political centre and now from the hard left, then what is their relevance. Other than making self-righteous noises like a political movement that has no hope of being able to form a govt and implement their promises and claims, the NDP will decompose into a group of 80s union veterans who gather once a month at a bar to reminisce about Solidarity's good old days when dinosaur unions bestrode the land.

What happens in this case is that the NDP the diehard union backroom boys will scare away good, credible candidates- middle class professionals who want to be part of a centre left party. It's so sad to see the NDP being unable to act in their own self-interest, a party leadership that stubbornly refuses to save itself. I should add a chapter about the BC NDP to Barbara Tuchman's "March of Folly."

Dix is emblematic of insouciance in the face of a need for positive change. Running a candidate like Dix, who is not only "framed", but framed in a solid lead millstone insults voters by hoping they will overlook the doubts surrounding him.

PoliSci lesson for Bobby

"one last hope for the NDP to be relevant"

It seems you are unable to feel the earth moving beneath your feet. This next election may be the last chance for the BC Liberals to become relevant before they go the way of their federal counterparts.

With the NDP around 40% on one side and nearly 40% on the other side preferring the Conservative brand over the Liberal one it leaves the Liberals fighting with the Greens for the other 20%.

History suggests NDP support isn't going anywhere much as you might like to wish it were. Its the BC Liberals that will be struggling to remain relevant in the years ahead.

I expect the Liberals to suddenly find God in the form of proportional representation.

Game on!

(still a bit giddy from last night...)

Frank. Please have a look at this Statscan table.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-209-x/2004000/part1/t/t5-1-eng.htm

Its certainly not jiving with what your saying. Although its incomplete for the 81-86 period in which you claim more people left, the numbers that are there don't appear to reflect that.
Furthermore you claimed upthread that I said trends were not important. I certainly did not, in fact go back and read, I made a point of bringing up trends. Such as this one from the table. BC had major inflow in 91. But that immediately started trending down after 91 and grew progressively worse every year the NDP was in power bottoming out in the year 98 and then creeping back up.

Again, these numbers aren't jiving with yours. In some cases better, in some worse. Can you supply your BC Stat link (as opposed to copy/paste) for comparison?

So if the economy was better then can McMartin please explain three credit downgrades and achieving "have not" status.
Furthermore, lets look at the full picture. I'd like to hear what infrastructure upgrades we got for our tax dollars in the 90's. Off the top of my head all I can come up with is the New Island Highway. The underused Mellinium line I suppose. And thats it. No briges, no ferries, no highway expansion in the Metro area where it was vastly more conjested than Parksville.
Yes, this things cost big bucks, which leads to big debt, correct?

You think the libs are done? Aren't you always claiming BC is a right wing province?
And think on this. IF we had had PR voting back in 96 the NDP would have lost that election wouldn't they.

happy

I posted the stats from BC Stats. In the context of BC I would assume they're more accurate as they tell me how many people moved to Port Alberni each year, let alone BC.

1975-1995
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/pop/mig/comp_RD1.pdf

1996 to now
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/pop/mig/rdcomp.pdf

"So if the economy was better then can McMartin please explain three credit downgrades and achieving "have not" status. "

You'd have to ask Will McMartin as to why the credit downgrades. As for "have not" status, it was temporary and reflected the fact that BC was the province most exposed to Asia. Why attempt to read more into it than that? If the auto-industry went kaput would we assume the Ontario provincial government was suddenly incompetent?

"Yes, this things cost big bucks, which leads to big debt, correct?"

Yes. Very big.

"You think the libs are done? Aren't you always claiming BC is a right wing province?"

Maybe and yes. Why would a right-wing province ignore a Conservative alternative?

"And think on this. IF we had had PR voting back in 96 the NDP would have lost that election wouldn't they."

They wouldn't have won, but the Liberals got only 41% of the vote so we would have had a coalition between the Libs and Reform (I would assume).

Frank

It would appear BC Stats and Stacan have different methods of accounting. We have signifigant differences here. Which makes both of us right depending on which report is used.
In my world federal laws and regulations trump provincial but thats my world. Lets call it a draw.

I'm not going to accept BC became a loser province solely due to a temporary blip in commodity provinces. It takes years to slide into that category and years to climb out.
Commodities took a worse beating in the "Great Recession" recently than they did in the 90's so we should be a have notter right now then. But we're not. Nor is our credit rating threatened.

"Why would a right-wing province ignore a Conservative alternative?" you ask.

Because they're a fringe party that associates with loose cannons and egomaniacs like Vander Zalm although Cummins gives them respectability but they aren't there yet.

happy

It doesn't matter, I'm not trying to convince you, I know I would fail.

If you prefer that StatsCan publication over BC Stats, again, that doesn't matter to me. But did you read the whole article? Saskatchewan has falling migration, as did Quebec and the Maritimes. Yet Charest, Wall, Williams, Lord etc are right-wingers. If you want to claim net migration is the proof by which ideology should be judged then by all means judge your Conservative governments as harshly as you judge the 97-98 NDP.

"I'm not going to accept BC became a loser province solely due to a temporary blip in commodity provinces."

That's fine, blame the NDP. But how do you explain the fact BC's economy was already well on the road to recovery in the 3 years after the Asian Crisis before the NDP left office?

If it was NDP policies that did the province in as you claim, then those 3 years should have been worse than 1997-98. I don't think you can square that circle but again, I'm not going to lose sleep over it if you don't.

"Commodities took a worse beating in the "Great Recession" recently than they did in the 90's so we should be a have notter right now then"

Commodity prices were very high in the first half of this decade. Some commodities are very high right now as Luke tells us often on here. And we are experiencing low growth, high unemployment and falling net migration. Of course, other provinces are also affected just as much or even moreso. Whereas in 97-98 it was BC that was the most exposed and suffered the most.

"Because they're a fringe party"

As was Reform and the Cdn Alliance. We'll see what happens over time, things change.

NDP of the 90s- Dismal economic legacy

happy makes some cogent and damning points about the NDP's dismal economic performance of the 90s. While the NDP claims that BC is in worse shape now under the Liberals than the NDP in the 90s, a close look at NDP policies show the difference.

Claiming that BC became a have not province in the 90s mainly due to commodity prices, is the easy way to wall paper the NDP's unsustainable social welfare spending policies of that period. Other resource based economies did not suffer the same fate. The NDP's jihadist attitude towards business in the form of massive red tape and minimum capital taxes simply deterred and depressed investment in the province.

Social welfare spending needs to be planned for long term sustainability. The NDP planners never understood that. Instead, the 90s saw fat pay raises for govt unions- so utterly predictable. In fact, the outgoing NDP purposely finalized big pay raises for unions that the incoming Liberals had to roll back. Wailing about the injustice of breaking agreements generated little public sympathy as the Liberals acted in the taxpayers interest and rid hospitals of overpaid unionized cleaners. I don't see a genocide of patients in the hands of private sector, subcontractors. So BC's credit downgrade in the 90s was a direct reflection of budget mismanagement, "fudge it budgets", expenses that were called investments.

The NDP cult followers just don't understand that the public has nothing but animosity to its blind loyalty to public sector unions. Don't expect any sympathy. Yes, achieving a have not status required a series of bad, anti-business policies. Indeed, the stock market in Canada and the US did very well in the 90s while the BC economy languished.

And, yeah, what did BC people receive in terms of useful govt infrastructure and investment in the 90s? Not much. While the NDP complains about the cost overrun for the convention centre, at least we have a useful facility that is needed for any world class city. What about the fast ferries? Totally useless. Only useful as a union make work project.

Look at all the Skytrain and road investment in the Lower Mainland under the Liberals. While the NDP increased debt through wasteful social welfare spending at least the Liberals built useful projects even if we needed the Olympics to rope in Federal money.

But, then at least the Liberals managed a decent relationship with the Federal govt. Unlike Glen Clark who went out of his way to antagonize the Fed. Glen Clark deserved his fate and he is lucky that Jim Pattison showed him mercy. Glen Clark was a disaster.

And all this happened with Adrian Dix as part of the inner circle. When will the NDP learn that you can't run a welfare economy while antagonizing business and investment? And I didn't even mention "memo to file" in this post.

Frank

So it was the Asian crisis and nothing else. So why did the NDP run continuous consecutive budget deficets beginning in 1990 when things wre going well? How many in a row was it by the way? Six? Eight?
When were the books first balanced then and why did it take so long. We know Glens first budget as premier wasn't balanced although we were told it was prior to the election. (no need to bring up Gordo doing the same thing, I know. Dirty tricks on both sides. Both)

Quebec, Saskatchewan and the Maritimes and thier governments have nothing to with this subject any more than revisitng the NDP reign in Ontario. In other words nothing. Lets stick to BC.

happy

"So it was the Asian crisis and nothing else."

We're all free to come up with our own conclusions. I think my view, that it was the Asian crisis, is borne out by the available data. If the Liberals had been in power during the 1990s with the same record I would still have the same view, but I would attack them anyway :) Just as Bobby Peru would be defending the 1990s if the Libs had been in power.

"So why did the NDP run continuous consecutive budget deficets beginning in 1990 when things wre going well?"

First, the deficits weren't bad. Combined, they add up to $14 billion over a decade. And that included capital spending. Second, those deficits were essentially passed on by the feds. If BC under the NDP had received the same level of transfers from the Feds in the 1990s as the Libs have in the last decade that $14 billion wouldn't exist.

A quote from the Finance Department of Canada :
"However, it should be noted that the level of transfer support for all provinces was cut by $6.2 billion since 1994/95. When population growth and inflation are taken into account, it is unlikely that CHST transfers for British Columbia in the year 2002/03 will reach 1994/95 levels."

And here's a link to a chart showing declining federal transfers to BC
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/archive/budget99/ch99_f1.htm

That's what BC had to deal with. The NDP made a political decision based on their (and my) ideology not to pass on the federal cuts to health, education and social services.

The Liberals on the other hand will receive over $5 billion this year alone from the Feds. Even back in 2005 it was over $4.5 billion in spite of high commodity prices and a growing economy.

"Quebec, Saskatchewan and the Maritimes and thier governments have nothing to with this subject any more than revisitng the NDP reign in Ontario. In other words nothing. "

As long as BC is part of Canada the other provinces will be part of the discussion. Its one country. But if net migration figures are only a way of keeping score of the NDP and not the Conservatives then fine, it's just one more reason for me to care less about that stat.

Frank

What's the use - Bobby the P has ADHD and can only handle one concept at a time; happy is generally more reasonable but we've been through these arguments so many times it's ridiculous to even bother.

Why not just post links to a couple of Will McMartin's thorough fiskings of the Campbell record (and comparisons with the NDP years) and call it a day.

Not much point arguing with a rocks.

Cheers

OK then Frank

You want to bring all the provinces in then fne. They all got the same cutbacks from Ottawa in the 90's as BC did. Yet ONLY BC went from have to have not in that time frame.
You sat the 14B they ran in deficets wasn't bad, I say what did we get to show for them then? At least today we can point to a ton of new infrastructure for our debt.

But like you say we are free to draw our own conclusions.

Seeing as how I know West a little I don't take offence to him calling me a rock.
I think he's in a bit of a funk these days b/c he declared after the last election Carole lost only b/c most BC voters were misogynists who would never elect a strong woman leader.
Yet the libs just elected one freely to lead the party, and unlike the NDP didn't need a quota system to do it!
Meanwhile the NDP stabbed thier woman leader in the back. Quite messy.

Yet you'll still vote NDP won't you. So does that now make NDP voters misogynist West?

Bobby Peru

Your constant over-the-top hyperbole makes your posts difficult to read. I can't help but wonder if there's anyone who actually reads all of them. Its like reading a right-wing version of a 4 hour Kruschev speech.

Dix won't get your vote. We get it.

happy

"You want to bring all the provinces in then fne. They all got the same cutbacks from Ottawa in the 90's as BC did. Yet ONLY BC went from have to have not in that time frame."

What's the connexion? I assume you don't realize that federal cutbacks and provincial budgets have nothing to do with the equalization formula? Your point is akin to me asking why it took the Canucks 7 games to beat the BlackHawks when it took the Alouettes only one game to beat the Riders. They're simply unrelated issues.

As for the fact that all provinces received the same level of cutbacks, so? Are you saying the cuts in federal transfers had no effect on their budgets? Because I can offer a lot of evidence to the contrary.

In the case of BC I think its necessary to point out that when comparing budgets and economic issues between two decades factors such as different levels of federal transfers and external market issues have to be part of the conversation. If you don't believe external markets and federal money have any effect on the provincial economy and budget then I think your conclusions are going to be nothing more than what you want them to be.

"You sat the 14B they ran in deficets wasn't bad, I say what did we get to show for them then?"

For one thing you got better healthcare. BC is the only province that didn't cut healthcare or education in the 1990s.

We also had better teacher to student ratios. We had lots of new schools built (a new one every 19 days they say for a total of 136,000 new spaces and 5,423 new classrooms).

We had the second lowest child poverty rate in Canada, trailing only PEI.

We were one of only two provinces that built social housing in the 1990s, 6,500 units completed.

So we got a lot for our taxes and if it hadn't been for federal cuts we would have had no increased debt.

To me those things are important. You'd rather have a new convention centre. We have different priorities obviously.

Frank

Now why would the NDP go on a school building binge in the face of declining enrollment? Did no one understand demographics?
Or maybe it had something to do with the heavy BCTF and CUPE influence in the party?

Heres some blab from the BC government web site. Its slanted I'm sure but they do spell out numbers and dates in detail. According to this schools atarted closing in the mid 90's. Feel free to dissect

VICTORIA – Here are the facts on student demographics in British Columbia:

As a result of declining enrolment, boards of education began closing schools in the mid-1990s. School districts have reported 556,331 full-time equivalent public school students for the 2010-11 school year - a net increase of 626 FTE students over 2009-10 as a result of full-day kindergarten expansion, the first enrolment increase since 1998.
Enrolment in grades 1-12 continues to decline. While the partial implementation of full-day kindergarten resulted in an additional 7,772 FTE kindergarten students, there were 5,282 fewer school-age students in grades 1-12 this September.
The trend of declining enrolment is expected to slow over the next three years and begin increasing again in 2014.
Since 2000-01, September enrolment has declined by more than 59,000 students across British Columbia.
24 of B.C.'s 60 school districts are enrolling more students this year than in 2009-10.
The other 36 school districts have fewer students this year.
For the tenth consecutive year, average per-pupil funding has increased. In 2010-11 the Province is delivering $8,341 in average per-pupil funding - the highest ever - a $159 increase over 2009-10 and a $2,079 increase since 2000-01.
Since 2000-01, the Province has increased funding to B.C. public schools by more than $1.3 billion: $919 million in operating funding and $407 million in one-time grants.
The Province continues to renovate, replace, and build schools where there is need.
Since 2001, the Province has spent more than $1.8 billion to complete 83 new and replacement schools, 149 additions, 26 renovation projects and 22 site acquisitions across British Columbia.
By the end of 2010-11, government will have committed more than $3.9 billion in school capital and maintenance projects across B.C.
Government is also investing $1.5 billion to upgrade schools to make them earthquake safe; the most comprehensive seismic plan ever undertaken by a B.C. government.

happy

"Now why would the NDP go on a school building binge in the face of declining enrollment? Did no one understand demographics?"

Perhaps the NDP wouldn't have encouraged school age kids to leave the public system? Plus, wouldn't we need to replace old schools anyway?

As for demographics, populations go up and down, the number of school age kids will not keep declining anymore than the number of senior citizens will keep increasing.

"Or maybe it had something to do with the heavy BCTF and CUPE influence in the party?"

If you want to keep playing politics, maybe the reason the BC government is no longer building lots of social housing is to please their developer friends and people like Phil Hochstein?

Frank

"Perhaps the NDP wouldn't have encouraged school age kids to leave the public system?"

Odd statement. I read and posted here figures form Stascan just recently that BC has the highest high school graduation rate in the entire country. Higher than the NDP era. Please clarify.

"Plus, wouldn't we need to replace old schools anyway?"

Yes. Such as the 83 new and replacements since 2001 mentioned in the reprint I did last post. Say, how come that figure is never mentioned BTW, why is it all we ever hear about is about closings from the BCTF?
Thats what I call playing politics.

Is Christina Clark a woman?

Happy...I actually meant that post to say rock and to refer to Bobby the P and you somewhat differently...I posted it at lunch and I was in a hurry.

I don't think you have ADHD.

But you do, seemingly purposefully, ignore the clear evidence that things have actually been worse during the Desperate Decade of Liberal Misanthropy than they were during the NDP years (see Bobby, two can play that stupid little game).

And yes, I think quotas and encouragement for women and minorities ARE important - and I think the NDP did an exceedingly stupid thing by dumping Carole James - but I bridle at the suggestion that Ms Christina is anything but a good ole boy without balls...she isn't fit to tie either Carole James or Adrian Dix's shoes and she can't even tell the truth about her lack of a single post secondary degree.

What I don't agree with is anyone who suggests that the dirtiest political wretches in this province would have behaved any differently toward any of the other candidates for the leadership.

The BC LIBERALS and their Daddy Warbucks partners are scum - they always behave that way and they'd have used Farnworth's gayness against him or Horgan's background in public service.

That's they way they play the game - if you want to associate with that kind of behavior, so be it - I find some of my comrades in the NDP bad enough as it is...at least they aren't BCLIBERALS.

happy

"Odd statement. I read and posted here figures form Stascan just recently that BC has the highest high school graduation rate in the entire country. Higher than the NDP era. Please clarify."

I'm sure the NDP also encouraged kids to graduate, building new schools for them was kind of a tip-off.

The number of kids being educated outside the public school system has increased, perhaps the NDP build some schools thinking that wouldn't happen.

"Yes. Such as the 83 new and replacements since 2001 mentioned in the reprint I did last post. Say, how come that figure is never mentioned BTW, why is it all we ever hear about is about closings from the BCTF?"

So does this mean you're good with the NDP building a new school every 19 days during their decade in office?

"Thats what I call playing politics."

A lot of that going on.

Let's sum up

Schools built by Liberals should be applauded, schools built by the NDP should raise questions about their knowledge of demographics and ties to unions.

People leaving the province in increasing numbers in 97-98 is proof the NDP is incompetent. People leaving the province in decreasing numbers in 1999-2001 is not important. People leaving the province in the 80s or the 2000s is not important. People leaving other provinces with Conservative governments is not important.

The NDP having the second best record in Canada on the child poverty file is unimportant. As is the Liberals having the highest child poverty rate.

Running up massive deficits when commodity prices are high and the feds are giving you $4.5 billion a year is great because now we have a convention centre and new roof for BC Place. Running small deficits in order to protect health, education and social services budgets when commodity prices are low and the feds are reducing transfer payments every year is ludicrous and proof of NDP incompetence.

On a related note, increasing the debt by $14 billion is asinine while increasing it by 5 times that is to be applauded.

Time to move on West

Really now. No one gives a rats ass in this day and age that Farnsworth is gay. Simons is gay too. It never came up, ever. No one cares. Except you.
But then it was also you that said lib voters were misogynist which has been proven spectacularly wrong so maybe you might want to stop making silly blanket statements like that that come back to bite you.
And please don't tell me what WOULD have happened. I could just as easily make unfounded accusations about the NDP which you would demand I retract immediately without any proof.

Frank. Were you in the Debating Club in school? Your very good at it.
I still disagree completely.

Cheers to you both, gotta run.

happy

"I still disagree completely."

I knew that going in, c'est la vie.

Nope I think you're wrong

Ms Christina and the Campbell clique will stop at nothing in their holy battle to prevent the socialists from storming the gates of the castle. They'd mount a whispering campaign against Farnworth as leader without a moment's thought - they're stilla bunch of misogynists too and, I believe I already pointed out there's a strong current of misandry in Clark's personality.

As for asking you or anyone to retract uncalled for and unsubstantiated accusations that's just silly.

I strongly support Bobby Peru and anyone else from making uncalled for, unsubstantiated and totally untrue comments and accusations.

The fact he, and others, keep doing it makes my job a hell of a lot easier.
There is already plenty of empirical evidence on my side of the ledger - it's especially helpful when it comes from a LIBERAL like Will McMartin though..

Lies make the liar look foolish - especially in black and white - keep dishing them out my friend.

likewise, Cheers.

erratum - para 3 should read:

I strongly support Bobby Peru and everyone else making uncalled for, unsubstantiated and totally untrue comments and accusations.

Wow, this has been quite the primer in basic economics

...and how little some people know about it.

Doesn't anybody remember 1987's Black Friday? That heralded a long period of underperformance in North American economies, and later the world economy. But for a brief rises in 1990-91 (at first touted by economists and academics as "an economic miracle" but later found to be due entirely to monetory expansion) the NA economy underperformed - indeed shrank - in most years right up until 1997. BC, as is traditional with resources-producing economies, entered the recession 18-24 months after it began, and came out of it some 24-48 months afterward. Much of this coincided with the period of administration under the NDP. There may be some who might like to follow the old political adage "take credit for whatever happens on your watch, because the blame is coming right along with it" but anybody with an ounce of economic education knows that the government has just about zero influence on the economy of a country that has decided to go into a recession.

What you might find is that the NDP government found all kinds of ways of diversifying the economy during this period of hard times - boosting the film industry along with minor tax breaks for its productions, and promoting the high-tech sector by encouraging development in BC of a knowledge sector aided by federal tax credits. Pretty stunning success too - growing both at annual rates of 8% and 11% respectively in the years 1994-1998. Too bad the indusries were so tiny at around 5% of the provincial economy in total.

Of course, one might also note BC tried to start a high-speed ship-building industry too, but that didn't work out so well.... ;>)

Hmmmm... as I recall, they also floated the idea of hosting the Owe-limp-ics at this time as a way of promoting tourism, but never pursued it as the costs and difficulties became obvious.

Seems like a remarkably productive government trying to stimulate and diversify a stultified BC economy totally at the mercy of national and international economic currents.

But I'm not here trying to convince anyone who's mind's already made up. I'll just keep reading the historians and economists who have the best picture of what happened years and decades ago, and leave the bullshit to those of you who want to re-fight old wars with "woulda, shoulda, coulda".

Gold medal for revisionism

One poster deserves special mention for revisionism. His bumptious claims included:

Claiming that BC’s welfare spending policies were profligate in the 1990s forgets that the BCNDP cut off thousands of welfare claimants, sent more to job-finding programs, threatened more with buying bus tickets back to Alberta after Klein sent them out here from his petro-province, and declined to raise welfare rates for more than 6 years. Read any newspaper from the period for the truth. Or ask anyone who was there.

Claiming public-sector unions got fat pay raises is belied by the fact that the three main unions in the 1990s (GEU, CUPE and HEU) set the trend for wage increases by settling for $0.25 across the board for several years while they attempted to raise underpaid women’s positions to a fairer prevailing average. This cost higher-earners bitterly as they fell further behind inflation and private-sector-comparable jobs. This also set the pattern for smaller unions at municipal levels to settle for the same amounts. I know - I was there the whole time. All these nominal wage increases are also readily seen on the LRB website for any collective agreement of the period at http://www.lrb.bc.ca/cas/

Claiming a dearth of government investment and infrastructure in the 1990s ignores the Island Highway along which log exports have continued southward to this day; the Millennium line and associated real estate development along the route, more than a dozen educational buildings at UBC and SFU built according to the traditional formula of 2/3 private funding 1/3 government funding, nearly a quarter of a billion spent finishing off the vacant tower at VGH that had sat empty since the late-1980s, nearly a billion in construction of new schools in growing communities such as Richmond, Surrey and Coquitlam and the lake country; almost $3 billion in construction and renovations of hospital facilities in a building boom to rival the great building program of the mid 1970s under the Socreds’ Bob McLelland who sought to grow the economy and the business of contractors everywhere at taxpayers’ expense.... No, there was a considerable public investment in infrastructure during the 1990s, because there was just about nothing else going on.

No, the ignoramus who thought the 1990s were a period of economic stagnation and waste due to NDP government has lost all touch with reality. There is nothing more that he has to say that I want to listen to. It’s all bullshit from one end to the other.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

"And Campbell's DUI bust was unfortunate incident of poor personal judgement,..."

Just like all the others! Gawd what will we do now that he's gone? It'll be hard to win the gold medal for sheer incompetence against Nigeria and Kenya now....

Wow, just wow...

If this thread was any deeper in the weeds it'd pull quite a few out.

I mean... "Is Christy Clark a Woman?" Seriously?!? See this: http://t.co/2NnhQJ2 Now report back you birther whack from the Planet of Ptealin.

Furthermore, zalm I find you just as vain as your namesake Bill VanderZalm. It was Bill VZ who made Alise Mills a lifelong BCLiberal...

Oh and BTW, G West... BCLiberals have ran openly gay candidates and made gays Heaven Forbid like Lorne Maynecourt, MLA chair of the historic provincial Safe Schools Task Force & the Honourable Ted Nebbeling a cabinet minister. Yeah, uh huh... if Mary Polak was a homophobe she wouldn't have gotten the Honourable before her name or the primetime assignments she's gotten.

I've had just about enough of this thread. :-)

Wow, just wow... (insult removed by me)

If this thread was any deeper in the weeds it'd pull quite a few out.

I mean... "Is Christy Clark a Woman?" Seriously?!? See this: http://t.co/2NnhQJ2 Now report back from the Planet of Ptealin and demand the long birth certificate will ya? I find that kind of talk sexist and beneath anybody but the most hyper of hyper.

Furthermore, zalm I find you just as vain as your namesake Bill VanderZalm. It was Bill VZ who made Alise Mills a lifelong BCLiberal... and who has worked to defeat the centre-right coalition party for a long time now.

Oh and BTW, G West... BCLiberals have ran openly gay candidates and made gays Heaven Forbid like Lorne Maynecourt, MLA chair of the historic provincial Safe Schools Task Force & the Honourable Ted Nebbeling a cabinet minister. Yeah, uh huh... if Mary Polak was a homophobe she wouldn't have gotten the Honourable before her name or the primetime assignments she's gotten.

I've had just about enough of this thread. :-).

Christy's fan

The 'honourable' goes with the cabinet job....

Need I remind you one more time about the million dollar bill Surrey taxpayers are still paying for a very serious campaign against gay people?

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT DIRECTED AT ANOTHER COMMENTER REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

a boat can only float with so many holes below the waterline.

Bye

zalm

Your engaging in a little revisionism yourself.
Trying to say the NDP dropped the idea of the Olympics when they became too expensive is maybe wishful thinking but it's simply not true.
The Vancouver bid was accepted by the Canadian Olympic organization to be forwarded to the IOC in December 1998.

Heres what a happy Glen Clark said at the time:

"The B.C. bid was highly favoured because Whistler's superb ski mountain. There is still much a lot of work left to do, says B.C. Premier Glen Clark, including improving the road between Vancouver and Whistler."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/1998/12/01/olympicsI981201.html

Christy CRUNCH fan

Christy CRUNCH fan is a close "friend" of ms. CRUNCH.

TRUST ME!!!!!

Don't you be bullying me misters...

Seriously.

You're just too weak to take what you dish out.

Seriously.

You just want to destroy wealth & job creation out of your own BCTF-led greedy orange machine.

Seriously.

If somebody dissents, by all means destroy them - that's your modus operandi.

Seriously.

media on media

amazing!
smyth, mason, sun, province, ctv...the media mogul in their own minds
smyth, 'too much like,' his cohort bruce allen
mason, is hopefully,'re-embarking on,' his real calling...sports
ctv,... 'seen as,'always #2
the province, 'scares the heck out of,' thinking people
and
the sun, 'yesterday's,' newspaper, snore
christy/gordo...interchangeable

thanks for an excellent article. it cuts to the chase. in light of the "journalism," being produced by the province, sun and now even the globe (YIKES!!! HARPER?) we are lucky to get some balance and common sense from the tyee.

Adrian Dix - Victim

That's what the title of this feature makes Adrian Dix look like: a victim of BC mainstream media on the wrong side of history. Only that it is Dix that is on the wrong side of history with his dangerous beliefs about how the state should own or control society's productive assets. That his supporters presume that Dix believes in free markets shows disregard for his disdain for capitalism. Dix doesn't want to partner with or believe that the private wealth creation is the key to long term prosperity, employment and economic growth.

Besides all the government spending - good or bad that occurred during the NDP 90s, what did the Glen Clark govt do to encourage private sector economic growth? Not much. In fact, they were the avowed enemy of the NDP.

I recall Dix insincerely saying that he would meet and talk to BC businesses, but would not give them more regard than any other interest group. Unfortunately, that is a poor attitude because most other interest groups, like the homeless, do no produce jobs and profits which are critical to our economy. What Dix is trying to coyly say is that BC businesses aren't really that important to him.

And that is what scares BC voters about Dix. If he's elected he will give a fine and free ride to unions and social welfare interests at the expense of average, hard working, BC people.

And if the Tyee is trying to act as a media counterbalance to the likes of The Sun, Globe & Mail, then its journalists have to sharpen their wits. Features like this, which are obviously reaching and selectively documenting the history of political framing and assassination stand on the thinnest of arguments. Instead, come at your readers head on and tell us or have Dix tell us why he should be leader. Don't say he should be our premier because he is the victim of "the man."

Bobby

We've been through this before fella - you really do seem to have ADHD.

[PERSONAL AND OFFENSIVE COMMENTS DIRECTED AT ANOTHER COMMENTER REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

The God-damned Campbell/Clark Liberals, for all their much vaunted tax-cutting economy stimulating bullshit have a worse record and have created 3 times the accumulated debt than 10 years of NDP governance did.
And the fucking NDP managed that, for Christ's sake, without tearing up contracts and shipping manufacturing jobs to subsidy supported union ship-building jobs in Germany. They didn’t increase tuition by more than 100% and tear up contracts and agreements with workers all across the province.
Give your head a shake man - you're living in la la land.
Dix doesn't scare me or the voters of BC half as much as the fear that the current hot tamale in Campbell's office will lie, cheat and steal herself into another term and another $20 billion dollars of accumulated debt.
As for the comparison between the Tyee and the MSM - after reading the execrable editorial in the Globe today (and seeing the thousands of angry comments) I think the learning curve the Tyee needs to contend with is pretty much down hill all the way.
You can't get much lower than the main stream media in this country....and the Tyee is head and shoulders above them already.
I don’t think you’d know an average British Columbian if one of them ran over your foot with her wheel chair.

Thank you Bobby Peru...

But Adrian Dix is no Lucien Bouchard. He is a man who choose his fate and as such should reap the division and rancor and scandal he has sown throughout his life.

I'm not going to respond to people who cuss on a message board as well. It's bullying and I stand with Christy Clark AGAINST the bullies.

Adrian Dix - Martyr

The NDP would make Dix a martyr if they could. But, memo to file is not exactly a sympathetic or romantic enough cause to lead a charge. It's more like feeling pity for a deluded assistant who destroyed his reputation by trying to mislead and obstruct a police investigation for a boss who sold political favours for a back porch. Sounds more like a subplot for "Trailer Park Boys."

So the best strategy is to try sweep it under the rug by having Dix say, "I own that mistake." But it is more than an old mistake. We all know it points to a character flaw. Dix has to bring it out into the open- like doing a whole show on Oprah or Dr. Phil or with Don Cherry to analyze and expose "who is the real Adrian Dix?"

Indeed, voters need to know the true Dix. Is he just a well meaning Marxist/statist/Communist/socialist policy wonk or is he a closet Richard Nixon who is willing to break any law to accomplish his goals and save himself and his cohorts?

I'm sorry that Gwest is so upset at me. Please refrain from using Fbombs on this family oriented site. I feel Dix's exposed ethical flaws are completely and directly related to his ability to lead this province. If you NDP'ers claim that the Liberals are completely dirty and you are chaste then Dix is the wrong salesman. Or if your standards for BC's next leader are so low that they are only relative bad to how bad the BC Liberals have behaved then offering Dix is a one of history's most sarcastic candidates.

As far as increasing tuition fees and tearing up union contracts, we all know Dix's solution is to give every interest group a free pass. Subsidizing tuition fees by rolling back corporate taxes is a typically ill conceived and naive move. By inciting class warfare- poor students vs. greedy corporations, Dix obscures the cause and effect. Corporations will either pass the added costs onto consumers or reduce investment in BC or lay off workers. This leads to a cycle of declining economic activity, much like under Glen Clark. It is not a costless policy that redistributes wealth simply at the stroke of a pen. But that is how Dix thinks- without any consultation with the business sector and failing to understand his duties to the taxpayer. Expect more of these magic, easy, at no cost to you type giveaways under Dix.

Frame? Character assassination? Fabricated stories? There's no need for that when the BC NDP has nominated such a seriously flawed candidate. And will the provincial NDP ride the coat tails of Layton? Doubt it, because it doesn't take much work to distinguish between them. Plus, Dix clearly does not have Layton's charm and winning personality. Dix can't help but to behave like Glenn Clark's pet pit bull- a belligerent, street fighting, pro-union bully.

Still nothing substantive?

Just more hate and vitriol...

Now the BC Government collects more money in tuition fees than it does from corporate taxes - how fucked up it that?

http://www.terracedaily.ca/go7214a/SUPPER_IS_MORE_IMPORTANT_THAN_LISTENING_TO_STUDENTS_CONCERNS

Sorry

That should be: How fucked up is that?

Enough F-bombs for you?

Bobby Peru...

You'd make a great wingman. I agree time to let G West suck wind... blow left wing whines... where's the alternative budget?

Adrian Dix - Yesterday's Man of Tax and Spend

That tuition fees are greater than collected corporate taxes is a fact that bears no relation to each other. Does Gwest think that corporate taxes should be measured by this metric? It's that kind of "corporations are evil and only should be tolerated" that make Dix and his ilk very dangerous to BC.

We'll see if Dix has truly any useful and sensible policies that promote the economic welfare and prosperity of BC people. Now just because economic benefits are not equally shared in society doesn't mean you attack corporations. And that is what scares most voters about Dix.

Indeed, with so many BC families having to pay mortgages on the most expensive homes in the country, I would imagine Dix has to assure us that he won't decimate the private sector, create unemployment and mortgage defaults.

Dix is deluded if he thinks he can summon the ghosts of union warriors past, like a scene from "The Mummy", who will rise up and compel all BC people to march to the land of socialist utopia. There are enough NDP contributors to blogs who openly criticize the NDP's selection of Dix, who say the NDP has learned nothing at all from its defeats.

"Energizing the NDP vote" with such a controversial candidate offends those in the political centre. It says the NDP doesn't care about most middle class BC people who are politically moderate. And that is the central and intractable problem in the NDP's message. Both the message and the candidate are irredeemable.